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.

1723 pope1

pope1

1713 against a sea of troubles] Pope (ed. 1723): “Perhaps siege, which continues the metaphor of slings, arrows, taking arms; and represents the being encompass’d on all sides with troubles.”

1733 theo1

theo1

1713 against a sea of troubles] Theobald (ed. 1733): “I once imagin’d, that, to preserve the Uniformity of Metaphor, and as it is a Word our Author is fond of using elsewhere, he might have wrote; - a Siege of Troubles. [cites MND, KJ,RJ,Timon] Or one might conjecturally amend the Passage, nearer to the Traces of the Text, thus; ‘Or to take Arms against th ’Assay of Troubles, Or, ‘— against a ’Say of Troubles,’ i.e. against the Attempts, Attacks, &c. So, before, in this Play; [cites ‘Makes vow ... To give th’Assay of Arms against your Majesty’ + H5, Macb, Lear] But, perhaps, any Correction whatever may be unnecessary; considering the great Licentiousness of our Poet in joining heterogeneous Metaphors; and considering too, that a Sea is used not only to signify the Ocean, but likewise a vast Quantity, Multitude, or Confluence of any thing else. [cites Jeremiah, Aeschylus 7 against Thebes, Cicero] And, besides, a Sea of Troubles among the Greeks grew into proverbial Usage; [quotes in Greek]. So that the Expression, figuratively, means, the Troubles of human Life, which flow in upon us, and encompass us round, like a Sea.”

1744 han1

han1

1713 against a sea of troubles] Hanmer (ed. 1744): “Instead of a sea of troubles perhaps Shakespear wrote assailing troubles, which would preserve a propriety in the metaphor.”

1747 warb

warb

1713 against a sea of troubles] Warburton (ed. 1747): “Without question Shakespear wrote ‘—against ASSAIL of troubles.’ i.e. assault.”

1745-60 mbrowne

mbrowne

1713 against a sea of troubles] Browne (1745-60) : “Warb. assail[?] i.e. assault. This alteration seems to have been made upon a supposition that Shakespear never mixed his metaphors—”

1752 dodd

dodd

1713 Or to take Armes against a sea of troubles] Dodd (1752, pp. 237-239): “The critics, greatly disgusted at the impropriety of Shakespear’s metaphors, and not conceiving what he could mean by taking arms against a sea, have either inferred in their text, or proposed, assail or assailing, and the like, but there isnone so frigid a reader of Shakespear as to admit such alterations. Propriety in his metaphors, was never one of the concerns of our author: so that if we were to correct every place where we find ill-join’d metaphors we may alter many of his finest passages: the expression of taking arms, signifies no more than putting ourselves in a state of opposition and defence; by a sea of troubles, according to the common use of the word sea, in the poets and other writers, he expresses no more than a confluence, a vast quantity, &c. — besides, a sea of troubles, is generally used to express the approach of human ills, and the misfortunes that flow in upon us, and it was amongst the Greeks a proverbial expression, (Greek text). Thus we may in a good measure justify the expression; at least, it is plain enough to be understood, and I think we may with as much certainty pronounce it genuin, as some critics pronounce it false. When I read over the Hippolytus of Euripides, I mark’d a passage greatly similar to the following lines; and on reading Mr. Whalley on Shakespear’s Learning, found he had likewise remark’d it. ‘We come next, says he, to the celebrated soliloquy in the 3d Act, which seems so peculiarly the production of Shakespear, that you would hardly imagine it can be parallel’d in all antiquity. Yet I will produce some examples of the same kind; one of which at least will shew how nearly two great tragedians could think upon the same subject. A learned gentleman has taken notice of the conformity which there is between a passage in Plato’s apology for Socrates, and the following lines of this speech*. The sentiment of Plato is to this purpose; If, says he, there be no sensation after death, but as when one sleeps, and sees no dream, death were then an inestimable gain. And the verses of the poet, are these which follow; ‘—To die! to sleep! No more—and by a sleep to say we end The heart-ach, &c. —To die! to sleep! To sleep! perchance to dream! Ay, there’s the rub,’ &c. And the whole has a remarkable similitude with these verses in the Hippolytus of Euripides; (Greek text) v. 190, & seq ‘How full of sorrow are the days of man, Of endless labour and unceasing woe! And what succeeds, our hopes but ill presage, For clouds conceal, and darkness rests upon it. Yet still we suffer light, averse to life: Still bend reluctant to those ills we have,Thro’ dread of others which we know not of, And fearful of that undiscovered shore.’ And in particular, ‘That undiscover’d country from whose bourn No traveller returns,’ may be very well translated by this of the Latin poet. ‘Nunc it per iter tenebricosum, Illuc, unde negant redire quenquam.’ Catull. III. v. II. See p. 68.”

1752 grey

grey

Grey (1752, p. 36) charges WARB with plagiarism: “Compare Sir T. Hanmer’s Note, p. 369. with Mr. Wrburton’s, p. 182. From which it is plain, Mr. Warburton borrowed his Note from Sir Thomas.”

1754 grey

grey

1713 against a sea of troubles] Grey (1754, p. 295): “‘Against a sea of troubles.’ Folios 1623, and 1632. An expression very common, though perhaps the propriety in the metaphor is not so well preserved.”

1765 john1

john1 = warb +

1713 against a sea of troubles] Johnson (ed. 1765): “Mr. Pope proposed siege. I know not why there should be so much solicitude about this metaphor. Shakespeare breaks his metaphors often, and in this desultory speech there was less need of preserving them.”

