Notes for lines 0-1017 ed. Bernice W. Kliman
| 632 Why thy canoniz’d bones hearsed in death | 1.4.47 |
|---|
c.1639 mWright
mWright
632-41 Wright (1639, fol. 85r): “tell me thou dreadful spirit, why thy canonized bones hearsed in death haue burst their cerements? why ye sepulchre, wherein wee saw thee quietly interred, hath op’t his ponderous and marble iawes, to cast thee vp againe, what makes thee so horridly to shake our disposition wth thoughts beyond ye reaches of our soules”
1723- mtby2
mtby2
632 canoniz’d] Thirlby (1723-) “v. K. John. III [Jn. 3.4.52 (1436)] 28.”
1730 Bailey
Bailey
632 canoniz’d] Bailey (1730): “to examine by rule [catechize?]; also to pronounce and declare one to be a saint.”
1739 Warburton
Warburton: contra Bailey
632 canoniz’d] Warburton (1739, 9:190 n. L): “canonized for interred with Church-rites, not for sainted.”
1745 han2
han2
632 canoniz’d] Anon. (ed. 1745) indicates original reading: “Why thy canoniz’d bones, hersed in”
han2
632 death] Anon. (ed. 1745) claims earth for death as a “Warb. emend.”
1746 Upton
Upton:
632 canoniz’d. . .
death]
Upton (1746, pp. 137-8) <p. 137> “Shakespeare labouring with a multiplicity of sublime ideas often gives himself not time to be delivered of them by the rules of
slow-endeavouring art; hence he5 crowds various figures together, and metaphor upon metaphor; and runs the hazard of far-fetched expressions, whilst intent on nobler </p. 137> <p.138> ideas he condescends not to grammatical niceties: here the audience are to accompany the poet in his conceptions, and to supply what he has sketched out for them. I will mention an instance or two of this sort. Hamlet is speaking to his father’s ghost [he quotes 630-3].” </p.138>
<p. 137> <n. 5> Upton (1746, p. 137 n. 5): “The crowding and mixing together heterogeneous metaphors is doing a sort of violence to the mind; for each new metaphor calls it too soon off from the idea which the former has rais’d: ’tis a fault doubtless, and not to be apologized for; and instances are very numerous in Shakespeare. The poet is to take his share of the faults, and the critic is to keep his hands from the context. Yet ’tis strange to see how many passages the editors have corrected, meerly for the sake of consonance of metaphor: breaking thro’ that golden rule of criticism; mend only the faults of transcribers.” </n. 5 > </p. 137>
1747 warb
warb
632 canoniz’d. . . death] Warburton (ed. 1747) Hamlet [in the quarto version] speaks with wonder, that he who was dead should rise again and walk. But this, according to the vulgar suspicion here followed, was no wonder. Their only wonder was, that one, who had the rites of sepulture performed to him, should walk; the want of which was supposed to be the reason of walking ghosts. Hamlet’s wonder then should have been placed here: And so Shakespear placed it, as we shall see presently. For hearsed is used figuratively to signify reposited, therefore the place where should be designed: but death being no place, but a privation only, hearsed in death is nonsense. We should read, ‘—tell Why thy canoniz’d bones hearsed in earth Have burst their cearments.’ It appears, for the two reasons given above, that earth is the true reading. It will further appear for these two other reasons. First, From the words canoniz’d bones ; by which is not meant (as one would imagine) a compliment, for, made holy or sainted; but for bones to which the rite of sepulture have been performed; or which were buried according to the canon. For we are told he was murder’d with all his sins fresh upon him, and therefore in no way to be sainted. But if this licentious use of the word canoniz’d be allowed, then earth must be the true reading, for inhuming bodies was one of the essential parts of sepulchral rites. Secondly, From the words, have burst their cearments, which imply the preceding mention of inhuming, but no mention is made of it in the common reading. This enabled the Oxford Editor to improve upon the emendation: so, he reads, ‘Why thy bones hears’d in canonized earth.’ I suppose for the sake of harmony, not of sense. For tho’ the rites of sepulture performed canonizes the body buried; yet it does not canonize the earth in which it is laid, unless every funeral service be a new consecration.
