HW Home	Previous CN	View CN	View TNM	View TNI	Next CN

Line 2521 - Commentary Note (CN)

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.

Notes for lines 2023-2950 ed. Frank N. Clary

For explanation of sigla, such as jen, see the editions bib.

2521 This bodilesse creation extacie is very cunning in.	3.4.139

1765- mDavies

mDavies

2521 bodilesse creation extacie] [Davies] (ms. notes in Johnson, ed. 1765, opp. 8: 244): “This Phantom of the brain—raised by madness—The word Ecstasy in Shakespeare, is often used for madness; And sometimes for a temporary or sudden fit.”

1774 capn

capn

2521 extacie] Capell (1774 1:1: glossary, extasy): “a Wandring of the Sense or Understanding, a Disturbance of it.”

capn

2521 cunning] Capell (1774 1:1: glossary, cunning): “Knowledge; the Word’s primary Signification.”

1778 v1778

v1778

2521 extacie] See 2522

1788 v1785

v1785 = v1778

1790 mal

mal = v1785 +

2521 extacie] Malone (ed. 1790): “See Vol. IV. p. 361, n. 9. Malone.”

1791- rann

rann

2521 extacie] Rann (ed. 1791-): “a disturbed fancy, a fit of frenzy.”

1793 v1793

v1793 = mal

1803 v1803

v1803 = v1793

1813 v1813

v1813 = v1803

1821 v1821

v1821 = v1813 +

2521 extacie] Malone (apud Boswell, ed. 1821): “Minshieu has thus accurately explained this word: ‘Extasie, or trance. G. extasé, Lat. Extasis, abstractio, mentis. Est proprié mentis emotio, et quasi ex statione suâ deturbatio, seu furore, seu admiratione, seu timore, adiove casu decidat.’ Minshieu, 1617. Malone.”

1826 sing1

sing1

2521 extacie] Singer (ed. 1826): “See p. 175, note 6, and Tmp., [3.3.108 (1647)]. This speech of the queen has the following remarkable variation in the quarto of 1603:—‘Alas, it is the weakness of thy brain Which makes thy tongue to blazon thy heart’s grief: But as I have a soul, I swear to heaven, But, Hamlet, this is only fantasy, And for my love forget these idle fits.’”

1832 cald2

cald2 ≈ v1821 without attribution

2521 extacie] Caldecott (ed. 1832): “i.e. ‘trance. ecstasis. abstractio mentis et emotio, et quasi ex statione sua deturbatio, seufurore, seu admiratione, seu timore, aliove casu decidet.’ Minshieu.”

1843+ mcol1

mcol1

2521 bodilesse] Anonymous (ms. notes in Collier, ed. 1843): “bodily] bodiless in fo. 1623. tc.”

1844 Dyce (Remarks)

Dyce (Remarks): col

2521 bodilesse] Dyce (1844, p. 217): bodily] “This new lection must, of course, be attributed to Mr. Collier’s printer [3.4, p. 291].—Read ‘bodiless.’”

1854 del2

del2: xref.

2521 extacie is very cunning in] Delius (ed. 1854): “die Seelenstörung ist sehr geschickt in solchen Schöpfungen, die keine Wirklichkeit haben. Ueber ecstasy vgl. Anm,. 33, A. 2, Sc. 1.” [mental derangement is very skillful in such creations that have no reality. For ecstasy cf. Note 33, [2.1.99 (999)].

1856 hud1 (1851-6)

hud1

2521 extacie] Hudson (ed. 1851-6): “This words has occurred in the same sense before. See 2.1 [999], note 22. H.”

1856b sing2

sing2 = sing1 +

2521 extacie] Singer (ed. 1856): “i.e. any temporary alienation of mind. See p. 226 ante, note 31 [3.1.160 (1816)].”

1857 fieb

fieb = v1778, mal (see 2522) for extacie

1860 stau

stau

2521 extacie] Staunton (ed. 1860): “Madness. The quarto, 1603, exhibits this speech of the Queen very differently to the after copies; and the peculiarity is interesting in connexion with the question of her participation in the murder of her first husband:—‘Alas, it is the weakness of thy braine, Which makes thy tongue to blazon thy hearts griefe: But as I have a soule, I sweare by heaven, I never knew of this most horride murder: But Hamlet, this is onely fantasie, And for my love forget these idle fits.’”

1864a glo

glo: xref.

2521 extacie] Clark & White (ed. 1864a [1865] 9: glossary, Ecstasy): “See [3.4.74 (2455+3)].”

1868 c&mc

c&mc: xref.; Shr. //

2521 extacie is very cunning in] Clarke & Clarke (ed. 1868, rpt. 1878): “‘Aberration of mind is very skilful in.’ See Note 37 of the present [3.1.160 (1816)], and Note 25, Act 1., Shr. [0000].”

1869 tsch

tsch: Sh. K. I

2521 Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “Eine Umstellung, welche der neueren Poesie und Prosa gemein ist, wird durch die Einschiebung des Prädicatverbs zwischen den Substantivbegriff und die darauf bezogene Präposition bewerkstelligt. So Sh. K. I. 2.1.552. And this rich fair town we make him lord of.” [A change of order, common to newer poetry and prose, is accomplished by putting the predicate verb between the substantive concept and the preposition that belongs with it. Thus Sh. K. I. 2.1.552: And this rich fair town we make him lord of.]

