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.

1768 SJC

Anon.: Nibbler +

698 burnt and purg’d away] Anon. [fire and Brimstone] (St. James’s Chr. no. 1127 [19-21 May1768]: 4): “To the Printer of the S. J. CHRONICLE. SIR, Your Correspondent Nibbler, is one of those inattentive Readers, who raise Difficulties as some Folk raise Bumps on their Foreheads, heavily against the Table, for Want of keeping awake.—Hamlet had a better Memory than Nibbler is aware of. The Ghost speaks of Purgatory, where he says he is confined, till his Sins – [698, 1733 ed.] &c. &c. &c. must mean the next Remove of departed Souls, which the Ghost had not then reached. It were tedious to explain further because needless. I am, Sir, your’s &c. Fire and Brimstone.”

Ed. note: Nibbler’s note is evidently in one of the missing editions of SJC.

1768 SJC

Anon.: Fire and Brimstone, Nibbler +

698 burnt and purg’d away] Anon. [Fire Plug](St. James’s Chr. no. 1132 [31 May - 2 Jun. 1768]: 4): “To the Printer The S. J. Chronicle. SIR, When a modest Question is asked, it is only genteel to give a civil Answer; but your Correspondent Fire and Brimstone could not, I suppose, refrain the infernal Fury of his Nature; or Nibbler would, undoubtedly, have met with a very different Treatment from him. He has been very unlucky, however, as well as ill-natured, in knocking Nibbler’s head against the Table; because, at the same Time he has committed a Blunder for which he deserves to have his own jolted against the Wall. The Ghost (says this sulphurous Critick) speaks of Purgatory where he is confined “[698]”—And “that the undiscover’d Country, &c. &c. &c.” must mean the next Remove of departed souls, which the Ghost had not then reached.’—Now I will beg Leave to ask this Picked-Pointed-Match, to what Place he apprehends a Soul, after having passed through Purgatory, is removed? If he does not know, I will tell him, that Purgatory, being, according to the Church of Rome, a Place where departed Souls are sentenced to expiate certain Crimes, not meriting eternal Damnation, the next remove from thence, must be to Heaven; which, surely, cannot be [quotes 1732-3] &c. which Hamlet mentions. The Truth is, Hell must be the undiscover’d Country alluded to; because, departed Souls, whose Crimes have merited eternal Punishment, are never permitted to return from that horrid Region of Torment. I am, Sir, Your’s &c. FIRE PLUG.”

1768 SJC

Anon.: Fire and Brimstone, Fire-plug +

698 burnt and purg’d away] Anon. [Pluto’s Link-Boy] (St. James’s Chr. no. 1149 [9-12 Jul. 1768]: 4): “To the Printer of the St. J. Chronicler. Sir, One would think from the Craft of some Folks’ Arguments, that close Reasoning like good Penmanship, was unfashionable, and below a Gentleman. After two or three Mediums have been offered upon any Point, if you were not at the Beginning of the Argument, you could not possibly guess what the Question was. Fire-plug is a Master-piece of this kind, as his Letters will convince any one who has superfluous Time to throw away on reading them. To recapitulate a little—Nibbler thought Hamlet must have had a short Memory to say that “No Traveller return’d from that undiscovr’d Country,” to which we are destin’d after Death; whereas he had been conversing with his Father’s Ghost.

“Fire and Brimstone (in Answer) conceived, that by after Death must be meant that eternal State of the Soul when removed to the World of Spirits and consequently that there was no Forgetfulness implied in Hamlet’s calling such a state [1733]. For it was evident the Ghost returned from Purgatory by its own account.

“Fire-plug comes with that Confidence which Ignorance is so happy in, and thinks to overset all that Fire and Brimstone had said, by observing, that from the Doctrine of Purgatory, the Souls sent for Purgation to that Place were afterwards to be removed to Heaven, therefore Hamlet could not have meant the next Remove of departed Souls from Purgatory by the undiscover’d Country, &c. for that was to be Heaven, and Hamlet speaks of the “Dread of something after Death.” One would think from this Conclusion, that Point deviated was the Nature of Purgatory, and the future State of Hamlet’s Father—For, says he, the next Remove is to Heaven, and that is no Object of Dread; this clearly places the Person in Dispute in Purgatory. Would not you, Mr. Baldwin, imagine, that in the Lines quoted from the Soliloquy we are speaking of, Hamlet was considering the State of the Father’s Spirit only, and not reflecting on the involuntary Fears arising within Men when they think of an Hereafter. Though a thousand Ghosts come from Purgatory, and tell men they are there for the present, purging away their Sins, in their Way to Heaven what is that to me, who am uncertain myself what will be my Lot, whether Purgatory and Heaven, or no Purgatory and Hell. Whenever I point my View to a future State, as Hamlet did in the Speech-in Question, sure my Ignorance of the Sum Total of my Sins, and what Sins are for Purgatory, and what not, is sufficient Ground for dreading something after Death. It is not the Progress of the Ghost of his Father that he is conjecturing about; the Jet of the Matter in Dispute is this:

