2477 vice of Kings] Theobald (ed. 1733): “This does not mean, a very vicious King; as, on the other hand, in King Henry V. this Grace of Kings, means, this gracious King, this Honour to Royalty. But here, I take it, a Person, and not a Quality, is to be understood. By a Vice, (as I have explain’d the Word in several preceding Notes) is meant that Buffoon Character, which us’d to play the Fool in old Plays; so that Hamlet is here design’d to call his Uncle, a ridiculous Ape of Majesty; but the Mimickry of a King.”

“This letter is also in Nichols, Illus. ii, 252, where there are many fewer capital letters and other orthographical changes.

“Here is part of the note from theo1 R3, in v.4.446-7n12, first with some of my comments; also in Theo TLNs doc:

“Vice: (1) Theobald has an extremely interesting essay explaining the word vice in R3. This could relate to Ham 2477, “Of your precedent Lord, a vice of Kings,” where Theobald also has a note but a much shorter one than the one in R3 and does not x-ref the R3 note but says “Vice (as I have explain’d the Word in several preceding Notes).” The word vice is not capitalized in Ham. 2477 (Q or F).

“Ham also uses the word vice in 2537, where it is also personified, but seems not to be the stage character—seems in fact to be his mother. TLN 2537 (Q) is not capitalized but TLN 2537 (F) is capitalized.

“Hamlet also uses the word vice in 3590, where the word does not seem to be a personification and is not capitalized in either Q or F. This is about Osric.

“In theo1 mtby3 has a note in Ham, 2477 a x-ref to Ham. 2537,where we do find the word vice as a personification, but Thirlby also has a x-ref to TLN 751 “swift as quick-silver it courses through” (which I do not understand).

“In R3, the line is “Thus, like the formal Vice, Iniquity, I moralize two meanings in one word” (4. 446-7n. 12 [1661]), where both Vice and Iniquity are capitalized. mtby3’s comment here is an interesting anti-WW one: It comes right after an anonymous conjecturer, whom Theobald quotes, quotes the R3 line: “Wt are there 2 Warburtons? or is this his friend Warburton? I surmize the latter.” Skipping over the conjecturer’s emendation, which Theobald rejected, I copy in [2477] .Theobald’s justification for keeping the readings “found in all the editions” of R3.

“By Vice, perhaps, the Author may mean not a Quality but a Person. There was hardly an old Play, tell the Period of the Reformation, which had not in it a Devil, and a drole Character, a/ Jeaster; (who was to play upon, and work, the Devil;) and this Buffoon went by the Name of a Vice. A Vice in a Play, badin, mime; To play the Vice, badiner; Mime, a Vice, Fool, Jeaster, &c. in a Play; says Cotgrave. Mimo, (mimus) a Jeaster, a Vice; says Minshew in his Spanish Dictionary. If it be worth the while to spend a Word or two upon Derivation, we are told, this Vice comes from the Saxon Word Ieck, which comes from the Greek [GREEK HERE], vanus, fatuus . .. This Vice, in my Mind, coems from the Greek original: for, adding the Æolic Digamma to [ same Grk word as above in brackets ] and then throwing out the Termination, Vice is very nearly produced. But to pass over from Etymology. This Buffoon was at first accoutred with a long Jerkin, a Cap with a Pair of Ass’s Ears, and a Wooden Dagger, with which (like another Arlequuin) he was to make Sport in belabouring the Devil. This was the conbstant Entertainment in the Times of popery, whilst Spirits, and Witchcraft, and Exorcising held their own. When the Reformation took place, the Stage shook off some Grossities, and encreas’d in Refinements. The Master-Devil then was soon dismiss’d from the Scene; and this Buffoon was chang’d into a subordinate Fiends, whose Business was to range on Earth, and seduce poor Mortals into that personated vicious Quality, which he occasionally supported; as, Iniquity in general, Hypocrisy, Usury, Vanity, Prodigality, Gluttony, &c. [mtby3, who has very few comments on this note and fewer underlinings than usual, asks here “Is this from authority?” Theobald continues] Now, as the Fiend, (or Vice,) who personated Iniquity (or Hypocrisy, for instance,) could never hope to play his Game to the purpose but by hiding his cloven Foot, and assuming a Semblance quite different from his real Character; he must certainly put on a formal Demeanour, moralize, and prevaricate in his Words, and pretend a Meaning directly opposite to his genuine and primitive Intention. If this does not explain the Passage in Question, ’tis all that I can at present suggest upon it. —Sub judice lis est: I relinquish it to more able Judgments” (4.446-7).