1747- mBrowne BL Ms 0.12.575
mBrowne: warb +
632 hearsed in death] Browne (1747-): “Hearsed in Death—i.e. buryed being in the State of Death, or as we commonly express it, dead and buryed—but Mr. W. says, Death being no being, i.e. but a privation only, Hearsed—Death, is Nonsense, and therefore and for three other reasons, reads, Hearsed in Earth—his other three are all founded upon the proposition that hearsed in Death does not mean buryed.”
1752 Dodd
Dodd: warb; han +
632 Dodd (1752, 1: 222-3): <p. 222>“The line [quotes] hath a good deal perplex’d the critics, and is indeed very obscure: Mr.
Warburton alters the passage; for
canoniz’d bones signifying only bones to which the rites of sepulture have been performed, and
inhuming being one of the essential rites, it is necessary that be mentioned, which, unless we read—
hearsed in earth, </p. 222><p. 223> he assures us, it is not;
hearsed being used figuratively for
reposited, and death being a privation only,
hearsed in death is ‘nonsense.’ Thus he would alter the passage—Sir
Thomas Hanmer, the rage of correction, gives us; ‘Why thy bones hears’d in canonized earth.’ But if we let the passage stand as it doth, is it not possible to give it some sense?
Shakespear is bold in his use of words, and licentious in his manner: it is not improbably, he might use death for the grave, and that, by no very far-fetch’d allusion: and then the passage is clear; why thy bones canonized,
i.e. buried according to the canon, and hearsed in death,
i.e. safely reposited in the grave.— Thus, even according to Mr.
Warburton’s sense of the words, the passage seems to be defensible: but may we not ask, whether this sense of the passage renders not the two parts of the sentence the same? for if his bones were
canoniz’d, that is, had all the rites of sepulture paid to them, it follows of course, they were
hearsed in death or earth, reposited in the grave. Mr.
Warburton says, ‘
canoniz’d cannot signify (what it usually does)
made holy or sainted; for we are told, he was murdered with all his sins fresh upon him, and therefore in no way to be sainted.’ But we may observe, it is a son, full of the perfections of his father, (whose equal, he tells us, the world could not produce ) that here speaks; no wonder then, he should use the highest compliment: beside, as to his being murder’d with all his sins upon him, that we know nothing of at present: ’tis the ghost himself only, that informs his son of that; and as he died, not by murder, according to the general report, he was very likely to have been canonized; it was very probable his wife and brother might have got him sainted out of abundant
love and
zeal for him, when dead, and the better to conceal their devilish purpose: so that if we understand the word in this sense, a better meaning may be given the passage;
“‘Tell me, oh my father, (says the dutiful and amazed Hamlet,) why this wonder happens; why I see you again on earth; why those bones have burst their cearment, which lately made holy and sainted, were hearsed in death: this increases my admiration; had’st thou not had the rites of sepulture, or only the common rites, I might have been less astonished; but they bones were not only hearsed in death, not only properly and duly entomb’d, but made sacred too: why then has the sepulchre op’d her marble jaws; why behold we again the buried and hallow’d Hamlet on the earth?’” </p. 223>
1765 Heath
Heath: warb; ≈ han 633 def, of crements without attribution +
632-3 canoniz’d . . .