1765 davies

1713 Davies (1765-): “Sea of Troubles | An Infinite number of Troubles”

1769 sjc

sjc

1713 Or...troubles] “Aeneanasensis” (St. James Chron. 1299 [24-27 June 1769]):“This Line has given great Offence to the Critics, on Account of the Harshness of the Metaphor. Mr. Pope proposes to read Siege instead of Sea; and Bishop Warburton peremptorily pronounces, ‘Without Question Shakespeare wrote — ‘Against Assail of Troubles.’’ In Defence of the Text I beg Leave to observe, that there is a Passage in the Prometheus Vinctus of Æschylus, the Athenian Shakespeare, from which one Stroke of the Imagery might seem to have been literally copied: [Greek text]. V. 671. ‘The stormy Sea of dire Calamity.’ And another, in which the Figure is, if possible, still harsher than that— ‘To take Arms against a Sea of Troubles.’ [Greek text.] V. 810, 11. ‘My plaintive Words in vain confus’dly beat Against the Waves of hateful Misery.’ I would not, however, be supposed to offer this Similarity of Expression as an Argument that Shakespeare was conversant with Æschylus, any more than I take the ‘Resemblance,’ which some Critics have discovered ‘between the leading Ideas of Malvolio in the Twelfth Night, and those of Alnaschar in the Arabian Nights’ Entertainments,’ to prove him acquainted with Arabic. All that is hereby intended is, to shew, from the Example of a Genius as bold and eccentric as his own, that the harsh constructing of a Metaphor, or the jumbling of different ones in the same Sentence, is not peculiar to Shakespeare, nor a sufficient Reason to authorise an Alteration of his Text.”

1772 Q [possibly ASHBY]

Q=AENEANASENSIS

1713 Or...troubles] Q (Gent. Mag. 42 [Sept. 1772]: 418): Plagerises (?!) AENEANASENSIS

1713 Or...troubles] Q (Gent Mag. 42 [Nov. 1772]: 555-556): <p. 555> “Mr. Urban,

In your Magazine for Sept. I produced a passage or two from Æschylus, to prove, that Shakespeare is not singular in the use of this metaphor, ‘A Sea of Troubles,’ with which two of his Commentators are so much offended as to propose each a different emendation. In support of the text, to the authority of the old Greek bard, may be added the suffrages of two modern poets. Baudius, in an elegant copy of Latin Iambics, written in a fit of sickness, and addressed to his friends, has the following beautiful passage, where we find an expression perfectly similar to that of Shakespeare. I shall make no apology for the length of the quotation, not doubting but every reader of taste will think one unneccessary. ‘Dulces amici, Baudius vobis abit Lubens et ultro, patriamque cogitat, Perfunctus hoc errore jam portum subit, Sacroque morsu figere anchoram parat. Vos, si quid in me dignum amari quod foret Amastis unquam, praeter hoc iners opus, Quod palpitat nunc, spiritu pauxillulo Donante vires, et vetante adhuc mori, Mox sunus alque sumus ut decesserit Animae satillum ventuli flabrum levis; Ne, quaeso, ne vos error in fraudem trabat Fallace fuco humanitatis blandiens, Ut his solutum corporis compagibus Me funerali lugeatis naenia, Turpique planctu: quippe tum demum fruar Vita, vocari vita quae vero meret, Non haec mali taberna, curarum mare, Palaestra luctus, officina cladium, Fomes dolorum, mors (ut absolvam) mera, </p. 555><p. 556> Quam morte nunc relinquo non ingratiis, Parere promptus imperatori Deo, Cui militat gens omnis haec mortalium.’ Dominici Baudii Epistol. Cent. I. Epist. x.

We meet with another instance of the same metaphor, in a curious modern Greek song, which the very ingenious M. de Guys has given us, in his Sentimental Journey thro’ Greece, (vol. iii. p. 95.) as a proof, and certainly no bad one, that the poetic fire of ancient Greece is not altogether extinguished. I transcribe no more than is necessary for my purpose; the rest may be seen in the volume and page referred to. [Greek text]. The Editor’s Translation. ‘I struggle with all the misfortunes of nature, plunged into an abyss of misery. Wandering, floating on this Ocean of Distress, my frail bark must soon be overwhelmed. Contrary impetuous winds raise the angry waves, which besiege me, and urge them on to my destruction. I pant for breath in the midst of a thick fog.’

Wigan, Nov. 20. Q.” </p. 556>

1773 v1773

v1773 = john

1773 jen

jen = pope, warb +

1713 sea] Jennens (ed. 1773): “He puts it in the text.”

1774 capn

capn

1713 Or to take Armes against a sea of troubles] Capell (1774-79?, pp. 135-36): “Editors make a mighty ado about the phrase “sea of troubles;" which they will needs have a part of the metaphor, and a defect in it, and–Siege, ‘Say, Assay, Assail, and assailing, are made amendments by turns. “Sea,” in this place, does the office of an epithet, and should be consider’d in that light only: the arms are taken up against “troubles” that come on like a sea; under which are comprehended their violence, their incessant beating, and the multitude of them; making in the whole a magnificent idea, which these amendments deprive us of. It may not be much amiss, to observe a piece of art of the Poet’s at the speech’s conclusion, which an actor should give particular heed to: the impression it has made on the speaker is so strong, that he cannot disengage himself presently from the mood it has put him in; and it is not ’till after three speeches of 0phelia’s, that he is able to take up another.”

c.1775 mmal1, BL 30,943 (f. 52v-53r)

mmal1

1713 against a sea of troubles] Malone: “Or to take arms against a sea of troubles. The reading proposedby Mr Pope—a siege of troubles—is strengthened not only by the slings & arrows mentioned in the foregoing line, which [53r] might naturally have suggested the word siege, but by the metaphor’s having been used by Shakespeare in other places. So in Timon —’Not ev’n Nature To whom all sores lay siege.’ So in Romeo & Juliet ‘You [Gow?] to remove that siege of grief from her. The same metaphor is used by Marston —[?] part of Antonio & Mellida 1602 ‘Whom fretful galls of chance, stern Fortune’s siege.’”