“If there be a State for departed Souls beyond Purgatory, from which no Spirit returns, is it any Forgetfulness in Hamlet to call such a State,[quotes 1733] when he had seen no other Spirit but that of his Father, which came only from Purgatory? Or while we believe in such a Place as Hell, is that not Ground enough for a Person conjecturing about a hereafter, and not speaking of a particular Soul in Purgatory, to speak of the Dread of something after Death? Let the famous Soliloquy of Hamlet be thus considered, and I fancy no Inconsistency will be seen in it. It were wrong to be rough and harsh to so gentle a Creature as Fire-plug seems to be therefore I will not frighten him with my with my real Name, but subscribe myself by the Name of my Office, which is June 21. Pluto’s Link-boy. The Passage in Dispute is often objected to, which is the Reason of my giving you further Trouble on the Subject; for it were Pity any ignorant Reader should raise a Blot on a Page of Shakespeare, and no one take the Trouble to rub it out—be that My Apology.”

1768 SJC

Anon.: Fire-plug +

698 burnt and purg’d away] Anon. [Lucifer Gridiron](St. James’s Chr. no. 1136 [9-11 Jun. 1768]: 4): “To the Printer of the S.J. CHRONICLE. SIR, I Fear there is a terrible bump on poor Fire-Plug’s Forehead, for he must have nodded very heavily when he wrote his Observation on Hamlet’s Speech to you – a Drop or too of Ink is the best Cure in these Cases—I shall bestow so much on him—I could spare him a Spoonful; but his head is not worth it—Mark his reasoning—

“Purgatory is to purge away Sins of a certain Magnitude; they who are guilty of no other than this Class of Crimes go to Heaven after such Purgation; they who have committed more atrocious Crimes are defined to Hell. Therefore, the next Remove of departed Souls must be Hell, and not Heaven; in the Sense of Hamlet’s Words, for he talks of the Dread of something after death.” Let the Sense of any Cinder-Wench judge, whether, by Fire-Plug’s own Notion of a Hereafter, Hamlet might not well dread something after Death, reckoning that Period to commence after Purgatory for Fire-Plug admits of a Hell a certain Degree of Sinfulness; and I Fancy he will grant, that Man is by a very indifferent Judge of the

“Sum Total of his Sins.—This to me appears sufficient Grounds for Dread in any one who is not Fire-Plug, as my Friend Fire-Plug seems to be. Your’s &c. June 7. Lucifer Gridiron”

1765- mDavies

mDavies

698-9 But . . . house] Davies (1765-): In Lucian’s Dialogue of Menippus & Pelonides, wch was published in English verse & latin prose in the reign of Q. Elizabeth there is a Sentiment so very similar to this that we cannot help supposing conjecturing that Shakespear read the Translation of this Dialogue which was published in English verse & latin prose, as near as I can guess about the Middle of Q Eliz:s reign.

“Philonides asks Menippius to relate to him what had passed discover the laws & Transactions & decrees of the Infernal Judges—Menippius tells him that it is not lawful for him to publish to ye upper world what he has heard below, nor to divulge the Infernal secrets lest Rhadamanthus [?] should punish him for it.”

1773 v1773

v1773

698 burnt and purg’d away] Farmer (apud ed. 1773): “Gawin Douglas really changes the Platonic hell into the ‘punytion of Saulis in ‘purgatory’: and it is observable, that when the ghost informs Hamlet of his doom there . . . the expression is very similar to the bishop’s: I will give you his version as concisely as I can; ‘It is a nedeful thyng to suffer panis and torment—Sum in the wyndis, sum under the water, and in the fire uthir sum: thus the mony vices—Contrakkit in the corpis be done away And purgit’ Sixth Book of Eneados, Fol. p. 191.”

1778 v1778

v1778 = v1773

698 burnt and purg’d away]

1780 mals1

mals1: “After Farmer’s note”

696 fires] Malone (1780, 1:352): “Historie of Hamblett, bl[ack].let[ter]. F2. edit 1608: ‘He set fire in the foure corners of the hall, in such sort, that of all that were as then therin not one escaped away, but were forced to purge their sinnes by fire.’”

1784 Davies

Davies ≈ mDavies (subst.)

698-9 But that I am forbid To tell the secrets of my prison house] Davies (1784, 3:20): “In Lucian’s Dialogue of Menippus and Pilonides, there is a sentiment which so strongly resembles this caution of the Ghost, that I am induced to believe our Shakspeare had read the translation, which was published, in English verse and Latin prose, about the beginning of Queen Elizabeth’s reign.

