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

Line 334 - 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.

334 O {God,} <Heauen!> a beast that wants discourse of reason	1.2.150

1603 Holland’s Plutarch

Plutarch

334 discourse of reason] Eliot (1853-): refers to “Plutarchs Morali Virtue, transl. by Philemon Holland, a contempy of Sh—” on the relation of passion to reason: “As if to the discourse of reason the gods had adjoined passion as a pricke to incite and a chariot to set it forward. ”

Ed. note: See Eliot below. Plutarch has a chapter about reason in man and beasts “That Brute Beasts have use of reason, a discourse in maner of a dialogue, named Gryllus” (with characters Ulysses and Circe, pp. 561-70), but I do not see the precise quotation by Eliot there. The Holland trans. was pub in 1603. Could it, in ms., have been a possible source for Q2? Holland also has a quotation including discourse of reason: “Such as are of quick conceite and delighted in discourse of reason in natural things,” and he refers to Bright on melancholy.

1747 warb

warb

334 discourse of reason] Warburton (ed. 1747): “This is finely expressed, and with a philosophical exactness. Beasts want not reason, but the discourse of reason: i.e. the regular inferring one thing from another by the assistance of universals.”

1755 Johnson Dict.

Johnson

334 discourse] Johnson (1755): “The act of the understanding, by which it passes from premises to consequences.”

1765 john1

john1 = warb +

334 discourse of reason] Johnson (ed. 1765): “Discourse of reason, as the logicians name the third operation of the mind, is indeed a philosophical term, but it is fine no otherwise than it is proper; it cost the authour nothing, being the common language of his time. Of finding such beauties in any poet there is no end.”

1773- mSteevens

mSteevens = warb

334 discourse of reason]

1805 = 1813 Gifford

Gifford ≈ warb +

334 discourse of reason] Gifford (1813, 1:148-9), in a note for Massinger’s The Unnatural Combat 2.1.? “Discourse and reason,” says, <n> <p. 148> “It is very difficult to determine the precise meaning which our ancestors gave to discourse; or to </p. 148> <149> distinguish the line which separated it from reason. Perhaps, it indicated a more rapid deduction of consequences from premises, than was supposed to be effected by reason:—but I speak with hesitation. The acute Glanville says, ‘The act of the mind which connects propositions, and deduceth conclusions from them, the schools call discourse, and we shall not miscall it, if we name it reason.’ Whatever be the sense, it frequently appears in our old writers, by whom it is usually coupled with reason or judgment, which last should seem to be the more proper word. Thus, in the City Madam: ‘—Such as want Discourse and judgment, and through weakness fall May merit men’s compassion.’ Again, in the Coxcomb: ‘Why should a man that has discourse and reason, And knows how near he loses all in these things, Covet to have his wishes satisfied?’ The reader remembers the exclamation of Hamlet, ‘Oh heaven! a beast that wants discourse of reason,’ &c. ‘This,’ says Warburton, who contrived to blunder with more ingenuity than usually falls to the lot of a commentator, ‘is finely expressed, and with a philosophical exactness! Beasts want not reason,’ (this is a new discovery,) ‘but the discourse of reason: i.e. the regular inferring one thing from another by the assistance of universals’! Discourse of reason is so poor and perplexed a phrase, that, without regard for the ‘philosophical exactness’ of Shakspeare, I should dismiss is at once, for what I believe to be his genuine language: ‘O heaven! a beast that wants discourse and reason.’ &c.” </p.149> </n>

1819 cald1

cald1

334 discourse of reason] Caldecott (ed. 1819): “Faculty of discussing and reasoning. See [Tro. 2.2.116 (1104)] Hect. & infra Haml. [2743+30].”

1819- Anon.

Anon: Gifford

334 a beast, that wants discourse of reason] Anon. (ms. notes in Malone, ed. 1790): “Gifford Massinger worth read

Discourse and reason both [. . .]

