2431-34 heauens . . . act] Warburton (ed. 1747): “If any sense can be found here, it is this. The Sun glows [and does it not always] and the very solid mass of earth has a tristful visage, and is thought-sick. All this is sad stuff. The old quarto reads much nearer the poet’s sense, [cites passage, much modernized] From whence it appears, that Sh. wrote, ‘Heavn’s face doth glow O’ER this solidity and compound mass With tristful visage; AND, as, ‘gainst the doom, Is thought-sick at the act.’ This makes a fine sense, and to this effect, The sun looks upon our globe, the scene of this murder, with an angry and mournful countenance, half hid in eclipse, as at the day of doom.”

2431-4 heauens . . . act] Johnson (ed. 1765): “The word heated, though it agrees well enough with glow, is, I think, not so striking as tristful, which was, I suppose, chosen at the revisal. I believe the whole passage now stands as the authour gave it. Dr.Warburton’s reading restores two improprieties, which Sh., by his alteration, had removed. In the first, and in the new reading: Heav’n’s face glows with tristful visage, and, Heav’n’s face is thought-sick. To the common reading there is no just objection.”

2431-4 heauens . . . act] [Davies] (ms. notes in Johnson, ed. 1765, opp. 8: 239-40): “In Northern Climates where ye Sun’s power is moderately exerted, any unusual & extraordinary heat continued for a Time must alarm ye Inhabitant, & oblige him to recur to something supernatural to account for such extraordinary appearances—All Poets have taken advantage of such Phenomena to adorn & exalt their fictions, but I believe you will we seldom find them brought in aid to a pathetick & moral Scene such as this is—”

2431-4 heauens . . . act] Capell (1774, 1:1:140): “What follows is a rhetorical flourish, and exaggeration of her ‘deed’s’ horror: that the face of heaven glow’d at it, as in anger; and that of the world beneath was tristful and melancholy, as if the day of doom were at hand.”

2431-4 heauens . . . act] Davies (1784, pp. 105-106): <p.105> “‘A deed so horrid, that it seemed to forerun the day of judgement, and earth itself to sympathise and feel a sensibility on the occasion.’ Milton, who was a great admirer of our poet, from these lines might possibly be indebted to Sh. for that </p.105><p.106> sublime passage of the earth’s sympathising with Adam and Eve when they at the forbidden fruit: ‘Earth felt the wound; and Nature, from her seat, Sighing through all her works, gave signs of woe That all was lost!’ Paradise Lost, Book IX.” </p.106>

2431-4 heauens . . . act] Malone (ed. 1790): “I am strongly inclined to think that the reading of the quarto, 1604, is the true one. In Sh’s licentious diction, the meaning may be, The face of heaven doth glow with heated visage, over the earth: and heaven, as against the day of judgment, is thought-sick at the act.

“Had not our poet St. Luke’s description of the last day in his thoughts?—‘And there shall be signs in the sun and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity, the sea and waves roaring: men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking on those things which are coming on the earth; for the powers of heaven shall be shaken,’ &c. Malone.”

2431 dooes glowe] Rann (ed. 1791-): “is red with uncommon wrath, and this globe sympathizes with it.”

2431-4 heauens . . . act] Chedworth (1805, p. 355): “I once thought we might read with only the transposition of one line, thus:—‘Heaven’s face doth glow With tristful visage, as against the doom; Yea this solidity and compound mass Is thought-sick at the act.’ I am not sure, however, that any change is necessary. I prefer tristful to heated. I now think that there should be no transposition.”

2431-4 heauens . . . act] Caldecott (ed. 1819): “The face of heaven looks heated, as if abashed; and this massive compound, the earth with heavy looks, as on the approach of the day of doom, is disquieted and disordered at the thought of what is done.”

2432 heauens . . . glow] Knight (ed. [1839] nd): “Heaven and earth are ashamed of your act.”

2432 heauens . . . glow] Knight (apud Verplanck, ed. 1847): “ ‘Heaven and earth blush for you.’—Knight.”

