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

Line 710 - 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.

710 Ghost. Reuenge his foule, and most vnnaturall murther.	1.5.25

1596 Lodge

Lodge: allusion to ghost

710 Lodge (Wits Miserie, or the Worlds Madness, 1596): “ . . . the ghost which cried so miserably . . . Hamlet revenge.”

Ed. note: See Farmer and others, below.

1625 Bacon

Bacon

710 Bacon (1625, D2v-D3) in “Of Revenge” (IIII. D2-D3, ed. Kiernan, 1985, pp. 16-17), after deploring revenge, says, <D2v> “The most Tolerable Sort of Revenge, is for those wrongs which there is no Law to remedy; . . . . </D2v> <D3> This is certaine; That a Man that studieth Revenge, keepes his own Wounds greene, which otherwise would heale, and doe well. Publique Revenges, are, for the most part, Fortunate; As that for the Death of Caesar; For the Death of Pertinax; for the Death of Henry the Third of France; And many more. But in private Revenges it is not so. . . . .” </D3>

Ed. note: See also n. 692 and 1590-1611 where Hamlet berates himself for letting his passion die away. He of course does not want to let the wound heal. Bacon does not discuss revenge for another, except indirectly in discussing kings who have been murdered and revenge taken.

1736 Stubbs

Stubbs

710 revenge] Stubbs (1736, pp. 23-4) <p.23> “We are to observe further that the King spurs on his Son to revenge his foul and unnatural Murder from these two Considerations chiefly, that he was sent into the other World without having had Time to repent of his Sins, and without the necessary Sacraments, (according to the Church of Rome,) as mr. Theobalds (See his note, p. 253 [762]) has well explained it, and that consequently his Soul was </p.23> <p.24> to suffer, if not eternal Damnation, at least a long Course of Penance in Purgatory; which aggravates the Circumstances of his Brother’s Barbarity. And Secondly, That Denmark might not be the Scene of Usurpation and Incest, and the Throne thus polluted and profaned. For these Reasons he prompts the young Prince to Revenge; else it would have been more becoming the Character of such a Prince as Hamlet’s Father is represented to have been, and more suitable to his present Condition, to have left his Brother to the Divine Punishment, and to a Possibility of Repentance for his base Crime, which by cutting him off, he must be deprived of.” </p.24>

1746 Upton

Upton: Sophocles

710 revenge]

1752 Dodd

Dodd

710 revenge]

Ed. note: See his n. 770

1765 john1

john1 appendix (ref. in v1773 re date)

1379 inhibition] Holt (in Johnson, ed. 1765, 8: [L12v]): “This is a proof this play was not wrote till after the 39 Eliz. 1597. (Shakespeare then 33,) when the first statute against vagabonds was made, including players; and perhaps, not till after the 1st James 1602. Mr. holt.”

1767 Farmer

Farmer: Lodge

710 revenge] Farmer (1767, rpt. 1966, pp. 75-6), on Sh.’s learning: “Shakespeare is said to have been no extraordinary actor; and that the top of his performance was the Ghost in his own Hamlet. Yet this chef d’oeuvre did not please: I will give you an original stroke at it. Dr. Lodge published in the year 1596 a pamphlet called Wit’s Miserie, or the World’s Madness, discovering the incarnate devils of the age, quarto. One of these devils is, Hate virtue, or sorrow for another man’s good successe, who, says the doctor, is a foule lubber, and looks as pale as the vizard of the Ghost, which cried so miserably at the theatre, Hamlet revenge.”

1773 v1773

v1773: Farmer Learning +

710 revenge] Steevens (ed. 1773): “As a proof that this play was written before 1597, of which the contrary has been asserted by Mr. Holt in Dr. Johnson’s appendix, I must borrow, as usual, from Mr. Farmer. ‘Shakespeare is said to have been no extraordinary actor; and that the top of his performance was the Ghost in his own Hamlet. Yet this chef d’oeuvre did not please: I will give you an original stroke at it. Dr. Lodge published in the year 1596 a pamphlet called Wit’s Miserie, or the World’s Madness, discovering the incarnate devils of the age, quarto. One of these devils is, Hate virtue, or sorrow for another man’s good successe, who, says the doctor, is a foule lubber, and looks as pale as the vizard of the Ghost, which cried so miserably at the theatre, Hamlet revenge.’ Steevens.”

Ed. note: The adjective could apply to the pathetic character rather than to the actor playing him.