Gesta Grayorum p. 58”

1819- mcald

mcald

334 discourse of reason] Caldecott (ms. notes in 1819-, BL 11766.k.20) “O heaven! a beast, that wants discourse of reason,”]

“T [Oth.4.2.153 (2867)] Desd. Mr. Boswell instances the Preface to Davy’s Reports: And higher? have I conceived of him, not out of mine own imagination, or weak discourse of reason. and Shuriles Tacitus’s Argicola 1591. p. 242 ‘Agricola, tho’ brought up in the field, upon a natural wit and discourse of reason etc.’ ”

1821 v1821

v1821 = warb [reintroduced!] + new long note by Boswell, mentioning Gifford [who had mentioned warb]

334 discourse of reason] Boswell (ed. 1821): “Mr. Gifford [ed. Massinger 1813, 1:148-9], in a note on Massinger’s Unnatural Combat, has ridiculed [Warburton’s] note, and maintains that we should read—‘discourse and reason.’ But the phraseology of the text may be supported by numerous examples. Out of many collected by Mr. Malone, I will produce two. Our author himself uses the same language in [Tro: 2.2.116 (1104)] ‘—Is your blood So madly hot that no discourse of reason—Can gratify the same.’ Sir John Davys in the preface to his Reports: ‘And this idea have I conceived of him, not out of mine own imagination, or weak discourse of reason, &c.’ I will add but one more from Sir Henry Savile’s translation of Tacitus’s Life of Agricola, 1591, p. 242: ‘Agricola, though brought up in the field, upon a naturall wit, and discourse of reason.’ Hamlet himself will best explain the phrase: ‘Sure he that made us with such large discourse, Looking before and after.’

“Brutes certainly have not what Warburton in his dashing language terms reason, but they have faculties which philosophers in all ages have been puzzled to define. They have memory; and they have that degree of judgment which enables them to distinguish between two objects directly before them; as a dog know his master from a stranger. Hamlet means to say that even their imperfect faculties, without an abstract knowledge of good or evil, would have made them capable of feeling such a loss as his mother had sustained, and of seeing the difference between his father and his uncle.”

1826 sing1

sing1 ≈ Boswell on Gifford +

334 discourse of reason] Singer (ed. 1826): “. . . In the language of the schools, ‘Discourse is that rational act of the mind by which we deduce or infer one thing from another.’ Discourse of reason therefore may mean ratiocination . . . . [Q1 CLN 212] reads, ‘a beast devoid of reason.’ We have discourse of thought, for the discursive range of thought in [Oth. 4.2.153 (2867)].”

1830 harn

harn= Gifford; ≈ Boswell +

334 discourse of reason] Harness (ed. 1830): “I have not admitted his [Gifford’s] alteration because the phrase was, as Mr. Boswell has shown, in frequent use, and is found a second time in the works of our author himself [Tro, 2.2.116 (1104)]. Discourse of reason means the instruction or counsel of reason.”

1832 cald2

cald2 = cald1; Boswell; mcald1; sing1

334 discourse of reason] Caldecott (ed. 1832): “ and discourse of thought. [Oth. 4.2.153 (2867)] Desd. [quotes Boswell on Davys, Saville’s Tacitus’ Agricola.]

1832- mEliot

mEliot

334 discourse of reason] Eliot (1832-): refers to “Plutarchs Morali Virtue, transl. by Philemon Holland, a contempy of Sh—” on the relation of passion to reason: “As if to the discourse of reason the gods had adjoined passion as a pricke to incite and a chariot to set it forward. ” mEliot continues: “Such as are of quick conceite and delighted in discourse of reason in natural things. Dr. T. Bright Treatise of Melancholy 1586.

Ed. note: Holland’s Plutarch has a chapter about reason in man and beast: “That Brute Beasts have use of reason, a discourse in maner of a dialogue, named Gryllus” (with characters Ulysses and Circe, pp. 561-70), published in 1603. He also has a quotation: “ ‘Such as are of quick conceite and delighted in discourse of reason in natural things’ Dr T Brights Treatise of Melancholy, 1586.”

1839 knt1

knt1 ≈ cald2 without attribution

334 discourse of reason] Knight (ed. 1839): “In Massinger we have:—‘It adds to my calamity that I have Discourse and reason.’ Gifford thinks that this passage in Shakspere should also be ‘discourse and reason.’ But a subsequent passage in this play explains the phrase, and shows that by discourse is not meant language:—‘Sure he that made us with such large discourse, Looking before and after.’ The discourse of reason is the discursion of reason—the faculty of pursuing a train of thought, ot of passing from one thought to another:—‘the discoursing thought,’ as Sir John Davies expresses it.”

