1219 good kissing carrion.] Warburton (ed. 1747): “The Editors seeing Hamlet counterfeit madness, thought they might safely put any nonsense into his mouth. But this strange passage when set right, will be seen to contain as great and sublime a relexion as any the poet puts into his Hero’s mouth thoughout [sic] the whole play. We shall first give the true reading, which is this, For if the Sun breed maggots in a dead dog Being a God, kissing carrion ———- As to the sense we may observe, that the illative particle [for] shews the speaker to be reasoning from something he had said before: What that was we learn in these words, to be honest, as this world goes, is to be one picked out of ten thousand. Having said this, the chain of ideas led him to reflect upon the argument which libertines bring against Providence from the circumstance of abounding Evil. In the next speech therefore he endeavours to answer that objection, and vindicate Providence, even on a supposition of the fact, that almost all men were wicked. His argument in the two lines in question is to this purpose, But why need we wonder at this abounding of evil? for if the Sun breed maggots in a dead dog, which tho’ a God, yet shedding its heat and influence upon carrion —- Here he stops short, lest talking too consequentially the hearer should suspect his madness to be feigned; and so turns him off from the subject by enquiring of his daughter. But the inference which he intended to make, was a very noble one, and to this purpose, If this (says he) be the case, that the effect follows the thing operated upon [carrion] and not the thing operating [a God ;] why need we wonder, that the supreme cause of all things diffusing its blessings on mankind, who is, as it were, a dead carrion, dead in original sin, man, instead of a proper return of duty, should breed only corruption and vices? This is the argument at length; and is as noble a one in behalf of providence as could come from the schools of divinity. But this wonderful man had an art not only of acquainting the audience with what his actors say, but with what they think. The sentiment too is altogether in character, for Hamlet is perpetually moralizing, and his circumstances make this reflexion very natural. The same thought, something diversified, as on a different occasion, he uses again in Measure for Measure, which will serve to confirm these observations: The tempter or the tempted, who sins most? Not she; nor doth she tempt; but it is I That lying by the violet in the sun Do as the carrion does, not as the flower Corrupt by virtuous season. ——— And the same kind of expression in Cymbeline, ‘Common-kissing Titan’.”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Johnson (ed. 1765): “This is a noble emendation, which almost sets the critick on a level with the authour. “ [Note in Yale ed. of Johnson’s Works: In the 1st ed. this note is printed on a leaf which is a cancel. The original note, preserved by Percy, reads: "This is an emendation which almost sets the critick on a level with the authour."]

c.1765 mF2FL27

mF2FL27 : WARB

1219 good kissing carrion.] mF2FL27 [this note is from Bernice; I still need the folio pagination]: “ie. a dead dog is a good kissing carrion, but Warb. not understanding yt alters it to God and makes yt refer to Sun. nonsense. e what is still worse ye noodled [or noddled] headed Blochead,Johnson, has followed Warburton e says ye Emendation of Warburton is a most noble thought writing? Revisal bombast pages on ye Occ[?] vide & vide.”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Malone (apud ed. 1785): “Our author, I imagine, wrote—’being a god-kissing carrion,’—i.e. a carrion that kisses the sun. So in this play: “New lighted on a heaven-kissing hill.” Again, in The Rape of Lucrece: ‘Threat’ning cloud-kissing Ilion with annoy.’ I do not believe that Shakspeare had any of the profound meaning, in this passage, that Dr. Warburton has ascribed to him.”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Malone (ed. 1790): “The old copies read—a good kissing carrion. The emendation was made by Dr. Warburton, who yet in my apprehension did not understand the passage. I have therefore omitted his laboured comment on it, in which he endeavours to prove that Shakspeare intended it as a vindication of the ways of Providence in permitting evil to abound in the world. He does not indeed pretend that this profound meaning can be drawn from what Hamlet says; but this is what he was thinking of; for ‘this wonderful man (Shakspeare) had an art not only of acquainting the audience with what his actors say, but with what they think!’

“Hamlet’s observation is, I think, simply this. He has just remarked that honesty is very rare in the world. To this Polonius assents. The prince then adds, that since there is so little virtue in the world, since corruption abounds every where, and maggots are bred by the sun, even in a dead dog, Polonius ought to take care to prevent his daughter from walking in the sun, lest she should prove ‘a breeder of sinners;’ for though conception in general be a blessing, yet as Ophelia (whom Hamlet supposes to be as frail as the rest of the world,) might chance to conceive, it might be a calamity. The maggots breeding in a dead dog, seem to have been mentioned merely to introduce the word conception; on which word, as Mr. Steevens has observed, Shakspeare has play’d in King Lear: and probably a similar quibble was intended here. The word, however, may have been used in its ordinary sense, for pregnancy, without any double meaning.

“The slight connection between this and the preceding passage, and Hamlet’s abrupt question, have you a daughter? were manifestly intended more strongly to impress Polonius with the belief of the prince’s madness.

“Perhaps this passage ought rather to be regulated thus:— ‘being a god-kissing carrion;’ i.e. a carrion that kisses the sun. The participle being naturally refers to the last antecedent, dog. Had Shakspeare intended that it should be referred to sun, he would probably have written—’he, being a god,’ &c. We have many similar compound epithets in these plays. Thus in K. Lear, Act. II. Sc.i. Kent speaks of ‘ear-kissing arguments.’ Again, more appositely in the play before us: ‘New lighted on a heaven-kissing hill.’ Again, in The Rape of Lucrece: ‘Threatning cloud-kissing Ilion with annoy.’

