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

Line 538 - 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.

538 And they in Fraunce of the best ranck and station,	1.3.73

1744 han1

han1

538 station] Hanmer (ed. 1743, 6: Glossary): “Attitude, Presence, Person”

1773 v1773

v1773

538-9 Or . . . chiefe ] Steevens (ed. 1773): “I think the whole design of the precept shews we should read, ‘Are most select, and generous chief, in that.’ Chief is an adjective used adverbially, a practice common to our author. Chiefly generous.”

1778 v1778

v1778 = v1773 +

538-9 Or . . . chiefe ] Steevens (ed. 1778): “Yet it must be owned that the punctuation recommended is very stiff and harsh.”

1783 mals2

mals2

538-9 Or of a most select . . . chiefe ] Malone (1783, p. 56): “Here has been a silent deviation in all the modern editions from the old copies, which all read ‘Are of a most select and generous chef in that.’ May we suppose that Shakspeare borrowed the word chef from heraldry, with which he seems to have been conversant? They in France approve themselves to be of a most select and generous escutcheon by their dress. Chef in heraldry is the upper third part of the shield. —This is very harsh; yet I hardly think that the words ‘of a’ could have been introduced without some authority from the Ms.”

1783 Ritson

Ritson

539-9 Or. . . chiefe ] Ritson (1783, pp. 192-3): <p.192> “This pointing, which comes recommended by mr. Steevens, makes the most ingenious and absolute nonsense of the whole passage. The folios read: </p.192> <p.193> ‘Are of a most select and generous cheff in that,’ without any punctuation. The genuine meaning of the passage requires us to point the line thus: ‘Are most select and generous, chief in that.’ i.e. the nobility of France are select and generous above all other nations, and chiefly in the point of apparel; the richness and elegance of their dress. ” </p.193>

1785 v1785

v1785 = v1778, mals2, Ritson minus comment on Steevens

539-9 Or . . . chiefe] Ritson (apud ed. 1785): “The genuine meaning of the passage requires us to point the line thus: ‘Are most select and generous, chief in that.’ i.e. the nobility of France are select and generous above all other nations, and chiefly in the point of apparel; the richness and elegance of their dress.”

1787 ann

ann = v1785 (subst.)

538-9 Or . . . chiefe]

1790 mal

mal: mals2 (similarities marked in blue) +

538-9 Or. . . chiefe ] Malone (ed. 1790): “Are of a most select and generous chief, in that]] “Thus the quarto, 1604, and the folio, except that in that copy the word chief is spelt cheff. The substantive chief, which signifies in heraldry the upper part of the shield, appears to have been in common use in Shakspeare’s time, being found in Minsheu’s Dictionary, 1617. He defines it thus: ‘Est superior et scuti nobilior pars; tertiam partem ejus obtinet; ante Christi adventum debatur in maximi honoris signum senatoribus et honoratis viris.’ [trans. Latin here]. B. Jonson has used the word in his Poetaster.

“The meaning then seems to be, They in France approve themselves of a most select and generous escutcheon by their dress. Generous is used with the signification of generosus. So in [Oth. 3.2.280 (1913)]: ‘The generous islanders, &c.

“If chief in this sense had not been familiarly understood, the editor of the folio must have considered the line as unintelligible, and would have probably omitted the words—of a in the beginning of it, or attempted some other correction. That not having been done, I have adhered to the old copies.

“Our poet, from various passages in his works, appears to have been accurately acquainted with all the terms of heraldry. Malone.”

1791- rann

rann = Ritson minus all but this sentence without attribution :

538-9 Or . . . chiefe ] Rann (ed. 1791-): “Are distinguished above all other nations for the richness and elegance of their dress.”

1793 v1793

v1793 = v778 + ; = mal +

538-9 And . . . chiefe ] Steevens (ed. 1793): “Yet it must be owned that the punctuation recommended is very stiff and harsh. I would, however, more willingly read: ‘And they in France, of the best rank and station, Select and generous, are most choice in that.’ Let the reader who can discover the slightest approach towards sense, harmony, or metre, in the original line—‘Are of a most select and generous chief, in that,—’ adhere to the old copies. ”

[Then v1793 has Ritson (v1785 cites him as REMARKS). Steevens ends with a comment on Bacon: ] “Of chief, in the passage quoted from Bacon, is, I believe, a bald translation of the old French phrase—de chef, whatever, in the present instance, might be its intended meaning.”

1803 v1803

v1803 = v1793

538-9 Or . . . chiefe]

1813 v1813

v1813 = v1803

538-9 Or . . . chiefe]

1821 v1821

v1821: mals2 and mal appendix; then v1793, including Ritson

538-9 Or . . . chiefe]

1826 sing1

Sing1: mal, and, without attribution: Steevens v1773 on adverbial, Ritson punc., cald1 on generous and //s. Nothing materially new.

538-9 Or . . . that] Singer (ed. 1826): “Malone has tried to torture the passage into a meaning, by supposing an allusion to the chief or upper part of a shield in heraldry. But the redundancy of the line, and discrepancy of the copies, evidently show it to be corrupt. The simple emendation by omitting of a, and the proper punctuation of the line, make all clear. ‘The nobility of France are most select and high-minded (generous) chiefly in that;’ chief being an adjective used adverbially. We have generous for high minded, noble, in Othello, and in Measure for Measure.”