1843 knt2

knt2 = knt1

334 discourse of reason]

1843- mcol2

mcol2: Bishop Hall; Gifford; Beaumont and Fletcher

334 discourse of reason] Collier (1843-): “So also Bp Hall in his Virgil Lib. IV, Sat 3 ‘Above instinct his reason and discourse’ See also the context. The abbreviation of and was often read ‘of’ by old printers. Gifford (Massinger I. 128) would second ‘discourse and reason’ the [illeg.] might be supported by a passage in B & F Coxcomb. Edit Dyce III.193/ ‘Why should a man that has discourse and reason’ &c.”

1844 verp

verp Glanville from Gifford without attribution; sing1 without attribution; + in magenta underlined

334 discourse of reason] Verplanck (ed. 1844): “The modern reader generally interprets this as meaning the want of the power of rational speech. Such was not the sense in which our poet and his contemporaries used this expression. ‘Discourse of reason’ was a phrase of the intellectual philosophy of that age, which had passed from the schools into the language of poetry and eloquence. According to old Glanville—‘The act of the mind, which connects propositions, and deduceth conclusions, from them, the schools call discourse, and we shall not miscall it, if we name it reason.’ It is the reasoning faculty, the power of pursuing a chain of argument, of deducing inferences. In this sense Milton makes the angel instruct Adam that the essence of the soul is ‘Reason, — Discursive or intuitive. Discourse Is oftest yours, the latter most is ours, Differing but in degree, of kind the same.’”

1853 Dyce

Dyce: Boswell on Gifford +

334 discourse of reason] Dyce (1853, pp. 134-5): “Boswell, by several examples, has supported the phraseology of the text against Gifford, who rather hastily asserted that we ought to read ‘discourse and reason.’ To the passages cited in Boswell’s note, add the following one; ‘There is no discourse of reason strong enough to diuert him from thinking that he was betrayed.’ A Tragic-comicall History of our Times, under the borrowed names of Lisander and Calista (from the French), 1627, p. 34. ”

1854 del2

del2

334 discourse of reason] Delius (ed. 1854): “discourse of reason ist, wie aus dem häufigen Gebrauch dieser Zusammensetzung bei Sh.’s Zeitgenossen, auch bei ihm selbst in [Tro. 2. 2. 116 (1104)] hervorgeht ‘vornünstiges, logisches Denken.’” [discourse of reason is logical thought, as from the freqeunt use of this combination by Sh.’s contemporaries, and by him himself in Tro. 2.2.116 (1104).]

1856 Mitford

Mitford

334 God] Mitford (1856, p. 12): [to be entered]

1856 hud1

hud1 standard; verp on Milton without attribution

334 discourse of reason] Hudson (ed. 1856): “Discourse of reason, in old philosophical language, is rational discourse, or discursive reason; the faculty of pursuing a train of thought, or of passing from thought to thought in the way of inference or conclusion. Readers of Milton will remember the fine lines in Paradise Lost, Book v.: ‘Whence the soul Reason receives, and reason is her being, Discursive or intuitive: discourse Is oftest yours, the latter most is ours, Differing but in degree, in kind the same.’ H.”

1856 sing2

sing2 = sing1 with minor variations +

334 discourse of reason] Singer (ed. 1856): “Hobbes, in his Treatise of Human Nature, was the first to perceive the error into which the use of discourse might lead, and he therefore changes it:— ‘Because the word discourse is commonly taken for the coherence and consequence of words, I will, to avoid equivocation, call it discursion.’ . . . ”

1860 stau

stau : Massinger without attribution perhaps by way of v1821 + in magenta underlined

334 discourse of reason] Staunton (ed. 1860): “By ‘discourse of reason’ was meant the comprehensive range, or discursiveness of reason, the retrospective and foreseeing faculties; thus in [4.4.36-9 (2743+30-3)]: ‘Sure he that made us with such large discourse, Looking before and after, gave us not That capability and godlike reason To fust in us unus’d.’”

