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.

1789 Anon.

Anon.: Kemble

631-3 but tell . . . cerements?] Anon. [re Kemble] (1789, p. 13): Hamlet’s “interrogations [quotes] are finely marked by an earnest desire of information, mixed with a natural awe resulting from the fear of giving offence to the spirit.”

1819 cald1

cald1

631 burst in ignorance] Caldecott (ed. 1819): “In the swelling agony of suspense, that struggle and convulsion of mind, which impelled him fearfully to break silence; as the equally perturbed spirit broke its confine or cerements [633].”

1832 cald2

cald2 = cald1

631 burst in ignorance]

1885 mull

mull

631 burst] Mull (ed. 1885): “The received reading is burst. In two lines after we again have, ‘burst their cerements,’ which suggests the suspicion that the early printer caught his eye upon the latter while setting up the former line, and so imported this word into it for rest—which is admitted to be the way in which mutilations were often caused. I need hardly remark, that the repetition of a verb in close proximity as these are is regarded as a fault in composition, and this would lend support to the belief that a mutilation is here; but a stronger reason for accepting the change will be found in its obvious appropriateness.

“‘Tell me why—let me not rest or remain in ignorance:’ how forcible, how pathetic is this appeal, developed by the change I propose; and how much more in harmony it is with the character of the passage than that exhibited by the received reading.

“Then I contend further, (a) that is appeal is continuous and compact, with all its profound pathos, down to [641], and that is should not be broken by a full stop in [631]: (b) that ‘tell me’ must be understood as governing this line, and to be read thus, ‘tell me what may this mean:’ and (c) that no interrogation is made or intended until at [642], where it comes in and is propounded with force and impressiveness: ‘Say, why is all this!’

“I supply the lines which exhibit the accepted punctuation, so that it may be compared with my changes, the reader being left to form his own choice: [quotes 631-41 from others’ versions].”

1888 Mull

Mull

631 burst] Mull (1888, p. 5), “I substitute rest for burst. (See my edition.) In support of this emendation I quote, ‘I rest perplexed with a thousand cares.’ [1H6 5.5.95 (2917). Try to read, ‘I burst perplexed’! Again, ‘O, hold me not with silence over-long. [1H6 5.3.13 (2440)]. i.e. keep me not, let me not rest, uninformed.”

1982 ard2

ard2: mull without attribution +

631 burst] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “This anticipates burst in 633; but though in theory it could be a reporter’s error taken from Q1 into Q2 and thence into F, it seems more reasonable to conclude that Shakespeare could use the same expressive word twice within three lines.”