2477 vice] Warburton (ed. 1747, 5: 266-7 n. 5), re R3 [3.1,82 (1661)]: ““formal Vice iniquity.” Most of this argues against the word “formal,” which WARB takes to mean serious, and he thinks the Vice is always a clown. But I think formal could mean something related to the theater. See Nares [lemma Iniquity, 257b), “By the formal vice . . . we may understand that Sh. meant the regular Vice, according to the form of the old dramas, which I believe no commentator has before explained.””

2477 vice] Johnson (1755): 1. “The course of action opposite to virtue; depravity of manners; inordinate life.”

2. “A fault; an offence. It is generally used for a habitual fault, not for a single enormity.”

3. “The fool, or punchinello of old shows.”

4. “Excessive grief or anxiety. This is not now used.”

5. “A kind of small iron press with screws, used by workmen.”

2477 vice of Kings] Johnson (ed. 1765): “A low mimick of Kings. The Vice is the fool of a farce; from whom the modern Punch is descended.”

2477 vice of Kings] Hanmer (ed. 1771, glossary): “vice. A person in our old plays. The word is an abbreviation of Devices: for in our old dramatic shows, where he was first exhibited, he was nothing more than an artificial figure, a puppet moved by machinery, and then originally called a Device, or ’Vice. In these representations he was a constant and the most popular character: afterwards adopted into the early comedy. The smith’s machine called a Vice, is an abbreviation of the same sort.—Hamlet calls his uncle ‘A Vice of kings,’ a fantastic, and factitious image of majesty, a mere puppet of royalty. See Jonson’s Alchymist, Act I. Sc. III. ‘And on your stall a puppet with a vice. Mr. Warton.”

2477 vice of Kings] Jennens (ed. 1773): “By a vice is meant that buffoon character, that used to play the fool in old plays. T.”

2477 vice] Capell (1774, 1:1: glossary, vice): “a very important Personage of the Drama in old Time, that sprung from the ancient Moralities, (in which particular Vices were personated, and sometimes Vices in general by the Name of—Iniquity) and was call’d in the Plays that succeeded them,—the Vice, Vitium; a buffoon Character, and Father of the modern Harlequin; of which no better Idea can be given than is contain’d in the Places refer’d to, and particularly the last.”

2477 vice] Capell (1774, 1:1:140-1): “From the brief account in the ‘Glossary,’ under the article ‘Vice,’ it may be collected—that they were of two sorts: both of them mixt characters; one, a villain with some spice of the fool; the other, a fool with a little dash of the knave; the first belong’d to ancient moralities, the latter to the plays that succeeded them, and these begot the Clowns of our Sh. The ‘Vice’ the king is compar’d to, is—the morality Vice: and ‘tis no ways improbable,—that the feat attributed to him in 3.4.100-101 (2479-80)], was taken from a piece of that sort to which the audience were no strangers; and if so, their relish of the lines above-mention’d might be greater than we can have for them now: In a line after these [3.4.102)]2483] the other Vice is alluded to, whose garment was the same as our Fool’s.”

2477 vice of Kings] Ritson (1783, pp. 206-7): “The vice, says Dr. Johnson, is a low mimick, the fool of a farce, from whom the modern punch is descended. But, with all proper deference to so good a judge in these matters, it is a much more probable conjecture that the facetious master Punch and his wife Joan are the true representatives of those distinguished characters, in the old mysteries, Pontius Pilate and his dreaming lady. The old vice, as we elsewhere read, had a dagger of lath (i.e. </p.206><p.207> a sword of thin wood), and is very likely the genuine ancestor of our more modern Harlequin. The fool of the Christmas gambols, in the North of Yorkshire, is yet called the Vice.” </p.207>

2477 vice of Kings] Rann (ed. 1791-): “a mockery, a buffoon imitator.”