1861 wh1

wh1: standard

334 discourse of reason] White (ed. 1861): “i.e. discursive reason which draws conclusions, as opposed to intuitive perception. The phrase was common in Shakespeare’s day, and before it.”

1865 hal

hal = v1821 (warb and Boswell) +

334 discourse of reason] Halliwell (ed. 1865): “‘It is nothing but the want of the discourse of reasonwhich doth breed this madnesse in mankinde, for where it raigneth, there can neither be want nor superfluitie, for it boundeth all things within a meane, and governeth with justice and judgement.’—A New Post with Soveraigne Salve to Cure the World’s Madnes, n.d.”

1867 dyceG

dyceG = johnd; Gifford (through hesitation), ref. to Boswell without attribution

334 discourse of reason]

dyceG contra Gifford on and; Boswell without attribution; Dyce on Lisander and Calista.

334 of]

1868 c&mc

c&mc ≈ sing2

334 discourse of reason] Clarke & Clarke (ed. 1868): “‘Ratiocination,’ the power of arguing rationally,’ ‘the faculty of reasoning.’”

1872 cln1

cln1: standard def, without attribution; Tro. // without attribution; Ham xref. without attribution; Oth. // without attribution.

334 discourse of reason]

1872 hud2

hud2 = hud1 minus Milton

334 discourse of reason]

1870 rug1

rug1 ≈ warb

334 discourse of reason] Moberly (ed. 1870): “The inferring power of reason.”

1877 v1877

v1877: Johnson, Gifford, boswell, cald, sing2, dyceG

334 discourse of reason]

1880 Tanger

Tanger

334 God] Tanger (1880, p. 122): ascribes the variant in F1 as “probably due to the critical revision which the text received at the hands of H.C. [Heminge & Condell], when it was being woven together from the parts of the actors.”

1880 meik

meik: standard, with ref. to Milton; 2743+30 xref. Tro. and Oth. // from cln1 without attribution + in magenta underlined

334 discourse of reason] Meikeljohn (ed. 1880): “the power of looking at this way and that way, and at length choosing. (From Lat. dis, apart, and curro, I run.). Milton [as above and adds:] (where discursive means by argument and selection; intuitive, by direct intuition). And, in the next line, Milton uses the word discourse for discursive reason. . . . ”

1881 hud3

hud3 = hud2

334 discourse of reason]

1883 wh2

wh2 ≈ wh1

334 discourse of reason] White (ed. 1883): “action of the mind, capacity of thought. The phrase was not uncommon in S.’s day.”

1885 macd

macd

334 discourse of reason] Macdonald (ed. 1885): “the going abroad among things.”

1885 mull

mull ≈ sing2, stau without attribution

334 discourse of reason] Mull (ed. 1885): “Discursiion, the faculty of reasoning. See [2743+30].”

1899 ard1

ard1: JohnD, Tro. // +

334 discourse of reason] Dowden (ed. 1899): Parallel in Florio’s 1603 ed. of Montaigne.

1902 Reed

Reed: claims Bacon is Shakespeare, supported by Promus notebooks begun Dec. 1594.

334 discourse of reason] Reed (1902, § 407): quotes Bacon Advancement of Learning “Martin Luther, conducted, no doubt, by an higher Providence, but in discourse of reason.”

1938 parc

parc

334 discourse of reason] Parrott & Craig (ed. 1938): “reasoning power.”

1939 kit2

kit2: john dictionary without attribution; Gifford without attribution (and see OED below)

334 discourse of reason] Kittredge (ed. 1939): "the process or faculty of reasoning. To discourse is an old word for ’to pass from premises to conclusions.’ The noun discourse (with or without the added phrase of reason) is used for either the process or the faculty. Cf. [2743+ 30-2743 +33]."

1947 cln2

cln2: standard

334 discourse of reason] Rylands (ed. 1947): "rational faculties."

1957 pel1

pel1: standard

334 discourse] Farnham (ed. 1957): “logical power or process.”

1957 pen1b

pen1b

334 discourse of reason] Harrison (ed. 1957): “power of speech.”

1958 fol1

fol1: standard

334 wants] Wright & LaMar (ed. 1958): “lacks.”

fol1: standard

334 discourse of reason] Wright & LaMar (ed. 1958): “the ability to reason, rationality.”

