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.

1747- mtby4

mtby4

123 our] Thirlby (1747-): “fsql your v. 116.22-28 [i.e. 32-8, Horatio is to watch with them] sed. v. 122.22 [i.e. 167 our watch].”

Ed. note: Thirlby conjectures mildly that our might be changed to your but finds in other lines conflicting evidence about whether Horatio is one of the men on guard or not.

1866 Bailey

Bailey: Stewart

123 source] Bailey (1866, 2:334-5): <p. 334>“Source, even in Shakespeare’s time, had acquired </p. 334><p. 335> this literal acceptation. Marcellus in ‘Hamlet’ having asked, ‘Why this same strict and most observant watch So nightly toils the subject of the land?” [87-8] Horatio gives his explanation of the matter, concluding with [121-3], an expression which a judicious critic would not condemn as an incongruous metaphor, but accept as a literal equivalent to cause; and other instances may be found in abundance, and the nice tact spoken of by Mr. Stewart.” </p. 335>

<p. 333> Bailey quotes Donald Stewart, Philosophical Essays, p. 251, who says “ ‘It requires a nice tact, aided by a familiar acquaintance with the best models, to be able to decide when a metaphorical word comes to have the effect of a literal and specific term, or (what amounts to the same thing) when it ceases to present its primitive along with its figurative meaning.’” </p. 333>. And Bailey continues, “Mr. Stewart mentions the word source as having ‘become virtually literal in its metaphorical application . . . [and he concludes] that the general rules which reprobate mixed metaphors ought to be interpreted with a greater degree of latitude than critics are accustomed to allow.’” </334>

1900 ev1

ev1

123 head] Herford (ed. 1900): “occasion.”

1904 ver

ver = ev1 +

123 head] Verity (ed. 1904): “The metaphor of a ‘fountain-head,’ source of a river; cf. [1079].”

1909 subb

subb

123 chiefe head] Subbarau (ed. 1909): “Principal source.”

1912 dtn3

dtn3

123-4 the chiefe . . . land] Deighton (ed. 1912): “the main spring, origin, of all this hurry and bustle which we see throughout Denmark.”

dtn3: // R2 1.1.97 (102)]

123 head]

1913 tut2

tut2 = Q1 ground without attribution; ≈ ver

123 head] Goggin (ed. 1913): “‘ground, cause,’ a metaphor from the source or head of a stream; cp. [1079].”

1939 kit2

kit2 ≈ ver without attribution

123 head] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “The same as source in meaning (cf. wellhead, fountainhead).”

1947 cln2

cln2 = ev1 without attribution

123 head]

1957 pel1

pel1: standard

123 head] Farnham (ed. 1957): “fountainhead, source.”

1970 pel2

pel2 = pel1: standard

123 head] Farnham (ed. 1970): “fountainhead, source”

1992 fol2

fol2: standard

123 head] Mowat & Werstine (ed. 1992): “fountainhead, source“

2006 ard3q2

ard3q2: standard

123 head] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “source, origin”