2477 vice of Kings] Douce (1807, p. 251): “‘A low mimick of kings. The vice is the fool of a farce; from whence the modern punch is descended.’ Thus far Dr. Johnson. The first position in his note is questionable, the others erroneous. The vice belonged to the old moralities; and the modern Punch is most certainly not descended from him, but legitimately from a character well known in the theatres of ancient Rome. We have borrowed him from the Italian Polichinello. With respect to the former part of the note, Hamlet’s expression may be quite literal. Thus in H5 [490], we have ‘this grace of kings.’ Afterwards indeed, Sh., in his usual manner, recollecting the ambiguity of the term, takes up another simile, and makes Hamlet call his uncle a king of shreds and patches [3.4.102 (2483)]. See a former note in vol. i. p. 467.”

2477 vice] Whiter (1811, 3:107n-108n): <p.107n> “It is necessary, that we should produce our authority to shew, that the sense of Vice, expressing the Fool of the ancient Moralities, belongs to the idea of Form, or Figure. Some of the Commentators on Sh. have suggested to us the true meaning of the word. Falstaff says of Shallow, ‘And now is this Vice’s dagger become a Squire,’ (2H4 [3.2.319-20 (1845-46)]) on which Mr. Malone has the following remark: ‘Sir Thomas Hanmer was of the opinion, that the name of the Vice, (a droll Figure heretofore much shewn upon our state, whose dress was always a long jerkin, a fool’s cap, with ass’s ears, and a thin wooden dagger,’) was derived from the French word Vis, which signifies the same as Visage does now. From this in part came Visdase, a word common among them for a Fool, which Menage says, is but a corruption from Vis d’asne, the Face; or Head of an Ass. By vulgar use this was shortened to plain Vis or Vice. Mr. Warton thinks, that the word is only an abbreviation of deVice, the Vice in our old Dramatic shows being nothing more than an artificial Figure, a puppet moved by Machinery. So Hamlet calls his Uncle, A Vice of Kings, a fantastick, and factitious image of Majesty, a mere Puppet of Royalty.’ Dr. Johnson has explained the same expression by ‘A low Mimick of Kings, where the term Mimic well expresses the idea. Mr. Malone in explaining the passage of Hamlet might have profited by a quotation, which he has produced in another place, where we find that the term Vice corresponded in sense with the Latin Mima. Philemon Holland has thus translated the following </p.107n><p.108n> passage in Pliny: ‘Lucceia Mima centum annis in scenâ pronunciavit. Galeria Copiola, emboliaria, reducta est in scenam annum centessimum quartum agens,—Lucceia, a common Vice in a play, followed the stage, and acted thereupon 10 yeeres. Such another Vice, that plaied the Foole, and made sporte betweene whiles interludes, named Galeria Copiola, was brought to act on the stage, when she was in the 104th yeere of her age.’ (Historical account of the Stage, Vol. I. Part II. p. 119)

“The mind of Sh. was strongly impressed with the idea of this Fantastic Figure in every part of the imagery, which belongs to the passage before us. [quotes ‘A Vice of Kings . . . . What would your gracious Figure?’ [3.4.96-104 (2475-2485)]] I have little doubt, but that the imagery of stealing the diadem from a shelf was taken from some scenical representation, in which the Vice performed an achievement of this nature. The King of Shreds and Patches, is still the ‘Vice of Kings,’ as Dr. Johnson has well observed, and the reader, who should amuse his mind by tracing the influence of the Associating Principle, on the imagination of the Poet, will perhaps suspect, that the word Guards, (You heavenly Guards) was impressed on the writer by the Guards,—’The fringes, the Shreds and Patches of the Vice, and that the idea of the Gracious Figure was likewise suggested by the opposite Fantastic Figure, of the Vice, which now occupied the thoughts of the Bard.—Though the sense of Vice is such, I imagine, as I have explained it to be, we must remember that the word is as used to represent the Bad Character, introduced into our Moralities, called sometimes Iniquity, as in the passage, ‘Thus like the formal Vice, Iniquity,’ where Vice appears to the Poet to mean the Vicious, or Bad Character. Yet even here, though such be his conception, he cannot help recurring to the original idea, that of Form, ‘The Formal Vice.’” </p.108n>

2477 vice of Kings] Caldecott (ed. 1819): “This character, which Mr. Douce says (Illustrat. II. 251) ‘belonged to the old moralities,’ is said, by Mr. Warton, as introduced here, to mean ‘a fantastic and factitious image of majesty, a mere puppet of royalty.’ ‘And on your stall a puppet with a vice.’ B. Jonson’s Alchymist, 1.3. And see 2H4 [3.2.319-20 (1845-46)] Falst. 3.2.”

