1479-1559 I heard thee...in the gods.] Dodd (1752, p. ???): “Mr. Warburton is of opinion, the play here mention’d was Shakespear’s own: composed by him on the model of the Greek dramas, with a design of restoring the chastness and regularity of the ancient stage: but failing in the attempt, he was forced back to his old Gothic manner: for which he took this revenge upon his audience.

The reader, if he thinks it worth while, may see more upon this subject, in the 8th vol. of Warburton’s edition of Shakespear, p. 267.”

1479-1488 I heard thee...handsome then fine] Capell (1774, 1:1:134): “Before any judgment can be form’d of this ‘speech’ which is call’d for by Hamlet, about which there have been various opinions, it will be necessary to conceive rightly what is said of the play in general out of which it is taken, for some of the Poet’s terms on that subject extend also to this particular speech, and give us his own opinion about it, that is– under certain restrictions that shall be mention’d hereafter: the terms are something ambiguous, but this (it is conceiv’d) is the force of them. The play, says he, (speaking in the person of Hamlet) was ‘well digested in the scenes,’ the fable well and artificially manag’d, ‘set down with as much modesty as cunning,’ yet of such a simplicity as was equal to the art of conducting it: this, says the speaker, is the opinion that I had of it, and others of better judgment than me, ‘whose judgments cried in the top of mine:’ On the other hand, there were who objected to it,– that’“there were no salts in the lines, to make the matter savoury,” no comick mixture wrought up with it, to make the grave relish better, ‘nor no matter in the phrase, that might indite the author of affection,’ and the grave itself was so worded, that the writer seem’d untouch’d by his subject: but they allow’d of what was said of the fable; call’d the conduct of it good, ‘an honest method;’ and moreover, it’s tendency moral, and its diction poetical, ‘as wholesome as sweet,’ having a natural beauty but not set off with much art, ‘more handsome than fine.’ If this be a right interpretation of the branches of this character, we have in them a general praise of the play, (exclusive of it’s want of ‘affection,’ and the other matter objected to it) and, consequently, of the speech and it’s poetry; which praise it had been justly intitl’d to, (with exception of two or three phrases,– ‘whiff, grandsire, and roasted’) had it ended at the end of poor Priam, 53, 20: but the Poet had a purpose to serve, which induc’d him to give the rest of this speech; though with hazard (or, rather, death) of his judgment, if we extend his commendation to all of it: An audience could not dine on fine speeches at that time of day, but would be fed with things ‘savoury:’ the addition, with the aid of Polonius, was a dish to their palate, which Shakespeare did not stick to serve up to them; reck’ning (as well he might) on their judgment, that it would acquit him of any intention of including the latter lines in his character, and bestowing praise upon them. Among the very few plays of that time that have not been seen by the editor, is one that bears the title of ‘Dido queen of Carthage,’ in which one might be apt to expect the speech in question: but,– besides the great probability that the play which contain’d this speech was never printed,– if Langbaine be right in his author, the speech will not be found in this ‘Dido;’ for the cast of Thomas Nash’s productions is widely different.”

1479 I...once] Hunter (-1845, f. 243v): “The first 4to omits me.”

1479- Trench (1913, pp. 102-3): <p. 102> “Why, it is asked, did Shakespeare here introduce a passage quite different in style from what he usually wrote? </p. 102> <p. 103> The answer is so simple: it is that Hamlet’s taste and Shakespeare’s differ.” </p.103>

1479-1559 Lodge (“Dido, Queen of Carthage,” TLS 1930: 700) regrets that Tucker Brooke, the ed. of Marlowe’s and Nashe’s play, agrees with the opinion that the Dido speech in Ham. is a burlesque of the Dido play. If a burlesque were intended then Hamlet would have to be ironic in his praise, and Hamlet’s irony is always clear. Lodge asserts that Hamlet’s praise of the Dido play is real. But Sh. heightens the style to mark the difference between “ordinary speech,” which distinguishes the rest of the play from the Dido speech, which is meant to be on a higher plane. While Sh. heightens this speech, he lowers the level of discourse for the play-within.

1479-80 I heard thee speake . . . once] Schücking (1936, p. 420): “Does not this utterance [as a reviewer of Schücking’s 1931 treatise suggested] point unmistakably to the possibility of private readings of dramatic literature in aristocratic society? .”

1480 the play] Jenkins (ed. 1982): "There is no justification for identifying this with Marlowe and Nashe’s Tragedy of Dido, which also gives ’Aeneas’ tale to Dido’ (see ll. 442-3), but from which Shakespeare’s version is not taken (see ll. 448-514 LN). This is still true even though Shakespeare may have been influenced by the prominence Dido gives to the slaying of Priam and by one or two particular details (see ll. 469-70 LN, 476 LN, 515-16 LN)."