“However, the instance quoted from Cymbeline by Dr. Warburton, ‘—common-kissing Titan,’ seems in favour of the regulation that has been hitherto made; for here we find the poet considered the sun as kissing the carrion, not the carrion as kissing the sun. So also in K. Henry IV. P.I. ‘Did’st thou never see Titan kiss a dish of butter?’ The following lines also in the historical play of King Edward III. 1596, which Shakspeare had certainly seen, are, it must be acknowledged, adverse to the regulation which I have suggested: ‘The freshest summer’s day doth soonest taint The loathed carrion, that it seems to kiss.’

“In justice to Dr. Johnson, I should add, that the high elogium which he has pronounced on Dr. Warburton’s emendation, was founded on the comment which accompanied it; of which however, I think, his judgment must have condemned the reasoning, though his goodness and piety approved its moral tendency.”

1219 good kissing carrion] (or, less likely, 1209 God a mercy]) Wesley (ms. notes 1790-, p.45): “(W. reads a comma after ‘god’. Malone does not believe that Shakspeare had any of the profound meaning which W. attributes to him. ) Nor I; but yet the passage is acutely corrected and anatomized. ”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Malone (apud ed. 1793): “Dr. Warburton, in my apprehension, did not understand the passage. I have therefore omitted his laboured comment on it, in which he endeavours to prove that Shakspeare intended it as a vindication of the ways of providence in permitting evil to abound in the world. He does not indeed pretend that this profound meaning can be drawn from what Hamlet says; but that this is what he was thinking of; for “this wonderful man (Shakspeare) had an art not only of acquainting the audience with what his actors say, but with what they think!”

“Hamlet’s observation is, I think, simply this. He has just remarked that honesty is very rare in the world. To this Polonius affirms. The prince then adds, that since there is so little virtue in the world, since corruption abounds every where, and maggots are bred by the sun, even in a dead dog, Polonius ought to make sure to prevent his daughter from walking in the sun, lest she should prove “a breeder of sinners;” for though conception in general be a blessing, yet as Ophelia (whom Hamlet supposes to be as frail as the rest of the world,) might chance to conceive, it might be a calamity. The maggots breeding in a dead dog, seem to have been introduced merely to introduce the word conception; on which word, as Mr. Steevens has observed, Shakspeare has play’d in King Lear: and probably a similar quibble was intended here. The word, however, may have been used in its ordinary sense, for pregnancy, without any double meaning.

“The slight connection between this and the preceding passage, and Hamlet’s abrupt question—Have you a daughter? were materially intended more strongly to impress Polonius with the belief of the prince’s madness.

“Perhaps this passage ought rather to be regulated thus: — ‘being a god-kissing carrion;’ i.e. carrion that kisses the sun. The participle being naturally refers to the last antecedent, dog. Had Shakspeare intended that it should refer to the sun, he would probably have written—”he being a god,” &c. We have many similar compound epithets in these plays. Thus, in King Lear, when the L. [The words after Lear, and before Kent, are unreadable.] Kent speaks of “ear-kissing arguments.” Again, more apparently in the same play before us: “New lighted on a heaven-kissing hill.” Again, in The Rape of Lucrece: “Threatening cloud-kissing Ilion with annoy.”

“However, the instance quoted from Cymbeline by Dr. Warburton, “—common-kissing Titan,” seems in favor of the regulation that has been hitherto made; for here we find the poet considered the sun as kissing the carrion, not the carrion kissing the sun. So, also in King Henry IV. Part I: :Did’st thou never fee Titan kissing a dish of butter?” The following lines also in the historical play of King Edward III. 1596, which Shakspeare had certainly seen, are, it must be acknowledged, adverse to the regulation I have suggested: “The freshest summer’s day doth soonest taint “The loathed carrion, that it seems to kiss.”

“In justice to Dr. Johnson, I should add, that the high elogium which he has pronounced on Dr. Warburton’s emendation, was founded on the comment which accompanied it; of which, however, I think, his judgement must have condemned the reasoning, though his goodness and piety approved its moral tendency. “

1219 good kissing carrion.] Steevens (ed. 1793): “As a doubt, at least, may be entertained on this subject, I have not ventured to expunge a note written by a great critick, and applauded by a greater.”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Whiter(1794, pp. 147-152): <p. 147>“God is the emendation of Dr. Warburton. The original reading is GOOD, which I am firmly persuaded proceeded from the pen of Shakspeare. I will not however venture to maintain, that the sense conveyed by the original word of the Author is in so lofty a strain as that, which is professed by the emendaton of the Critic. I cannot however sufficiently express my surprise, that the original reading should have been so universally abandoned, as if altogether destitute of meaning or propriety; nor can I refrain from observing, that there is something in the whole passage, as it stands with the emendation of Dr. Warburton, which to my feeling does not entirely accord with the genuine spirit of the Shakesperian manner. The physical operation of the Sun and the metaphorial energy of the Deity, are to my apprehension combined into a form, which appears not to have proceeded from the fancy of the Poet, but from the disturbed imagination of an inflated Critic...</p.149><p.150> ‘There is scarecely at present’ (says the Poet) ‘any honesty remaining in the world. All things are degenerated into so vile a nature, that they even become tainted by a commerce with those objects, which are in themselves virtuous and commendable. The Sun itself, though a good—though in general the source of what is excellent, beomes in some cases the origin of corruption; since we find that this good by operating on carrion breeds maggots in a dead dog. Why therefore, in such a state of universal corruption, may not your daughter herself be tainted, and become a breeder of sinners. Let her not walk in the sun—keep her retired and remonte from all possibility of contamination—even from communicating with those natures, which in general appear possessed of good and virtuous principles. In a word, dread the consequences that may ensure by exposing her to the temptations of the world. Conception is a blessing; but not as your daughter may conceive—that is, Though conception in some cases be indeed a blessing, yet it is not a blessing according to the corrupt mode in which your daughter’s inclinations may induce her to receive it.’—Such I am firmly persuaded is the sense of this celebrated passage. Mr. Malone seems to agree with me in some part of the explanation, though he reads God with Dr. Warburton, </p.150><p.151>and conjunction that a ‘God kissing carrion,’ means a carrion that kisses the Sun.” Here Whiter cites Malone’s readings of passages from Cymbeline and in Henry V before continuing, “The reader or the commentator, who has thought it necessary to personify the Sun on this occasion, was probably misled by the metaphorical, or rather perhaps physical, ambiguity of the word kissing. I will inform him however, that the Author himself was induced to use the term by the same train of ideas; though he has not applied it in that full sense, which is comprehended under a personified agency.” In a footnote at the end of his continuing discussion, Whiter adds the following: <p. 152>: “Why should Hamlet mistake Polonius for a Fishmonger? Though I am not able to inform the reader respecting the full force and nature of the exquisite reason, which belongs to this denomination; yet I can certainly convince him that some reason (such as it is) existed in the mind of the Poet. In Jonson’s Christmas Masque, (595) Venus is introduced as a Fire-Woman, and thus speaks of her son Cupid. ‘I had him by my first husband; he was a Smith, forsooth; we dwelt in Do-little-lane then: He came a month before his time, and that may make him somewhat imperfect: But I was a Fishmonger’s Daughter.’—We see now, that some opinion prevailed, which induced Hamlet, who is still harping on the daughter of Polonius, to mistake the father for a Fishmonger; though I shall leave others to discover the peculiar notion which was attached to this matter. Probably it was supposed, that the daughters of these tradesmen, who dealt in so nourishing a species of food, were blessed with extraordinary powers of conception.—I am surprised that this passage has escaped the diligence of our Critics.”