2477 vice of Kings] Fleming (apud Singer ed. 1826): “i.e. ‘the low mimic, the counterfeit, a dizard, or common vice and jester, counterfeiting the gestures of any man.’—Fleming.”

2477 vice of Kings] Caldecott (ed. 1832): “This character, which Mr. Douce says (Illustrat. II. 251) ‘belonged to the old moralities,’ is said, by Mr. Warton, as introduced here, to mean ‘a fantastic and factitious image of majesty, a mere puppet of royalty: in Wise Vieiliard ‘Idolles and Statues, artificially moved by vises and gynnes’ 4to. 1631. sig. H. And see 2H4 [3.2.319-20 (1845-46)] Falst. and TN 4.2. Clown, and WT [1.2.416 (529)]. Cam. ‘An instrument to vice you to’t.’

“Although there has been much controversy, and a great deal of confusion, introduced, upon this subject, it is perfectly clear that the Virtues and Vices were constantly personified in our Mysteries and Moralities; and equally so, that when this species of scenic representation gave place to a better order of things, a Vice was retained upon the stage: not indeed as one of the Characters of the piece, not as one of the Personæ Dramatis, but between the scenes in the interludes to make merriment and engage attention, while the actors (the stage being yet ill regulated) were preparing the succeeding parts of the representation. That this was so in comedies and tragedies, and therefore in theatrical representations generally, is shewn in Puttenham’s Arte of Poesie, p. 21. (See 2H4 [3.2.319-20 (1845-46)] Falst.) To this Interlude the Farce has succeeded; but scenes such as those, in which the Vice so comically figured, however out of place and character in tragedy, as well as unnecessary to the actor’s convenience, after the stage became better managed, were so familiar and acceptable to the audience, that to this cause, to the powerful operation of this principle, we must ascribe the introduction of the Gravediggers in this play.”

2477 vice of Kings] Knight (ed. [1839] nd): “the Vice of the old Moralities. See 2H4 [3.2.319-20 (1845-46)].”

2477 vice of Kings] Collier (ed. 1843): “The vice was the fool, clown, or jester of the older drama, and was frequently dressed in party-coloured clothes: hence Hamlet just afterwards calls the usurper, ‘a king of shreds and patches [3.4.102 (2483)].’”

2477 vice of Kings] Delius (ed. 1854): “Er ist unter Königen nur ein gemeiner Possenreisser. Vice, die stehende lustige Person auf dem vorshakspereschen Theater, war mit ihren plumpen, witzlosen Spässen zu Sh.’s Zeit, wo man auch an den Narren der Bühne grössere Ansprüche machte, in ziemliche Verachtung gerathen. Diese Verachtung drückt Hamlet mit vice stärker aus, als wenn er clown gesagt hätte. Auf den vice beziehen sich auch die bald erwähnten shreds and patches, aus denen sein buntes Narrencostüm zusammengestückt war.” [Among kings he is only a common jester. Vice, the regular comic person in the pre-Shakespearean Theater, had fallen into disrepute with clumsy, stupid jokes in Sh’s time, when more was expected of stage fools. Hamlet expresses the disrepute more strongly when he says vice instead of clown. To vice is also connected the recently mentioned shreds and pa’ches from which the colorful costume of the fool was put together.]

2477 vice] Fiebig (ed. 1857): “I.e. a low mimick of kings. The vice is the fool of a farce, whence the modern punch is descended, the buffoon or harlequin of the puppet show.”

2477 vice of Kings] Staunton (ed. 1860): “A ‘vice’ was the buffoon or clown of the older drama.”

2477 vice of Kings] White (ed. 1861): “An allusion to the Vice or inferior comic character of the old stage, who, as his name implies, was generally wicked as well as ridiculous.”

2477 vice] Clark and Wright (ed. 1864a [1865] 9: glossary, Vice): “sb. the buffoon in the old morality plays. Ham. [3.4.154 (2537)].”