1778 v1778

1713 against a sea of troubles] STEEVENS (ed. 1713): “The change which Mr. Pope would recommend, may be justified from a passage in Romeo and Juliet, scene the last:‘You—to remove that siege of grief from her—’”

1713 against a sea of troubles] MALONE (ed. 1778): “Again, from another in Timon:‘--Not even nature To whom all sores lay siege.’ The same metaphor is used by Marston, in the Second Part of Antonio and Melada, 1602: ‘Whom fretfull galls of chance, stern fortune’s seige.’ Again, in Romeo and Juliet: ‘She will not stay the siege of loving terms.” Again, in our author’s 65th Sonnet: ‘Or shall summer’s honey-breath hold out ‘Against the wrackful siege of batt’ring days--’”

1784 phosphorus

1711-1714 Whether...them] PHOSPHORUS (Gent. Mag. 54 pt. 1 [1784]: 84): <p. 84> “If the following attempt to clear up an obscure passage in Shakspeare meets with your approbation, you may probably hear again soon, from Phosphorus.

[Quotes TLN 1711-1714]

This has been much censured as a faulty allegory; because the writer flies from one allusion to another, from slings to taking up of arms— against what?— a sea, &c. &c. &c. Now if Shakspeare meant this for an allegory, it is doubtless very faulty; but I truly believe that was not his meaning. It seems to me, that he only took the first strong metaphor which came into his head, to express himself forcibly and pathetically, and then another and another, as the subject rose upon them, but had no idea of making them connected with or dependant on each other. I will not venture to affirm I am right; but I am certain, that one of the most judicious and correct authors that ever wrote comedy does the self-same thing: I mean Terence. He makes one of his characters say: ‘I am walled about with so many and so great difficulties, that I cannot swim out.’

This, you see, is liable to the very same exception with the former, the metaphor not being continued in the same kind; but I believe neither author had even the most distant notion of an allegory. P.” </p. 84>

1785 v1785

1713 Or to take Armes against a sea of troubles] S. W. (ed. 1785): “Shakspeare resembles Aeschylus in in the sudden breaks of his metaphors. To take up arms against a sea of troubles, is in the manner of our author. Were we to admit seige for sea, we might improve the picture; but we should endanger the likeness. Io says, in the Prometheus vinctus of Aeschylus, v. 885. ‘My confused words strike at random against a sea of troubles, or the waves of misery;’ by which she means,--I talk confusedly in my misfortunes.

1790 mal

1713 Or to take Armes against a sea of troubles] Malone (ed. 1790): “One cannot but wonder that the smallest doubt should be entertained concerning an expression which is so much in Shakspeare’s manner; yet, to preserve the integrity of the metaphor, Dr. Warburton reads assail of troubles, and Mr. Pope proposed siege. In the Prometheus Vinctus of Æschylus a similar imagery is found: (Greek symbols) The stormy sea of dire calamity. And in the same play, as an anonymous writer has observed, (Gent. Magazine, Aug. 1772,) we have a metaphor no less harsh than that of the text: (Greek symbols) My plaintive words in vain confusedly beat Against the waves of hateful misery.’ Shakspeare might have found the very phrase that he has employed, in The Tragedy of Queen Cordila, Mirrour for Magistrates, 1575, which undoubtedly he read: ‘For lacke of frendes to tell my seas of giltlesse smart.’”

1790- Wesley

Wesley

1713 take Armes against a sea of troubles] Wesley (ms. notes 1790, p.45): “(J. defends ‘sea of troubles’ on the ground that in a desultory speech there is no need to preserve exactness of metaphor). It is strange that Dr. Johnson should excuse a man’s talking nonsense, especially when all the rest of his speech except this word is the finest chain of reasoning. Every man in his sense would read ‘siege’ which, if it be not Shakspear’s, is better than ‘sea’ or ‘assail’.”

1791- rann

rann

1713 a sea of troubles,] Rann (ed. 1791-): “—Under this expressive term are included their violence, their multitude, and the frequency of their attacks.”

1793 v1793

1713 against a sea of troubles] STEEVENS (ed. 1793): “A similar phrase occurs in Rycharde Morysine’s translation of Ludovicus Vive’s Introduction to Wysedome, 1544: ‘--how great a sea of euils euery day overrunneth’ &c. The change, however, which Mr. Pope would recommend, may be justified from a passage in Romeo and Juliet, scene the last: ‘You--to remove that siege of grief from her--.’”

1713 against a sea of troubles] MALONE (ed.Malone): “One cannot but wonder that the smallest doubt should be entertained concerning an expression which is so much in Shakspeare’s manner; yet, to preserve the integrity of the metaphor, Dr. Warburton reads assail of troubles . In the Prometheus Vinctus of Aeschylus a similar imagery is found: [Greek Lettering] ‘The stormy sea of dire calamity.’ and in the same play, an anonymous writer has observed, (Gent. Magazine, August 1772,) we have a metaphor no less harsh than that of the text: [Greek Lettering] ‘My plaintive words in vain confusedly beat Against the waves of hateful misery.’ Shakspeare might have found the very phrase that he has employed, in The Tragedy of Queen Cordila, MIRROUR FOR MAGISTRATES, 1575, which undoubtably he read: ‘For lacke frendes to tell my seas of giltlesse smart.’”

1713 against a sea of troubles] WHITE (ed. 1793): “Menander uses this very expression. Fragm. p. 22. Amftel. [unreadable word] 12mo. 1719: [Greek Lettering] ‘In mare molestiarum te conjicies.’”

1805 seymour

1713 against a sea of troubles] SEYMOUR (1805, p. 175): Sir Walter Raleigh has this metaphor in the preface to his History of the World: ‘For the sea of examples hath no bottom.’”

1815 becket

1713 a sea] Becket (1815, pp. 40-41): <p. 40> “‘A sea of troubles’ is assuredly wrong. I therefore read— </p. 40><p. 41> ‘Or to take arms against the assay of troubles.’

