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.

1778 v1778

v1778

Steevens (ed. 1778): “This is ridicule on the quantity of false hair worn in Shakespeare’s time, for wigs were not in common use till the reign of Charles II. In the Two Gentlemen of Verona, Julia says—“I’ll get me such a colour’d periwig.” Goff, who wrote several plays in the reign of James I. and was no mean scholar, has the following lines in his tragedy of the Courageous Turk, 1632: “—How now, you heavens, “Grow you so proud you must needs put on curl’d locks, / And clothe yourselves in periwigs of fire?” Players, however, seem to have worn them most generally. So, in Every Woman in her Humour, 1609: “--as none wear hoods but monk and ladies; and feathers but fore-horses, &c;--none periwigs but players and pictures.

1784 ays1

ays1=v1778

1857 perwig-pated fellowe] Ayscough (ed. 1784): “This is a ridicule on the quantity of false hair worn in Shakspeare’s time, for wigs were not in common use till the reign of Charles II. Players, however, seem to have worn them most generally.”

1784 davies

davies

Davies (1784, p. 80): “Long is the period before taste and judgement can prevail over established custom, be it ever so erroneous.

“The first French actress, who introduced a remarkable change in the female theatrical habit, was Madame Couvreur[notes that this celebrated actress died in 1730]. To the body of the robe she added a long and majestic train, more conformable to the antique. But the heroes of antiquity, on the French stage, were as absurdly habited as the heroines. Scipio, Caesar, and Brutus, wore indeed the ancient cuirass and buskins; but their heads were covered with French hats, and adorned with large plumes of feathers. La Clairon and Le Kin, from a love to the art, which they cultivated with a superior taste, have entirely altered the old mode of dressing, and rendered it more conformable to the costume.

“The heads of the English actors were, for a long time, covered with large full-bottomed perriwigs, a fashion introduced in the reign of Charles II. which was not entirely disused in public till about the year 1720. Addison, Congreve, and Steele, met, at Button’s coffee-house, in large, flowing, flaxen, wigs; Booth, Wilks, and Cibber, when full-dressed, wore the same. Till within these twenty-five years, our Tamerlanes and Cantos had as much hair on their heads as our judges on the bench.--Booth was a classical scholar and well acquainted with the polite arts; he was conversant with the remains of antiquity, with busts, coins, &c. Nor could he approve such a violation of propriety; but his indolence got the better of his good taste, and he became a conformist to a custom which he despised. I have been told, that he and Wilks bestowed forty guineas each on the exorbitant thatching of their heads. We have, at length, emancipated ourselves from the usual mode of ornamenting our heroes, and are coming nearer to truth and nature. The tragedy of Macbeth would have been still dressed in modern habits, if the good taste of Mr. Macklin had not introduced the old highland military habit. Is it not an absolute contradiction to common sense, that the play of Hamlet should in dress be modernized, and the King of Denmark wear an order which was instituted several hundred years after the action of the tragedy? It is but within these twenty years, that the plays, of Richard III. and Henry VIII. were distinguished by the two principal characters being dressed with propriety, though differently from all the rest. Falstaff was, till very lately, an unique in dress as well as character."

1832- anon.

1857 Anonymous [possibly Thomas Carlyle ](ms. notes, ed. 1832): “For they commend writers as they do fencers or wrestlers; who if they come in robustiously, & put for it with a great deal of violence are received for the braver fellows—Jonson’s Address to the Leader. Alchemist. ”

1872 cln1

cln1

1856 Clark & Wright (ed. 1872):“robustious occurs in Henry V, iii. 7. 159: ’The men do sympathize with the mastiffs in robustious and rough coming on.’ "

periwig-pated] Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): “Periwigs (the word is derived from the French perruque) were worn by actors, not as yet commonly by gentlemen. See Two Gentlemen of Verona, iv. 4. 196, and Comedy of Errors, ii. 2. 76."

1874 corson

corson

1856-7 Corson (1874, p. 25): “To see a robustious Pery-wig-pated Fellow, teare a Passion to tatters, F. to hear . . . C. The tearing of a Passion to tatters, F. to hear . . . C. The tearing of a passion to tatters by a robustious periwig-pated fellow, is more addressed to the eye than to the ear. His robustiousness and his periwig-patedness are seen alone, as are also the distortions through which he endeavors to exhibit the passion; it is only what he says is addressed to the ear.

1899 ard1

ard1

robustious] Dowden (ed. 1899): “sturdy, as in King Henry V. III. Vii. 159.”

periwig-pated] Dowden (ed. 1899): “Steevens quotes from Every Woman in her Humour, 1609: ‘as none wear . . . periwigs but players pictures.’”

1897 rushtonN

rushtonN

1855-83 ô it offends mee . . . . imitated humanitie so abhominably] Rushton (1897, pp. 5-6): <p.5> [quotes 1855-1860, 1876-83 before giving Ascham passage] “‘Of the makynge of the bowe, I wyll not greatly meddle, leste I shoulde seeme to enter into an other mannes occupation, whyche I can no skyll of. Yet, I woulde desyre all bowyers to season theyr staues well, to woorke them and synke them well, to giue them heetes conuenient, and tyllerynges plentye. For thereby they shoulde bothe </p.5><p.6> get them selues a good name, (And a good name encreaseth a mannes profyte muche) and also do greate commoditie to the hole Realme. If any man do offend in this poynte, I am afraid they be those iourny men whiche labour more spedily to make manye bowes for theyr owne monye sake, than they woorke dilignetly to make good bowes, for the common welth sake, not layinge befroe theyr eyes, thys wyse prouerbe “Sone ynough, if wel ynough.”

‘Wherewyth euere honest handye craftes man shuld measure, as it were wyth a rule, his worke withal. He that is a iourney man, and rydeth vpon an other mannes horse, yf he ryde an honest pace, no manne wyll dysalowe hym: But yf he make Poste haste, both he that oweth the horse, and he peraduenture also that afterwarde shal bye the horse, may chaunce to curse hym.’

“In these passages Shakespeare and Ascham speak in disparaging terms of the work of journeymen, and use the same words. It offended Hamlet ‘to the soul to hear a robustious periwig-pated fellow tear a passion to tatters, to very rags,’ and says ‘I have seen players who have so strutted and bellowed that I have thought some of nature’s journeymen had made men and not made them well, they imitated humanity so abominably:’ and Ascham, in desiring all bowyers to season their staves well, to work them and sink them well, to give them heats convenient and tillerings plenty, says, ‘if any do offend in this point I am afraid they be those journeymen which labour more speedily to make many bows for their own money sake, than they work diligently to make good bows for the common wealth sake.’”

FNC: This is typical of Rushton’s penchant for picing up echoes and claiming allusion.

1934a cam3

cam3

Wilson (ed. 1934): “This I take to be a criticism of the acting of the Admiral’s men, and suspect Alleyn to be the ‘robustious periwig—pated fellow’; I Player as Lucianus commits all the faults here condemned.”