2431-4 A rapsedy . . . act] Fiebig (ed. 1857): “Warburton censures the last four lines, explaining them thus: ‘The sun glows and the very solid mass of earth has a tristful visage, and is thought-sick,’ and calling it all a sad stuff. The old quarto reads ‘Heaven’s face does glow,/Oe’r this solidity and compound mass/With heated visage, as against the doom,/Is thought-sick at the act.’ Whence it appears, as he says, that Sh. wrote, ‘Heaven’s face doth glow,/Oe’r this solidity and compound mass,/With tristful visage; and, as ‘gainst the doom,/Is thought-sick at the act.’ This makes a fine sense, and to this effect. The sun looks upon our globe, the scene of this murder, with an angry and mournful countenance, half hid in eclipse, as at the day of doom—We reply to this, that tristful is more striking than heated, though this agrees well enough with glow. The adjective tristful may have been chosen by the poet at the revisal. To the common reading there is therefore no just objection to be made, though the reading of the quarto, 1604, may be the original one. In Sh’s licentious diction, the meaning may be (according to Malone, who pretends that the poet probably had St. Luke’s description of the last day in his thoughts),—The face of heaven does glow with heated visage over the earth; and heaven, as against the day of judgment, is thought-sick at the act.

2431 rapsedy of words] Fiebig (ed. 1857): “I.e. the queen’s faithlessness makes sweet religion appear like a rhapsody of words. A rhapsody was originally the reciting of Epic poetry; also Epic composition, apposite to lyric; then, a portion of an Epic poem fit for recitation at one time. f. I. a book of the Iliad or Odyssey; and metaphorically, a long rambling story, tirade; it is now applied to any wild or unconnected effusions of imagination.”

2431 rapsedy] Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “rhapsody erklärte Sam. Johnson: Any number of parts joined together without necessary dependence or natural connection.” [rhapsody is defined by Sam. Johnson as Any number of parts joined together without necessary dependence or natural connection.]

2431 heauens . . . glowe] Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “Nach der Volksvorstellung verfinstert sich Sonne und Mond vor staatlichen Umwälzungen, namentlich vor Königsmord. Dass vor der Ermordung des alten Hamlet solche bedeutsame Zeichen am Monde vorgetreten waren, wird Act 1.1.121. f. von Horatio erzählt. Auf dieses Ereigniss deuten hier H.’s Worte hin. S. m. Shaksp.-Forsch. I. p. 23. f. u. II. p. 14. is thought ist histor. Präsens. thought-sick zu lesen und compound mass auf die Erde zu beziehen, verbietet der Sinn und der Ausdruck tristful visage. Schon Warburten bezeichnet jene Auslegung als ‘sad stuff’.” [According to folk superstition, the sun and moon are darkened when a government falls, that is, when a king is murdered. That such meaningful signs occurred with the moon before the murder of the old Hamlet is recounted by Horatio in [1.1.112 (124+5) ff.]. Hamlet’s words here refer to this event, See m. Shaksp.-Forsch. I. p. 23 f. u. II. p. 14. is thought is historical present. To read it thought-sick and and to refer compound mass to the earth is contradicted by the sense and the expression tristful visage. Warburten has already called such an interpretation sad stuff.]

2436 in the Index] Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “Die Erklärer lesen in the index, haben jedoch für die Stelle nur lahme Interpretationen. Für "in" ist offenbar "is" zu lesen; der Sinn: "Weh, welche That, die so laut ruft und donnert, ist mein Ankläger?" so dass index im Sinne der Alten und der engl. Gerichtssprache zu fassen ist. So auch Sam. Johns. E. D. nach Arbuthnot.” [The interpreters read in the index but have only weak interpretations for the passage. Clearly in should be read is, giving the meaning: Ah me! What act, that roars so loud, and thunders, is my accuser? so that index here is to be understood in the sense it has in old language and in English legal language. Thus also Sam. Johns. E. D., following Arbuthnot.]

2431 rapsedy] Clark and Wright (ed. 1872): “The meaning of the word here is well illustrated by the following passage from Florio’s Montaigne, p. 68, ed. 1603: ‘This concerneth not those mingle-mangles of many kindes of stuffe, or as the Grecians call them Rapsodies.’”

2431 rapsedy] Neil (ed. 1877): “from the Greek rhapsodia, the title of each of the books of the Homeric poems, and perhaps meaning here parts without mutual dependence or coherency. Florio, in his translation of Montaigne, 1603, has ‘mingle-mangles of many kinds of stuffe, or, as the Greeks call them, rhapsodies’—p. 68.”

2431 rapsedy] Rolfe (ed. 1878): “Wr. well illustrates the meaning of the word here by quoting Florio, Montaigne: ‘This concerneth not those mingle-mangles of many kindes of stuffe, or as the Grecians call them Rapsodies.’”

