2254-2258 Then . . . . friends] Theobald (1726, pp. 97-8): <p.97> “We have already, in the Course of these Remarks, convers’d with a Place or two, which have given Reason to presume, that, if corrected at all, they could be corrected only by the Servants at the Press. Here again is a Passage so confused, and so indiscriminately printed, that it furnishes a strong Suspicion of never having been revised by the Editor. Could so nice a Judge as Mr. POPE pass over such absurd Stuff as is jumbled here together, and not observe a Fault that is so plain and palpable? Correct it with all the Editions that I have ever seen, except the Quarto’s of 1637, and 1703. in which the text is likewise shuffled and faulty; </p.97><p.98> ‘Haml. Then will I come to my Mother by and by.—They fool me to the top of my Bent.—I will come by and by. Exit Polon. Polon. I will say so. Haml. By and by is easily said. Leave me, Friends. Exeunt Rosen. and Guilden.’”

2254 Then . . . by] Caldecott (ed. 1819): “Then I assent to your request, as yours is assentation to every thing I say.”

2254-2258 Then . . . said] Hackett (1863, p. 160-1): <p.160> “Hamlet, upon finding that Polonius will agree to every thing he suggests, reciprocates the courtesy and dismisses him with,—’Then, I will come to my mother by and by!’ and turning away from him, and walking towards </p.160><p.161> the other side of the stage, soliloquizes respecting his own vexation—’They fool me to the top of my bent’; and naturally supposing that Polonius, to whom he had already given an answer, had gone with it in haste to his mother, Hamlet is about to resume his invective against the Courtier when he turns and perceives Polonius still standing just where he was when he had given him his answer, and also still gaping at him in stupid amazement; whereupon, as I conceive, Hamlet ought to approach Polonius and repeat loudly, and syllabically-distinct, the words:—’I will come by and by!’ in order that Polonius, now no longer unable to comprehend Hamlet’s desire for his departure, may withdraw, as he does presently, saying—’I will say so!’ upon which Hamlet abruptly remarks—’By and by is easily said!’ in a tone and with a brusquerie, denoting in plain prose,—’If you understood my answer, which is simple and easily carried, why do you continue here instead of dispatching it?’” </161>

2254 by and by] Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “by and by geht auf zeitl. unmittelbare Nähe. Look his winding up the watch of his wit; by and by it will strike. Tmp. [2.1.12 (687-8)].” [by and by refers to temporal closeness. Look his winding up the watch of his wit; by and by it will strike. Tmp. [2.1.12 (687-8)]

2254 by and by] Clark and Wright (ed. 1872): “immediately. Compare Matthew xiii. 21, where ‘by and by’ translates GREEK HERE.”

2254 by and by] Rolfe (ed. 1878): “Presently, soon; as often in S. See H5[2.2.2 (629)].”

2254 Then I will come] Elze (ed. 1882): “The reading of F1 has inadvertently been inserted in the text.”

2254 by and by] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “immediately.”

2254 Then . . . by] Deighton (ed. 1891): “an intentional inconsequent answer.”

2254 by and by] Deighton (ed. 1891): “at once.”

2254 They foole . . . bent] Deighton (ed. 1891): “they are ready to assent to anything I say. However foolish, in order to gain their purpose for bent see note on [2.2.30 (1051)].”

2254 by and by] Dowden (ed. 1899): “immediately, as often in Shakespeare.”

2254 by and by] Craig (ed. 1931): “immediately.”

2254-58 Wilson (1934, rpt. 1963, 2:190-1): <2:190> “The presence of the catchword ‘Ham. Then’ at the foot of the previous page in Q2, proves that the speech-heading was in the manuscript and was omitted by the compositor; and it is natural, as all editors have tacitly assumed, to suppose that he also omitted the two speech-headings that follow in F1. Nevertheless, there is a case to be made for the Q2 text, and one worthy of consideration. It was put to me in a letter from a friend, whom I consulted on the question.2 After noting that the first prefix must have been in the copy, and that we have only the evidence of F1 to show that the other two were, he writes: ‘The proof-reader ought to have observed the omission of the first, but he may easily have overlooked the other two, as the text </2:190><2:191> has, I think, a possible meaning without them, if you read it thus: ‘Ham. Then I will come to my mother by and by. [aside] They foole me to the top of my bent. [to Pol.] will come by and by. [to the rest] Leave me friends. [exit friends. Pol lingers. [to Pol.] I will. Say so! ‘By and by’ is easily said. [exit Pol.’ I do not mean to suggest that it is right, but I think that a proof-reader might consider it quite good enough sense, and, to make it a little clearer, insert a comma after ‘will.’ Indeed, I think the idea of Polonius hanging about in a fussy sort of way after he has had his answer and Hamlet having to drive him away by repeating ‘I will,’ is rather attractive and more in character than Polonius’s somewhat flat acceptance of Hamlet’s message in the Folio! However, my point is only that a proof-reader would not necessarily observe that the two later prefixes were omitted.’ My correspondent is cautious in his statement; he is being asked an opinion and is not having to make a decision. For myself, I am inclined to feel that F1 is preferable here. Textually the probabilities seem equally balanced; we have the omitting compositor in the one scale, and the clarifying prompter in the other. We are therefore thrown back upon purely aesthetic considerations; and while I think the scene of Q2 just expounded is good enough for a proof-reader (though I doubt the ability of this proof-reader to follow it), I hesitate to believe it good enough for Shakespeare. Apart from the jerkiness of the whole, my chief difficulty is with the last line which, if the interpretation be as my correspondent suggests, ought surely to run ‘I will. Say so! “Will come” is easily said,’ since the words ‘by and by’ have ceased by this time to be relevant. In F1, on the other and, the reading is easy enough, and ‘by and by’ is the pivot of the litter altercation with Polonius.” </2:191>

2254 by and by] Wilson (ed. 1934): “= before long (cf. [5.1.297 (3496)]), i.e. at my own time, not (as most interpret) ‘immediately.’”

2254 Then] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “The false appearance of logic given by the use of then is a part of Hamlet’s counterfeit madness.”

2254 by nd by] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “immediately.”

2254 by and by] Cross & Brooke (ed. 1947): “at once.”

2254 by & by] Evans (ed. 1974): “at once.”

2254 by and by] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “This has its modern sense, as Dover Wilson, against many other commentators, recognizes. Cf. [3.3.90 (2365)].”

2254 by and by] Bevington (ed. 1988): “quite soon.”

2254 by and by] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “immediately.”