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

Line 28 - 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 0-1017 ed. Bernice W. Kliman

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

28 Hora. A peece of him.	1.1.19

1747 warb

warb

28 A peece] Warburton (ed. 1747): “But why a piece? He says this as he gives his hand. Which direction should be marked.”

1765 Heath

Heath: warb +

28 A peece] Heath (1765, p. 519): “This is a common humourous expression, and intimates no indication of giving the hand at the same time.”

1765 john1

john1 = warb

28 A peece]

john Tmp.: warb +

28 A peece] Johnson (ed. 1773, 1:46 n. 8): “For morsel Dr. Warburton reads ancient moral, very elegantly and judiciously, yet I know not whether the author might not write morsel, as we say a piece of a man. Johnson.”

1773 jen

jen = warb; Heath

28 A peece]

1773 v1773

v1773 = john1; Heath without attribution

28 A peece] Steevens (ed. 1773): “I believe, no more than a cant expression. Steevens.”

Ed. note: Close to Heath while giving credit to himself.

1778 v1778

v1778 = v1773

28 A peece]

v1778 Tmp. = john1 +

28 A peece] Steevens (ed. 1778, 1:53 n. 4): “So in Hamlet, What, is Horatio there? A piece of him. Again in Measure for Measure, ‘How doth my dear morsel; thy mistress?’ In [Cor. 1.1.222 (237)], —‘Hence you fragments.” Steevens.”

v1778 Tmp.

28 A peece] Malone (ed. 1778, 1:53 n. 4): “So in [Ant. 3.13.116 (2294)], ‘—As a morsell cold Upon dead Caesar’s trencher.’ Malone.”

1785 v1785

v1785 = v1778

28 A peece]

1790 mal

mal = v1785

28 A peece]

1791- rann

rann

28 A peece] Rann (ed. 1791-): “The same.”

1793 v1793

v1793 = mal +

28 A peece] Steevens (ed. 1793): “It is used, however, on a serious occasion in Pericles [3.1.17]: ‘Take in your arms this piece of your dead queen.’ ”

1803 v1803

v1803 = v1793

28 A peece]

1813 v1813

v1813 = v1803

28 A peece]

1821 v1821

v1821 = v1813

28 A peece]

1854 del2

del2 ≈ Heath

28 A peece] Delius (ed. 1854): “scherzhaft für ‘Er selbst.’” [Jokingly for ‘he himself.’]

1868 c&mc

c&mc: warb +

28 Clarke & Clarke (ed. 1868): “We think that Horatio rather says this as if implying ‘the mortal part of him,’ ‘the substantial or material portion of him,’ in all but sportive allusion to his having been summoned by Marcellus and Bernardo to behold a spiritual appearance which they believe to have seen, but in which he does not believe.”

1869 tsch

tsch ≈ c&mc

28 See v1877.

1872 cln1

cln1 ≈ c&mc without attribution; tsch; molt

28 Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): “This is, of course, said jestingly. But the German editor Tschischwitz finds a deeper meaning. ‘The philosophic Horatio,’ he says, ‘regards the personality of a man in his merely physical aspect as only a part of himself.’ Another editor, Max Moltke, takes the same view. He supposes that Horatio, being a sceptic as to the reality of the Ghost, does not bring with him that belief which predominates in and fills the whole being of Bernardo and Marcellus, and thus the whole Horatio is not present but only a piece of him.”

1873 rug2

rug2

28 Moberly (ed. 1873): “as we say, ‘Something like him.’ The phrase has none of the deep meaning which some of the German editors find in it.”

1875 Ingleby

Ingleby: Knight, + Charlotte Brontë + in magenta underlined

28 Ingleby (1875, pp. 136-7): “The late Charles Knight speaks of this as Horatio’s ‘familiar pleasantry’: but what is its meaning? The simple answer is—Horatio calls his hand, as he touches that of the soldier—a piece of himself, because he could not be distinctly seen in the dark shade of the battlement: i.e., a piece, as implying that the rest was there, though not revealed to Hamlet’s sense at once. Now all of this is suggested by a passage in the penultimate chapter of Jane Eyre. She has come upon the blind Rochester, and placed her hand in his: ‘Her very fingers,’ he cried, ‘her small, slight fingers! If so, there must be more of her.’

‘Of course, neither Charlotte Brontë nor Mr. George Dawson [someone he cites for an earlier crux] had the faintest notion of illustrating Shakespeare. when these things were uttered. If either of them had, some of the force of the illustration would be lost. As it is, we here see the power of common sense, even in this day, to do the great playwright yeoman service.”

1877 v1877

v1877: warb, Heath, Steevens, rug2, tsch

28 tschischwitz (ed. 1869, apud ed. 1877): “The philosophic Horatio conceives the personality of man, in its outward manifestation merely, as only a piece of himself.”

v1877: moltke

28 Moltke (ed. 1869, apud ed. 1877): “It is not without significance that Sh. makes Horatio return a different answer to this question than did Bernardo. The latter by his reply of ‘He’ implies that he is present body and soul (for he and Marcellus have no longer any doubt; they have already seen the apparition with their own eyes; whereas Horatio by his answer implies that owing to his incedulity he is not wholly present, that is not there with his body and soul, but that he had undertaken to share the watch with the corporal part only of his entire individuality.”

