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

Line 2712-13 - 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.

2712-3 Ham. I see a Cherub that sees {thē} <him:> but come for \| England,

2713 Farewell deere Mother.

1765- mDavies

mDavies: see Davies 1784

2712 I . . . th] [Davies] (ms. notes in Johnson, ed. 1765, opp. 8: 253): “I see a spirit that looks into ye bottom of this design of sending me to England—”

1784 Davies

Davies = mDavies

2712 I . . . th] Davies (1784, p. 120): “‘I see a spirit that looks into the bottom of your purpose in sending me to England.”

1805 Seymour

Seymour

2712 sees] Seymour (1805, p. 194): “This may stand; but perhaps it would be better to read, ‘I see a cherub that knows them.’”

1832 cald2

cald2

2712 I . . . th] Caldecott (ed. 1819): “This beauteous and sudden intimation of heavenly insight and interference, against the insidious purpose of the King’s shew of regard for Hamlet’s welfare, flashes upon us with a surprise and interest rarely to be found or equalled, and worthy of this great master of the drama.”

1843 col1

col1

2712 th] Collier (ed. 1843): “him] him seems to have no reference, unless Hamlet be mentally adverting to his father.”

1854 del2

del2

2712 th] Delius (ed. 1854): “Hamlet verlässt sich auf den Schutzengel, der, was ihm selbst von diesen Absichten des Königs verhüllt ist, sieht. Die Lesart der Fol, him für them, zerreisst den Zusammenhang des Dialogs, da him sich nicht auf purposes, sondern etwa auf Hamlet’s Vater beziehen müsste.” [Hamlet is depending on his guardian angel who sees what of these intentions of the king is hidden from him. The reading of the Folio edition him for them destroys the coherence of the dialogue, since him must refer not to purposes but perhaps to Hamlet’s father.]

1869 tsch

tsch: Drake (Nialssaga analogue)

2712 Cherub] Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “Kurz vor seinem Ende sieht der Mensch nach der gemanischen Vorstellung seinen Engel oder Schutzgeist. So Nialssaga cap. 41. Pû mant vera feigr maõr, oc munt pû hafà sêd fylgja pîna, Fies homo moribundus et genium tuum visurus es. Notker, bei Grimm M. 830 berichtet darüber: et generalis omnium praesul, et specialis singulis mortalibus g e n i u s admovetur, quem etiam praestitem, quod praesit g e r u n d i s o m n i b u s vocaverunt. Nam et poluli genio, quum generalis poscitur, supplicant, et unusquisque gubernatori proprio dependit obsequium, ideoque g e n i u s dicitur, quoniam quum quis hominum genitus fuerit, mox eidem copulatur. Hic tutelator fidissimusque germanus, animos omnium mentesque custodit: et q u o n i a m c o g i t a t i o n u m a r c a n a s u p e r a e a n n u n t i a t p o t e s t a t i , etiam angelus poterit nuncupari. S. Drake I. 334, wo das Vorhandensein desselben Mythus bei den Engländern nachgewiesen wird.” [According to Germanic theory, shortly before his end a person sees his angel or guardian spirit. Thus Nialssaga, cap. 41: Pû mant vera feigr maõr, oc munt pû hafà sêd fylgja pîna, Fies homo moribundus et genium tuum visurus es. Notker, with Grimm. M. 830 reports about it: et generalis omnium praesul, et specialis singulis mortalibus genius admovetur, quem etiam praestitem, quod praesit-gerundis omnibus vocaverunt. Nam et poluli genio, quum generalis poscitur, supplicant, et unusquisque gubernatori proprio dependit obsequium, ideoque genius dicitur, quoniam quum quis hominum genitus fuerit, mox eidem copulatur. Hic tutelator fidissimusque germanus, animos omnium mentesque custodit: et quoniam cogitationum arcana superae annuntiat potestati, etiam angelus poterit nuncupari. See. Drake I. 334, where the presence of the same myth in England is shown.]

1870 rug1

rug1

2712 Cherub ] Moberly (ed. 1870): “The cherubs are angels of love; they therefore of course know of such true affection as the king’s for Hamlet.”

1872 hud2

hud2

2712 I . . . th] Hudson (ed. 1872): “Hamlet means that he divines them, or has an inkling of them.”

1872 del4

del4 ≈ del2 minus “The reading . . . father.”

1873 rug2

rug2 = rug1

1877 v1877

v1877 = cald2, col1, rug

2712 Cherub] Furness (ed. 1877): “Caldecott: This beauteous and sudden intimation of heavenly insight and interference, against the insidious purpose of the King’s show of regard for Hamlet’s welfare, flashes upon us with a surprise and interest rarely to be found or equaled, and worthy of this great master of the drama. Collier: ‘Him’ [of the Ff] seems to have no reference, unless Ham. be mentally adverting to his father. Moberly: The cherubs are angels of love; they therefore, of course, know of such true affection as the King’s for Ham.”