1219 good kissing carrion] Whiter (1794; rpt. 1967, p.129-132): “God is the emendation of Dr. Warburton. The original reading is GOOD, which I am firmly persuaded proceeded from the pen <p.129> <p.130> of Shakspeare. I will not however venture to maintain, that the sense conveyed by the original word of the Author is in so lofty a strain as that, which is professed by the emendation of the Critic. I cannot however sufficiently express my surprise, that the original reading should have been so universally abandoned, as if altogether destitute of meaning or propriety; nor can I refrain from observing, that there is something in the whole passage, as it stands with the emendation of Dr. Warburton, which to my feeling does not entirely accord with the genuine spirit of the Shakspearian manner. The physical operation of the Sun and the metaphorical energy of the Deity, are to my apprehension combined into a form, which appears not to have proceeded from the fancy of the Poet, but from the disturbed imagination of an inflated Critic. The noble sentiment, which has been given to Angelo in the preceding passage from Measure for Measure [2.2.162], may shew us the general and prominent idea, which on this occasion, I imagine, was likewise impressed on the mind of our Poet. — He considers the blessed breeding Sun [refers in footnote to Timon of Athens 4.1.82] as the GOOD principle in the fecundity of the earth — as impregnating the powers of nature with that excellent SEASON — that sovereign virtue — that rich influence, by which are produced and preserved the best and the fairest of her works. — Impressed with this sentiment, let us carefully examine the train of reasoning, which the whole passage appears to comprehend. ‘There is scarcely at present’ (says the Poet) ‘any honesty remaining in the world. All things are degen- <p.130> <p.131> erated into so vile a nature, that they even become tainted by a commerce with those objects, which are in themselves virtuous and commendable. The Sun itself, though a GOOD — though in general the source of what is excellent, becomes in some cases the origin of corruption; since we find that this GOOD by operating on carrion breeds maggots in a dead dog. Why therefore, in such a state of universal corruption, may not your daughter herself be tainted, and become a BREEDER of sinners. Let her not walk in the SUN — keep her retired and remote from all possibility of contamination — even from communicating with those natures, which in general appear possessed of GOOD and virtuous principles. In a word, dread the consequences that may ensue by exposing her to the temptations of the world. Conception is a blessing; but not as your daughter may conceive — that is, Though conception in some cases be indeed a blessing, yet it is not a blessing according to the corrupt mode in which your daughter’s inclinations may induce her to receive it.’— Such I am firmly persuaded is the sense of this celebrated passage. Mr. Malone seems to agree with me in some part of the explanation, though he reads God with Dr. Warburton, and conjectures that a GOD KISSING carrion,’ means a carrion that kisses the Sun. The reader or the commentator, who has thought it necessary to personify the Sun on this occasion, was probably misled by the metaphorical, or rather perhaps physical, ambiguity of the word kissing. I will inform him however, that the Author himself was induced to use the term by the same train of ideas; though he has not applied it in that full sense, which is comprehended under a personified agency. <p.131>

<p.132> “A passage, which Mr. Malone candidly produces as adverse to his own explanation, is very fortunately altogether applicable to mine. The passage occurs in the Historical Play of King Edward III. (1596.), which Mr. Malone thinks Shakspeare had certainly seen. ‘The freshest summer’s day doth soonest taint The loathed carrion, that it seems to kiss.’ Here we have neither Deity nor personification; but a GOOD — genial summer’s day, which refreshes nature with its influence, tainting the carrion. As in the passage of Shakspeare, we have the obvious metaphor of this GOOD principle KISSING carrion; so here likewise we have a similar poetical decoration of the freshest day LOATHING the carrion which it appears to KISS. — Though I will not flatter myself, that I have overturned this celebrated emendation of Dr. Warburton; yet I have certainly proved, that the ancient reading affords us a clear, just, and sufficient sense; and that it likewise inculcates a sentiment, which on another occasion has been adopted by our Poet. I might however venture to ask, by what rule of criticism, a Commentator is authorized to disturb an original reading of this sort; unless it be for the ingenious purpose of ‘almost setting himself on a level with his Author?’”