2477 vice] Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “das Laster, komische Figur der Moral-plays. In Schlesien ist das Wort "Laster" noch jetzt Scheltname zweideutiger Frauenzimmer.” [trollop, comic figure of morality plays. In Silesia the word Laster is still a derogatory term for improper women.]

2477 vice] Romdahl (1869, p. 33): “was the name of the buffoon in the old moralities and mysteries. He was called so, because he always was the personification of some vice; on that account sometimes also called iniquity, as representative of sin in general.”

2477 vice of Kings] Hudson (ed. 1872): “An allusion to the old Vice or jester, a stereotyped character in the Moral-plays, which were going out of use in the Poet’s time. The Vice wore a motley or patchwork dress; hence the shreds and patches applied in this instance [3.4.102 (2483)]. See vol. ix. page 202, note 8.”

2477 precedent] Clark and Wright (ed. 1872): “So Ant. [4.14.83 (2921)]: ‘thy pecendent services.’”

2477 a vice of Kings] Clark and Wright (ed. 1872): “a buffoon king. The’vice’ in a play was the clown or buffoon, the name being handed down from the moralities of an older time, when virtues and vices were personified. Cotgrave has ‘Badiner. To play the foole, or Vice.’ Compare 2H4 [3.2.319-20 (1845-46)]: ‘Now is this Vice’s dagger become a squire.’ The Vice was equipped with a wooden dagger, or ‘dagger of lath.’ See TN [4.2.123-127 (2107-09)].”

2477 a vice of Kings] Moberley (ed. 1873): “A buffoon-king, as the Cambridge editors explained it; see their note.”

2477 vice] Furness (ed. 1877): “Theobald was the first who noted that this means ‘that buffoon character which used to play the Fool in old Plays.’ In the Variorum notes to 2H4: iii, ii, 343, various fanciful etymologies of the word are given. Douce (I, 468) closes the discussion by showing that the character in the old moral-plays, known as the ‘Vice,’ was doubtless so named from the vicious qualities attributed to him, and from the mischievous nature of his general conduct. Collier (Hist. of Eng. Dram. Poetry ii, 264, et seq.) gives the best account of this curious personage in a passage quoted by Dyce (Gloss.): As the Devil now and then appeared without the Vice, so the Vice sometimes appeared without the Devil. Malone tells us that ‘the principal employment of the Vice was to belabor the Devil;’ but, although he was frequently so engaged, he had higher duties. He figured now and then in the religious plays of a later date, and, in The Life and Repentance of Mary Magdalen, 1567, he performed the part of her lover, before her conversion, under the name of Infidelity; in King Darius, 1565, he also acted a prominent part, by his own impulses to mischief, under the name of Iniquity, without any prompting from the representative of the principle of evil. Such was the general style of the Vice, and as Iniquity he is spoken of by Sh. (R3: 3.1.82 (1661)] and Ben Jonson (Staple of News, second Intermean). The Vice and Iniquity seem, however, sometimes to have been distinct persons, and he was not unfrequently called by the name of particular vices; thus, in Lusty Juventus, the Vice performs the part of Hypocrisy; in Common Conditions he is called Conditions; in Like will to Like, he is named Nichol New-fangle; in The Trial of Treason his part is that of Inclination; in All for Money he is called Sin; in Tom Tyler and his Wife, Desire; and in Appius and Virginius, Haphazard . . . . though Douce is unquestionably correct when he states that the Vice ‘was generally dressed in a fool’s habit’ [hence the expression in Hamlet, ‘A king of shreds and patches.’—Dyce], he did not by any means constantly wear the parti-colored habiliments of a fool; he was sometimes required to act a gallant, and now and then to assume the disguise of virtues it suited his purpose to personate. In The Trial of Treasure, 1567, he was not only provided, as was customary, with his wooden dagger, but, in order to render him more ridiculous, with a pair of spectacles (no doubt of a preposterous size) , , , ,The Vice, like the Fool, was sometimes furnished with a dagger of lath, and it was not unusual that it should be gilt . . . . Tattle [in Jonson’s Staple of News] observes that’ there is never a fiend to carry him [the Vice] away,’ and in the first Intermean of the same play Mirth leads us to suppose that it was a very common termination of the adventures of the Vice for him to be carried off to hell on the back of the Devil; ‘he would carry away the Vice on his back, quick to hell, in every play where he came.’ In The Longer thou liviest the more Fool thou art, and in Like will to Like, the Vice is disposed of nearly in this summary manner: in the first, Confusion carries him to the Devil, and in the last, Lucifer bears him off to the infernal regions on his shoulders. In King Darius the Vice runs to hell of his own accord, to escape from Constancy, Equity, and Charity. According to Bishop Harsnet (in a passage cited by Malone,—Sh., by Boswell, iii, 27), the Vice was in the habit of riding and beating the Devil, at other times than when he was carried against his will to punishment.”