‘Assay’ is attack, it is used in that sense by Spenser: and our author has it in a preceding scene of the play, ‘assay of arms.’ In the reading thus proposed, it will be seen that there is a perfect uniformity of thought, a perfect integrity of expression; ‘taking up arms to repel an attack;’ while in ‘taking up arms to repel a sea,’ the want of that integrity is apparent; nay the sentiment is even absurd. Assay, and a sea; would be easily confounded, when sound only was perhaps attended to by the transcriber. I must here take occasion to observe that much has been said respecting the mixed metaphors, the heterogeneous images, which the pages of Shakespeare, as it is said, continually offer to our view. I find, however, on a close examination of the text, that this charge of incongruity is unfounded, and that it has arisen chiefly from the ignorance and inattention of the earlier editors, who have brought in so many and foul corruptions, that the Temple of Nature has nearly become an Augean stable. This I maintain to be the case, for when these sordities are swept away, a scene of magnificence is at once presented to us: beautiful though devoid of art.” </p. 41>

1819 cald1

cald1

1713 Or to take Armes against a sea of troubles] Caldecott (ed. 1819): “‘Provide means of resistance against an overwhelming flood.’ This mode of speaking is proverbial, and has been so, in all ages and languages: neithercan any metaphor he conceived more apt than that of the sea, to convey the idea of an overwhelming mass or multitude: and ‘multitudinous’ our author denominates it in II. 2. Macb. in which place Steevens tells us, that ‘a sea of heads’ is a phrase employed by one of our legitimate poets. With the closest analogy we say, a flood of transport, a torrent of abuse; a peek, a world oftroubles. He uses it himself every where and in every form; and the integrity of his metaphor is that which, by him, is of all things the least thought of. In Timon, IV. 2. he speaks of ‘a sea of air.’ And in I. 1. ‘a flood of visitors.’ Poet. In Pericles, V. 1. of ‘a sea of joys.’ In II.; VIII. III. 2. of ‘a sea of glory.’ In Tarq. and Lucr. of ‘a sea of care.’ In R. C.’s Hen. Steph. Apol. for Hepodotus, fol. 1608. p. 159. (and few books have more of the phraseology of Shakespeare), we have ‘a sea of sorrow:’ and it is not a dissimilar, but a more licentious and less common figure, that Leonato uses when he says, he will ‘bring Benedict and Beatrice into a mountain of affection with each other.’ M. ado &c. II. 1. We shall produce instances of the popular use of this figure to express both this feeling and its opposite; and one also of its use in early times to express a great quantity generally, 1. ‘Comforteth me a middle the main seas of my sorrowes and heavinesse.’ Cicero to P. Lentulo, Abr. Flemming’s Panoplie of Epstles, 4to. 1570. p. 4. ‘Me in summo dolore consalatur.’ Epist. 1. 6. ‘I am replenished therefore with seas of pleasure.’ Cicero to Appio Pulchro. Ib. p. 16. ‘Itaque capio magnam voluptatem.’ Epist. III. 10.--2. ‘Had not this, as ye would saie an hougemain sea of thynges stil freshe and freshe comyng to mynde, enforced and driven me to blowe retreacte and to recule backe.’ Nic. Udall’s Erasmus’s Apopthegmes, 12mo. 1542. Pref. III.b. It will perhaps be some relief to the weary reader to see a proper note upon this subject and to those who retain a memory and just sense of that which they must not expect to see and hear again, it must be peculiarly gratifying to know, that it proceeds from that pen of one, whose living comments upon Shakespeare have never been equalled, and throughout all time, as is most probable, never will.

1832- anon.

1713 a sea of troubles] Anonymous [possibly Thomas Carlyle ](ms. notes, ed. 1832):“assay. Singer. assault. assaulting. siege. Pope. assail. Pope. Warb. “ ‘assailed with fortune fierce & keen.’ Pericles V.3. ” “ In hoc ...periculorum . . . Philip xxiii. . . .Hor. Epist. 1.2.8 J.” I wonder if he means this is a JOHN note? Also, “ ‘sea of joys’ Pericles. V.1. (842). [The relevant lines in Per. “O Helicanus, strike me, . . .Lest this great sea of joys rushing upon me, O’erbear the shores of my mortality, and drown me with their sweetness.” ANON. continues ] What age is this where honest men Placed at the helm A sea of some foul mouth or [?] Shall overwhelm . . . Chorus in Jonson’s Cataline 4.5. adversis serum immensat . . . Hor. Epis. 1.2.22. ‘sea of care’— of glory’ of conscience in other plays of Sh. St n [I think he means he has taken this from a Steevens note?]

1832 cald2

cald2 = cald1 +

1713 Or to take Armes against a sea of troubles] Caldecott (ed. 1832): “Here Johnson, who not unfrequently took alarms not very philosophical, indignantly charges our author not only with false reasoning and vulgarity but also with impiety, forgetting that Cicero spoke a language nearly identical ‘habes somnum imaginem mortis, eumq quotidie induis, et dubitas quin sensus in morte nullus sit cum in ejus simuloacro videas esse nullum sensum.’ Tusc. Disp, lib.1; and that the highest and most venerable authorities in speaking of good men, that have passed away, describe them as having fallen asleep. If Shakespeare has gone rather further than this and in the exercise of his art has put into the mouth of one of his Personë Dramatis every topic of persuasion to effect a most important object, the mere circumstance of that Person (the Duke) having assumed the habit and character of a Friar cannot affect the question, of subject the author to the charge of impiety even supposing the sentiments expressed to be liable to such imputation. It may be said therefore of the Doctor’s remarks upon this passage that although in prosecution of a cause and object that cannot be too much respected, this was the mere dictate of precipiation and over zeal.”