1218-19 For... carrion.] Becket (1815, p. 35): “Mr. Malone’s ‘god-kissing Carrion’ entirely destroys the meaning. The conception of the Poet is here wonderfully grand: there is divinity in it—while the exposition of the Commentator (W.) in which the anagogical sense, as it may be called, is considered, is truly philosophical and just:—an exposition, indeed, which sets him high above his competitors in the critic art.”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Caldecott (ed. 1819): “it would be too forced a sense to say that our author calls the sun ‘a good kissing carrion,’ we have nothing better to offer than that ‘the carcass of a dead dog, being a good kissing carrion,’ may mean, food for the sun, the breeder of maggots, to kiss for the purpose of causing putrefaction, and so conceiving or generating any thing carrion like, any thing apt quickly to contact taint in the sunshine: good at catching or drawing the rays or kisses of ‘common kissing Titan:’ and in the phraseology of the day, as shewn by Mr. Malone in the historical play of Edw. III. 1596, the above ideas appear to have bee connected ‘The freshest summer’s day doth soonest taintThe loathing carrion that it seems to kiss.’

“Hamlet having thus (if this too is not also thought too forced a construction) in no very delicate combination of them, started the ideas of ‘breeding and kissing,’ in a wild or mad way (and yet, as Polonius says, having method in it) talks of Polonius’s daughter, whom he cautions against this same Titan; whose property of corrupting, whose generating touch and teeming kiss, may ripen into conception: and then, proceeding most obviously, to infer, that within the sun’s reach his influence must be in this way powerfully impressive, at the same time that he admits that one of its consequences, conception, is a blessing, he yet adds; but not as the maid, who instead of being recluse, stages herself to the broad day, i. e. mixes with the world, and in his phrase, ‘walks in the sun’ (when she is prodigal enough, who but unmasks her beauty, who but unmasks her beauty to the moon, I. 3.) exposing herself to be tainted, ‘not a blessin, in the way in which she may conceive.’ Or its meaning and argument may be simply this; it is dangerous for your daughter to be in the sun, because the sun will breed maggots in a dead dog, he being so good (lusty) a kisser even of carrion. Here is unquestionably mush doubt fortunate conjecture must be left to others; be this as it may, we cannot resist the temptation of subjoining a specimen of the note- taking, alluding to at the close of the observations upon the character of Polonius; and one that was certainly not made for the sake of the author or his reader. [Quotes WARB and JOHN1]

“The wish of Dr. Johnson, expressed upon other comments of this writer, would not have been out of place here: a wish, that it had been true.”

1218-19 Coleridge (ms. notes 1819 in Ayscough, ed. 1807; rpt. Coleridge, 1998, 12.4:847): <p. 847>“Warburton is often led astray in his interpretations by his attention to general positions without the due Shakespearian reference to what is probably passing in the mind of the speaker, characteristic and expository of his particular character and present mood. In confirmation of my preceding note, see 1014, 1. 7, ß [[1451-2]].’—O Jeptha, judge of Israel! what a treasure hadst thou &c’”</p. 847>

1219-20 Coleridge: “For if the Sun &c, I rather think refers to some thought in Hamlet’s mind contrasting the lovely daughter with such a tedious old fool, her Father: as he represents Polonius to himself. “Why, fool that he is, he is some degrees in rank above a dead dog’s carcase—and if the Sun, being a god that kisses carrion can raise life out of a dead dog, why may good fortunem that favrs fools, have raised a lovely girl out of this dead-alive old fool.—”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Singer (ed. 1826): “The old copies read—’being a good kissing carrion.’ The emendation is Warburton’s, who has accompanied it with a long comment, in which he endeavours to prove that Shakspeare intended the passage as a vindication of the ways of Providence in permitting evil to abound in the world. He observes that Shakespeare ‘had an art not only of acquainting the audience with what his actors say, but what they think.’ This emendation, and the moral comment on it, delighted Dr. Johnson, who says ‘that is almost sets the critic on a level with the author!’ There was certainly much ingenuity in the emendation (which is unquestionably right as well as in the argument, but the latter appears totally irrelevant and strained, and certainly was rather intended to show the skill and ingenuity of the critic than to raise the character of the poet, or display his true meaning. Warburton pointed out the same kind of expression in Cymbeline:— ‘Common-kissing Titan.’ And Malone has adduced the following passage from the play of King Edward II.1596, which Shakspeare had certainly seen:— ‘The freshest summer’s day doth soonest taint / The loathed carrion that it seems to kiss.”

1219-20 good kissing carrion.] Knight (ed. 18841): “The ordinary reading, which was suggested by Warburton, is, ‘being agod, kissing carrion.’ The text, as we give it, is that of the quartos and the folios. We fear that this ‘noble emendation,’ as Johnson calls it, cannot be sustained by what follows. The carrion is good at kissing —- ready to return the kiss of the sun—- ‘Common kissing Titan,’—- and in the bitterness of his satire Hamlet associates the idea considers thatgood, the original reading, is correct; but that the poet uses the word as a substantive—- the GOOD principle in the fecundity of the earth. In that case we should read, ‘being a good, kissing carrion. ‘ (See ‘Specimen of a Commentary on Shakespeare,’ p.157)”

1219-20 good kissing carrion.] Collier (ed. 1843): “Warburton’s note, and Johnson’s eulogy of it, seem to have led most subsequent editors from the old text in this place without sufficient consideration. The passage is not found in the quarto, 1603, (where, by the way, the scene is transposed) and in every other old impression, quarto and folio, the words are ‘being good kissing carrion,’ and not ‘being a god, kissing carrion,’ as Warburton gave them. ‘Good’ could hardly have been a misprint for God, as in the latter case it would most likely have been written with a capital letter. Coleridge considered the passage ‘purposely obscure,’ but understood the reference to be to Ophelia and Polonius—- the former as bred out of the latter, ‘a dead dog,’ but nevertheless ‘a good kissing carrion.’ As Warburton remarked, in ‘Cymbaline’ the sun is called ‘common-kissing Titan,’ but the whole sense which seems to have been intended by Hamlet is obtained without altering ‘good’ to god: if the sun breed maggots in a dead dog, which dead dog is a good kissing carrion, why may not Ophelia have been produced by such carrion as Polonius? Such is Coleridge’s interpretation. (Lit. Rom. vol. ii. p. 224.) The objection to this notion seems to be, if Hamlet likens Polonius to carrion, he necessarily likens Ophelia to the offspring of carrion. In a case of such difficulty it is at all events better to furnish the ancient wording, leaving the reader to form his own conjectures.”

