HAMLET’S MELANCHOLY By JOHN W. DRAPER MORGANTOWN, W. VA. ritics are generally agreed Thus the one pertinent author whom that Hamlet suffered from Bradley cites would seem to refute his “melancholy,” a condition case. Nevertheless the tradition of the of mind and body thought to romantic Hamlet has not died easily.® Cbe caused by a superfluity of blackMeanwhile bile. the investigation of Eliz­ Hamlet’s own statement^ and that of abethan “melancholy” has proceeded Claudius^ attest this “melancholy”; and by fits and starts. Nineteenth-century the depression and irascibility that he critics, confusing the wisdom of the sometimes shows seem to bear out their artist with the knowledge of the scholar, statement. To this physical and mental commonly ascribed to Shakespeare an condition, many critics have imputed encyclopedic mastery of the sciences, in­ his delay in avenging his father’s mur­ cluding medicine.His medical ref­ der; and, according to their theory, mel­ erences, to be sure, are widespread and ancholy becomes the fundamental mo­ numerous®; but so they are in most tive in the play. Some scholars, to be Elizabethan plays,® for the science was sure, ascribe his tardiness to objective not yet entirely freed from the common­ difficulties such as the guards about the places of folklore. Shakespeare’s ref­ King or Hamlet’s doubt of the veracity erences, moreover, are usually super­ of the Ghost®; but the larger number ficial, as compared with those of have preferred subjective causes, a Jonson, for example^’®; and more recent paralysis of the will arising from morbid scholars, therefore, have generally been melancholy, either innate, or super­ less sweeping in their claims. Elze,^’^ induced by his father’s death and his Miss O’Sullivan^2 ^^d Professor Dover mother’s hasty marriage. Today, most Wilson^® think that Shakespeare took commentators have discarded the the­ his concept of melancholy from the ory of innate melancholy; for the Prince “Treatise” of Dr. Timothy Bright; and in his normal life before his father died Shakespeare may well have read it; but, was apparently a gay young man, soldier so far as melancholy was important in and courtier and habitue of the theater; the character and action of a popular indeed it is this sudden change in him tragedy, he must have modeled his con­ that so disturbs Polonius and Ophelia ception of it on popular tradition; for and the King. Thus Bradley,^ in order otherwise his audience could not have to support the old subjective theory, followed him; and, indeed, many of the declared Hamlet’s melancholy the re­ parallels cited from Bright are medical sult of recent shock; but, except for a commonplaces. Bieber’s history, more­ reference to Burton, Bradley cites no over, of the theory of the disease since contemporary writers on melancholy; the time of Hippocrates does not sug­ and, unfortunately for Bradley’s theory, gest that procrastination and paralysis Burton elsewhere in his treatise denies of will were generally recognized as its that a sadness arising from such a spe­ symptoms or its consequences.® This cial cause is pathological melancholy.® somewhat chaotic state of scholarship. Miss Campbell meets by denying that his character. If then the Prince’s mel­ Hamlet is “a man of natural melancholy ancholy is related to his long delay, it humour”; she considers him a “study in must be, as most critics agree, the path­ grief” but, among her several quo­ ological melancholy supposed to arise tations from contemporary writers, she from a superfluity of black bile in the does not cite one that associated “grief” system and generally treated by exercise with inability to act. In short, the sub­ and diet. jective critics, to prove their case, must This melancholy was supposed to show (as they have not) that the Eliz­ show itself in various psychological re­ abethans generally thought of “melan­ actions as set forth in both medical and choly” as causing inaction; and, failing popular writers of the day; but neither that, scholars must not only abandon paralysis of the will nor even procras­ the old subjective theory, but also ex­ tination was a generally accepted symp­ plain why Shakespeare added this “mel­ tom; indeed, melancholy might lead to ancholy” to the story as he found it. certain types of feverish activity. Pro­ These difficulties have led some com­ fessor Stoll, who has especially studied mentators to follow counsels of despair, the “malcontent type,” which was sup­ and declare Hamlet’s delay either a posed to suffer from this complaint, does flaw in the original story that Shake­ not seem to find any relation between speare could not mend^® or a mere the “melancholy” that characterized it stage-convention to which his art must and a tendency to delay^®; and Dr. An­ bow.