1841 knt1 (nd)

knt1

1713 Knight (ed. 1839): “Pope wished to print, ‘a siege of troubles.’ Surely the metaphor of the sea, to denote an overwhelming flood of troubles, is highly beautiful. It is thoroughly Shaksperian; for we find, in Pericles, ‘a sea of joy;’ [5.1.192. (2169)] ---in Henry VIII., ‘sea of glory;’ [3.2.360. (2260)] ---in Tarquin and Lucrece, ‘a sea of care,’ [(1100)]. In Milton, we have, ‘in a troubled sea of passion lost.’ (Par. Lost. x. 718.)”

1843- mlewes

mlewes: knight’s note

1713 sea of troubles] Lewes (ms. notes in Knight, ed. 1843): “It is also abundantly used by the Greek poets. Thus [Greek] Sept. con Theb. 758] + {Greek} Sup. 466.—”

-1845 mhun1

mhun1

1713 sea...troubles] Hunter (-1845, n. 21): <f. 225r>“some would read ‘seige’:— but sea has at least a classical authority, [Greek text] Soph. [Q2. tyr.?]:— but to take arms against a sea seems an incongruous metaphor: but not the only one of which the good Shakespeare is guilty.”</f. 225r>

1847 verp

verp

1713 to take Armes against a sea of troubles] Verplanck (ed. 1847): “The fastidious criticism of the last century was shocked by this confusion of metaphor. Warburton proposed to remedy it by reading ‘an assail;’ and another editor (I am sorry that it was Pope!) conjectured ‘a siege of troubles.’ The poet and the divine appear but small critics here, contrasted with David Garrick, who, in his Oration at the Shakespeare Jubilee, 1769, rises from the explanation and defence of the passage to a bold strain of lofty criticism and philosophical eloquence.” Quotes Garrick. “In cast of thought and attic elegance of style, this oration strongly resembles the contemporary discourses of Reynolds on the arts of design; and if, as has been conjectured, Garrick, though a wit and a scholar, feeling his inadequacy to his task, had recourse to some friendly hand for aid, that aid was probably contributed by Reynolds. Yet I would rather believe that veneration for ‘the god of his idolatry,’ whose works had been the study of his life, raised the great actor above his ordinary powers as an author.”

1856b sing2

sing2

1713 Singer (ed. 1856): “Pope proposed to read a siege, and Warburton, assail. That the word was assay, which was easily mistaken for a sea, and which was used in the same sense as assail, I have no doubt. Thus in the first part of King Henry IV. Act v. Sc. 4 ‘I will assay thee so defend thyself’. And in Act ii. Sc. 2 of this play:—’To give th’assay of arms against your majesty’. Numerous instances might be adduced of the use of the word in this sense in the poet’s time. Thus:—’Yf Bevis of Hampton, Colburne & Guy Will thee assaye, set not by them a flye’. A New Enterlude called Thersites.

1865 hal

hal

1713 Halliwell (ed. 1865): “Whatsoever it be (which hardly at the length can be depainted) that after a sea of troubles we injoy in this life, it seems to me to be apparell, that defends our flesh from the harme of the elements, and feedes our spirit with vaineglory; drinke and meat that nourishes our body: sleepe, which strengthens and restores nature: the joy of the flesh, that glads the hart, and preserves the species: and mony, that obtaines and gives us every thing.--The Passenger of Benvenuto, 1612.”

1862 bailey

bailey= john, v1821 +

1713-14 Or...them] Bailey (1862, pp. 28-42): <p. 28> “Here I am struck at once by a glaring corruption in the text. Not only is there a most incongruous metaphor, from which good sense and good taste have long recoiled, but what is worse, the expressions employed do not contain a consistent meaning. They exhibit, on the contrary, incoherence of thought: what was manifestly in the mind of the author is not brought out: the train of reflection does not takes its natural or logical course: </p. 28><.p. 29> it begins with proposing one thing and ends with substituting another. The fourth and fifth lines [713-14] at once fail in proper purpose, and are such in themselves as no clear-headed thinker could have written. How could anyone entitled to be heard have possibly said or sung, ‘Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, And by opposing, end them?’

“Let us analyse the passage to show this.

“Hamlet, oppressed by the cruel position in which he is placed, begins his soliloquy by proposing to himself the question whether he shall continue to live or put an end to his life:— indisputably the plain meaning of ‘to be, or not to be.’

“He then proceeds to expand the question; very forcibly amplifying the first branch of the proposed alternative, namely to be, into the words ‘whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune;’ and we naturally expect him to amplify similarly the second branch or not to be, into some corresponding sentence or clause, such as, ‘or whether ‘tis nobler to escape from this multitude of troubles by putting an end to life and them together.’ In brief, whether ‘tis nobler to live or to die by one’s own hand. But when, instead of the matter being so presented, the sentence dissolves into something else, a sort of perplexity comes over the reader. He finds the second branch of the alternative converted into ‘or </p. 29><p. 30> whether ‘tis nobler to take arms against the numerous troubles that beset me and put them down:’ which is abruptly starting off from the natural and logical course of the speaker’s reflections;— an extraordinary and glaring instance of that inconsequence of thought which a superior writer can hardly fall into.

“In short, he first asks ‘shall I live on or commit suicide?’ and then, when he ought to state the same alternative more circumstantially, he proposes a quite different one, namely, ‘shall I live on, quietly suffering the evils of my lot, or, multitudinous as they are, shall I oppose and vanquish them?’

“We may safely conclude that Shakespeare never committed a blunder of so gross a character, especially in a case where it was so easy, I may say indeed so much easier, to be coherent and correct.

“That he could not have proposed the last-mentioned alternative is further proved by the sequel.

“The subsequent lines all turn on the question whether it is better to live under evil, or die by one’s own hand and so escape from it, not whether the evil should be endured or be resisted and overcome. He shows why it is that we submit to the various grievances of life, when it is at any time in our power to rid ourselves of them ‘with a bare bodkin:’ we ‘rather bear those ills we have, than fly to others that we know not of.’ Here is not a word about bearing evils in contradistinction to </p. 30><p. 31> opposing them, but a good deal about bearing known evils in preference to encountering unknown and perhaps greater ones by committing suicide.

