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.

1726 theon

theon

Theobald (1726, p. 173): “those Players were so far from appearing human Creatures, that he could scarce imagine them the Handy-Work of Nature, but of Some of her clumsy Journeymen.”

1773 v1773

v1773

Farmer (in Steevens ed. 1773 10:Qq5v): “I would read thus, . . . ‘had made the men.”

1790 mal

mal

Malone (ed. 1890, 10:685): “The notion of Nature keeping a shop, and employing jouneymen to form mankind, was common in Shakspeare’s time. See Lily’s Woman in the Moon, a comedy, 1597: ‘They draw the curtains from before Nature’s shop, wher stands an image clad, and some unclad’.”

1791- rann

rann

1882 them,] Rann (ed. 1791-): “—men, the men.”

1856 hud1 (1851-6)

hud1

Hudson (1856): "A friend suggests whether men should not have the before it, or else be them. This would give a very different sense, limiting it from men in general to the particular players in question. Perhaps it may be doubted whether Hamlet means that he had thought the players themselves to be the second-hand workmanship of nature, from their imitating humanity so falsely, or whether he had taken their imitation as true, and so extended his thought of secondhand workmanship over all mankind. However, our best road to what he means, is by what he says, probably. Malone would read them. H."

1866a dyce2

dyce2

1881-2 Dyce (ed. 1886): “‘I have no doubt that our author wrote ‘had made them, and not made them well,’ &c. Them and men are frequently confounded in the old copies.’ MALONE .”

1872 cln1

cln1

1881 had made men] Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): "Perhaps we should read ’them,’ with Rann, as Theobald indeed had suggested, or ’ ’em,’ or, with Farmer, ’the men.’ "

1882 elze

1881 made men] Elze (ed. 1882): “This is the unanimous reading of QA, QB and FA. Farmer: made the men; Theobald: made them. Compare K. Lear, II, 2, 59 seq.: Nature disclaims in thee; a tailor made thee.”

1882 abhominably] Elze (ed. 1882): “Marston, The Malcontent, IV, 1 (Works, ed. Halliwell, II, 256) also spells abhominable; B. Jonson (Cynthia’s Revels, Induction, ed. 1616, p. 183 and elsewhere) abominable.”

1885 macd

macd

1882-3 MacDonald (ed. 1885): “Shakespere may here be playing with a false derivation, as I was myself when the true was pointed out to me—fancying abominable derived from ab and homo. If so, then he means by the phrase: ‘they imitated humanity so from the nature of man, so inhumanly.’”

1897 rushtonN

rushtonN

1855-83 ô it offends mee . . . . imitated humanitie so abhominably] Rushton (1897, pp. 5-6): <p.5> [quotes 1855-1860, 1876-83 before giving Ascham passage] “‘Of the makynge of the bowe, I wyll not greatly meddle, leste I shoulde seeme to enter into an other mannes occupation, whyche I can no skyll of. Yet, I woulde desyre all bowyers to season theyr staues well, to woorke them and synke them well, to giue them heetes conuenient, and tyllerynges plentye. For thereby they shoulde bothe </p.5><p.6> get them selues a good name, (And a good name encreaseth a mannes profyte muche) and also do greate commoditie to the hole Realme. If any man do offend in this poynte, I am afraid they be those iourny men whiche labour more spedily to make manye bowes for theyr owne monye sake, than they woorke dilignetly to make good bowes, for the common welth sake, not layinge befroe theyr eyes, thys wyse prouerbe “Sone ynough, if wel ynough.”

‘Wherewyth euere honest handye craftes man shuld measure, as it were wyth a rule, his worke withal. He that is a iourney man, and rydeth vpon an other mannes horse, yf he ryde an honest pace, no manne wyll dysalowe hym: But yf he make Poste haste, both he that oweth the horse, and he peraduenture also that afterwarde shal bye the horse, may chaunce to curse hym.’

“In these passages Shakespeare and Ascham speak in disparaging terms of the work of journeymen, and use the same words. It offended Hamlet ‘to the soul to hear a robustious periwig-pated fellow tear a passion to tatters, to very rags,’ and says ‘I have seen players who have so strutted and bellowed that I have thought some of nature’s journeymen had made men and not made them well, they imitated humanity so abominably:’ and Ascham, in desiring all bowyers to season their staves well, to work them and sink them well, to give them heats convenient and tillerings plenty, says, ‘if any do offend in this point I am afraid they be those journeymen which labour more speedily to make many bows for their own money sake, than they work diligently to make good bows for the common wealth sake.’”

1934a cam3

cam3

Wilson (ed. 1934): “Another hit at the ‘robustius periwig—pated fellow’ [(1856-7)]. Lucianus later makes ‘damnable faces’ and Ham. sarcastically bids him ‘bellow ‘[(2121-3)].”

1882-3 Wilson (ed. 1934): “Q2 ‘abhominably.’ The mod. sp. conceals the quibble; the word being supposed to derive from ‘ab homine.’