2431 dooes glowe] Elze [ed. 1882]: “Glow is a misprint.”

2431-4 heauens . . . act] MacDonald (ed. 1885): “I cannot help thinking the Q2 reading of this passage the more intelligible, as well as much the more powerful. We may imagine a red aurora, by no means a very unusual phenomenon, over the expanse of the sky:—’Heaven’s face doth glow (blush) O’er this solidity and compound mass, (the earth, solid, material, composite, a corporeal mass in confrontment with the spirit-like ethereal, simple, uncompounded heaven leaning over it) With tristful (or heated, as the reader may choose) visage: as against the doom, (as in the presence, or in anticipation of the revealing judgment) Is thought sick at the act. (thought is sick at the act of the queen). My difficulties as to the Folio reading are—why the earth should be so described without immediate contrast with the sky; and—how the earth could be showing a tristful visage, and the sickness of its thought. I think, if the Poet indeed made the alterations and they are not mere blunders, he must have made them hurriedly, and without the due attention. I would not forget, however, that there may be something present but too good for me to find, which would make the passage plain as it stands.

“Compare AYL [1.3.104-5 (568-9)]. ‘For, by this heaven, now at our sorrows pale, Say what thou canst, I’ll go along with thee.’”

2431 rapsedy] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “The Clarendon Press edd. rightly say that the meaning of the word rhapsody is well illustrated by the following passage from Florio’s Montaigne, p. 68, ed. 1603: ‘This concerneth not those mingle-mangles of many kindes of stuffe, or as the Grecians call them Rapsodies.’”

2431 A rapsedy of words] Deighton (ed. 1891): “a mere extravagant utterance of words without meaning.

2431 rapsedy] Deighton (ed. 1891): “Gk. [GREEK HERE], the reciting of epic poetry, from [GREEK HERE], one who strings odes or songs together.”

2431 rapsedy] rolfe (ed.1903): “A senseless medley; used by Sh. only here.”

2431 rapsedy] Chambers (ed. 1905): “declamation.”

2431 rapsedy] Kellner (1925, p. 66): “rhapsidie (F) for rhapsody.”

2431 rapsedy] Craig (ed. 1931): “string.”

2431-4 heauens . . . act] Wilson (1934, rpt. 1963, 1: 73-4; 1:166-7; 2:327): <1:73> “Whether through crowding at the foot of a page, or because Sh’s handwriting was peculiarly difficult at this point, something—not I believe much—has gone wrong with the text, though what exactly it was we shall enquire later. Enough that his copy baffled the Q2 com- </1:74><1:74> positor at this point, and that those responsible for the prompt-book were equally baffled. For the passage appears in F1 as follows: [quotes F1 version of passage]. The changes are skilful. In particular, the substitution of ‘tristful’ for ‘heated’ shows a command of poetic diction so persuasive, that most modern editors have swallowed the emendation whole and followed the F1 text. Knowing, however, what we now know about the two texts, we have only to compare it with the Q2 reading to see that it cannot be what Sh. originally wrote. And yet is seems too intelligent altogether for Scribe C. The example is an instructive one; and I shall return to it. </1:74>

“ . . . . <1:166> The obvious seat of the corruption in Q2 is ‘Ore,’ which, as I shall later try to show, was probably ‘and’ in Sh’s manuscript. In any case, those responsible for the prompt-book must have found the word as difficult to read as the Q2 compositor, since the ‘yea’ of F1, though restoring what I take to the original sense, bears no </1:166><1:167> graphical resemblance whatever to ‘Ore’ and is a patent gloss. This gloss I should unhesitatingly attribute to Scribe P, like the other prompt-book emendations referred to above, were in not for the second change in the passage, viz. ‘tristful’ for ‘heated,’ which displays a command of poetic diction too considerable for Scribe C; and though it is probably not beyond Scribe P, one is left asking why a prompter should go out of his way to make this, from his standpoint, quite unnecessary alteration. The possibilities seem to be against it. On the other hand, ‘heated’ is itself far too apt to be context to be attributable to the Q2 corrector. In a word, while I find it hard to believe that ‘heated’ can have come from any other pen that Sh’s, ‘tristful’ may well have done so likewise.” </1:167>