1877 neil

neil ≈ mob for Cherub without attribution

1878 rlf1

rlf1 = rug

1881 hud3

hud3 = hud2

1889 Barnett

Barnett

2712 Cherub] Barnett (1889, p. 55): “here a guardian spirit—’A sweet little cherub that sits up aloft Keeps watch o’er the life of poor Jack.’ Perhaps also an allusion to the common saying—‘Some bird has told me.’”

1899 ard1

ard1

2712 Cherub] Dowden (ed. 1899): “The cherubim are angels of knowledge, and so they see the King’s purposes.”

1904 ver

ver

2712 I see a Cherub] Verity (ed. 1904): “meaning, to himself, that the cherub gives him a warning sign not to trust Claudius. See p. 289.”

ver: N.T. epistles; Ezekiel.; Dante, Heywood, Milton analogues; Mac., Tro., MV //s

2712 I see . . . th] Verity (ed. 1904, Appendix A): <p. 289> “According to a medieval belief the Heavenly beings were divided into three Hierarchies, and each Hierarchy was subdivided into three Orders or Choirs. These Orders comprised the Seraphim, Cherubim, and Thrones, forming the first Hierarchy; Dominations , Virtues, and Powers, forming the second; Principalities, Archangels and Angels, forming the third. This system was deduced, in the main, from St. Paul’s words in Ephes. i.21 and Colos. i. 16. First formulated in the treatise (Greek here), which was long attributed, thought falsely, to Dionysius, the Areopagite, the notion had great influence in the Middle Ages; cf. Dante, Paradiso, xxxviii. 98-126. Allusions to it are frequent in Elizabethan writers.

“Heywood’s Hierarchie of the Blessed Angels (1635) deals with the subject at great length. </p. 289>

<p. 290>“Milton accepted the tradition and made it the basis of the whole angelical system of Paradise Lost.

“Each of the Orders possessed some special quality.

“The Cherubim had a wondrous power of vision: hence their main duty in Paradise Lost is to keep watch: they are essentially the sentinels of the poem. See iv. 778, xi.128. And through this power of vision they enjoyed in a peculiar degree the Visio Beatifica, or faculty of ‘contemplating’ the Deity. . . . And this notion is the key to that line (54) in Il Penseroso, the point of which has been so much misunderstood—‘The cherub Contemplation.’

“It can hardly be doubted that Shakespeare was familiar with this tradition and refers to it here and in several other passages. Cf. Mac. [1.7.22-3 (496-7)], where it is implied that the Cherubim are in a special degree sharp of vision, since they are made to direct ‘the sightless couriers of the air.’ Cf. also Tro. 3.2.69-70 (1699-1700)]: ‘Fears make devils of cherubins; they never see truly’; and note the striking epithet applied to the Cherubim in MV [5.1.62 (2474)], viz. ‘young-eyed’; I have ot the slightest doubt that the sense intended is ‘with sight ever young, i.e. keen, undimmed.’ The whole idea, of course, derives from Ezekiel’s description of the Cherubim as being ‘full of eyes round about them’ (Ezekiel i. 18, x. 12). We must remember that these traditions about the Heavenly Orders were quite familiar to people in Shakespeare’s time.” </p. 290>

1931 crg1

crg1: ard1

2712 Cherub] Craig (ed. 1931): “Cherubim are angels of knowledge (Dowden).”

1934 rid

rid ≈ ard1

2712 Cherub] Ridley (ed. 1934): “the cherubim were angels specially of knowledge.”

1934 cam3

cam3 ≈ ver (MV, Mac. //s; Milton analogues)

2712 I see a Cherub] Wilson (ed. 1934): “Cf. 3.4.202-209. The Cherubim were the watchmen or sentinels of Heaven, and therefore endowed with the keenest vision; cf. MV [5.1.62 (2474)] ‘the young-eyed cherubins’; Mac. [1.6.22-4 (496-8)]; Par. Lost, iv.778-80, xi.128; Il Penseroso., 54 ‘The Cherub Contemplation’ (Verity).”

1935 ev2

ev2

2712 I see a cherub] Boas (ed. 1935): “I have a guardian angel.”

1939 kit2

kit2

2712 I see a Cherub] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “A mad-sounding remark, meaning simply ‘I have some notion of what they are.’ Heaven’s cherubim, of course, see everything.”

kit2: xref.