1219 being a good kissing carrion] Verplanck (ed. 1847): “Thus the passage stands in all the old editions. I understand Hamlet as saying in ‘wild and whirling words,’ — If even a dead dog can be kissed by the sun, (‘common-kissing Titan,’ as the poet elsewhere styles him,) how much more is youthful beauty in danger of corruption, unless it seeks the shade. But the editors have not been satisfied with any sense the passage can afford, as it was originally printed, and have generally followed Warburton’s famous conjectural emendation, though few are satisfied with his explanation. He maintains that the author wrote ‘Being a god , kissing carrion,’ and his commentary is one of the most celebrated curiosities of Shakespearian literature. He finds in Hamlet’s remark a great and sublime argument ‘as noble as could be drawn from the schools of divinity,’ vindicating the ways of ‘Providence in permitting evil to abound in the world;’ which he thus sums up: [quotes WARB].”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Hudson (ed. 1856): "Such is the reading of all the old copies. Warburton changed it to, ’being a god, kissing carrion,’ and supported the change with a long comment which, in the opinion of Dr. Johnson, ’almost sets the critic on a level with the author!’ The critic remarks that Shakespeare ’had an art not only of acquainting the audience with what his actors say, but what they think;’ and he regards the passage as intended to ’vindicate the ways of Providence in permitting evil to abound in the world.’ He sums up his argument thus: ’If the effect follows the thing operated upon, carrion, and not the thing operating, a God, why need we wonder that. the supreme Cause of all things diffusing blessings on man, who is a dead carrion, he, instead of a proper return, should breed corruption and vices?’ The comment is certainly most ingenious; too much so indeed, as it looks as if the critic were attributing his own thoughts to the Poet. Shakespeare, it is true, elsewhere calls the sun ‘common-kissing Titan;’ but if, in this ease, good had been a misprint for god, it would most likely have begun with a capital, Good. Either way, the passage is very obscure; Coleridge thinks it is purposely so. We are unable to decide whether good kissing should mean good to kiss, of good at kissing, that is, at returning a kiss. Mr. Verplanck explains it thus: "If even a dead dog can be kissed by the sun, how much more is youthful beauty in danger of corruption, unless it seek the shade.’ This is, on the whole, the best we have seen, but we must add Coleridge’s explanation: ’Why, fool as he is, he is some degrees in rank above a dead dog’s carcass; and if the sun can raise life out of a dead dog, why may not good fortune, that favours fools, have raised a lovely girl out of this dead-alive old fool?’ In elucidation of the passage, Malone aptly quotes the following from the play of King Edward III, 1596: ’The freshest summer’s day doth soonest taint The loathed carrion that it seems to kiss.”

1218-20 For ... carrion]Singer(ed. 1856): “The sense is evidently: ‘for if the sun, being a god, breed maggots in a dead dog, let not your daughter walk in the sun:— (i.e. let her not be exposed to corrupting influences:) conception is a blessing, but not as your daughter may conceive.’ I cannot think with Coleridge that ther is any reference to Polonius himself, or that a meaning can be made of ‘a dead dog’ being a ‘good kissing carrion!’”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Dyce (ed. 1857): “This passage is not in the quarto, 1603.—The other old eds. have ‘— being a good kissing carrion.’ —I give Warburton’s emendation,which, if overpraised by Johnson (who called it a "noble" one), at least had the merit of conveying something like a meaning.—That not even a tolerable sense can be tortured out of the original reading. we have proof positive in the various explanations of it by Whiter, Coleridge, Caldecott, Mr. Knight, and Delius. (‘The carrion,’ says Mr. Knight with the utmost gravity, ‘the carrion is good at kissing—ready to return the kiss of the sun— ’Common kissing Titan,’ and in the bitterness of his satire Hamlet associates the idea with the daughter of Polonius. Mr. Whiter, however, considers that good, the original reading, is correct; but that the poet uses the word as a substantive—the GOOD principle in the fecundity of the earth. In that case we should read, ’being a good, kissing carrion’. Equally outrageous in absurdity is the interpretation of Delius, which (translated for me by Mr. Robson) runs thus: ‘Hamlet calls the dog, in which the sun breeds maggots, a good, kissing carrion; alluding to the confiding, fawning manner of the dog towards his master. If the sun breeds maggots in the dead dog, which during its lifetime was so attached,—what, days Hamlet, in his bitter distrust [Misstrauen], and to annoy Polonius, might not the sun breed in the equally tender Ophelia, who ought therefore not to expose herself to the sun.’)”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Collier (ed. 1858): “The old annotator on the folio, 1632, evidently gave up the passage as inexplicable, and put his pen through the lines from ‘For if the sun,’ &c. down to ‘friend look to’t.’ [2.2.181—6 (1218—1224)].”