. . . . <2:327> “This would offer no crux to an editor, if the contention on pp. 166-9 of vol. 1 is correct, viz. that we may owe the F1 reading to emendation by Sh.. Yet, even so, it is interesting to ask what it was that he wrote in his own manuscript. Certainly not ‘Yea,’ which has no graphical resemblance whatever with ‘Ore.’ Of course ‘Ore’ will not do either because it makes nonsense. It gives us the clue, however, for our guesses. What we need is a word of three letters, easily mistaken for ‘ore’—for we may neglect the capital letter, which Sh., like Bridges, we may feel sure, did not employ at the beginning of his lines. And the word we seek is, I believe, one of the commonest in the language, none other in fat than the conjunction ‘and.’ The emendation involves the assumption of a triple misreading, a combined a:o, n:r, d:e error, but there is nothing really far-fetched about this in the light of other misprints in Hamlet and the rest of the quartos. Thus, for example, we find ‘and’ misprinted ‘our’ in Tro. [1.3.195 (655)], ‘on’ (sp. ‘one) misprinted ‘ore’ both in LLL [4.1.6 (980)] and Ham. [4.7.137 (3127)], and so on. As to the contextual side of the business, ‘And’ gives us very much the same sense as ‘Yea’ and would so tally with Sh’s remembrance of his meaning. Nevertheless, though this is by the way, his meaning in general has, I am convinced, been misapprehended by all the commentators, who take ‘this solidity and compound mass’ to be the earth, whereas Hamlet is clearly referring to the moon, at which he points as he speaks. The lines in short are, as I have suggested on p. 224, an allusion to some contemporary lunar eclipse, and patently echo the words of Horatio at [1.1.117-120 (124+10-124+13)]. </2:327><2:328> Anyone who watched the eclipse at the beginning of September 1932, will remember how ‘heaven’s face’ did ‘glow’ when lighted by the ‘heated visage’ of the moon.” </2:328>

2431-34 heauens . . . act] Ridley (ed. 1934): “F tried to improve matters by putting a stop at glow, reading Yea for O’er and tristful for heated, but though this improves the grammar it is more than doubtful whether it improves the sense; to give the solidity and compound mass a visage, either tristful or heated, seems to me awkward; whereas the picture of Heaven looking down with glowing, heated face seems natural enough. I suspect the corruption of lying in as against the doom which has hitherto passed almost unchallenged, except by Warburton, who read and as ‘gainst . . ., which gives very tolerable sense.”

2431 rapsedy of words] Hereford (ed. 1935): “empty utterance.”

2431 rapsedy] Parrott and Craig (ed. 1938): “senseless string.”

2431 rapsedy of words] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “mere senseless verbiage.”

2431 glowe] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “Cf. KJ [4.1.112-3 (1692-3)]: ‘blush and glow with shame.’”

2431 rapsedy of words] Rylands (ed. 1947): “medley, a string of words.”

2431-33 heauens face . . . doom] Munro (ed. 1958): “From 2432 the poet had religion in mind; and the passage in question is an echo of 2 Peter iii 7: ‘But the heavens and the earth . . . are . . . reserved unto fire against the day of judgement.’ Editors have usually understood this solidity and compound mass to mean the earth. ‘Our globe,’ writes Kittredge, ‘is conceived as an harmonious compound of the four elements.’ Dover Wilson: MSH, 73, 166 f., 224, 319, 326, urges that Hamlet clearly refers to the moon, at which he points as he speaks. There are reasons against this, though the moon may have appeared in painting in the roof over the stage (see Hodges, 69 f.): the reference in 2 Peter which alludes to heaven and earth and the Doom; the inappropriateness of solidity and compound mass applied to the inconstant moon; and perhaps the difficulty of making such a point in the Queen’s closet. Also cf. Mac. [2.1.55 (636)], Thou sure and firm-set earth.”

2431 rapsedy] Evans (ed. 1974): “miscellaneous collection, jumble.”

2431 glowe] Evans (ed. 1974): “i.e. with anger.”

2431 A rapsedy] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “(of words) a confused and meaningless heap. So, substantially, Cotgrave. Cf. Florio’s Montaigne, i.25 (Tudor Trans., i.151), ‘those mingle-mangles of many kindes of stuffe or as the Grecians call them Rapsodies’.”