1832 cald2

cald2 = cald1; mal +

538-9 And . . . that] Caldecott (ed. 1832): “In this confused and difficult, if not corrupt, passage we have ventured to follow the modern editors, as alone giving a plain and clear sense; adopting the correction of Mr. Ritson. But, as there is no other difference between the quartos and folios, than the former place a comma after ‘generous’ and read chiefe, the folios, without the comma, reading cheff, and as this word, throughout our author, when used in its ordinary sense, is spelt, as we now do, chiefe,—questioning our warrant to disturb the text, we respect the principle, and conceive the cause of good letters to be much indebted to Malone, who insists, that cheff or chief means ‘of principal or high eminence or estimation:’ that the chief is the highest and most honourable part of a shield, as it is defined by Minshieu; and that the word itself was perhaps originally heraldic. He adds, and with seemingly very good reason, that had it not been understood by the editors of the folios in this, or some such, sense, they must have expunged the words of a, as rendering it unintelligible, and embarrassing the measure as well as sense. The reading of the original 4to. of 1603, seems here to be worthy of observation. ‘And they of France of the chiefe rancke & station Are of a most select & general chiefe in that.’ General we have no doubt is a mistake for generous; but the introduction also in the second line here of the differently spelt word cheff, chiefe, or cheefe, as a substantive, though in the absence of all direct proof of such use of it, nor less from the adjective use of it in the preceding line, appears to me to give much countenance to Malone’s conjecture.”

1857 fieb

fieb = Steevens (v1793), mal, Ritson

538-9

1859 Dyce

Dyce = col3, knt +

538-9 Dyce (1859, pp. 186-7): <p. 186> “1. The passage in The Widow is this; . . . ‘First Suit. I heard our counsellor speak a word of comfort, invita voluntate; ha, that’s he, wench, The word of words, the precious chief, i’faith! . . . ’ and it seems almost incredible that Mr. Collier should seriously propose to alter ‘chief’ to ‘choice,’—‘the meaning being that of a “precious choice” word.’

“The Suitor, in his ignorance, is evidently speaking of ‘invita voluntate’ as facile princeps verborum.’

“2. Though Mr. Collier states that I am ‘strongly in favour of chief in this passage of Hamlet,’ he does not state how I wished the line to stand in other respects, viz. thus, </p.186 > <p. 187> ‘Are most select and generous chief in that,’ instead of ‘Are of a most select and generous chief in that.’

“Mr. Collier’s declaration that ‘chief’ is ‘entirely ungrammatical’ is only an additional evidence (see ante, p. 34) of his not knowing that adjectives were often used adverbially in Shakespeare’s days.

“(‘Although we printed the original line in our former editions, we adopt now the reading of Mr. Dyce. [[“Are most select and generous, chief in that”]],’ &c. Mr. Knight ad l. ).” </p. 187>

1861 wh1

wh1

538-9 White (ed. 1861): “The folio has,— [quotes], and so, excepting more literal variation, the 4to. of 1604. But the 4to. of 1603 has,— ‘And they of France of the chiefe rancke and station Are of a most select and generall chiefe in that.’ Here I believe that we have not only the obvious misprint of ‘general” for ‘generous,’ and the interpolation of ‘of a,’ which all editors have supposed, but the accidental repetition in the second line of ‘chief’ in the first—a kind of misprint which often occurs in the old texts of these plays. The two errors last named were perpetuated, (as errors sometimes unaccountably are,) although ‘chief’ in the first line was changed to ‘best’.”

1865 hal

hal = v1821 (mal; Steevens; Ritson)

538-9 Or. . . chiefe

1866 cam1

cam1 ≈ wh1 +

538-9 Clark & Wright (ed. 1866, 1: viii-ix): <1: viii>“It is clear that the corruption in both passages [Q1, Q2] is due to an error in the transcript from which both were copied. Probably the author had originally written </1:viii><1:ix> ‘And they in France of the best rank and station Are most select and generous in that:’ and then given between the lines or in the margin, ‘of,’ ‘chief’, meaning these as alternative readings for ‘in’ and ‘best’ in the first line. The transcriber by mistake inserted them in the second line..” </1:ix>

1869 str

str ≈ cam1

538-9

1877 v1877

v1877: Steevens (v1793), Ritson (p. 193), mal (w/ Minsheu), knt1, col1, dyce (Remarks), col3, wh, White (Cambridge Editors, Pref. viii), stau, Ingleby (N&Q 1856), H. C. K. (N&Q 1856), tsch, rug2, Keightley, Beale (1775, N&Q p. 182). See also Lord Burghley in v. 2.

538-9

1877 dyce3

dyce3 = dyce2

538-9

1898 Dowden

Dowden

538-9 Dowden (1914, p. 284) in a letter to T[homas]. H[utchinson], without month/day, in 1898, speculates: “A just possible Hamlet reading has occurred to me in the advice of Polonius to Laertes,

‘And they of France of the best rank and station,

Are of a most select and generous chief in that.’

The easy thing is to drop ‘of a’ or to drop both ‘of a ‘ and ‘chief.’ But this is to oppose a curious agreement of texts. Q. 1604 (our highest authority) has, however, ‘or of a.’

‘And they of France of the best rank and station

Or of a most select, are generous chief in that.’

“Polonius is so fond of distinctions that he may distinguish those of a most select rank from those of the best rank.”

1934 clowes

clowes: standard

538-9 Harrison (ed. 1934): “Chief, chef, literally the head, here signifies eminence, superiority. Those of the best rank and station are of a most select and generous superiority in the indication of their dignity by their apparel.”

1947 cln2

cln2: standard

538-9 Rylands (ed. 1947): "the French nobility display their taste and breeding particularly in their apparel."

1987 oxf4

oxf4 = Knight

538-9 Hibbard (ed. 1987): "‘"Chief,"literally the head, here signifies eminence, superiority. Those of the best rank and station (in France) are of a most select and generous superiority in the indication of their dignity by their apparel’ (Knight, as quoted in Furness."