cerements]
Heath (1765, p. 530-1): <p. 530> “The former editions concur in giving us a much preferable reading, to wit </p. 530> <p. 531> ‘
Why thy canoniz’d bones,
hearsed in death.’ By the expression,
hersed in death,x is meant, shut up and secured with all those precautions which are usually practiced in preparing dead bodies for sepulture, such as winding sheet, shrowd, coffin, &c. and perhaps embalming into the bargain. So that
death is here used, by a metonymy of the antecedent for the consequents, for the rites of death, such as are generally esteemed due, and practised, with regard to dead bodies. Consequently, I understand by
cearments,x the waxed winding sheet or winding sheets, in which the corse was enveloped and sewn up, in order to preserve it longer from external impressions from the humidity of the sepulchre, as embalming was intended to preserve it from internal corruption. If the reader hath an inclination to divert himself with a sample of plausible but empty reasoning, which appears to say something, but in effect says nothing, he may amply gratify his curiosity by perusing Mr. Warburton’s note on this passage. He would persuade us that Shakespear wrote,
hearsed in earth; and is so far from perceiving the impropriety of this reading, and its inconsistency with that other expression in the text,
have burst their cearments, that he even urges this very expression as one of his four reasons, which, according to him, undeniably establish it. Thus
cearments must signify the coffin and marble sepulchre; an interpretation that could have entered into no other head but that of Mr. Warburton.” </p.531>
“x” marks Tollet’s notes; see below
1765 john1
john1 = warb +
632 canoniz’d. . . death] Johnson (ed. 1765): “It were too long to examine this note [Warburton’s] period by period, tho’ almost every period seems to me to contain something reprehensible. The critick, in his zeal for change, writes with so little consideration as to say, that Hamlet cannot call his father canonized, because we are told he was murdered with all his sins fresh upon him. He was not then told it, and had so little the power of knowing it, that he was to be told it by an apparition, The long succession of reasons upon reasons prove nothing, but what every reader discovers, that the King had been buried, which is implied by so many adjuncts of burial, that the direct mention of earth is not necessary. Hamlet, amazed at an apparition, which, though in all ages credited, has in all ages been considered the most wonderful and dreadful operation of supernatural agency, enquired of the spectre, in the most emphatic terms, why he breaks the order of nature, by returning from the dead; this he asks in a very confused circumlocution, confounding in his fright the soul and body. Why, says he, have thy bones, which with due ceremonies have been intombed in death, in the common state of departed mortals, burst the folds in which they were embalmed? Why has the tomb in which we saw thee quietly laid, opened his mouth, that mouth which, by its weight and stability, seemed closed for ever? The whole sentence is this: Why dost thou appear, whom we know to be dead?
“Had the change of the word removed any obscurity, or added any beauty, it might have been worth a struggle, but either reading leaves the sense the same.
“If there be any asperity in this controversial note, it must be imputed to the contagion of peevishness, or some resentment of the incivility shown to the Oxford Editor, who is represented as supposing the ground canonized by a funeral, when he only meant to say, That the body was deposited in holy ground, in ground consecrated according to the canon.”
Ed. note: john1 has a long discussion exposing warb’s errors. He comes to Hanmer’s defense, too : See also Hamlet document in Charactersƒ on Hamlet’s state of mind. See Warburton 1747 document in Hanmer/Warburtonƒ. After the refutation john cuts to the bone with a succinct paraphrase.
1765- mtol2
mtol2
632 canoniz’d. . . death] Tollet (ms. notes in Heath, p. 531): “hearsed is coffin’d. [5:198-9].”
Tollet : cerements is related to a noun and verb, cered. OED confirms. I put the 633 note here only because it fits in the Heath note; I also put it in 633.
1773 v1773
v1773 = john1
632 canoniz’d. . . death]
1774 capn
capn: warb without specific attribution + in magenta underlined
632 canoniz’d. . . death] Capell (1774, 1:1:126): “ ‘hearsed,’ says an editor, ‘is used figuratively for—reposited;’ and ‘death’ (as he might have added) for—the place of the dead, by another figure: ‘canoniz’d’ has no other meaning than —sacred, a fit epithet for the ‘bones’ of a father.”
1785 v1785
v1785 = v1778
632 canoniz’d. . . death]
1787 ann
ann = john1 minus warb (from beginning of note through “is not necessary”)
632 canoniz’d. . . death]
1790 mal
mal = john1 (minus warb); heath +
632 hearsed] Malone (ed. 1790): “By hearsed in death, the poet seems to mean, reposited and confined in the place of the dead. In his [ Luc.] he has again used this uncommon participle in nearly the same sense: ‘The sea within a puddle’s womb is hearsed, And not the puddle in thy sea dispersed.’”