1888 mull

mull

28 Mull (1888, p. 4): “Some German editors have found remarkably deep meanings in this bit of pleasantry. It was well understood as such, and as nothing more; in [WT 1.2.137 (213)], we find it in another form:—‘Most dear’st! my collop!’ i.e. piece or slice.”

1891 dtn1

dtn1: standard gloss; Ingleby

1899 ard1

ard1 ≈ warb; ≈ Ingleby; Clarke & Clarke without attribution

c. 1900 lee

lee ≈ cln1 + in magenta underlined

28 lee (ed. c. 1900]: “a jesting meiosis: ‘what there is of him.’” Ed. note: meiosis = a figure of deprecation of size

1903 rlf3

rlf3 ≈ rug2 gloss without attribution; Steevens on jocularity without attribution; Ingelby on night without attribution

28 Rolfe (ed. 1903): “As we say, ‘something like him.’ It seems to be a playful reference to the darkness of the night.”

1909 subb

subb: warb, c&mc; ≈ molt without attribution; ≈ rug2 without attribution

28 Subbarau (ed. 1909):

1912 dtn3

dtn3: standard gloss; Ingleby

1913 tut2

tut2 ≈ subb without attribution

28 Goggin (ed. 1913): “A jesting answer, perhaps intended to show the light-heartedness of the sceptical Horatio.”

1931 crg1

crg1 ≈ tut2 without attribution

28 Craig (ed. 1931): “A casual answer implying flippancy.”

1934 cam3

cam3

28 Wilson (ed. 1934): “Hor.’s jocularity is contrasted with the nervousness of the others; he does not believe in ghosts. The jest means, I take it, that he is pinched with the cold.”

1939 kit2

kit2: // Tit. 4.2.53 (1735); analogues B&F Thierry and Theodoret 3.2, Southern The Maid’s Last Prayer 4.3, p. 44; standard on humor + xref.

28 Kittredge (ed. 1939) considers Hor. “a sedate person, constitutionally prone to such mild pleasantries” as this “mildly humourous affirmative.” He refers to 816-17, 1940-1, 2151, 2157, 2980, 3622+1.

1947 cln2

cln2: ≈ cam3 without attribution + in magenta underlined

28 Rylands (ed. 1947): “Horatio perhaps feels pinched by the cold and hugs himself as he gives this jesting reply.”

1958 fol1

fol1 ≈ cln1 without attribution

28 A peece of him] Wright & LaMar (ed. 1958): “a joke, reflecting Horatio’s skepticism about the existence of ghosts; he is present but his heart is not in the venture.”

1968 Sjogren

Sjogren

28 Sjogren (1968, p. 226): “A Danish historian . . . suggested that Horatio’s intriguing ’A piece of him’ in answer to Bernardo’s ’Say, is Horatio there?’ in the very first scene of the play might reflect one of the shibboleths of the craft guilds. A wandering journeyman had to use a certain vocabulary and on entering a workshop looking for work was supposed to stay by the door until asked by the master . . . . This particular formula seems to have been known from Denmark to Switzerland and may be the point of Horatio’s otherwise rather feeble joke.”

1982 ard2

ard2: standard; kit2 xref.

28 Jenkins (ed. 1982) comments on Horatio’s “tone of humorous deflation.” He has xref. to other examples.

1985 cam4

cam4 ≈ cln2 without attribution

28 Edwards (ed. 1985): “He is so cold he is not wholly himself.”

1987 oxf4

oxf4 ≈ cam4 without attribution

28 Hibbard (ed. 1987) takes the position that Horatio means he is “shrinking away in the cold.”

2006 ard3q2

ard3q2 ≈ Ingleby without attribution on hand as piece; ≈ oxf4 without attribution on cold

28 Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006):

2009 Pequigney

Pequigney contra other exlanations

28 A peece of him] Pequigney (2009, personal communication): “To Bernardo’s query, ’is Horatio there?’ the latter answers ’A piece of him’ (1.1.19). Editors have construed the reply as a jest, indicative of skepticism about ghosts, as referring to a hand held out from the shadows or to his being pinched with cold. The remark may, though, suggest low spirits, the speaker’s feeling that he’s not himself. That reading would bring with it the question of what’s wrong. Later we learn that Horatio has been back in Denmark (from Wittenberg) for a month—he had returned to attend King Hamlet’s funeral—but has not made his presence known to Hamlet. Now the apparition of the King provides him with a reason for doing so. Why the reticence? It could have been from a fine, self-effacing discretion. Bernice W. Kliman notes that he ’has not taken advantage of his friendship with the prince to insinuate himself into the court.’ (’About the Play,’ the Horatio segment, hamletworks.org). But at a conceivable cost to himself. Horatio can have been lonely, distressed by the abeyance of that intimate friendship that the two of them shared at Wittenberg. Here is plausibly the dejection that ’A piece of him’ might intimate.”