1872 hud2

hud2: Mac. //

2521 This . . . in] Hudson (ed. 1872): “The Ghost scene, as also in the banquet-scene of Mac. [3.4.37 (1299)], is plainly what we should call a subjective ghost; that is, existing only in the heated imagination of the beholder. As the Queen says, insanity is very fertile in such ‘bodiless creations.’ It is not so with the apparition in the former scenes, as the Ghost is there seen by other persons. To be sure, it was part of the old belief, that ghosts could, if they chose, make themselves visible only to those with whom they were to deal; but this is just what we mean by subjective. For this reason I have long thought that the introduction of the Ghost on the stage in this scene ought to be discontinued.”

1872 del4

del4 = del2

1872 cln1

cln1: xref.

2521 extacie] Clark and Wright (ed. 1872): “See [2.1.100 (1000)].”

1877 v1877

v1877 ≈mal (Luc. //); xrefs.

2521 extacie] Furness (ed. 1877): “See 2.1.102. [1000]. Malone: Compare Luc. 460.”

1881 hud3

hud3 = hud2 minus “For . . .continued.” + magenta underlined

2521 This . . . in] Hudson (ed. 1881): “The Ghost scene, as also in the banquet-scene of Macbeth, is plainly what we should call a subjective ghost; that is, existing only in the heated imgination of the beholder. As the Queen says, insanity is very fertile in such ‘bodiless creations.’ It is not so with the apparition in the former scenes, as the Ghost is there seen by other persons. To be sure, it was part of the old belief, that ghosts could, if they chose, make themselves visible only to those with whom they were to deal; but this is just what we mean by subjective. The ancients could not take the idea of subjective visions, as we use the term. So that the words here put into the Ghost’s mouth are to be regarded as merely the echo of Hamlet’s own thoughts.”

1883 wh2

wh2

2521 extacie] White (ed. 1883): “madness.”

1885 macd

macd: xrefs.

2521-2 MacDonald (ed. 1885): “Here is the correspondent speech in Q1. I give it because of the queen’s denial of complicity in the murder. [quotes Q1CLN 1580-7].”

1890 irv2

irv2 = wh2

2521 extacie] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “madness.”

1891 dtn

dtn

2521 Deighton (ed. 1891): “madness is very skillful in giving birth to such illusions of the sight.”

1899 ard1

ard1: xref.

2521 extacie] Dowden (ed. 1899): “see [2.1.100 (1000)].”

1906 nlsn

nlsn

2521 extacie] Neilson (ed. 1906, glossary): “being beside oneself.”

1931 crg1

crg1 = wh2 + magenta underlined

2521 extacie] Craig (ed. 1931): “madness arising from the predominance of passion.”

1939 kit2

kit2

2521 cunning] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “skillful.”

1942 n&h

n&h = irv2 for extacie

1947 cln2

cln2

2521 Rylands (ed. 1947): “i.e. madness is skillful in creating shapes and phantoms.”

1957 pel1

pel1 = n&h

1974 evns1

evns1 = n&h for extacie

1980 pen2

pen2

2521 This bodilesse creation] Spencer (ed. 1980): “this kind of hallucination.”

pen2 ≈ cln2

2521 extacie is very cunning in] Spencer (ed. 1980): “madness is very skilful in creating.”

1982 ard2

ard2 = evns1 + xrefs.

2521 extacie] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “madness (its synonym in 2526). Cf. [2.1.99 (999), 3.1.160 (1816), and [3.4.74 (2455+3)] above.”

1984 chal

chal = ard1 for extacie

chal = kit2 for cunning

1985 Fisher

Fisher

2521 is very cunning in] Fisher (1985, p. 5): “Line is meaningless and has not been hitherto explained. It appears likely to be the emphasis of 2520: ‘Its very coinage is’. This is close graphically to the words printed, gives poetic support to the Queen’s words and to Hamlet’s reply, and makes good sense and poetry.”

1985 Ferguson

Furguson

2521 bodilesse creation] ferguson (1985, pp. 296): “Even though when reading the play we see the SD for the Ghost’s entrance, we may be confused about whom to believe, Hamlet or Gertrude.”

1987 oxf4

oxf4

2521 bodilesse creation] Hibbard (ed. 1987): “i.e. tendency to hallucinate.”

1988 bev2

bev2 ≈ cln2

2521 Bevington (ed. 1988): “madness is skillful in creating this kind of hallucination.”

1993 dent

dent: xref.

2521 Andrews (ed. 1993): “This conjuring up of imaginary bodies is something madness is very skillful in prompting. Ecstasy echoes [3.4.74 (2455+3)].”

1997 evns2

evns2 = evns1

2006 ard3q2

ard3q2

2521 bodiless creation] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “manufacture of fantasies or hallucinations.”

ard3q2 = irv2

2521 ecstasy] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “madness.”

ard3q2 ≈ kit2

2521 cunning] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “clever, skilful.”