1219 good kissing carrion.]Staunton(ed. 1859): “In this passage, famous rather from the discussion it has occasioned than for any sublimity of reflection or beauty of language, we adopt the now almost universally accepted correction of Warburton— ‘a god’ for ‘a good’ of the old editions. At the same time we dissent toto cëlo from the reasoning by which he and other commentators have sought to conned ‘For if the sun breed maggots in a dead dog, being a god kissing carrion, ‘with what Hamlet had previously said. The circumstance of the prince coming in reading, that he evinces the utmost intolerance of the old courtier’s interruptions, and rejoices in his departure, serve, in our opinion, to show that Shakespeare intended the actor should manifest his wish to be alone, after the words, ‘Ay, sir; to be honest, as this world goes, is to be one man picked out of ten thousand,’ in the most unmistakable manner, by walking away and appearing to resume his study:—that then, finding Polonius still watching him, he should turn sharply round with the abrupt question, ‘Have you a daughter?’ It is this view of the stage business which prompted us to print the passage above, as something read, of affected to be read, by Hamlet,—an innovation—if it be one, (for we are ignorant whether it has been suggested previously)—that will the more readily be pardoned, since the passage as usually exhibited has hitherto defied solution.”

1219 good kissing carrion.] White (ed. 1861): “The old copies (except the 4to. of 1603, in which the passage is not found) have, ‘a good carrion,’ The correction, which is almost of the obvious sort, was made by Warburton, who improved the occasion in a small sermon, which the reader will find preserved in the Variorum editions.— This speech of Hamlet’s has an intimate connection in thought and in expression with his next; the thought being one which his madness, real or affected, may excuse, but upon which it is not pleasant to dwell, much lass to expatiate.”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Cartwright (1862, p. 59-60): “This passage has caused much ingenious speculation; but the simplest and easiest explanation is, not unfre-</p. 59><p. 60>quently, mearer the truth than a more erudite or far-fetched meaning. Instead of finishing the sentence, Hamlet carries on his joke of pretending not to know Polonius, and asks, ‘Have you a daughter?’ On this occasion we must remember, the conversation is a tete-a-tete, and that two months have passed away since Hamlet saw the ghost; time has weakened the impression, he suspects it to have been an illusion, though at intervals the idea rises vividly in his mind, it may have been his father’s spirit; in the meantime absence has added strength to his love, by dwelling on the image of Ophelia; and it is hardly two hours ago since he was made supremely happy by a stolen interview with her: —his asking, ‘Have you a daughter?’ is therefore a direct allusion to his visit that morning, and to the strict seclusion in which she had been kept during the last two months, not allowing to walk out, lest Hamlet should meet her.”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Keightly (1867, p. 290): “Warburton for ‘good’ read god, which alone makes sense. we have ‘commom—kissing Titan’ (Cymbaline. [3. 4. 163. (1853)]. Malone also quoted from King Edward III.:—- ‘ The freshest summer’s—day doth soonest taint | The loathed carrion that it seems to kiss.’”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): "Both quartos and folios have ’good kissing carrion.’ Warburton first proposed the change, which Johnson calls ’a noble emendation.’ There can be little doubt of its truth. Malone quotes King Edward III (one of the plays printed by Capell as being possibly Shakespeare’s) : ’The freshest summer’s day doth soonest taint The loathed carrion that seems to kis.’ (Act ii. sc. 1). Compare measure for Measure, ii. 2. 166-168, Cymbeline, iii. 4. 166, and 1 Henry IV, ii. 4. 134. "

1219 good kissing carrion.] Corson (1874, pp. 19-20): <p. 19>“ One thing can with certainty be assumed at the outset, namely, that the Sun, "common-kissing Titan," is the "osculist," to use Mr. Field’s word, and not the carrion dog; ’and now remains that we find out the cause of the effect, or rather say, the cause of the defect,’ in the several attempted explanations of the passage in question. That defect is due to one thing, and one thing only, and that is, to the understanding of ’kissing’ as the present active participle, and not as the verbal noun. It is well known to all English scholars that, in the early period of our languages, there were distinct forms for the present active participle and the verbal noun, the former ending in Anglo Saxon in -ende, and the latter in -ung, which endings became, respectively, -end (-ende), and -ing (inge), in Middle English. This distinction between the participle and the verbal noun continued to be quite strictly observed until nearly the end of the XIVth Century. It is so observed in the earlier text of the Wycliffite versions of the Scriptures, and in Gower’s "Confessio Amantis," the present participle terminating almost invariably in -ende, a few cases only occurring of the latter form in -inge (-ing). In Chaucer’s works, which represent the most advanced stage of the language in his time, the present participle terminates , with very rare exceptions, in -ing or-yng (-inge or -ynge). Soon after the close of the XIVth Century, -ing became the common ending of the participle and the verbal noun. But it is often important to determine which is which, in reading an author of so contriving a spirit of expression as Shakespeare exhibits.

“In the following passages, for example , the present active participle is used: ’Life’s but a walking shadow,’ Macbeth, A. v. S. v. l. 24; ’Look, here comes a walking fire.’ King Lear, A. 111. S. iv. l. 110; ’the dancing banners of the French,’ King John, A. 11. S . I. l. 308; ’my dancing soul doth celebrate This feast of battle with mine adversary. Richard II. A. I. S. III. l. 91; ’labouring art can never ransom nature From her inaidible estate;’ All’s Well that Ends Well, A. II. S. I. l. 116; ’more busy than the labouring spider’ II. Henry VI. A. III. S. I. l. 339; ’And let the labouring bark climb hills of seas Olympus -high ’ Othello, A. II. S. I. l. 184; ’thy parting soul!’ 1 Henry VI. A. II. S. v. l. 115; ’paring guest’ Troilus and Cressida, A. III. S. III. l. 166; ’a falling fabric.’ Coriolanus, A. III. S. I. l. 247; ’this breathing world,’ Richard III. A. I. S. I. l. 21; ’O blessed breeding sun,’ Timon of Athens, A. IV. S III. l, I;

But in the following passages the same words are verbal nouns used adjectively: </p. 19><p. 20>

’a palmer’s walking staff,’ Richard II. A. III. S. 3. l. 151; ’you and I are past our dancing-days:’ Romeo and Juliet, A. I. S. 5. l. 29; ’you ought not walk Upon a labouring day’ Julius Casar, A. I. S. I, l. 4; ’ere I could Give him that parting kiss’ Cymbeline, A. I. S. III. l. 34; "And say, what store of parting tears were shed?’ Richard II. A. I. S. IV. l. 3; ’he hath the falling sickness.’ Julius Casar. A. I. S. II. l. 252; ’Cannot be quiet scarce a breathing while,’ Richard III. A. I. S. III. l. 60; ’it is the breathing time of day with me;’ Hamlet A. v. S. II. l. 165.

