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

Line 3719, etc. - 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 2951-end ed. Hardin A. Aasand

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

3719-20 King. I doe not feare it, \| I haue seene you both,

3721 But since he is {better} <better’d>, we haue therefore ods. 3721

1773 jen

jen

3721 But since he is better, we haue therefore ods] Jennens (ed. 1773) : “better’d]] Since he is better’d, &c. i.e. since the wager he gains, if he should win, is better than what we shall gain if he loses, therefore we have odds, that is, we are not to make so many hits as Laertes.”

1774 capn

capn

3721 But since he is better, we haue therefore ods] Capell (1774:1:1:149) :“By ‘odds,’ in this place, and again in [3718] is meant — the unequal worth of the things were wager’d; those on the King’s side being of much greater value than those on Laertes’: but these odds , says he, I have given you, (speaking to Laertes) because I know my cousin is ‘betterd’‘ by the practice he has had since you left him. The old reading “we “ arose from a mistake of the printer’s; who confounded these odds with the “ odds “ that Hamlet speaks of at [3660], where they signify—odd hits.”

1791- rann

rann

3721 But since he is better, we haue therefore ods] Rann (ed. 1791) : “to be the greater gainer if successful; much improved of late in the science of defence; the odds, in point of the number of hits, are on our side.”

1793 v1793

v1793 : Ritson

3721 But since he is better, we haue therefore ods] Ritson (apud Steevens, ed. 1793) :“These odds were twelue to nine in favour of Hamlet, by Laertes giving him three. RITSON

1803 v1803

v1803 = v1793

3721 But since he is better, we haue therefore ods]

1813 v1813

v1813 = v1803

3721 But since he is better, we haue therefore ods]

1821 v1821

v1821 = v1813

3721 But since he is better, we haue therefore ods]

1854 del2

del2

3721 But since he is better, we haue therefore ods] Delius (ed. 1854) : “Weil Laertes seit der Zeit, dass der König ihn und Hamlet fechten sah, sich in dieser Kunst noch vervollkommnet hat, sind von den zwölf Gängen des Gefechts drei dem Hamlet vorausgegeben.” [“While Laertes has improved still in this art since the time that the King saw him and Hamlet duel, there have been given to Hamlet three of the 12 passes of the duel.”]

1864 ktly

ktly

3721 But . . . ods] Keightley (ed. 1864) : “‘Tis true he did neglect his exercises (!), K.”

[Ed. HLA: Is this Keightley’s own feeling about this line?. It appears from his KTLYN, that K. believes that this is a missing line to be inserted.]

1867 Ktly

Ktly : ktly

3721 But . . . ods] Keightley (1867, p. 298) : <p. 298> “If he (i.e. Laertes) was bettered, in the ordinary sense of the word, how could the odds lie against him? You’re would give better sense than ‘he’s;’ but it does not satisfy me. A line has evidently been lost, and the latter part may be addressed to the Queen. The lost line may have been something like this: ‘Tis true he did neglect his exercises.’ Hamlet had said (2.2) he had ‘foregone all custome of exercixes.’ In my Edition I have made an Aside here to the Queen, who may have made a sign of dissent; but a speech of the queen’s to the same effect may have been what is lost.” </p. 298>

1872 del4

del4 = del2

3721 But since he is better, we haue therefore ods]

1872 cln1

cln1

3721 better] Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): “better’d]] The reading of the folios. The quartos have ‘better.’”

1877 v1877

v1877 ≈ jen ; ≈ cald2 (see n. 3717-18; only “‘Better’d,’ . . . estimation”) ; ≈ del4(and allusion to MOBERLY) ; ≈ Ktly

3721 But since he is better, we haue therefore ods]

1881 hud3

Hud3 : standard

3721 But since he is better, we haue therefore ods] Hudson (ed. 1881): “Here the reference is to the three odd hits in Hamlet’s favour, the numbers being nine and twelve. The King affects to regard this as a fair offset for Laertes’s improved skill in the handling of his weapon.”

1885 macd

macd

3720 MacDonald (ed. 1885): “‘seen you both play’—though not together.”

macd

3721 MacDonald (ed. 1885): “Point thus: ‘I do not fear it—I have seen you both! But since, he is bettered: we have therefore odds.’

““Since’—’since the time I saw him’”

1885 mull

mull

3721 ods] Mull (ed. 1885): “each at exercise.”

mull

3721 better] Mull (ed. 1885): “bettered]] by study at Paris.”