-1778 mmal1

mmal1: Farmer

710 revenge] Malone (-1778, fol. 50v): “Mr. Farmer’s observation is confirmed by the following passage in an anonymous Play called A Warning for faire women 1599 which seems to allude to Hamlet. We also learn from it the usual dress of the stage ghosts at that time. ‘—A filthie whining ghost Lapt in some foule sheet or a leather pelch Comes screaming like a pigge half-stickt And cries vendicta — revenge — revenge.’”

1778 v1778

v1778 = v1773

710 revenge]

1785 v1785

v1785 = v1778

710 revenge]

1789 Anon.

Kemble

710-76 Anon. (1789, p. 12): “Never was the poet’s meaning more strongly marked in the actor’s face than in his [Kemble’s] during the recital of the horrid deed.”

1790 mal

mal = v1785 +

710 revenge] Malone (ed. 1790): “I suspect that this stroke was levelled, not at Shakspeare, but at the performer of the Ghost in an older play on this subject, exhibited before 1589. See An Attempt to ascertain the order of Shakspeare’s plays, Vol. 1. Malone.”

1793 v1793

v1793 = mal

710 revenge]

1803 v1803

v1803 = v1793

710 revenge]

1813 v1813

v1813 = v1803

710 revenge]

1821 v1821

v1821 = v1813

710 revenge]

1826 sing1

sing1 ≈ v1821 (both Steevens and Malone) without attribution

710 revenge] Singer (ed. 1826): “There is an allusion to the ghost in this play, or in an older one of the same name, by Lodge in his Wit’s Miserie, and the World’s Madness, 1596. He describes one of the Devils, by the name Hate Virtue, as a ‘foule lubber, who looks as pale as the vizard of the Ghost, which cried so miserably at the theattre [sic], Hamlet, revenge.’”

1846 Ulrici

Ulrici

710 Murther] Ulrici (trans.1846, p. 503): <p. 503>“Shakspeare [in contrast to Calderon] has in his comedies but seldom, and in his tragedies, in the single case of “Hamlet,” built his exposition on a fact antecedent and external to the proper action of the piece; and whenever he has done so, he has with great skill invariably contrived some means of presenting it again before the spectators (as, for instance, by the appearance of the Ghost in ‘Hamlet.’) ” </p. 503>

1856 sing2

sing2 = sing1 including theattre

710 revenge]

1875 Marshall

Marshall

710 Marshall (1875, p. 37): “The most solemn charge that could be given to man—most solemn because it would seem that Nature’s very laws had been set aside for the purpose of enjoining on him this sacred duty—had been given to Hamlet by the Spirit of that father at whose wrongs he had hitherto been so helplessly indignant . . . .”

1890 irv2

irv2

710 Marshall (ed. 1890, pp. 4-5) <p. 4> discussing early allusions to Hamlet, says that Samuel Rowlands, 1620, in The Night Raven (Sig, D 2) has: </p. 4><p. 5> ‘I will not cry Hamlet Revenge my greeves But I will call Hang-man Revenge on theeves.’ All these passages are generally held to be to the old play; but, though this may be true of the earlier allusions before 1600, I do not see any reason to believe that the later ones, because they happen to contain the words Hamlet Revenge, should not refer to Shakespeare’s play. It is no uncommon thing for persons who quote from memory to make mistakes; and the words Hamlet Revenge may simply be a recollection of the line spoken by the Ghost [710; quotes].” </p. 5>

1930 Granville-Barker

Granville-Barker

710 Granville-Barker (1930, rpt. 1946, 1: 247-8): <p. 247> “Hamlet’s task would at best be a hard one. . . . [but] Shakespeare does not develop [the] political and practical aspect of the business” which would have been clearer <p. 247> <p. 248> to his contemporary audience than to us. </p. 248>

1942 Lewis

Lewis

710 C. S. Lewis (1942, apud Knights, 1960, p. 39) says: “The Hamlet formula, so to speak, is not ‘a man who has to avenge his father,’ but ‘a man who has been given a task by a ghost.’”

1947 cln2

cln2

710-17 Rylands (ed. 1947, p. 31): “These lines are the keystone of the First Movement. The two words Murder and Revenge are the climax towards which every part and detail are directed. The delayed effect is summed up in the Ghost’s “I could a tale unfold . . . ” [700].