“The observations which I have now presented to the reader, will be allowed, I think, to establish the conclusion, that the fifth and sixth lines are corrupt; in other words, they are not the lines which Shakespeare wrote.

“But it is much easier to establish a strong probability that the text is not genuine, than to suggest with plausibility what the reading ought to be.

“After much consideration, trying all sorts of substitutions, and framing numerous hypotheses under the conditions before laid down, I am strongly inclined to regard the following emendation as a near approach at least to the genuine text, if not a complete restoration of it. Let not the reader start off at once at the magnitude of the alteration, but patiently consider the reasons assigned in its favour. ‘To be, or not to be— that is the question; Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against the seat of troubles, And by a poniard end them?’

“Trying this emendation by my own canons, I find that in the first place it corrects the gross inconsistency in the train of thought; it maintains the alternative with which the soliloquy began: in the second place it disembarrasses the passage from </p. 31><p. 32> the monstrous metaphor which is acknowledged by all to be an incoherent deformity. Nor is the emendation at all inferior in tone of thought or force of expression to what it displaces, or to the context in which it is inserted. It does not relax the tension of the soliloquy, notwithstanding its taking away what may be dear to the ears of many a devoted admirer— the sounding phrase a sea of troubles.

“In the next place, the phraseology introduced resembles expressions employed by Shakespeare in other places. With regard to the word seat in the proposed phrase seat of troubles, which so used would of course denote the heart or breast, I find in ‘Twelfth Night’ the heart styled ‘the seat where love is throned.’ In ‘Hamlet’ the clause occurs ‘while memory holds a seat in this distracted globe,’ referring in this case to the head; and we have a similar reference in ‘Coriolanus’ — ‘the seat of the brain.’

“Other instances might be adduced to show the familiar use of the term in a manner analogous to that in which it is employed in the proposed emendation. Seat is a very frequent word in our author’s pages, and is applied in several ways which I shall have hereafter to notice. But the passage which appears to me to lend the greatest support to my emendation, although it does not contain the particular term in question, occurs in ‘Cymbeline’ iii.4, where Imogen is trying to prevail on </p. 32><p. 33> Pisanio to follow the orders of her husband Posthumus to take away her life: ‘Come, fellow, be thou honest; Do thou thy master’s bidding. When thou seest him, A little witness my obedience: look! I draw the sword myself: take it; and hit The innocent mansion of my love, my heart. Fear not; ‘tis empty of all things but grief: Thy master is not there, who was, indeed, The riches of it. Do his bidding; strike!’

“I have next to consider the word poniard, which it is sufficient for form’s sake to show was employed by Shakespeare on more occasions than one.

“By the help of Mrs. Cowden Clarke’s very valuable ‘Concordance,’ I find that he uses this word five times; enough to justify the introduction of it into any proposed emendation, as far as mere phraseology is concerned.

“The probability of its having been employed as suggested, rests partly on its accordance with the equivalent phrase bare bodkin, which follows a few lines after in the same soliloquy, and clearly indicates the mode of committing suicide predominant in the thoughts of Hamlet, namely, stabbing himself to the heart, not poisoning or drowning himself.

“It may be added that the expression bare bodkin seems somewhat harsh and abrupt, if it is taken as the first intimation of the particular method of escape from his misery which he was contemplating.

“The alteration in the meaning of the passage by </p. 33><p. 34> the proposed emendation is doubtless great, as it unavoidably must be, for no small alteration in that respect could redress the incoherence of the thoughts, banish the barbarous metaphor and rectify the want of consecutiveness throughout.

“But the verbal alteration by which these defects are removed, and appropriate sense and connexion restored to the soliloquy is in reality small. In the fourth line ‘the seat’ replaces ‘a sea’: in the fifth line ‘a poniard’ replaces ‘opposing.’* Such and no more is the whole extent of the verbal change.

“In point of sound the amended lines are so near the received ones, that the substitution of one for the other amidst the various liabilities to mistake prevailing at the time when the plays were first printed, could not have been difficult. An author

* In the progress of the error a poynard (so spelt in ed. 1604) might have been originally changed into opponing, and afterwards opponing have been replaced by opposing as the more common form of the verb. That the form oppone was occasionally used in that age may be shown by an instance which occurs in Ben Jonson’s ‘Alchemist,’ Act iii. sc. 2. With these old forms the transition from the text (as I propose to make it) to the received reading would be still easier. Let us put the two lines together. ‘And by a poynard end them.’ ‘And by opponing end them.’ How readily the one would be transmuted into the other is plain. The only difference worth notice is that between ard and ing, in itself not very formidable. </p. 34><p. 35> In the present day, would scarcely be surprised to find such errors in a proof from his printer.

In the course of my ruminations on the passage, I soon became satisfied that I had hit upon the right correction of the fourth line; none that I was able to think of could compete with it in claims to be adopted.

I did not however feel at first equally confident about that of the fifth line. Should the emendation of the fourth be admitted, the subsequent line, it occurred to me, might perhaps be considered allowable as it stood. On reflection, nevertheless, I could not help observing that the line in question would lose something of the little force it possesses, through my emendation of the preceding one, for it would be exceedingly weak to talk of ending the troubles by opposition when what the speaker meant has just been so strongly indicated to be suicide. Beside, in the received reading of the passage, taking arms against, which implies attacking, must be considered at the best as but poorly followed up by opposing.

Another reading, effected by a very trifling alteration, suggested itself,— the substitution of ‘deposing,’ for ‘opposing.’ ‘Or to take arms against the seat of troubles, And by deposing end them.’