And now we are all ready for ’kissing:’ In the following passages it is the participle:

’A kissing traitor.’ Love’s Labour ’s Lost, A. v. S. II. l. 592; ’the greedy touch Of common-kissing Titan,’ Cymbeline, A. III. S. IV. l. 164; ’O, how ripe in show Thy lips, those kissing cherries, tempting grow!’ A Midsummer Night’s Dream, A. III. S. II. l. 140.

’Kissing,’ in the last passage, might be taken for the verbal noun, meaning, for kissing, or, to be kissed; but it must here be understood as the participle. Demetrius speaks of the lips of Helena, as two ripe cherries that kiss, or lightly touch, each other. But to say of a pair of beautiful lips that they are good kissing lips, would convey quite a different meaning, -a meaning, however, which nobody would mistake: ’Kissing ’ in such expression , is the verbal noun used adjectively, and equivalent to ’for kissing.’ And so the word is used in the passage in question:

’For if the sun breed Magots in a dead dogge, being a good kissing Carrion’-

That is, a dead dog being, not a carrion good at kissing , as Mr. Knight and others understand it, and which would be the sense of the word . as a present active participle, but a carrion good for kissing, or, to be kissed , by the sun, that thus breeds a plentiful crop of Maggots therein, the agency of ’breed’ being implied in ’kissing.’ In reading this speech, the emphasis should be upon ’kissing’ and not upon ’carrion,’ the idea of which last word is anticipated in ’dead dog;’ in other words, ’kissing carrion’ should be read as a compound noun, which in fact it is, the stress of sound falling on the member of the compound which bears the burden of the meaning. The two words might, indeed, be hyphened, like ’Kissing-comfits,’ in The Merry Wives of Windsor, A. v. S. v. l. 19.

The fact that all the Quartos and Folios perfectly agree in the expression ’a good kissing carrion,’ is quite conclusive evidence that it is the correct reading, and that its meaning was plain to early readers and hearers. Had it been obscure, so obscure that "not even a tolerable sense," to use Dyce’s words, could have been "tortured out of the original reading," it would no doubt have been tinkered into variations before Bishop Warburton made the noble emendation which almost sets the critic on a level with the author.’!”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Bulloch (1878, pp. 224-5): <p. 224> “The expression ‘god kissing carrion’ is a reading of Warburton’s, and adopted by Hanmer, while the Quartos and folios all read ‘good kissing carrion’. The Cambridge notes also acquaint us that Malone conjectured ‘god-kissing carrion.’ A conjecture by Whiter is ‘good, kissing carrion’; and one by Mitford is ‘carrion-kissing god’. My Staunton is of opinion that Hamlet reads from a book. Dr. Johnson was so well pleased with Warburton’s emendation, that he says it ‘almost sets the critick on a level with the author’.

“Malone’s reading by the insertion of the hyphen alters the reading of Warburton considerably. Mitford transposes the whole thus — ‘a carrion-kissing god’. The difficulty would seem to be whether the three chief words should be connected with the sun or the dead dog as the antecedent, and the settlement of this, when read by the light of Hamlet’s next speech warrants the rejection of good and god as the word really intended by the author.

“It will be noticed that immediately on giving utterance to the expression ‘carrion,’ Hamlet suddenly puts the question ‘Have you a daughter?’ and on receiving a reply in the affirmative adds — [quotes TLN 1222-3]

“Shakespearian phraseology will help us in this matter. In ‘The Merry Wives of Windsor,’ III.iii.205, Mrs. Ford puts the question to Mrs. Page—’Shall we send that follish carrion, Mistress Quickly, to him?’ and in ‘Romeo and Juliet,’ III.v.157. Capulet thus rails on his daughter ‘Our you green-sickness carrion.’ Our genial acquantiance too, </p. 224><p. 225>Mr. Samuel Pepys, has the following entry in his ‘Diary’ under date 15th September, 1661. [Third edition.] ‘Pegg Kit, who, I doubt will be but a troublesome carrion to the executors’? and this ‘Pegg” was his own cousin whose mother’s funeral the worthy diarist had just been superintending.

“The proper word for good should be cold; the dog was a cold-kissing carrion while the daughter of Polonius was a warm-blooded one, and hence the necessity of precaution.” </p. 225>

1219 good kissing carrion.] Hudson (ed. 1881): “‘A good kissing carrion’ is, no doubt, a carrion good for kissing, or good to kiss. So in The Merry Wives, we have ‘kissing—comfits’ [5.5.20. (2501)] which were candies flavoured so as to perfume the breath, and render the lips sweet for kissing. And so we often say ‘good hay—making weather,’ meaning, of course, weather good for hay—making, or good to make hay.”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Gould(1884, p. 38): “‘A good kissing carrion’ means a good carrion for kissing; i.e. breeds fast as a result of, the kissing, in this case maggots. As sometimes happens with this word, ‘kissing’ here means rather more than it expresses. Shakespeare uses it in the same sense in All’s Well: ‘He that kisses my wife is my friend.’