^®’ Indeed, it seems high time derson, who has worked particularly on that Elizabethan scientific and popular Elizabethan theories of psychology, writers be examined at some length to even suggests that such a condition of ascertain the contemporary theory of mind was thought to lead rather to ac­ melancholy and the psychological symp­ tion. The further researches of the toms of those that suffered from it, so present writer in the Surgeon General’s that we may understand the significance Library and in the Institute of the His­ of this motif in Shakespeare’s drama. tory of Medicine at the Johns Hopkins As appears in Bieber and the “New University, supplemented somewhat by English Dictionary,” melancholy was a the British Museum, tend to bear out very common word, and covered a va­ this view. The tradition of Hippocrates riety of concepts, some of which can did not accept inaction as an effect of hardly apply to Hamlet’s case. It was melancholy^®; nor did that of Aristotle, sometimes a mere fashionable affecta­ whom an Elizabethan treatise cites as de­ tion, like the “melancholy” of Jaques, claring that melancholy people were es­ which he himself had “compounded of pecially “desirous of revenge. ”2® Practi­ many simples”; but Hamlet’s melan­ cal medical books such as those by Bar- choly was no mere affectation. In the rough^i and Clowes,^^ though by no general sense of grief or sadness, it means neglectful of the disease, do not might arise from any misfortune such as cite procrastination as a symptom; and a a father’s death; but such passing grief more popular work, likewise, Elyot’s would not make a normal man for “Castel of Helth,” does not list it as a months unable to act. “Melancholy” consequence of the disease.^® Bright, to as a serious disease might be a concomi­ be sure, remarks that “Melancholicke tant of love-sickness; but Hamlet’s af­ persons . be not so apt for action”^'^; fair with Ophelia is hardly so serious but Bright’s theory of melancholy, as he as to cause an utter disintegration of himself declares, was heterodox; and. moreover, he seems in this passage to cause of melancholy. They often men­ be referring merely to the religious mel­ tion diet and want of exercise®^’ and ancholy of contemporary fanatics. Over­ Harrison adds over-eating of rich food bury also says that a melancholy man is and the decay of the teeth, for which the “all contemplation, no action”; but he age is notorious.®® Laurentius®^ and looked on such a one as “crazed” and “a Batman®® say that melancholy arises man only in shew”^®: Professor Bradley “without any apparent occasion”; but would hardly accept this as an analogue a number of authors, especially popular to Hamlet, who he insists is not in­ writers, impute the disease to the baf­ sane. In short, the Elizabethans did not fling of some natural impulse, love, am­ generally think of melancholy such as bition, or the like. The learned Barthol­ Hamlet’s as causing paralysis of the will omew Anglicus seems to approximate or even marked procrastination. this view when he describes melancholy On the contrary, a number of learned as a condition in which the vital spirits and popular works suggest that mel­ were “impaired or let [hindered] in ancholy persons were especially fit for their working”®®; and, according to Pro­ politics and even for Machiavellian in­ fessor Dover Wilson, something of this trigue. Walkington implies as much^®; sort produced Hamlet’s melancholy.®'^ Riche says that the melancholy man Professor Wilson leaves this as a some­ thinks himself “capable of managing what vague suggestion; and one may the state”^'^; and Rowlands’ “Melan­ suppose that this hindrance from which choly Knight” is quite ready to kill the Hamlet suffered may have been disap­ merry musicians who disturb him.^® If pointed love, as Polonius suggests, or Harrison be right in saying that Shake­ “thwarted ambition,” as Claudius speare’s other melancholy characters are seems to believe, though neither of Jaques, Timon and Lear,^® one would these is the dominant motive of the hesitate to declare that the dramatist as­ tragedy, nor in his soliloquies does sociated with this cast of mind paralysis Hamlet greatly stress them. of the will. Perhaps most significant is Certainly, however, the Elizabethans the statement of the illustrious French looked upon melancholy as arising from physician Laurentius, whose works some objective frustration of the will. were read throughout western Europe: In the first scene of Chapman’s “Re­ “The melancholike are accounted as venge for Honor,” it appears as the most fit to undertake matters of consequence of enforced inaction; Mar­ weightie charge and high attempt. Aris­ ston’s Lampatho likewise turns to mel­ totle in his Problemes sayth that the ancholy because his scholarly ambitions melancholike are most wittie and in­ have no outlet®®; and Nashe likens a genious.