One of the commonest significations of the word ‘seat’ in Shakespeare’s writings is ‘throne,’ as </p. 35><p. 36> seen in such expressions as ‘seat of majesty,’ ‘heir to England’s royal seat,’ ‘the crown and seat of France,’ ‘the supreme seat, the throne majestical.’

In the proposed emendation, then, the seat of troubles might be taken figuratively as ‘the throne of troubles,’ and consistently with that metaphor the poet might proceed to speak of deposing them from their throne, the heart, and thus putting an end to their existence. A passage in ‘King John,’ might be adduced to countenance this language, where one of the citizens of Angiers speaks of being ‘King’d of our fear, until our fears resolved Be by some certain king purged and deposed.’ Act. ii. sc. 1.

There would be something in this reading accordant enough with the tendency manifested by Shakespeare and all men of great wit to push their metaphors beyond the first stage of analogy, and it would also be quite consonant with the prevailing humour of Hamlet; but the prolongation of the figure would imply too light a play of fancy for the mental pressure under which the soliloquy was uttered, and would consequently lower the strength of the passage.*

*Besides the argument in the text, it deserves to be noticed that the last suggested reading, as will be manifest on reflection, would scarcely lapse into the received text more easily </p. 36> <p. 37>

On the whole the reading now proposed, ‘and by a poniard end them,’ appears to me decidedly preferable to either of the others, and this conclusion is strengthened by some further considerations.

The force of the preceding part of the soliloquy requires that in the fifth line the second branch of the alternative should be stated in plain and direct terms. And this is also equally necessary for the sequel. In the common reading no mention has, up to this point, been made of death, except as it is implied in the phrase not to be, and yet the sentence before us is immediately followed by the utterance of the words to die, intended evidently to take up the concluding idea of the antecedent clause. Hence that clause ought to speak of death.

In the received text this is not done, as every reader will at once see: ‘Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, And by opposing end them. To die— to sleep— No more’—

[footnote cont.] than the first; particularly if we compare the several readings when put into the old forms before mentioned. ‘And by opponing end them.’ ‘And by deposing end them.’ ‘And by a poynard end them.’ And this remark would hold good even if we were to alter deposing into deponing, although not so conspicuously; ard into ing is not a greater change than de into opp. </p. 37>

<p. 38> Here, then, is no proper transition from the conclusion of one sentence to the beginning of the other. The latter does not take up what the former lays down. ‘To die’ has no connection with opposing, and to find any kindred expression you are thrown back to the commencement not to be.

In the proposed emendation, this defect is wholly removed; the connection is close, the transition natural and direct: ‘Or to take arms against the seat of troubles, And by a poniard end them. To die— to sleep— No more—’

In a word, the expression to die so placed requires to be introduced by the mention of the act of suicide immediately before it, and this condition is fulfilled by the suggested alteration, and not by any other of the readings which have had our attention.

In reference to the incongruous metaphor ‘to take arms against a sea of troubles,’ it may be observed that it has been defended or palliated by bringing instances in which phrases analogous to ‘a sea of troubles,’ have been employed.

Thus, Theobald quotes from Æschylus the expressions ‘[Greek text],’ and ‘[Greek text].’

Shakespeare himself, I may add, has similar phrases: ‘Thus hulling in The wild sea of my conscience, I did steer Towards this remedy.’ Henry VII. act ii. sc. 4. </p. 38>

<p. 39> ‘Put me to present pain Lest this great sea of joys rushing upon me O’erbear the shores of my mortality, And drown me with their sweetness.’ Pericles, act v. sc. 1.

We find besides, ‘seas of tears,’ and ‘to weep seas,’ which are rather exaggerations than tropes.

If, however, a thousand examples of such language could be adduced, they would not amount to the slightest justification of the condemned metaphor. The objection is not to the metaphorical designation a sea of troubles, but to the figurative absurdity implied in ‘taking up arms against a sea of troubles,’ or indeed against any other sea, literal or imaginary. I question whether any instance is to be found of such a fight in the whole compass of English literature, previous to Mrs. Partington’s celebrated contention with the Atlantic. The character of her weapon, the only appropriate one that could be wielded in such a contest, is decisive that neither Shakespeare nor Hamlet had in his head a battle with the ocean.

But were the metaphor unexceptionable, the principal proof of the corruption of the passage would, I repeat, remain; namely, that the lines as they stand do not sustain the alternative which in consistency they ought to have carried out, and which it was in fact the purpose of the soliloquy to expatiate upon.

I would further remark that in the passage cited </p. 39><p. 40> from ‘Pericles,’ Shakespeare shows a consistency in the management of the metaphor there introduced, which in itself, were it needful to urge such a plea in his behalf, would constitute a presumption that he could not have so grossly mismanaged the analogous one in Hamlet’s soliloquy. He carries on the figure through three lines without the slightest vacillation or flaw in the imagery— at least till he comes to the very last word, the incongruity of which with the rest strongly indicates a corruption of the text. Drown with sweetness is an expression more applicable to a ‘butt of malmsey,’* than to ‘the great salt sea.’

Hence it may be suspected that the poet wrote something very different. It is the greatness, the rushing, the violence, which Pericles fears will overwhelm him, not the deliciousness of the joy. Our author may possibly have written, nay, I will even venture to say, probably wrote, surges, where now we find sweetness. ‘And drown me with their surges.’ or better still— ‘And drown me with its surges.’

What strengthens the probability is that Pericles had before made use of the same word: ‘Thou God of this great vast, rebuke these surges Which wash both heaven and hell.’ Act iii. sc. 1.

