HW HomePrevious CNView CNView TNMView TNINext CN

Line 2986, etc. - Commentary Note (CN) More Information

Notes for lines 2951-end ed. Hardin A. Aasand
For explanation of sigla, such as jen, see the editions bib.
2986-7 {Hor. } Horatio, when thou shalt haue ouer-lookt this, giue these | fel- 
1796 Goethe
Goethe
2986-3002 Goethe (1796, 5.4.178): <p. 178>“To my mind these external circumstances [affecting characters and their movement] include the troubles in Norway, the war with youg Fortinbras, the ambassadorial mission to the old uncle, the settlement of the dispute, young Fortinbras’s march into Poland, and his return at the end of the play. Like Horatio’s return from Wittenberg, Hamlet’s desire to go there, Laertes’s visit to France and his subsequent return, the dispatching of Hamlet to England, his capture by pirates, and the death of the two courtiers because of the treacherous letter. All these things are circumstances and events which would give breadth to a romance, but they seriously disturb the unity of a play in which the hero himself has no plan, and are therefore defects.” </p. 178>
1818-19 mCLR2
mCLR2
2986-3002 Coleridge (ms. notes 1819 in Ayscough, ed. 1807; rpt. Coleridge, 1998, 12.4:857): <p. 857>“Almost the only play of Shakespeare, in which mere accidents independent of all will form an essential part of the plot; but here how judiciously in keeping with the Character of the over-meditative Hamlet ever at last determined by accident or by a fit of passion—”</p. 857>
This is also found in L.R., 233
1855 Wade
Wade
2986-3002 Wade] see n. 3054-58.
1870 Miles
Miles : Coleridge ; Goethe
2986-3002 Miles (1870, 70-1): <p. 70>“The letter to Horatio is longer [than the letter to Claudius]: [cites 2988-90 “Ere . . . valour”]
“Before discussing the rest of the letter, let us examine this perpetually misunderstood piratical capture. We have already noticed Hamlet’s first glance at it, ‘I see a cherub that sees them.’ But there is a previous most positive and most specific allusion to it, at the close of the interiew with his mother: ‘O ‘tis most sweet Where in one line two crafts directly meet.’ If the word crafts had its present maritime significance, in Shakespeare’s time, the pun alone is conclusive of a pre-arranged capture. How arranged, is neither here nor there; but opportunities of chartering a free crusier, could not have been wanting, to a prince of Denmark; and what is more significant, the fleet of Fortinbras was then in port at Elsinore. There is an understanding, just ever so vaguely glanced at, </p. 70> <p. 71>between the two young princes. But the following lines admit of but one interpretation: [cites 2577+1-2577+8] One would think it required a miraculous allowance of critical obtuseness to ignore a counterplot so strikingly pre-announced. Yet, opening Coleridge, you find, ‘Hamlet’s capture by the pirates: how judiciously in keeping with the character of the over-meditative Hamlet, ever at last determined by accident or by a fit of passion!’ And, opening Ulrici, [see n. 3189-91] you find, ‘He cheerfully obeys the command to visit England, evidently with the view, and in the hope, of there obtaining the means and opportunity ((perhaps the support of England, and a supply of money and men, for an open quarrel with his uncle)) to set about the work in a manner worthy both of himself and its own importance.’ —God save the mark! ‘Accident frustrates his plans. Captured by pirates, he is set on shore in Denmark against his will,’&c. And, opening Wilhem Meister [see n.] , you find Hamlet’s ‘capture by pirates, and the death of the two courtiers by the letter which they carried,’ regarded as ‘injuring exceedingly the unity of the piece, particularly as the hero has no plan.’ After such obvious, amazing, misconception, one may be pardoned for believing he sees ‘—’Two points in Hamlet’s soul Unseized by the Germans yet.’ To make assurance doubly sure, comes the letter to Horatio, ‘In the grapple I boarded them; on the instant they got clear of our ship: so I alone became their prisoner. They have dealt with me like thieves of mercy; but they knew what they did.’ Can circumstantial proof go farther? Could any twelve men of sense, on such a record, acquit Hamlet of being an accessory before, as well as after, the fact?” </p. 71>
1883 wh2
wh2
2986 ouer-lookt] White (ed. 1883): “looked over.”
1913 tut2
tut2 : contra Miles
2986ff goggins (ed. 1913): “[the conjecture that Hamlet has engineered this pirate interference] does not seem warranted by the letter, and is inconsistent with Hamlet’s account in V.ii.”
1939 Kit2
Kit2wh2 w/o attribution
2986 ouer-lookt] Kittrede (ed. 1936)
2986 ouer-lookt] Kittredge (ed. 1936, Glossary):
1954 Sis
Sis ≈ standard
er-lookt] Sisson (ed. 1954, Glossary):
1957 pel1
pel1 : standard
2986 ouer-lookt]
1970 pel2
pel2=pel1
2986 ouer-lookt]
1980 pen2
pen2 ≈ standard
2986 ouer-lookt]
1982 ard2
ard2 ≈ standard
2986 ouer-lookt]
1984 chal
chal : standard
2986 ouer-lookt]
1987 oxf4
oxf4 ≈ standard
2986 ouer-lookt]
1988 bev2
bev2 ≈ standard
2987 ouer-lookt]
1992 fol2
fol2≈ standard
2988 ouer-lookt]
2986 2987