Commentary notes (CN):

1. SMALL CAPS Indicate editions. Notes for each commentator are divided into three parts:

In the 1st two lines of a record, when the name of the source text (the siglum) is printed in SMALL CAPS, the comment comes from an EDITION; when it is in normal font, it is derived from a book, article, ms. record or other source. We occasionally use small caps for ms. sources and for works related to editions. See bibliographies for complete information (in process).

2. How comments are related to predecessors' comments. In the second line of a record, a label "without attribution" indicates that a prior writer made the same or a similar point; such similarities do not usually indicate plagiarism because many writers do not, as a practice, indicate the sources of their glosses. We provide the designation ("standard") to indicate a gloss in common use. We use ≈ for "equivalent to" and = for "exactly alike."

3. Original comment. When the second line is blank after the writer's siglum, we are signaling that we have not seen that writer's gloss prior to that date. We welcome correction on this point.

4. Words from the play under discussion (lemmata). In the third line or lines of a record, the lemmata after the TLN (Through Line Number] are from Q2. When the difference between Q2 and the authors' lemma(ta) is significant, we include the writer's lemma(ta). When the gloss is for a whole line or lines, only the line number(s) appear. Through Line Numbers are numbers straight through a play and include stage directions. Most modern editions still use the system of starting line numbers afresh for every scene and do not assign line numbers to stage directions.

5. Bibliographic information. In the third line of the record, where we record the gloss, we provide concise bibliographic information, expanded in the bibliographies, several of which are in process.

6. References to other lines or other works. For a writer's reference to a passage elsewhere in Ham. we provide, in brackets, Through Line Numbers (TLN) from the Norton F1 (used by permission); we call these xref, i.e., cross references. We call references to Shakespearean plays other than Ham. “parallels” (//) and indicate Riverside act, scene and line number as well as TLN. We call references to non-Shakespearean works “analogues.”

7. Further information: See the Introduction for explanations of other abbreviations. Click here for more information about browsing the entries and here for more information about the special symbols used in Hamletworks. Click the question mark icon above to remove this help message.

1726 theon

theon

2314 A brothers] Theobald (1726, pp. 99-100): <p.99> “ ‘Here again the last Verse halts in the Measure, and, if I don’t mistake, the Sense is a little lame too. Was a Brother’s Murther the eldest Curse? Surely, it was rather the Crime, that was the Cause of this eldest Curse. We have no Assistance, however, </p.99><p.100> either to the Sense or Numbers, from any of the Copies. All the Editions concur in the Deficiency of a Foot; but it we can both cure the Measure, and help the Meaning, without a Disgrace or Prejudice to the Author, I think, the Authority of the printed Copies is not sufficient to forbid a Conjecture. Perhaps, the Poet wrote; ‘It has the primal eldest Curse upon’t, THAT OF a Brother’s Murther. Pray, I cannot, &c.’ ” </p.100>

1733 theo1

theo1 ≈ theon (conj. emend. That of)

2314 A brothers] Theobald (ed. 1733): “That of]]“The last Verse, ‘tis evident, halts in the Measure; and, if I don’t mistake, is a little lame in the Sense too. Was a Brother’s Murther the eldest Curse? Surely, it was rather the Crime, that was the Cause of this eldest Curse. We have no Assistance, however, either to the Sense or Numbers from any of the Copies. All the Editions concur in the Deficiency of a Foot: but if we can both cure the Measure, and help the Meaning, without a Prejudice to the Author, I think, the Concurrence of the printed Copies should not be sufficient to forbid a Conjecture. I have ventur’d at two Supplemental Syllables, as innocent in themselves as necessary to the Purposes for which they are introduced: ‘That of a Brother’s Murther—’”

1747-53 mtby4

mtby4

2314 Thirlby (1747-53): “T _^ [inserts before line] That of ex conj.”

mtby4 ≈ mtby3 + magenta underlined

2315 will] Thirlby (1747-53): “ fsql [low-level probability] want np Mr T. mentions another conj. of a friend of his ’twill but I think it not English. [illeg.] np.”

1740 theo2

theo2 = theo1 minus “All the Editions . . . Conjecture” for A brothers

1752 Dodd

Dodd: [theo1], [warb] + magenta underlined

2314-15 pray . . . will] Dodd (1752, 1:244-5): <p.244> “This passage has greatly perplext all the editors, and is indeed very difficult: it is read, ‘That of a brother’s murder. Pray I cannot, &c. ‘A brother’s murder. Pray, alas, I cannot, Tho’ inclination be as sharp as ‘twill. ‘—Pray, I cannot Tho’ inclination be as sharp as th’ill.’ Amidst this multitude of conjectures, I must own myself not satisfied. I think, by one slight addition we may greatly clear up the difficulty. The king, conscious of his own guilt, is desirous, yet afraid, to repent and pray: is it not natural then he should say; ‘A brother’s murder—Pray, I [would, yet] cannot— ‘Now this slight addition will explain the next puzzling line; let us consider, what we may reasonably expect him to have said after this: ‘I wou’d pray, but I cannot, tho’ my inclination, [my great desire] to do so is no less powerful and persuasive with me, than the already determin’d resolution of my mind so to do: that is, I am no less desirous to do what I would (namely, pray) and cannot, than I am resolv’d to do so’; the seeming want of difference between inclination and will, causes all the obscurity: if the reader attends to that, and observes, that by inclination he means, a longing desire, a disposition to do it with pleasure; and by will, the determination of the mind, the actual resolution, I think all will be clear: and the words I have added in the foregoing line, if not genuine, (tho’ they seem to bid fair for it) at least add to the explaining the poet’s thought. The latter fine lines, ‘Try what repentance can, what can it not? Yet what can it, when one cannot repent?’ throw some light on these in question: he could not pray, for his guild defeated his intent: here he would try the force of all pow- </p.244><p.245> erful repentance, yet again is check’d by his guilty conscience: for tho’, says he, repentance can do all things, yet what can it do, when one cannot really and truly use it? when we are indeed desirous of repenting, but are by our guilt prevented from so doing: when we would fly to its aid, and be pardon’d for our offence, and yet retain the offence itself, and beg for forgiveness, while we still are guilty? the whole speech is a comment on itself. In Philaster, the king is praying to be forgiven, tho’ still retaining the offence, as here: ‘But how can I Look to be heard of gods, that must be just, Praying upon the ground I hold by wrong?’ ”