1790- Wesley
Wesley: john1
632 Wesley (ms. notes 1790-, p. 44): “In the darkest, most. This [john’s] is a noble note.”
1791- rann
rann; standard
632 canoniz’d. . . death] Rann (ed. 1791-): “sacred bones, deposited in the place of the dead, have burst the folds, wherein they were embalmed.”
1793 v1793
v1793 = mal
632 canoniz’d. . . death]
1803 v1803
v1803 = v1793
632 canoniz’d. . . death]
1813 v1813
v1813 = v1803
632 canoniz’d. . . death]
1819 cald1
cald1 ≈ rann in word “Deposited” +
632 hearsed in death] Caldecott (ed. 1820): “Deposited with the accustomed funeral rites: conveyed in the vehicle appropriated to this ceremonial.”
1821 v1821
v1821 = v1813 (minus Malone) +
632 canoniz’d] Blakeway (apud ed. 1821): This word [canoniz’d] should be printed with an accent over the second syllable, in this and other places in which it occurs in our author: as in [Jn 3.1.? (0000)]: ‘Canònized and worshipp’d as a saint.’ and again: ‘ And thou shalt be canònized cardinel.’ [Tro. 2.2.? (000): ‘And fame in time to come canònize us.’ This is also the accentuation in Massinger: ‘That have canònz’d them you’ll find them worse.’ (Virgin Martyr 3.1.?). And again, ‘What the canòniz’d Spartan ladies were.’ And in The Fatal Dowry [4.1.?].Blakeway.”
1826 sing1
sing contra Blakeway without attribution + in magenta underlined
632 canoniz’d] Singer (ed. 1826, n. 637): “The accentuation of cómplete and canónized on the first syllable is not peculiar to Shakspeare, but the practice of several of his contemporaries.”
no note in 632 but in his note for 637 Singer comments on his innovation, the accent mark. He mistakenly says 1st syllable for canonized. ∑
1832 cald2
cald2: standard; Blakeway
632 canoniz’d . . .
death]
Caldecott (ed. 1832): “i.e. ‘that have received all the formal rites and ceremonies of sepulture, that the office of the church prescribe.’ Mr. Blakeway observes that throughout our author
canòniz’d has the accent thrown on the second syllable . . . .”
1854 del2
del2 contra cald2 on accent
632 canoniz’d] Delius (ed. 1854): “to canonize, bei Sh. bald auf der ersten, bald auf der zweiten Silbe betont, ist nicht bloss = heiligsprechen, sondern auch = wie heilig verehren.” [to canonize—in Sh. sometimes stressed on the first, sometimes on the second syllable—is not only for sanctified but also venerated as if holy.]
1854 Walker
Walker
632 canoniz’d] Walker (1854, p. 197) lists 632 as one of the instances of the accent on the syllable before -z’d.
1856 sing2
sing2 = sing1 +
632 canoniz’d] Singer (ed. 1856, n. 637): “The accentuation of cómplete on the first syllable, and canónized on the second, is not peculiar to Shakespeare, but the practuce of several of his contemporaries.”
1865 hal
hal = john; = Heath
632 canoniz’d . . . death] Halliwell (ed. 1865): “Hamlet, amazed at an apparition, which, though in all ages credited, has in all ages been considered as the most wonderful and most dreadful operation of supernatural agency, enquires of the spectre, in the most emphatick terms, why he breaks the order of nature, by returning from the dead; this he asks in a very confused circumlocution, confounding in his fright the soul and body. ‘Why, (says he,) have thy bones, which with due ceremonies have been entombed in death, in the common state of departed mortals, burst the folds in which they were embalmed? Why has the tomb, in which we saw thee quietly laid, opened his mouth, that mouth which, by its weight and stability, seemed closed for ever?} The whole sentence is this: ‘Why dost thou appear, whom we know to be dead"’ —Johnson.
