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

Line 2395 - 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 2023-2950 ed. Frank N. Clary

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

2395 {And} <But> would {it} <you> were not {so, you} <so: You> are my mother.	3.4.16

1726 theon

theon

2395 And] Theobald (1726, p. 102): “If I understand at all what Hamlet should be presum’d to say here, I think, the Editor has adopted a Reading directly opposite to the Sentiment the Poet would express. Surely, Hamlet does not so much wish that the Queen was not his Mother, as that She was not his Uncle’s Wife. He loves and honours her as his Mother; and therefore, out of those Regards, wished She had not that Disgrace upon her Character, of having married his Uncle, whom he knew to be his Father’s Murtherer. The Passage, certainly, ought to be distinguished as the second Folio Edition, and several other of the better Copies, lead the way. ‘Queen. Have you forgot me? Haml.—No, by the Rood, not so;You are the Queen, your Husband’s Brother’s Wife, BUT, ‘would you were not so!—You are my Mother.”

1847 verp

verp: knt1, Henderson, v1785

2395 Verplanck (ed. 1847): “The folio reads—‘But would you were not so: you are my mother’—thus making Hamlet wish, not that she was not his mother, but that she was not his uncle’s wife. Both readings have their beauty as well as authority. Most editors have preferred the first, which best agrees with the Queen’s answer. Mr. Knight has chosen the other; and Henderson, of whose exquisite conception of the character tradition has preserved the fame, seems, from a note contributed by him to the Variorum edition [v1785], to have been of the same opinion.”

1854 del2

del2

2395 And would it] Delius (ed. 1854): “But . . .you] Die Stelle lässt sich nach verschiedener Interpunction verschieden deuten: entweder wird were it not so parenthetisch eingeschoben in den Satzt: but you are my mother, so dass Hamlet bedauert, dass sie seine Mutter sei; oder but would you were not so gehört zu dem Vorhergehenden: Ihr seid die Königin, Eures Gatten Bruders Frau, aber ich wollte, Ihr wäret das nicht. Die erstere Construction scheint die vorzüglichere.” [With different punctuation this passage may be interpreted differently: either were it not so is inserted parenthetically into the phrase but you are my mother so that Hamlet is expressing regret that she is his mother; or but were you not so belongs to the preceding material: you are the wife of your husband’s brother, but I wish you were not. The first construction seems the preferable one.]

1857 fieb

fieb

2395 would . . . not so] Fiebig (ed. 1857): “The folio reads, ‘But would, you were not so.’”

1872 del4

del4 ≈ del2

1884 Gould

Gould

2395 Gould (1884, p. 40): “The last phrase should read ‘But (would you were not so) you are my mother.’”

1891 dtn

dtn

2395 would . . . not so] Deighton (ed. 1891): “alas.”