1757 theo4

theo4 = theo2

1765 Heath

Heath: contra theo1

2314 A brothers] Heath (1765, p. 541): "The interpolation in the second of those lines which is recommended by Mr. Theobald, ‘That of a brother’s murder,’ is perfectly unnecessary. The defect in the measure is sufficiently accounted for by the break which divides the verse. The words, a brother’s murder, are joined by apposition, not to the curse, in the next preceding line, but to the offence, in the line next preceding this last."

1774 capn

capn: contra [theo1]

2314 can I not] CAPELL (1774, 1:1:138): “The imperfection of the line . . . is descriptive of the speaker’s emotion; and the actor who would do justice to it, should pronounce the first half of it as if it were follow’d by ——dreadful thought! or words of that import: The line has suffer’d more ways than one; by fillings-up, and a transposition unauthoriz’d of ‘can’ and ‘I’ .”

1805 Seymour

Seymour

2314 pray can I not] Seymour (1805, p. 181): “A word has been lost; perhaps: ‘A brother’s murder! pray! that I can not.’ “

1819 Jackson

Jackson: john1

2314-15 pray . . . will] Jackson (1819, p. 353): “The compositor, in my opinion, mistook a note of admiration for a t. I believe our author wrote: ‘—Pray, can I?—No! Though inclination be as sharp as ‘twill’ The reading—’twill for will, as recommended by Dr. Johnson, should certainly be adopted; for inclination and will are nearly synonymous terms.”

1854 del2

del2

2314 murther] Delius (ed. 1854): “Metrisch ausdrucksvoll ist die Pause hier nach murder.” [The pause here after murder is metrically expressive.]

1857 fieb

fieb

2314 murther,] Fiebig (ed. 1857): “murder!—] Attend to the particular weighing efficacy which lies in this pause.”

1860 Walker

Walker

2314 murther] Walker (1860, 2: 199): “LXXXIX. Final er and final erer confounded. . . . Write, for metre-sake, ‘A brother’s murderer!’ “

1869 tsch

tsch

2314 a brothers murther] Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “Nach brother’s murder lahmt der Vers. Man denke sich die Pause durch eine Interjection Ah oder Oh ausgefüllt.” [After brother’s murder the verse breaks. One can imagine the pause filled by the interjection Ah or Oh.]

1870 Abbott

Abbott

2314 murther] Abbott (1870, §478): murder] “ [Final er] seems to have been sometimes pronounced with a kind of ‘burr,’ which produced the effect of an additional syllable; just as ‘sirrah’ is another and more vehement form of ‘sir.’ Perhaps this may explain the following lines, some of which may be explained by §505-10, but not all: ‘A broth / er’s mur / der. / Pray can / I not.’ Ham. 3.3.38.”

1872 del4

del4=del2; Walker

2314 murther] Delius (ed. 1872): “Sidney Walker vermuthet murderer.” [Sidney Walker suggests murderer.]

1877 v1877

v1877 ≈ theo1, Heath, Walker

2314 murther] Furness (ed. 1877): “Theobald: Was a brother’s murder the eldest curse? Surely, it was rather the crime that was the cause of this eldest curse. I have ventured at two supplemental syllables, as innocent in themselves, as necessary to the purposes for which they are introduced: ‘That of a brother’s murder.’ Heath (p. 541): The defect in the measure is sufficiently accounted for by the break which divides the verse: ‘A brother’s murder’ is in apposition, not to the curse, but to the offence. Walker (Crit. ii, I99): ‘Read, for metre-sake, murderer.’”

1885 macd

macd: xref.

2314 A brothers murther] MacDonald (ed. 1885): “This is the first proof positive of his guild accorded even to the spectator of the play; here Claudius confesses not merely guilt (see 1702), but the very deed. Thoughtless critics are so ready to judge another as if he knew all they know, that it is desirable here to remind the

student that only he, not Hamlet, hears this soliloquy. The falseness of half the judgments in the world comes form our not taking care and pains first to know accurately the actions, and then to understand the mental and moral condition, of those we judge.”

1899 ard1

ard1: Walker

2314 murther] Dowden (ed. 1899): “Walker suggests ‘murderer.’”

ard1: han

2314 pray] Dowden (ed. 1899): “Hanmer needlessly emends the metre by inserting ‘alas!’ after ‘Pray.’”

1984 chal

chal: Genesis analogue (see 2313)

2314 brothers murther] Wilkes (ed. 1984): “Cain’s murder of Abel (Genesis 4:11-12).”

2006 ard3q2

ard3q2: 341 xref

2314 A brothers murther] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “the murder of a brother. It is perhaps notable that the King does not mention incest as another offence here (see 1.2.157 [341]).”