1890 irv2

irv2 : standard

3721 better] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “Better’d probably refers to Laertes’ practice in Paris.”

1899 ard1

ard1

3721 better] Dowden (ed. 1899): “better’d]] not naturally superior, trained by Parisian fencers.”

1934 Wilson

Wilson

3721 better] Wilson (1934, 2:280) prefers F1’s better’d over Q2 as more “attractive”

3721 better] Wilson (1934, 2:284-85): <p. 284> “Here is one more instance in which I have had to change my mind and must now eat former words. In the Cranach Hamlet and in my Introduction to an edition for the Shakespeare Association of Silve’s Paradoxes of Defence (pp. xiv=xv) I subscribed to the Q2 ‘better’, explaining it, not as ‘superior in skill’, but as ‘the proposer of the bet’, who had therefore to give the odds; ‘for’, I argued, ‘it would be surely absurd that Claudius should first declare his disbelief in Hamlet’s inferiority and in the same breath assert that Laertes is the better of the two’. Since then I have written the present book and worked out the whole theory of the relationship between F1 and Q2, with the result that I now find the F1 ‘better’d’ very difficult to account for, as an alteration, either careless or deliberate, by one of the two F1 scribes. The verb, ‘to better’, is a favourite one </p. 284> <p. 285> with Shakespeare, and is moreover one most unlikely to have occurred to a prompter or a copyist. Furthermore, I have come to realize that, even if ‘better’ had been intended to mean ‘he who made the bet’, an audience would not easily catch that significance. I am, therefore, obliged to conclude that previous editors are right in accepting F1 here and interpreting ‘better’d’ as ‘improved by practice with the scrimers in Paris’.” </p. 285>

1934 cam3

cam3 = ard1 ; Wilson; +

3721 better] Wilson (ed. 1934): “v. G[lossary]. . . . (cf. 4.7.94-101). ‘Better’ is a favourite vb. with Sh.; v. Schmidt’s Lexicon. At one time I favoured Q2’s reading, explaining it as ‘the proposer of the bet’; but I think now that had Sh. intended this he would have written ‘the better’; v. MSH. pp. 284-5 for discussion.”

cam3

3721 better] Wilson (ed. 1934, Glossary): “(vb.), improve, perfect oneself.”

1939 KIT2

Kit2 ≈ standard

3721 better] better’d]]

3721 better] better’d]] Kittredge (ed. 1939, Glossary):

kit2 ≈ standard

3721 ods]

1938 parc

parc ≈ standard

3721 better] better’d]]

1947 cln2

cln2 ≈ standard

3721 better] better’d]]

1974 evns1

evns1 ≈ standard

3721 better] better’d]]

evns1 ≈ standard

3721 ods]

1980 pen2

pen2

3721 ods] Spencer (ed. 1980): “Perhaps since means ‘since then’, giving the meaning’ Since I saw you both fence, Laertes has improved himself. Therefore we are giving three points to Hamlet.’ Another suggestion is that the King’s stake is so much more valuable than Laertes’s that he has asked for favourable odds. But it is difficult to see how this could be communicated to an audience.”

pen2 ≈ standard

3721 better] better’d]]

1982 ard2

Ard2

3721 better] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “better’d]]pronounced ((by public opinion)) to be the better. The meaning, though it has escaped the dictionaries, is plain, and the inept traditional explanation that Laertes has improved ((through his stay in Paris)) must be firmly contradicted. The comparison is not between Laertes as he is and was but between Laertes and Hamlet.”

3721 ods] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “Referring to Hamlet’s advantage of three hits (([3631])). Cf. [3660].”

1985 cam4

cam4

3721 better] Edwards (ed. 1985): “An extremely politic reply. Claudius says he does not think Hamlet is weaker, but because Laertes has improved, he has arranged a handicap for him.”

1987 oxf4

oxf4 ≈ ard2 (pronounced . . . better)

3721 better]

oxf4

3721 ods] Hibbard (ed. 1987): “i.e. odds that are in our favour. Claudius is doing his best to cover up the fact that the odds are designed to give Laertes as many opportunities as possible to kill Hamlet.”

1988 bev2

bev2: standard (pen2)

3721 better] better’d]]

1992 fol2

fol2≈ standard

3721 ods]

3719 3720 3721