1962 mCraig

mCraig ≈ Bacon without attribution

710 Craig (1962-63, Box 3, ƒ B5, p. 84) asserts that Ham. is not a revenge tragedy, “that is, a tragedy in which a character actuated by personal animus seeks vengeance.” Rather, the ghost calls on Hamlet to bring Claudius to justice; he is the only one who can. “if Hamlet does not punish the murderer and restore his kingdom, nobody else will or can discharge these obligations.”

mCraig

710 Craig (1962-63, Box 3, ƒ B5, p. 84): In the play of Hamlet we have discovered, first, that there is in humanity a natural tendency toward the true and the good. There are many reasons why this is true but we content ourselves with saying that this condition is demanded by the doctrine of evolution. Secondly, we have discovered that this tendency may be blocked. Hamlet and Horatio follow human nature and do right simply because it is right. Polonius and Laertes live according to a system that they consider practical—rules, proverbial beliefs, and what we may call worldliness. They impose their system on Ophelia, and the consequence is that we see in her fate one of the most pitiful tragedies in Shakespeare.”

1977 Teaching Sh.

Beckerman

710-73 Beckerman (1977, pp. 305-6) <p. 305> notes that the audience is told about the murder of King Hamlet three times. </p. 305> <p. 306> The first is by the ghost, who quickly reveals the fact of murder (710), "then the identity of the murderer [727], next--in the longest section--both his dismay at his wife’s infidelity [729-42] and the way the murder was accomplished [744-65], and ends with a demand that Hamlet avenge him by punishing the murderer but sparing the wife-mother [766-73]. The Ghost’s speeches thus follow the sequence of first revealing the two major facts (Shakespeare gives this information quickly), then depicting the response to the facts as details are sketched in, and finally setting a task to be drawn from the revelation. In the course of these speeches we, the audience, learn necessary expository material but in a manner that stresses the fall from the ideal to the grotesque." </p. 306>

Beckerman (1977, p. 309): "Having three versions of one event . . . facilitates the recognition of Shakespeare’s theatrical strategy." He goes on to discuss the difficulties of grappling with dramaturgy: even trying performance possibilities does not guarantee success.

Ed. note: The ghost began, in 710, with the word "revenge" even before the word "murder."

1980 pen2

pen2: standard

710, 713 vnnaturall] Spencer (ed. 1980): “(because contrary to family feeling).”

1982 ard2

ard2: Lodge; analogues;

710 Reuenge] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “The one thing certainly known about the pre-Shakespearean Hamlet is ’the ghost which cried so miserably . . . Hamlet revenge’ (Lodge, Wit’s Misery). To cry for revenge was the traditional function of the stage ghost which the Elizabethans took over from Seneca (as, e.g., in The Spanish Tragedy, The Misfortunes of Arthur, Locrine, The Battle of Alcazar) and which was ridiculed in A Warning for Fair Women (printed 1599). But Shakespeare’s ghost is no mere theatrical stereotype. For the age-old notion that murderers are pursued by the souls of their victims, going right back to Plato (Laws, 9: 865d), was one of the commonest of popular ghost-beliefs. According to the 1665 addition to the ’Discourse concerning Devils and Spirits’ appended to Scot’s Discovery of Witchcraft (3rd ed.), ’such persons as. . . do most frequently appear again’ are those who have been ’secretly murthered’; and though such apparitions are normally silent, when ’the murther . . . hath been more than ordinary, horrid, and execrable’, ’then the remembrance of the same doth sometimes enable the apparition to frame a voice. . . and discover the fact’ (2:3, pp. 45-6). Cf. Aubrey, Miscellanies (1857 ed., p. 95), ’So certainly does the revenge of God pursue the abominated murderer, that, when witnesses are wanting of the fact, the very ghosts of the murdered parties cannot rest quiet in their graves, till they have made the detection themselves’. Ed. note: Lodge, a satirist, may not be the best source for the actual words a ghost spoke in a Hamlet play.”

1995 OED

OED

710 murther] OED: Murther is an older form of Murder, but there are examples of both forms though the 18thc at least. The OED has several Shn quotations with both forms.

1997 Shaksper

Groves

710 murther] Groves (Shaksper 29 Sept. 1997): th “had a /dh/ sound (as in "bathe" or "then") in OE and ME, and thus presumably also for Shakespeare; the change to /d/ in these words in Early Modern English (as also in Lear’s "pudder" for "pother") may be by analogy with the regular change /dh/ -> /d/ before continuants like /l/, /m/, /n/ and /r/ in Middle English.