“By the expression ‘hearsed in death’ is meant, shut up and secured with all those precautions which are usually practised in preparing dead bodies for sepulture, such as the winding-sheet, shrowd, coffin, &c. perhaps embalming into the bargain. So that death is here used, by the metonymy of the antecedent for the consequents, for the rites of death, such as are generally esteemed due, and practised with regard to dead bodies. Consequently, I understand by cerements, the waxed winding-sheet or winding-sheets, in which the corpse was enclosed and sown up, in order to preserve it, the longer from external impressions from the humidity of the sepulchre, as embalming was intended to preserve it from internal corruption.—Heath.”
1870 Abbott
Abbott: standard on accent
632 canoniz’d] Abbott (§ 491): “-Ised, when ending polysyllables, generally has now a certain emphasis. This is necessary, owing to the present broad pronunciation of i. Such polysyllables generally have now two accents, the principal accent coming first. But in Shakespeare’s time it would seem that the i approximated in some of these words to the French i, and, the -ed being pronounced, the i in-ised was unemphatic. Hence the Elizabethan accent of some of these words differs from the modern accent. . . . ‘Why thy | canón | iz’d bónes, | héarsed | in déath’ . . . .”
1870 rug1
rug1: standard on syllable length + in magenta underlined; Dodd on gloss sainted without attribution + in magenta underlined
632 canoniz’d] Moberly (ed. 1873): “Sainted: the second syllable is generally long in Shakspere, like ‘authorized’ in [Mac. 3.4.65 (1335)].”
1872 cln1
cln1: standard on accent +
632 canoniz’d] Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): “The sacred rites of the funeral were a kind of canonization.”
cln1
632 hearsed] Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): “entombed. See Ben Jonson’s Epitaph on the Countess of Pembroke: ‘Underneath this marble hearse.’”
1872 hud2
hud2 ≈ dyce (accent); warb (sepulture) + in magenta underlined
632 canoniz’d] Hudson (ed. 1872): “has the second syllable long, and means made sacred by the canonical rites of sepulture.”
1873 rug2
rug2 = rug1
632 canoniz’d]
rug2 ≈ cln1 (minus Ben Jonson title) without attribution
632 hearsed] Moberly (ed. 1873): “entombed in the ‘marble hearse’ of Ben Jonson’s epitaph.
1877 v1877
v1877:
warb (
minus all but gist)
, Blakeway
; Furness: Walker, Abbott
632 canoniz’d]
Furness (ed. 1877): “
Warburton: Bones over which the rites of sepulture have been performed, or which was buried according to the canon.
Blakeway: The accent is on the second syllable. [See
Walker,
Vers. 197;
Abbott, § 491.]”
v1877: john contra warb; Heath (p. 531)
632-5 Furness (ed. 1877):
Furness (ed. 1877): “
Johnson has a long note on these lines, called forth by
Warburton’s superfluous change of ‘hearsed in
earth,’ and sums up the whole sentence in: ‘Why dost thou appear, whom we know to be dead?’
Heath (p. 531): By the expression
hearsed in death is meant, shut up and secured with all those precautions which are usually practised in preparing dead bodies for sepulture, such as winding-sheet, shroud, coffin, &c. So that
death is here used, by a metonymy of the antecedent for the consequent, for the rites of death, such as are generally esteemed due, and practised with regard to dead bodies.”
1881 hud3
hud3 = hud2 (minus note on syllable length)
632 canoniz’d]
1885 macd
macd
632 hearsed] MacDonald (ed. 1885): “I think hearse was originally the bier—French herse, a harrow—but came to be applied to the coffin: hearsed in death—coffined in death.”
1899 ard1
ard1 ≈ cald2 on accent without attribution
632 canoniz’d]
1929 trav
trav
632 hearsed]
Travers (ed. 1929): “ = coffined (the noun always means coffin in Sh.), perhaps, here, entombed; cp. inurn’d [634].”
1938 parc
parc
632 canoniz’d] Parrott & Craig (ed. 1938): “buried according to church rules.”
