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.

1710 Gildon

Gildon

622-42 Enter Ghost] Gildon (ed. 1710, p. 404), after mentioning the strength of the ghost portion of the closet scene [2483-2519], continues “as indeed Shakespear is in the fomer Scene, which as I have been assur’d he wrote in a Charnel House in the midst of the Night.”

1736 Stubbs

Stubbs

622-42 Enter Ghost] Stubbs (1736, pp. 21-2): <p. 21> “We are now come to the sublimest Scene in this whole Piece, a Scene worthy of the greatest Attention; an Heroical Youth addressing the Shade of his departed Father, whom he tenderly loved, and who, we are told, </p. 21> <p. 22> was a Monarch of the greatest Worth. Surely there cannot be imagin’d any Scene more capable of stirring up our noblest Passions. Let us but observe with how much Beauty and Art the Poet has managed it. This Spectre has been once spoken to by the Friend of our young Hero, and it must be cinfessed, that Horatio’s speech is truly great and beautiful: But as the like Incident was again to happen; that is, as the Ghost was again to be addressed, and with this Addition, by the Hero of the Play, and Son to the King, whose Spirit appears; it was necessary, I say, upon these Accounts, that this Incident should be treated in a sublimer Manner than the Former. Accordingly we may take Notice, that Hamlet’s speech to his Father’s Shade is as much superior to that of Horatio on the same Occasion, as his is to any Thing of that kind that I have ever met with in any other Dramatick Poet.” </p. 22>

On entrance of Ghost and he continues beyond also, but I’ll put the remarks where they can fit with other TLNs.

This Stubbs is interesting. He grasps dramatic necessity: The ghost has come before and been spoken to; what will make this event even more sublime? Sh achieves that, as he must.

1773 gent1

gent1

622-42 Gentleman (ed. 1773): “There is a striking solemnity in this address to the Ghost; it begins with a natural degre of intimidation, proceeds in a beautiful climax of imagery, and warms into a just manly confidence of interrogation; the Author has been so correct, as not to introduce an idea or expression, but what such a personage might be supposed on this occasion to form.”

1774 gent2

gent2 = gent1

622-42

1782- mCooke

mCooke

622-30 Cooke (ms. notes, ed. 1782): “When the Ghost appears Hamlet starts, — a short pause — speaks the first line — a longer pause — at the word “father” [630] — pause — and during the whole Scene, never takes his eye off the Ghost.”

1853 Collier

Collier: Perkins (mcol1)

622 Enter Ghost] Collier (1853, p. 421): “When the Ghost enters, a manuscript note states that he is armed as before.”

2006 ard3q2

ard3q2: Gurr and Ichilawa; xref

622 Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “Gurr and Ichikawa (131) again suggest that the Ghost enters and leaves by the centre trap (see [51 CN]).”