2477 vice of Kings] Collier (ed. 1877): “The vice was the fool, clown, or jester of the older drama, and was usually dressed in party-coloured clothes: hence Hamlet just afterwards calls the Danish usurper, ‘a king of shreds and patches [2483].’”

2477 a vice of Kings] Rolfe (ed. 1878): “A clown of a king; alluding to the Vice in the old moralities or moral-plays. Cf. TN [4.2.123-127 (2107-9)]: ‘Like to the old Vice, / . . . /Who, with dagger of lath,/In his rage and his wrath/Cries, ah, ha, to the devil,’ etc. The Vice was equipped with a wooden sword or dagger, with which he used to beat the devil, and sometimes to pare his nails. Cf. 2H4 [3.2.319-20 (1845-46)] and H5 [4.4.70-71 (2450-51)].”

2477 vice of Kings] Hudson (ed. 1881): “An allusion to the old Vice or jester, a stereotyped character in the Moral-plays, which were going out of use in the Poet’s time. The Vice wore a motley or patchwork dress; hence the shreds and patches applied in this instance [3.4.102 (2483)]. See vol. ix. page 202, note 8.”

2477 vice of Kings] White (ed. 1883): “a king like the Vice in the old Moralities.”

2477 vice] MacDonald (ed. 1885): “The clown of the old Moral Play.”

2479 stole] Mull (ed. 1885): “took it in a mean, cowardly manner.”

2477 vice of Kings] Barnett (1889, p. 52): “a mere buffoon king. In the old Moralities the clown was the vice and was equipped with a wooden dagger.”

2477 precedent] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “former.”

2477 precedent] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “Sh. uses precedent (accentuated on the second syllable) in two other places in the present sense of former: Ant. [4.14.83 (2921)], and Tim., [1.1.132 (165)]. In using it as a noun he accentuates the word, as we do now, on the first syllable.”

2477 vice of Kings] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “i.e. a buffoon king.”

2477 vice of Kings] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “One of Sh’s several allusions to the Vice or buffoon of the moralities. Compare TN [4.2.123-127 (2107-9)]; and see Extracts from Collier’s History of English Dramatic Poetrry, ii. 264 et seq. in Furness, Var. Ed. pp. 295, 296. See note 305 to R3.”

2477 vice of Kings] Deighton (ed. 1891): “who is a real king nothing more than the buffoon in the old Moralities was to the serious characters. Douce shows that the “Vice” in those plays was so named from the vicious qualities attributed to him, and from the mischievous nature of his general conduct.”

2477 vice] Dowden (ed. 1899): “the vice of the old moralities was commonly a mischievous buffoon; he wore sometimes the parti-coloured dress of a fool, whence, Dyce supposes, ‘a king of shreds and patches.’”

2477 vice] Porter & clarke (ed. 1903): “A buffoon in morality plays and interludes, representing wickedness in an outrageous way more farcically and despicably than the devil. He was dressed in parti-color clothes like a fool, – hence Hamlet says A King of shreds and patches [3.4.102 (2483)], - and wore a ridiculous gilt dagger of lath to belabor the devil with when he bore him off to hell at the end of the play. In ‘King Darius’ (1565) he ran to hell himself to get away from Constancy, Equity, and Charity.”