1219-20 good kissing carrion.] MacDonald (ed. 1885): “When the passion for emendation takes possession of a man, his opportunities are endless—so many seeming emendations offer themselves which are in themselves not bad letters and words affording as much play as the keys of a piano. ‘Being a god kissing carrion,’ is in itself good enough; but Shakespere meant what stands in both Quarto-and-folio: the dead dog being good carrion good at kissing. The arbitrary changes of the editors are amazing.”

1219-20 MacDonald (ed. 1885): “He cannot help his mind constantly turning upon women ; and if his thought s of them are often cruelly false, it is not Hamlet but his mother who is to blame : her conduct has hurled him from the peak of optimism into the bottomless pool of pessimistic doubt, above the foul waters of which he keeps struggling to lift his head.”

1219 good kissing carrion.] Dowden (ed. 1899): “Retaining the good of Q, F, good kissing (which might be hyphened) must be explained, with Caldecott, Corson, Furness, good for kissing. But much might be said on behalf of Warburton’s emendation, which Johnson accepted with an outbreak of admiration-god kissing; compare ‘common-kissing Titan,’ Cymbeline, III. iv. 166, and see 1 Henry IV. II. iv. 113. In King Edward III. (1596) we have: ‘The freshest summer’s day doth soonest taint The Loathed carrion that it seems to kiss.’ In support of god-kissing Malone cites Lear, II. I 9: ‘ear-kissing arguments.’ Hamlet ironically justifies the severance by Polonius of Ophelia from himself: all the world is evil, even the sun has the basest propensities ; if a dead dog is corrupted by the sun, how much more your daughter by me. Staunton supposes that Hamlet reads or pretends to read, these words. See by Ingleby, Shakespeare Hermeneutics, p. 159.

1219 being a good kissing carrion] Subbarau (ed. 1909): “The text of Qq Ff is quite good and intelligible and needs no emendation. The phrase ‘being a good kissing carrion’ does not refer either to ‘sun’ or ‘dog’ but to ‘daughter’ following it in the speech which Hamlet breaks off. If Hamlet had not broken off, his words would probably have run as follows: ‘For if the sun breed maggots in a dead dog, being a good kissing-carrion your daughter cannot escape kissing and conception.’ The order is purposely inverted so as to mark the contrast between bad kiss-unworthy carrion (a dead dog) and good kiss-worthy carrion (Ophelia) — ‘carrion’ being used in the literal sense of ‘flesh.’ Polonius had warned his daughter against Hamlet’s advances and told her that his vows were but ‘springes to catch woodcocks,’ mere ‘implorators of unholy suits.’ Hamlet had learnt this from Ophelia herself (when and how will be explained in the Exposition) and he now taunts the old man about it, ironically praising his advice and policy: ‘Yes, you are right in warning your daughter against my advances. This is indeed a wicked world: honesty is a very rare virtue, even princes cannot be trusted to be honourable and virtuous. Does not the noble Sun stoop to baseness and kiss the loathsome flesh of a dead dog and breed maggots therein? How then can a fine kiss-worthy piece of flesh like your lovely daughter escape his kissing and consequent conception? Therefore, let her not walk in the sun. The noblest men often kiss and unite even with low and loathsome women. It is therefore a most proper precaution that a charming damsel like your daughter should be warned to keep herself aloof from a princely suitor like myself.’ Polonius does not understand the taunt and takes Hamlet’s words as the wandering speech of a mad man ‘harping on his daughter.”

1219-20 good kissing carrion.] Wilson (ed. 1934): “i.e. flesh good enough for kissing purposes. Warburton read ‘ a god, kissing carrion,’ and many edd. follow, quoting Cymb.[3.4.163. (1853)] ‘common—kissing Titan’ and I Hen. IV, [2.4.120. (1082)], ‘Didst thou never see Titan kiss a dish of butter?’ Tilley supports the emendation as being in keeping with the incorruptible or divine nature of the sun, insisted upon in all proverbial or literary expressions of the idea, especially in that of Tertulllian, which occurring in an attack upon the theatre may have been familiar to Shakespeare. The fact that ‘god’ and ‘good’ are sometimes confused in this and other Qq. seems at first sight to lend support also. But ‘good’ is far more often spelt ‘god’ than vice versa; and ‘good kissing’ is textually very difficult to set aside. The two versions give different meanings, both convenient to the context; but the cynicism of the unemended text is more appropriate to Ham.’s mood than Warburton’s ‘noble emmendatian,’ as Johnson called it. Cf. note [(1222-3)].”

1219 good kissing carrion] Harrison (ed. 1934): “The carrion is good at kissing—ready to return the kiss of the sun—’Common kissing Titan.’—and in the bitterness of his satire, Hamlet associates the idea with the daughter of Polonius.”

1218-19 Jenkins (ed. 1982): "The sense, correctly understood by Raleigh (Johnson on Shakespeare, p. XXV) and well explained by Corson (quoted in Furness, i. 149-50), may be brought out by analogy. A good eating apple is one which makes good eating ; a good selling car is a model of car which sells well, the car being the thing sold as here the carrion is the thing kissed. Cf. LLL I. i. 65, ’too hard a keeping oath’. It is because the dog’s carcase makes good kissing that the sun can breed maggots in it, good kissing it is. The failure to recognize this idiomatic usage and the consequent attempt to take kissing as an active present participle has obfuscated the plain sense with a wilderness of comment. Warburton’s famous emendation god, though called by Johnson a ’noble emendation’, still occasionally resuscitated by otherwise reputable editors, and misleadingly maintained by Bowers (SQ, IV, 51-6 ; SB, XXXI, 106 ; cf. I.v. 32-3 LN), is as unnecessary as it is unjustified."