1939 kit2
kit2: del2 gloss without attribution; Abbott on pronunciation without attribution; analogues
632 canoniz’d] Kittredge (ed. 1939): "sanctified, i.e., buried with all sacred rites. Cano’nize was the regular Elizabethan accentuation. Cf. Marlowe, Faustus, i, 1 (ed. Dyce, II, 13): ’Shall make all nations cano’nize us.’ "
kit2: standard
632 hearsed] Kittredge (ed. 1939): "entombed. Hearse in Elizabethan English may mean ’bier,’ ’monument,’ or ’tomb.’ "
1947 cln2
cln2 = john1 gloss
632 canoniz’d] Rylands (ed. 1947): "consecrated."
1957 pel1
pel1: standard
632 canoniz’d] Farnham (ed. 1957): “buried with the established rites of the Church.”
1957 pen1b
pen1b
632 canoniz’d] Harrison (ed. 1957): “buried according to the canon of the church.”
1970 pel2
pel2 = pel1
632 canoniz’d] Farnham (ed. 1970): “buried with the established rites of the Church”
1980 pen2
pen2: xref
632 thy . . . death] Spencer (ed. 1980): “Hamlet’s father had been properly buried with all due religious rites (see the note to 1.1.128-40).”
pen2: standard
632 canoniz’d] Spencer (ed. 1980): “(accented on the second syllable) consecrated by Christian burial.”
pen2: standard
632 hearsed] Spencer (ed. 1980): “coffined.”
1982 ard2
ard2: Nowottny
632-4 thy . . . interr’d] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “A traditional motive of the classical ghost was to demand proper burial. The emphasis here upon the due formality, the finality (hearsed in death, quietly inurn’d) and the sanctity (canoniz’d) of the burial rites makes the appearance of this ghost the more unaccountable and gives moreover the effect of a violation. It is unnecessary to speculate on the precise nature of the rites, but Winifred Nowottny suggests to me a possible reminiscence of those described by Samuel Lewkenor as practised at Würzburg at the funeral of a bishop-prince. The corpse, after a ritual progress through the town, reposed in the cathedral overnight, ’the clergy environing the hearse with many psalms and orisons’, was then taken ’to the temple of the new monastery’, and ’after many dirges and prayers’ was brought back to the cathedral to be ’at length interred’ (Discourse of Foreign Cities, 1600, pp. 7v-8).”
ard2: Abbott
632 canoniz’d] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “having received the most sacred rites of the Church. The accent on the second syllable was normal. See Abbott 491.”
ard2: //s
632 hearsed] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “coffined. Hearse, originally denoting a structure carrying lighted tapers under which the bier with the coffin was placed in church, came to be used for the bier or for the coffin itself. This seems to be the usual sense in Shakespeare (e.g. R3 1.2.2; MV 3.1.77).”
1985 cam4
cam4
632 hearsed] Edwards (ed. 1985): "coffined. Accent on first syllable. The line as a whole gets a strong rhythmic effect from disputing the underlying iambic structure; viz. [with accent on <i>Why, -non-, bones, -hear-,death, </i>]."
1987 oxf4
oxf4
632 canoniz’d bones] Hibbard (ed. 1987): "consecrated bones, bones buried according to the rules of the Church."
oxf4
632 hearsed] Hibbard (ed. 1987): "coffined. Compare [MV 3.1.89-90 (1301-2)], ‘would she [Jessica] were hearsed at my foot, and the ducats in her coffin’ A hearse is invariably ‘a coffin’ in Shakespeare."
1987 Mercer
Mercer
632-43 Why thy . . . vp againe]
Mercer (1987, pp. 163-4): <p 163.> Hamlet “begins with a kind of rhetorical elaboration [632-33a] </p. 163> <p. 164> Such language of the grave . . . is firmly in the tradition [of revenge tragedy,] particularly Act III of
Antonio’s Revenge —but it is in actuality not very appropriate to this particular ghost. Andrugio really did burst from his marble sepulchre before his son’s astonished eyes, really did rip up his cerecloths. But this ghost is no mouldy corpse; it does not stink of the grave. It comes in complete armour, just like the King as he nobly lived And so [in the rest of the speech, 633b-643] Hamlet finds for it a language more fitting.”