* ‘Richard III.’ </p. 40>

<p. 41> It is singular that Dr. Johnson, in his note to Hamlet’s soliloquy, totally misses the drift of the commencement, about which I have been occupied. He construes it as follows:—

[quotes Johnson]

On this comment, Malone very justly remarks:—

[quotes Malone]*

The learned Doctor evidently misapprehends the whole matter: he overlooks the question of suicide altogether, and even supposes possible death from a hostile encounter to have been in Hamlet’s contemplation— an oversight and a misconception which, in such a quarter, would suffice alone to indicate some kind of obscurity or confusion not

*Malone’s ‘Shakespeare,’ vol. ix. p. 286, Boswell’s ed. </p. 41>

<p. 42> Shakespearian in the lines that could furnish occasion for them, were such indirect evidence required.”

1867 ktlyn

ktlyn

1713 Keightly (1867, p. 291): “Though we meet in Shakespeare with incongruities as great as this, I incline to read for ‘sea’ siege, my own conjecture, as well as Pope’s. We have ‘All sores lay siege’ (Tim. [4. 3. 7. (1609)]), ‘Sickness did lay siege’ (M. N. D. [1. 1. 142. (152)], and several other expressions; and this is almost a solitary instance of the figurative use of ‘sea’ by our poet. Assay, or assays, for ‘a sea,’ has also been proposed, ‘Galling the gleaned land with hot assays’ (Hen. V. 1. 2. 151. ( 298)]; and it may have been the poet’s word. If so, I should incline to read the assay.”

1872 cln1

cln1

1713 Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): "Here is a mixed metaphor, or rather two metaphors blended into one. The author’s thought would be fully expressed by ’take arms against a host of troubles which break in upon us like a sea.’ Compare Richard II, iii. 2. 190: ’This ague-fit of fear is overblown.’ And in Henry VIII, ii. 4. 199 sqq. we have conscience first represented as a wild sea buffeting the ship, and then as a sea-sick passenger. See also Hamlet, iii. 1. 86, 87, and 155. We have ’sea of glory,’ Henry VIII, iii. 2. 360, and ’sea of joys,’ Pericles, v. 1. 194. Theobald first proposed for ’as sea’ ’a siege,’ and then ’th’ assay.’ "

1877 clns

clns

1713 to take Armes against a sea of troubles] Neil (ed. 1877): Plautus uses mare malorum, ‘a sea of troubles.’ This phrase seems to us to be easily explained if we remember the passage: ‘Dar’st thou, Cassius, now Leap in with me into this angry flood, And swim to yonder point? . . . . We did buffet it With lusty sinews, throwing it aside And stemming it with hearts of controversy.’ — Julius Caesar, I, ii, 101-109. Abraham Fleming, in 1576, translated the Regystre of Hystories by Claudius Ælianus of Præneste. In that work we are told of Celts that ‘many also oppose the overwhelming sea; there are some likewise, who, taking arms, rush upon the waves and sustain their attack, extending their naked swords and spears in like manner as if they were able to terrify or wound them’ — quoted by Dr C. M. Ingleby on the suggestion of Dr Sebastian Evans from Ritson’s Memoirs of the Celts, p. 118, in The Still Lion, p. 89.”

1878 bulloch

bulloch

Bulloch (1878, pp. 226-7): <p. 226> “The fourth line [TLN 1713] has been charded with presenting a mixed metaphor ‘to take arms against a sea’; and I may add the insufficienty ‘of ending troubles by merely opposing them’. All the attempts to remedy this fourth line have been in one direction ‘a sea of troubles’; and the Cambridge notes furnish the collowing. [quotes CAM1]

The chief error lies in the first half of the line ‘to take arms’. The term ‘fortune’ is the key-note to the whole. The principal word in the clause is a gambler’s term, and occurs once only in Shakespeare--’All’s Well that Ends Well,’ II.iii.86. Lafeu thus expresses himself in reference to Helena’s choice for a husband, ‘I had rather be in this choice that throw ames-ace for my life’. In the opening lines of Ben Jonson’s ‘Bartholomew Fair,’ where Littlewit the proctor congratulates himself on his good luck for that special day, ‘A very . . . less than ames-ace on two dice!” The word is from the French, and formerly spelled ambs-ace from the Latin ambo, but now generally known as deuce-ace. Hamlet does not propose to throw, as that had been done by the accident of birth, but to toss against, or throw away entirely, and to end all by a draught of poison. The figure is that of a favourite of fortune annoyed by circumstances tending to make life miserable, swallowing a deadly potion, probably out of a dice box. [Quotes TLN 1710-11] ‘Or toss ames-ace against a sea of troubles, And by a potion end them.’”

1884 gould

gould

Gould (1884, p. 38): “‘Sea of troubles’ should on no account be altered. The expression is as old as literature. Se Aeschylus, Prom. Vict. 795; Euripides, Hecuba, 834, etc.”

1885 macd

macd

1713 MacDonald (ed. 1885): “Perhaps to a Danish or Dutch critic, or one from the eastern coast of England, this simile would not seem so unfit as it does to some.”

1899 ard1

ard1

sea] Dowden (ed. 1899): “Various emendations have been suggested: Theobald ‘siege’; also, ‘th’ assay’ or: a ‘say’; Hanmer, ‘assailng’; Warburtoon. ‘assail of’; Baily, ‘the seat.’ It has been shown from Aristotle, Strabo, Aelian, and Nicolaas of Damascus that the Keltts, Gauls, and Cimbri erexhibited their intrepidity by armed combats with the sea, which Shakespeare might have found in Abraham Fleming’s translation of Aelian, 1576. But elsewhere Shakespeare has ‘sea of joys,’ ‘sea of glory,’ ‘sea of care.’ Here the central metaphor is that of a battle(‘slings and arrows’); the ‘sea of troubles,’ billows of the war, merely develops the metaphor of battle, as in Scott, Marimion VI. xxvi.:‘Then mark’d they, dashing brod and far, The broken billows of the war, And plumed crests of chieftains brave, Floating like foam upon the wave.’”

1934a cam3

cam3 = hereford, ard1 +

1713 Wilson (ed. 1934): “But prob. sh. means no more than ‘troubles as many as the sea.’”