2477 a vice of Kings] Verity (ed. 1904): “a clown of a king, a m’merry Andrew’ of a monarch. The reference is to the Vice of the old ‘Morality’ plays, in which the Devil, a personification of wickedness, and the Vice were traditional characters, representing the popular comic element. Each was marked by a traditional equipment. The Vice, attired in a long particoloured Fool’s coat, a vizor, and a cap with ass’s ears, bore a dagger of lath (wood); the Devil, often dressed as a bear, had long talons and carried a club. The chief fun of the scenes in which they appeared was that the Vice belaboured the Devil with the dagger of lath, so that he roared again with pain, and tried to cut the Devil’s talons. In the end the Devil descended to the infernal regions with the Vice on his back. From the character of the Vice was developed the Clown or Fool of Sh’s plays. Cf. TN [4.2.123-127 (2107-09)], where the Clown tells the imprisoned Malvolio that he will return again in a moment as swift as “the old Vice.”

2477 vice] Chambers (ed. 1905): “stage fool.”

2477 vice] Neilson (ed. 1906, glossary): “sb., the buffoon in the Moralities.”

2477 precedent lord] Craig (ed. 1931): “i.e. the elder Hamlet.”

2477 vice of Kings] Craig (ed. 1931): “buffoon of kngs; a reference to the Vice, or clown, of the morality plays and interludes.”

2477 vice] Ridley (ed. 1934): “the comic figure in the old interludes and moralities.”

2477 vice of Kings] Harrison (ed. 1937): “the caricature of a King. The Vice was the clown in the old Morality plays.”

2477-80 a vice . . . pocket] Kittredge (ed. 1939, Introduction, p. xvii-xviii): <p. xvii> “In Hamlet’s Denmark, </p. xvii><p. xviii> as in Macbeth’s Scotland,1 the crown was elective within the limits of the royal family, and there was noting against the law in Claudius’s taking advantage of his nephew’s absence to bring about his own election. Nowhere in the play is the question of usurpation raised. The nearest approach to such an idea comes in Hamlet’s passionate outburst to his mother [this passage]. And this ambiguous evidence is vacated by his words to Horatio when he is setting forth, with relentless logic, the ‘perfect coincidence’ of his vengeful plan (v, 2, 64 ff.). Hamlet’s deliberate use of the term ‘election,’2 and of ‘my hopes’ instead of ‘my rights’ is decisive. The council of nobles has elected Claudius, and no Dane questions his title.</p. xviii>

<n1><p. xviii> “1See Mac. [1.4.37 (324)]; [2.4.30-31 (964-65)] (and notes). </p. xviii></n>

<n2><p. xviii> “2Hamlet uses the word again in [5.2.355 (3844)], when he prophesies that ‘th’election lights on Fortinbras,’” </p. xviii></n>

2477 a vice of Kings] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “a rascally buffoon among kings. The vice in the old morality plays was a comic character.”

2477 vice] Neilson & Hill (ed. 1942): “the Vice, the mischievous buffoon of the Morality plays.”

2477 precedent] Rylands (ed. 1947): “previous.”

2477 vice ] Rylands (ed. 1947): “clown, caricature.” Notes: “The Vice with his dagger of lath, ass’s ears, and parti-coloured Fool’s coat was, like the Devil whose nails he would try to pair, a traditional figure of the Morality plays from which the Fool of Shn. and other drama was derived.”

2477 vice] Farnham (ed. 1957): “vice clownish rogue (like the vice of the morality plays).”

2477 vice] Evans (ed. 1974): “buffoon (like the Vice of the morality plays).”

2477 precedent Lord] Spencer (ed. 1980): “previous husband.”

2477 vice of Kings] Spencer (ed. 1980): “king who behaves like a buffoon (like the Vice in the Morality plays of the sixteenth century).”

2477 a vice] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “(1) a model of iniquity, with particular reference to (2) the character so called in the Morality plays. As the devil’s henchman, he was a mischievous buffoon. A vice of kings thus stresses the paradox of a king who is both villain and clown, a grotesque figure against his majestic predecessor.”

2477 a vice of Kings] Wilkes (ed. 1984): “a vice of kings a king degraded to the role of Vice, the comic figure of the interludes and morality plays.”

2477 precedent] Bevington (ed. 1988): “former (i.e., the elder Hamlet).”

2477 vice] Bevington (ed. 1988): “buffoon. (A reference to the Vice of the morality plays).”

2477 precedent] Andrews (ed. 1993): “Both (a) previous, and (b) of a higher order of precedence. Here pronounced ’pre-cee-dent’.”

2477 vice of kings] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “supreme example of a vicious king. There may also be reference to the traditional character of the Vice in the morality plays.”