“Philonides asks Menippus to discover to him the laws and decrees of the infernal judges. Menippus informs him, that it is not lawful for him to lay open, in the upper world, what he had heard in the regions below, nor to divulge the infernal secrets, lest Rhadamanthus should punish him for it.”

1785 v1785

v1785 = v1778, mals1 +

698 burnt and purg’d away] Whalley (apud ed. 1785): “Shakspeare talks more like a Papist, than a Platonist; but the language of bishop Douglas is that of a good Protestant: ‘Thus the many vices Contrakkit in the corpis be done away And purgit.’ These are the very words of our Liturgy in the commendatory prayer for a sick person at the point of departure, in the office for the visitation of the sick: ‘—whatsoever defilements it may have contracted—being purged and done away.’ ”

1787 ann

ann = v1785 (subst.) [Farmer, mals1, Whalley]

698 burnt and purg’d away]

1790 mal

mal = v1785

698 burnt and purg’d away]

1791- rann

rann

698 burnt and purg’d away]

1793 v1793

v1793 = mal

698 burnt and purg’d away]

1803 v1803

v1803 = v1793

698 burnt and purg’d away]

1805 Seymour

Seymour

698 but that I am forbid] Seymour (1805, 2:158): “This is exuberant: I suppose we should read: ‘—But being forbid.’ i.e. Only that I am forbid.”

Ed. note:See TNM

1813 v1813

v1813 = v1803

698 burnt and purg’d away]

1819 cald1

cald1 = v1813 minus mals1 [i.e. includes Farmer, Whalley]

698 burnt and purg’d away]

1821 v1821

v1821 = v1813

698 burnt and purg’d away]

1826 sing1

sing1 = Farmer v1821

698 burnt and purg’d away]

1831 Gent. Mag.

Cydwell: Hazlitt +

698-9 But . . . house] Cydwell (Gent. Mag. 101.2 (1831), 257): “Mr. Hazlitt conceives that the literary brilliancy of the Elizabethan age, was owing to the unlocking of the Bible, the great storehouse of the subline and the beautiful. It would be an intersting field of annotation on Shakspeare, to trace in Scripture the source of his ideas and language. To give an instance, the Ghost in Hamlet says, ‘But that I am forbid To tell the secrets of my prison-house, I could a tale unfold, &c.’ St Paul, speaking of the state of departed souls (i.e. paradise, as distinct from heaven) 2 Cor. xii.3, says, ‘he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.” Cydwell.”

1832 cald2

cald2 = cald1

698 burnt and purg’d away]

1856 hud1

hud1 ≈ sing1 on Gawin Douglas without attribution

698 burnt and purg’d away]

1856 sing2

sing2 = sing1

698 burnt and purg’d away]

1865 hal

hal = Farmer, Malone, Whalley (via v1821)

698 burnt and purg’d away]

1870 rug1

rug1 ≈ Farmer without attribution

698 burnt and purg’d away] Moberly (ed. 1870): Thus Gawain Douglas in his translation of AEn. vi.740, says that ‘it is a nedeful thing to suffer panis and torment,.......some in the wyndis, sum under the watter, and in the fire uther sum......

‘Till the mony vices

Contrakkit in the corpis be done away

And purgit.’”

1873 rug2

rug2 = rug1; ≈ hal

698 burnt and purg’d away] Moberly (ed. 1873): “This is, perhaps, a poetic and pagan rather than Roman Catholic purgatory. Thus Gawain Douglas [as in Farmer].”

1877 v1877

v1877 = Farmer (Douglas quotation only)

698 burnt and purg’d away]

1929 trav

trav ≈ Seymour

698 but that I am forbid] Travers (ed. 1929): “were it not that I am forbidden.”

1981 Wright

Wright

698 burnt and purg’d] Wright (1981, pp. 173-4), <p.173> identifying the phrase as hendiadys, says that the “Ghost of the older Hamlet speaks hopefully of his sins </p. 173> <p. 174> being burnt and purged away’ . . . (i.e. purged by burning) . . . .” </p.174>

1987 oxf4

oxf4

698 but] Hibbard (ed. 1987): "except, if it were not."

1988 bev2

bev2: standard

698 but that] Bevington (ed. 1988): “were it not that.”

2006 ard3q2

ard3q2: standard

698 purg’d] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “This word again evokes the notion of purgatory.”

2007 Wilson

Wilson

698-700 Wilson (2007, p. 231): “. . . [T]he tale the Ghost says it could ’unfold,’ if only it were not ’forbid,’ about being ’burnt and purged’ is an even more ’harrowing’ secret that its murder.”

Wilson

698 purg’d]Wilson (2007, p. 231): Wilson discusses the relevance of a Catholic father [Hamlet’s, Sh’s] whose needs for prayer is disregarded by his Protestant son [Hamlet, Sh.].

Ed. note: The Church of England repudiated purgatory in 1563. The religion of Sh’s father is disputed, many scholars finding the evidence for his Catholicism skimpy.