HW Home	Previous CN	View CN	View TNM	View TNI	Next CN

Line 682 - 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

For explanation of sigla, such as jen, see the editions bib.

682 Ham. {Whether} <Where> wilt thou leade me, speake, Ile goe no further.	1.5.1

1570, 1572 Lavater

Lavater

682 speake] Lavater (1572, apud Hoy, ed. 1963, 113-14): Though Lavater does not agree with Roman Catholic ideas about ghosts, he provides a description of how a "popish" ghost behaves: “First, they say that if he be a good spirit, he will at the beginning somewhat terrify men, but again soon revive them by their outward and visible shape. . . . good spirits do appear under the shape of a dove, a man, a lamb, or in the brightness and clear light of the sun.

[Secondly] We must consider whether the voice which we hear is sweet, lowly, sober, sorrowful, or otherwise terrible and full of reproach . . . .

“Thirdly, we must note whether the spirit teach ought that doth vary from the doctrine of the apostles . . . or whether he utter anything that doth dissent from the faith, good manners, and ceremonies of the church . . . and against the laws of the holy Church of Rome.

“Fourthly, we must take diligent heed whether in his words, deeds, and gestures, he do show forth any humility, acknowledging or confessing of his sins and punishment . . . . ”

But Lavater counters the above position with “Testimonies out of the word of God, that neither the souls of the faithful nor of infidels do walk upon the earth after they are parted from their bodies.”

He agrees that angels sometimes appear to men. Thus if the apparition “be not a vain persuasion proceeding through weakness of the senses, through fear, . . . or if it be not deceit of men, or some natural thing . . . it is either a good or evil angel, or some other forewarning sent by God. . . . ” He cites Isaiah the 63:9 and New Testament commentators. Evil angels, he says, “are hurtful and enemies unto men,” drawing them into evil ways, contrary to the gospel.

1710 Gildon

Gildon

682-776 Gildon (1710, p. 398): “All the Scene betwixt Hamlet and the Ghost is admirable, [such] as the Ghost’s Description of his Residence in the other World.”

1723- mtby2

mtby2

682 Whether] Thirlby (1723-): “Whether is made a monosyllable 411.10 in Rowe’s Ed. (and I suppose in Q & Fol too) and elsewhere. v. 395.4 [1560] ubi [where] when is put for for whether, ut vid. in R. and as I suppose in Q & Fol. too. Mr Pope has turned it into if [i.e. in 1560]. v. 219.13. See where their basest mettle be not mov’d.”

1752 Dodd

Dodd

682-776 Dodd (1752, 1: 225): “The present scene betwixt Hamlet and the ghost is so truely excellent and inimitable, that I dare say, I shall need no apology to the reader, for giving it whole and intire.”

1780 Mackenzie

Mackenzie

682-776 Mackenzie (1780, 3: 236-7): <p.236>“The incident of the Ghost, which is entirely the poet’s own, and not be be found in the Danish legend, not only produces the happiest stage-effect, but is also of the greatest advantage in unfolding the character which is stamped on the young prince at the opening of the play. In the </p. 236><p. 237> communications of such a visionary being, there is an uncertain kind of belief, and a dark unlimited horror, which are aptly suited to display the wavering purpose and varied emotions of a mind endowed with a delicacy of feeling that often shakes his fortitude, with sensibility that overpowers its strength.” </p. 237>

1789 Anon.

Anon. re Kemble

682-776 Anon. [re Kemble] (1789, pp. 13-14): <p. 13> “Some critics have objected to his making use of too much action during the succeeding conversation between Hamlet and the Ghost, and, perhaps, with reason; yet his countenance is so highly expressive of that proper indignation against </p. 13><p. 14> the murderer of his father, that we are inclined to make some allowance for the too frequent movement of the arms: this is a fault, however, I could wish him to avoid, as it is the only obstacle to the most perfect acting the stage can at present exhibit.” </p. 14>

1796 Goethe

Goethe

682-776 Goethe (1796, 5:11:195): “The scene changed, and when they reached the distant place the Ghost suddenly stopped and turned, so that Hamlet found himself too close to him. Wilhelm peered eagerly into the shut visor but all he could see were deep-set eyes and a well-shaped nose. He stood before him, timid and observing; but when the first sounds emerged from beneath the helmet, uttered in a pleasing but somewhat rough voice, out came the words: ‘I am thy father’s spirit,’ Wilhelm stepped back shuddering, and the whole audience shuddered. The voice seemed familiar to everyone, and Wilhelm thought it sounded like that of his own father. These mysterious feelings and memories, his eagerness to discover the stranger’s identity without offending him, coupled with his own clumsiness in getting too close to him on the stage—all this tore Wilhelm in different directions. He changed position so often during the long narration of the Ghost, he seemed so uncertain of himself and ill at ease, so attentive but at the same time so distracted that his performance aroused the admiration of all and the Ghost heightened their terror. The Ghost spoke in a tone of vexation rather than of sorrow, but it was an anger of the mind, slow and inestimable. It was the malaise of a great soul that is deprived of all finiteness and consigned to infinite suffering. At last there came the moment the Ghost descended, but he departed in a strange way, for a thin Grey veil surrounded him nd dragged him down, like a mist rising from the depths.”

1843 col1

col1

682 Whether] Collier (ed. 1843): “ ‘Whither, like whether, as have have seen in various instances ([in other plays: 2:149; 5:173], &c.) is to be pronounced in the time of a monosyllable. It is sometimes so printed.”

1899 ard1

ard1 = dyce on Fletcher

682-92 speake . . . heare] Dowden (ed. 1899): Fletcher quotes in The Woman-Hater c 1607 (Dyce ed. 1:37)

1939 kit2

kit2

682 no further] Kittredge (ed. 1939): "Hamlet is still uncertain whether the apparition is a ghost or a demon."

1947 cln2

cln2

682-709 Rylands (ed. 1947, p. 31) says that these lines “and the three previous apparitions of the Ghost are all intended to lead up to the word Murder, three times repeated [quotes 710-17].” See n. 710.

1990 OED 2nd edition on Internet

OED

682 Whether] OED has both Whither and Whether for adv. now meaning Where.