Line 2597 - 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
| 2597 And in {this} <his> brainish apprehension kills | 4.1.11 |
|---|
1747-53 mtby4
mtby4
2597 brainish] Thirlby (1747-53): “fsql brainfish.”
1774 capn
capn
2597 brainish] Capell (1774 1:1: glossary, brainish): “(H. 89, 3.) mad, of a disorder’d Brain.”
1791- rann
rann
2597 brainish apprehension] Rann (ed. 1791-): “frantic conceit.”
1819 cald1
cald1
2597 brainish apprehension] Caldecott (ed. 1819): “Distempered, brainsick, mood.”
1822 Nares
Nares
2597 brainish] Nares (1822, glossary, brainish): “Probably deduced from the former [i.e. brainsickly]; mad. So cerebrosus in Lat. [Hamlet line cited].”
1832 cald2
cald2 = cald1+
2597 brainish apprehension]
Caldecott (ed. 1832): “or conceit.”
1857 fieb
fieb
2597 brainish apprehension] Fiebig (ed. 1857): “furious suspicion, hot-headed conception or fear.”
1869 tsch
tsch: xref.
2597 brainish apprehension] Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “brainish heissköpfig, apprehension hier bloss Vermuthung. Die Stelle würde 3.3.7. die Vertaushung von brows oder lunacies mit “brains” rechtfertigen.” [brainish hot-headed, apprehension here just supposition. The passage would justify the substitution of brains for brows or lunacies.]
1872 cln1
cln1
2597 brainish] Clark and Wright (ed. 1872): “imaginary, having no ground in fact. It does not occur again in Shakespeare.”
1877 v1877
v1877 ≈ cald2, cln1 minus “imaginary . . . fact.”
2597 brainish]
Furness (ed. 1877): “
Caldecott: Brain-sick mood, or conceit.
Clarendon: It does not occur again in Sh.”
1878 rlf1
rlf1 = Schmidt; ≈
cln1 without attribution
2597 brainish]
Rolfe (ed. 1878): “’Brainsick’ (
Schmidt); used by S. nowhere else.”
1881 hud3
hud3 ≈ Nares
2597 brainish] Hudson (ed. 1881): “Brainish for brainsick; that is, crazy.”
1882 elze2
elze2
2597 this brainish] Elze (ed. 1882): “his brainish] Though this latter reading is supported to a certain degree by Q1 (and in his rage), yet that of Q2 seems preferable.”
1889 Barnett
Barnett
2597 brainish apprehension] Barnett (1889, p. 53): “mad suspicion.”
1890 irv2
irv2 ≈ cald1
2597 brainish] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “brainsick.”
1891 dtn
dtn
2597 brainish apprehension] Deighton (ed. 1891): “mad-brained fancy; the suffix –ish, having, as often, a contemptuous signification.”
1899 ard1
ard1: Palsgrave
2597 brainish] Dowden (ed. 1899): “headstrong, passionate. Palsgrave, Lesclarcissement, 1530: ‘Braynisshe, hedy, folisshe, selfe wylled.’”
1900 ev1
ev1
2597 brainish] Herford (ed. 1900): “illusory.”
In EV2 Boas will substitute “mad” for “illusory.”
1903 rlf3
rlf3 = rlf1 minus Schmidt attribution
1904 ver
ver ≈ ard1 + magenta underlined
2597 brainish] Verity (ed. 1904): “The only sense given by the New E. Dict [OED]. is ‘headstrong, passionate.’ It quotes Palsgrave’s Dict., the very first (1530) of French-English dictionaries: “Braynisshe, hedy, folisshe, selfe wylled.” For the senses ‘illusory, engendered in the brain’ or ‘brainsick,’ which some have assigned here, there is no evidence.”
EV1 gives “illusory” as the annotation.
1906 nlsn
nlsn = ard1 minus “passionate” and Palsgrave analogue
2597 brainish] Neilson (ed. 1906, glossary): “headstrong.”
1931 crg1
crg1 = ard1 minus Palsgrave anal.
2597 brainish] Craig (ed. 1931): “headstrong, passionate.”
crg1
2597 apprehension] Craig (ed. 1931): “conception, imagination.”
1934 rid
rid ≈ nlsn
2597 brainish apprehension] Ridley (ed. 1934): “headstrong fancy.”
1937 pen1
pen1
2597 brainish apprehension] Harrison (ed. 1937): “mad imagination.”
1939 kit2
kit2
2597 brainish apprehension] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “insane notion.”
kit2
2598 good old man] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “The regard of the King and Queen for Polonius is evident throughout the play. It should teach the actor who plays the part that the old Councillor, though at times ridiculous, is not to be made a mere ancient buffoon.”
1942 n&h
n&h ≈ Barnett
2597 brainish] Neilson & Hill (ed. 1942): “mad.”
1957 pel1
pel1
2597 brainish apprehension] Farnham (ed. 1957): “headstrong conception.”
1974 evns1
evns1 ≈ kit
2597 brainish apprehension] Evans (ed. 1974): “crazy notion.”
1980 pen2
pen2
2597 brainish apprehension] Spencer (ed. 1980): “headstrong illusion.”
1982 ard2
ard2: contra ver; OED; Drayton analogue
2597 brainish] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “deluded, frenzied. Verity objects that there is no evidence for this sense; but the context requires a word which will sustain the ideas of mad and lawless fit as well as describe apprehension, which the OED glosses, ‘headstrong, passionate’, do not do. The Queen attributes Hamlet’s act to the false apprehension of his own disordered brain. Cf. Drayton, England’s Heroical Epistles (Pref.), ‘the work . . . might be judged brainish, if nothing but amorous humour were handled therein.”
1984 chal
chal
2597 brainish] Wilkes (ed. 1984): “i.e. arising from the brain.”
1993 dent
dent
2597 brainish apprehension] Andrews (ed. 1993): “Misjudgement, based on a figment of his imagination. The Queen implies that Hamlet thought Polonius really was a rat.”
2006 ard3q2
ard3q2
2597 brainish apprehension] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “deluded (mis-)understanding.”
2597