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.

1872 cln1

cln1

1352 express] Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): “exact, fitted to purpose, as the seal fits the stamp. So in Hebrews i. 3. ’express image’ is the rendering of the Greek ( )."

1899 ard1

ard1

1352 express] Dowden (ed. 1899): “exact. Clar. Press quote Hebrews I. 3: ‘express image.’ Schmidt, ‘expressive.’”

1981 Wright

Wright

1351 forme and moouing] Wright (1981, p. 185 n. 20): “Although the two nouns could be taken separately, they seem more effective in combination: ‘in his form, and in the movements of that form.’ It would seem more appropriate to describe the movements of the body as ‘express’ than to speak so of the body at rest. The word moving sets the idea of form in motion.

“Most editors have felt some anxiety about express. Several gloss is as ‘exact,’ one as ‘well-devised,” another as ‘well-framed (?).’ Rylands suggests ‘active, purposeful, or well-modelled (Lat. exprimere, to portray).’ Kittredge offers ‘precisely adapted to its purposes—like a delicately adjusted piece of mechanism.’ (He does not say what mechanism—a Swiss watch? the 3:18 to Stratford?—Shakespeare may have had in mind.) But most of the OED’s meanings for express emphasize the idea of distinctness: clearly outlined, sharp, definite, explicit. So ‘how express and admirable’ probably means ‘how admirably distinct, how wonderfully clear and sharp in the articulation of its form’.”