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.

summary of CN through 1807; see below for individual CNs:

851 Sweare by my sword] Discussion has revolved around the source of Sh.’s image: theatrical practice, histories, or classical literature. Theobald (ed. 1733), perhaps referring to a theatrical practice of the men kissing Hamlet’s sword, finds a mock of “This adjuration and the solemnity of kissing Hamlet’s sword” in Beaumont & Fletcher, Knight of the Burning Pestle, where Ralph asks the Barber to swear on the burning pestle and the Barber agrees, saying “I swear and kiss.” In a letter to Warburton (17 Jan. 1730, fol. ??; Nichols, Illus. 2:422) Theobald had referred to this same analogue, demonstrating the connections between Sh. and contemporary drama. Upton (1746, p. 61 n. 3) refers to “Jordanes in his Gothic history” and “Ammianus Marcellinus” in his history of the Huns, who refer to this custom. Upton also sees an analogue “in Homer, where Achilles swears by his [spear], which he hurls to the ground. Il. a 234 and 245.” Warburton (ed. 1747) says, “Here the poet has preserved the manners of the ancient Danes, with whom it was Religion to swear upon their swords. See Bartholine, De causis contemp. mort. apud Dan.”

Johnson (ed. 1765) adds: “I was once inclinable to [Warburton’s] opinion, which is likewise well defended by Mr. Upton, but Mr. Garrick produced me a passage, I think in Brantôme, from which it appeared, that it was common to swear upon the sword, that is, upon the cross which the old swords always had upon the hilt.” [Hawkins] (ed. 1771): “It is said, that the common oath of the Scythians was, by the sword and by the fire; and that the Irish swore by their swords. Spenser’s View of Ireland. Fol. P.41.” Steevens (ed. 1773) adds to

Johnson’s demurral, “Shakespeare, it is more than probable, knew nothing of the ancient Danes, or their manners. Every extract from Mr. Farmer’s pamphlet [on Sh.’s learning] must prove as instructive to the reader as the following. ‘In the Passus Primus: of Pierce Plowman, “David in his daies dubbed knightes, And did them swere on her sword to serve truth ever.” And in Hieronymo, the common butt of our author, and the wits of the time, says Lorenzo to Pedringano:—“Swear on this cross, that what thou say’st is true, But if I prove thee perjur’d and unjust, This very sword, whereon thou took’st thine oath, Shall be a worker of thy tragedy.” ’ ” Then Steevens continues with his own analogues: “Holinshed, p. 664. ‘Warwick kissed the cross of K. Edward’s sword, as it were a vow to his promise.’ Again, p. 1038. it is said, ‘that Warwick drew out his sword . . . [and] commanded, that each should kiss other’s sword . . . . ’ &c. So in Green’s Tu quoque. ‘By the cross of these hiltes.’ So in Decker’s comedy of Old Fortunatus, 1600. ‘He has sworn to me on the cross of his pure Toledo.’ So in the Second Part of The Downfall of Rob. E. of Huntington, 1601, ‘—by the cross of my good blade, An excellent mother to bring up a maid.’ ” Steevens (ed. 1778) adds two more analogues: “Again, in Decker’s Satiromastix: ‘By the cross of this sword and dagger, captain, you shall take it’. In the soliloquy of Roland addressed to his sword, the cross on it is not forgotten: ‘—capulo eburneo candidissime, cruce aurea spendidissime, &c.’ Turpini Hist. de Gestis Caroli Mag. cap. 22.” Steevens (ed. 1785) adds a Shn parallel: “Again, in an ancient MS. of which some account is given in a note on [Wiv. 1.1], the oath taken by a master of defence when his degree was conferred on him, is preserved and runs as follows: ‘First you shall sweare (so help you God and halidome, and by all the christendome which God gave you at the fount-stone, and by the crosse of this sword which doth represent unto you the crosse which our Saviour Jesus Christe sufered his most payneful deathe upon, that you shall upholde, maynteyne, and kepe to your power all sech articles as shal be geare declared unto you, and receve in the presence of me your maister, and these the rest of the maisters my bretheren heare with me at this tyme.” Douce (1807, 2:229) mentions the preservation of a sword “on the monument of a crusader in the vestry of the church at Winchelsea”—and of others depicted in books—on which the name Jesus is engraved, a “consequence,” he thinks, “of the practice of occasionally swearing by a sword . . . . ” See also CN 842, 844, 857, 858

1805 Seymour

Seymour

851-4 Seymour (1805, 2:162-3): “Some words are wanting for the metre: we might regulate it thus: ‘Ham. Swear by my sword. Ghost. —Swear. Ham. —Hic et ubique. | Then we’ll shift ground: come hither, gentlemen.’”

Ed. note: Seymour wants 851through ubique to be one line; then then through gentlemen to be a second line. He omits our.