1970 pel2

pel2 = pel1

334 discourse] Farnham (ed. 1970): “logical power or process”

1980 pen2

pen2: standard

334 wants . . . reason] Spencer (ed. 1980): “lacks the (human) faculty of reason.”

1982 ard2

ard2:

334 a beast]] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “Anticipating Hamlet’s reproaches to his mother in 3.4, where the corresponding passage in Belleforest has, ’Est-ce � une Royne . . . de suivre les appetites des bestes . . . ?’, with much elaboration of beast analogies. See Intro., pp. 91-2. Cf. also 1.5.56-7 and CN on 324.”

ard2:

334 wants . . . reason] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “The faculty of reason was traditionally recognized as the crucial difference between man and the beasts, for the classical statement of which see Cicero, De 0fficiis, 1.4.11. This lends further significance to the Hyperion-satyr comparison above (324). It was through his reason that man could perceive the relation of cause and effect and thus connect past with future, whereas the beast, precisely because it lacks reason, must live largely in the present moment. Hence the axiom that its mourning would be brief. Cf. 4.4.33-9; and for Gertrude’s failure to be guided by reason, 4.4.88. Discourse of reason was a regular term, occurring also in Tro. 2.2.116, as well as in, e.g., Bright’s Treatise of Melancholy (dedication), Holland’s Plutarch (Moral Virtue), Florio’s Montaigne, the translation of La Primaudaye’s The French Academy (pp. 269, 278). For other instances, see Boswell, and OED discourse sb. 2 b. While sometimes apparently used as a cliché for ’reason’, it properly denotes the faculty or process of reasoning from premises to conclusions. Discourse alone is also used in the same sense (see 4.4.36). The ’discursive reason’ which was a property of man was distinguished from the higher ’intuitive reason’ of angelic beings. In Par. Lost (5.469ff.) Raphael tells Adam that ’Reason is [the Soul’s] being, Discursive or intuitive: discourse Is oftest yours, the latter most is ours’. But the difference, as Milton says, is of degree rather than kind.”

1985 cam4

cam4

334 discourse of reason] Edwards (ed. 1985): "faculty of reasoning."

1987 oxf4

oxf4

334 wants . . . reason] Hibbard (ed. 1987): "lacks the capacity, peculiar to man, to reason logically from a premise to a conclusion. The phrase discourse of reason was a common one (see OED discourse sb. 2b), and is used again by Shakespeare in Troilus (2.2.116)."

1988 bev2

bev2: standard

334 wants . . . reason] Bevington (ed. 1988): “lacks the faculty of reason.”

1992 fol2

fol2: standard

334 wants . . . reason] Mowat & Werstine (ed. 1992): “lacks the ability to reason”

1994 Pierce

Pierce

334-5 Pierce (1994, p. 147): “ . . . a hypothetical animal would find the loss of its mate more upsetting than the queen did the loss of her husband.”

1999 OED

OED

334 discourse of reason] OED: sb. 2. “The act of the understanding, by which it passes from premises to consequences’ (J.); reasoning, thought, ratiocination; the faculty of reasoning, reason, rationality. Obs. or arch.

2b. Phr. discourse of reason: process or faculty of reasoning. Obs. or arch. 1413 Pilgr. Sowle (Caxton 1483) IV. xxviii. 74 The soule seketh by discors of reson the skyles and the causes of the wonderful beaute of creatures. 1553 EDEN Treat. Newe Ind. (Arb.) 9 As could hardely be comprehended by the discourse of reason. 1602 SHAKS. Ham. I. ii. 150 A beast that wants discourse of Reason. . . . Gifford (Massinger I. 142) would read ‘discourse and reason’ [. . .]. So also Bp Hall in his Virgil. Lib. IV Sat 3[?] ‘Above instinct his reason and discourse’ See also the context. The abbreviation of and was often read ‘of’ by old printers.”

2006 ard3q2

ard3q2: xref

334 God] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “F’s ’Heauen’ may be expurgation (as at [386]), following the 1606 ’Act to Restrain Abuses of Players’ . . . .”

ard3q2: standard; OED

334 discourse of reason] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “process or faculty of reasoning. OED lists uses of this formulaic phrase from 1413.”