2431-4 heauens . . . act] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “The Queen’s act is here made to epitomize the guilt of the world – whether, with Q2,we take what ‘is thought-sick’ at it to be heaven, or, with F, the world itself (this solidity and compound mass). as against the doom, as if in anticipation of the day of judgment (which is prophetically associated with signs in the heavens). Thought-sick, sick with sorrowful contemplation or mental distress. Cf. [3.1.84 (1739)] (‘sicklied o’er with . . . thought’) and n. ln. Ambiguities in phrasing and syntax, the variants, and the possibility of unresolved corruption have made this a stubborn crux. This solidity and compound mass is usually taken to refer to this earth, which is compound because composed of four elements. The periphrasis is not perhaps felicitous, but it has point in emphasizing the characteristics of the earth which contrast with its threatened disintegration at doomsday. The phrase would be much less apt as a description of the moon, and Dover Wilson’s attempt so to interpret it (MSH, p.327)—by drawing an analogy with [1.1.120 (124+13)], where the moon ‘was sick almost to doomsday’ (but also, be it noted, ‘moist’)—has nowhere found support. The chief problem is to decide whether it is earth or heaven which is made ‘thought-sick’ by the monstrous ‘act’. As between the variants, the higher textual authority of Q2 is offset by the pleonasm of a face that does glow with heated visage and the awkward lack of a connective before Is; but these defects may be less serious than F’s discordant Yea, which switches the theme from heaven’s face to earth’s while purporting to be reiterating the same idea (With the lack of copula between the co-ordinate clauses cf. [4.5.125 (1869)]). Dover Wilson (MSH, pp. 166-7, 327) and Greg (MLR, xxx, 85) agree in regarding Yea as corrupt; yet they are apparently influenced by it to accept solidity and compound mass rather than Heaven’s face as the subject of Is thought-sick. I do not know why Q2 Ore is said to be nonsense; like Sisson (NR) I see no difficulty in heaven’s glowing over a sinful world. Sisson and some others take glow to indicate shame, as in KJ [4.1.112-3 (1692-93)] (‘blush And glow with shame’), but Sh. associates a glowing countenance with various emotions, including anger (cf, JC [1.2.183 (285)], ‘The angry spot doth glow on Caesar’s brow’). There is no incompatibility in heaven’s being simultaneously outraged at the world’s evil and grieved at the doom it must incur. On the contrary I think it more in keeping for Hamlet to envisage heaven rather than earth as ‘thought-sick’. He nowhere else suggests that the world is distressed by the corruption in its midst; his characteristic complaint is that it is not (e.g. [1.2.135-137 (319-21)]; [2.2.347-351 (1394-98)]; [3.4.152-155 (2535-38)]. There is also the very striking parallel at the murder of Duncan, when ‘the heavens, as troubled with man’s act, Threatens his bloody stage’ (Mac. [2.4.5-6 (930-1)]. That which threatens in Macbeth does glow (with menace?) in Hamlet, and the heaven that in Macbeth is troubled by a human act has a tristful visage when it contemplates one in Hamlet.

“Neither F tristfull nor Q2 heated can very well be a misreading of the other. In theory tristful may belong with Yea as part of an attempt to improve a passage imperfectly understood. But so rare and eloquent a word seems beyond an improver; a suggestion that it is Sh’s own alternative is more plausible than most conjectures of the kind (Honigmann, The Stability of Shakespeare’s Text, pp. 135-6). But I agree with Greg that it is probably the original word and Q2 heated a stopgap prompted by glow. See Intro., p. 60. Such signs that the manuscript was difficult here and that the compositor’s efforts corrupted the text inevitably undermine confidence in interpretations proposed. If emendation were attempted, either And for Ore (Dover Wilson) or ‘Tis for Is (Pope) would smooth the syntax; the first would go against, the second with, my notion of the sense.”

2431 rapsedy] Wilkes (ed. 1984): “rhapsody medley, confusion.”

2431 rapsedy] Hibbard (ed. 1987): “stringing-together, mingle-mangle (OED 3) – not used by Sh. elsewhere.”

2431-4 heauens . . . act] Hibbard (ed. 1987): “The F reading here has all the appearance of an authorial revision made to clear up what is something of a tangle in Q2.”

2431 heauens . . . act] Bevington (ed. 1988): “heaven’s face looks down upon this solid world, this compound mass, with sorrowful face as thought the day of doom were near, and is thought-sick at the deed (i.e., Gertrude’s marriage).”

2431-4 Heaven’s. . . act] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “In Q2’s version, the visage of heaven (i.e. the sky) glows red-hot over the earth as if it were the Day of Judgement and is thought-sick at the Queen’s behaviour.”