Line 108 - Commentary Note (CN) 
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.
Notes for lines 0-1017 ed. Bernice W. Kliman
| 108 Was gaged by our King, which had {returne} <return’d> | 1.1.91 |
|---|
1611 Cotgrave
Cotgrave
108 returne] Cotgrave (1611) has for retour “A returne . . . comming backe.”
-1761 Rochester?
Rochester?
108-9 Rochester? (-1761, pp. 194-5) < p. 194> wants to emend thus: “Was gaged by our King, which had enur’d Unto th’ Inheritance of Fortinbras [. . . ].” </ p. 194>< p. 195> He remarks, “Those lands could have no Return, that had never turned, or moved from the primitive Owner.” </ p. 195>
1723- mtby2
mtby2
108 had returne] Thirlby (1723-): “why either one or the other, Returning seems improper.” But he says to see Tim 3.2.24 (1067) which has return’d. There he has a note back to Ham. 108 where, he says, “return’d is used in the same sense; return’d to him, gone to him, been his.”
-1760 mBrowne TCC Ms 0.12.5755
mBrowne
108 had returne] Browne “. . . But of the Grammar and meaning of the word design’d in that Line, and of the expression, which had return—perhaps it should be wh had i.e. wd have return’d.”
1765- mDavies
mDavies
108 had returne] Davies (1765-): “which had returned to the Inheritance of Fortinbras which had been forfeited to him.”
1768-70 mwar2
mwar2
108 gaged] Warner (1768-70): “i.e. Pledged.”
1822 Nares
Nares
108 gaged] Nares (1822): “to lay as a wager: [quotes 108]. . . .”
1854 del2
del2 ≈ Rochester? without attribution
108 had returne] Delius (ed. 1854): “to return ist hier ‘anheimfallen,’ nicht eigentlich ‘zurückfallen,’ da Fortinbras vorher nicht im Besitz des fraglichen Landes gewesen war.” [To return is, here, not actually ‘go back to’ because Fortinbras had not actually been in possession of the lands in question.]
1866 cam1
cam1: mcol1; Hamilton
108 return’d] Clark & Wright (ed. 1866): “1.1.91. This [i.e. remained] and other emendations of the MS. corrector (mcol1), not recorded by Mr. Collier, are given on the authority of Mr Hamilton (An Enquiry into the Genuineness of the MS. Corrections in Mr J. Payne Collier’s annotated Shakespeare, pp. 34-85).”
1872 cln1
cln1: mWarner + in magenta underlined
108 gaged] Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): “pledged. See our note on [MV 1.1.130 (139)] Both ‘gage’ and ‘wage” come from the Low Latin vadiare through the French.”
1872 hud2
hud2 = cln1 without attribution +
108 gaged] Hudson (ed. 1872): “Gaged is pledged. Observe that, in the text as here printed, (and it is so in the old copies) the ending ed, in verbs and participles, always makes a distinct syllable by itself, save when it is preceded by i, in such words as applied. When it should coalesce with the preceding syllable, it is uniformly printed with the apostrophe as in assur’d.”
1875 Browne
Browne = Rochester +
108 had returne] Browne (1875): “‘Enure,’ in legal phraseology, means to come into use or possession, just the meaning required here. The passage is one of those relied on by lawyers who desire to annex Shakespeare, and bristles with law terms as ‘seiz’d,’ ‘moiety competent,’ ‘covenant,’ ‘article,’ &c.”
1877 v1877
v1877 = Rochester
108 gaged]
1880 meik
meik
108 had returne] Meikeljohn (ed. 1880): “the subj. = would have returned. Cf. [MV 2.1.20 (537) quotes]: ‘But, if my father had not scanted me, Yourself, renownéd prince, then stood as fair.’”
1881 hud3
hud3 = hud2 minus everything but gloss
108 gaged]
1909 subb
subb
108 returne] Subbarau (ed. 1909): “gone.”
1912 dtn3
dtn3: standard
108 gaged]
1912 dtn3
dtn3
108-9 which . . . Fortinbrasse] Deighton (ed. 1912): “and this would have gone as an inheritance to Fortinbras; would have passed into his possession.”
1912 dtn3
dtn3 ≈ mtby2 on Tim. // without attribution
108 returne] Deighton (ed. 1912): “involving no idea of going back, cp. Tim. 3.2.84 (1067). ‘Had this necessity made use of me (i.e. had he in his necessity applied to me) I would have put my wealth into donation, And the best half should have return’d to him.’”
1938 parc
parc
108 returne] Parrott & Craig (ed. 1938) claim that the Q2 misprint results from a misreading of a final d as an e.
1939 kit2
kit2: standard gloss and accent on 2nd syll.
108 gaged]
kit2: standard
108 had] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “ subjunctive”
1957 pel1
pel1: standard
108 gaged] Farnham (ed. 1957): “engaged, staked.”
1970 pel2
pel2 = pel1 standard
108 gaged] Farnham (ed. 1970): “engaged, staked”
1980 pen2
pen2 ≈ dtn (minus //) without attribution
107 returne] Spencer (ed. 1980) glosses returned as “passed (not necessarily ‘passed back again’).
1982 ard2
ard2 ≈ pen2 without attribution
108 returne] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “A loose use, not to be taken as implying that Fortinbras would have got back possessions originally his.”
1992 fol2
fol2: standard
108 gaged] Mowat & Werstine (ed. 1992): “engaged, i.e., pledged“
1995 OED 2nd edition on Internet
OED apud Bill Hutchings
108 had returne] Hutchings, 19 March 1995: “I cannot find anything in OED that suggests the construction “to have return’: if this were possible, then “had return” could mean “would have had return,” so making good sense. “Had made return” is OK (OED cites Bacon), but is not good for our line. The def that looks most interesting for us is OED sb 10b: return as a legal term for the restoration of something to somebody (precisely the point of our line), but the phrase aapears to have been “return of cattle” etc. Legal language does often employ rather specialized and odd forms, though, so I wonder if this might be a trail to follow.I’ll do some hunting around in Eliz’than statute etc when I’ve got a while free in the Rylands....”
2006 ard3q2
ard3q2
108 gaged] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “gagèd (disyllabic); wagered”
ard3q2
108 had returne] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “was to revert. Return (often emended to F’s ’return’d’) seems misleading if it implies that Fortinbras and his heirs would recover lands they had previously owned.”
108