1988 bev2
bev2: standard
632 canoniz’d] Bevington (ed. 1988): “buried according to the canons of the church.”
bev2: standard
632 hearsed] Bevington (ed. 1988): “coffined.”
1992 fol2
fol2: standard
632 canoniz’d] Mowat & Werstine (ed. 1992): “i.e., buried in accord with the canons of the church (accent on second syllable)”
1996 OED
OED
632 canoniz’d] OED: “canonized, ppl. a. [f. PREC. + -ED.] Placed in the canon; sainted; consecrated, beatified, deified. canonized epistles: cf. CANONICAL 3. 1382 WYCLIF James Prol., Not the same ordre is at Greekis..of the seuen epistoelis that ben clepid canonysid. c 1440 Promp. Parv. 60 Canonyzyde, canonizatus. 1593 SHAKS. 2 Hen. VI, I. iii. 63 Brazen Images of Canonized Saints. 1602 -- Ham. I. iv. 47 Thy Canoniz’d bones Hearsed in death.”
1996 OED
OED
632 hearsed] OED “hearse: it only latterly has been used as the vehicle that carries a corpse to be buried. hearse (hs), sb. Forms: 4–5 heers(e, 5 heerce, 5–6 hers, 5–6 (9) herce, 6 hearce, herst, 7 hierce, 4–9 herse, 6– hearse. [Formerly herse, a. F.
herse (12th c. in Littré) = It. erpice: - L. hirpic-em (hirpex) large rake used as a harrow; ? cf. Gr. grappling-iron. See HERSE, under which the sense `harrow’ and its immediately derived senses are treated.] 1. a. A triangular frame somewhat similar in form to the ancient harrow, designed to carry candles, and used at the service of Tenebrae in Holy Week.
2.a. An elaborate framework originally intended to carry a large number of lighted tapers and other decorations over the bier or coffin while placed in the church at the funerals of distinguished persons; also called castrum doloris, chapelle ardente, or catafalco.
† 6The solemn obsequy in a funeral. Obs. (Perh. only an error.) [But this could be Sh’s source.] 1579 SPENSER Sheph. Cal. Nov. 60 O heauie herse [gloss. Herse, is the solemne obsequie in funeralles]. Ibid. 70 The earth now lacks her wonted light, And all we dwell in deadly night, O heauie herse.
† 7. A dead body, a corpse. Obs. 1530 PALSGR. 230/2 Herce, a deed body, corps. 1609 HEYWOOD Brit. Troy III. lxxxvi. 72 Bold Archas pierses Thrugh the mid-hoast and strewes the way with herses. 1633 MAY Hen. II, V. 775 Her hearse at Godstow Abbey they enterre.
8. a. A carriage or car constructed for carrying the coffin at a funeral. (The current use.) 1650 B. Discolliminium 2 It is hung about with as many..trappings, as Coll.Rainsboroughs Herse and horse were at his fine Funerals.
OED has cered pp cered for cere, to infuse with wax for a shroud.
1999 Dessen&Thomson
Dessen&Thomson
632 hearsed] Dessen & Thomson(1999) associate hearses, in SDs, with coffins or biers.
2006 ard3q2
ard3q2: xref
632 canoniz’d] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “(three syllables, with stress on the second) blessed, consecrated (by Christian burial rites). Pursuing the cannon/canon pun noted at [316], Booth (49-50) points out that we have recently heard the cannon (see [610-11 SD and CN]) and that the bones themselves seem to become projectiles here, bursting out of the grave. The repetition of burst ([631], [633]) is slightly awkward, an effect exaggerated in Q1, where it occurs three times in five lines.”
ard3q2
632 hearsed] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “hearsèd: enclosed in a hearse or coffin”
2008 Crystal
Crystal
632-5 cerements . . . iawes] Crystal (2008, p. 165): The first part of Hamlet’s speech begins with words ordinary enough. “But in line 9 [632], something different happens: we encounter hearsed, cerements, and enurned, as well as two distinctive collocations, jaws which are ponderous and marble,” an example of a cluster of neologisms.