2713 deere Mother Kittredge (ed. 1939): “The maddest speech that Hamlet has yet made. The Queen is not present. The King corrects Hamlet patiently in his reply, which carries us back to [1.2.64, 110-2 (244, 292-4)].”

1947 cln2

cln2

2712 Cherub] Rylands (ed. 1947): “The Cherubim were the sentinels of Heaven.”

1957 pel1

pel1 ≈ rid

2712 cherub] Farnham (ed. 1957): “one of the cherubim (angels with a distinctive quality of knowledge).”

1958 fol1

fol1

2712 I see a Cherub . . . them] Wright & LaMar (ed. 1958): “though Hamlet has not the omniscience of an angel, he has his suspicions of the King’s purpose.”

1974 evns1

evns1

2712 I . . . them] Evans (ed. 1974): “i.e. heaven sees them.”

1980 pen2

pen2 ≈ ver (Ezekial analogue)

2712 Cherub] Spencer (ed. 1980): “(a heavenly spirit with exceptional powers of vision: Ezekial 1.18 and 10.12).”

1982 ard2

ard2: Tro., Mac. //s

2712 I see a Cherub . . . th] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “A hint that Hamlet perceives more than the King supposes. Cherubim had the gift to ‘see truly’ (Tro. [3.2.69-70 (1699-1700)]. Cf. Mac. [1.6.22-4 (496-8)].”

ard2: xref.

2713 mother] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “Hamlet, who had obeyed his mother by staying in Denmark [1.2.120 (302-3)], naturally thinks of her on leaving it. The King’s misunderstanding provokes the sudden switch to chop-logic.”

1984 chal

chal ≈ pel1 + megenta underlined

2712 Cherub] Wilkes (ed. 1984): “an angel of the second order, excelling in knowledge (implying that Claudius is under surveillance from heaven).”

1984 klein

klein: ver; Bib. analogues; Dante, Heywood, Milton analogues; Tro., MV //s

2712 I see . . . sees th] Klein (ed. 1984): “This may sound stark staring mad for those present, but is again a provocation. The cherubim belong, as Verity explains, to the highest group of the angelic hierarchy (see Paul to the Ephesians I.21 and to the Colossians I.16, systematised around A.D. 500 by Dionysius Areopagites); cf. Dante, Paradiso XXVIII.94-129, later in England Heywood in The Hierarchy of Blessed Angels (1635). Ezekiel I.18 writes: “... and their rings were full of eyes round about them four” (cf. X,12). In Milton, Paradise Lost IV.778-80 and XI.127-33 they are guardians. cherub only here in Sh., elsewhere he uses cherubin, e.g. Tro. [3.2.69-70 (1699-1700)] and esp. MV [5.1.62 (2474)] “the young-eyed cherubins” (young-eyed because their eyes never tire). Beside the distrust of Claudius’s intentions the phrase continues the religious note which since 3.3 gains in overall importance.”

klein: xrefs.

2713 Farewell deere Mother] Klein (ed. 1984): “In the eyes of all present (except the King) this must crown all preceding manifestations of madness. The Queen is not present (save in Q1, where the action of 4.1 continues straight and Gertrude is only sent away before the King’s soliloquy, G4r). Claudius has once more overdone it in [4.3.50 (2714)]; the reaction in [4.3.51f. (2715f.)]. sharpens Hamlet’s rejection of any parental bond in. [1.2.65-7 (245-7)] and [1.2.120 (302-3)].”

1985 cam4

cam4

2712-3 I . . . th] Edwards (ed. 1985): “A mischievous ‘antic’ speech in which Hamlet both hints his own knowledge and warns Claudius that heaven is watching him.”

1987 oxf4

oxf4: Milton analogue

2712 Cherub] Hibbard (ed. 1987): “The cherubim, or second order of angels, excelled in knowledge and keenness of vision. Compare Paradise Lost X!. 128-31, ‘watchful Cherubim; four faces each / Had, like a double Janus, all their shape / Spangled with eyes more numerous than those / Of Argus’.”

1988 bev2

bev2

2712 Cherub] Bevington (ed. 1988): “(Cherubim are angels of knowledge. Hamlet hints that both he and heaven are onto Claudius’s tricks.)”

1992 fol2

fol2 ≈ ard1

2712 I see a Cherub . . . them] Mowat & Werstine (ed. 1992): “Heaven’s angels (cherubim), Hamlet suggests, can see Claudius’s purposes.”

1993 dent

dent

2712 Cherub] Andrews (ed. 1993): “Presiding angel.”

1997 evns2

evns2 = evns1

2006 ard3q2

ard3q2

2712 I. . . them] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “Cherubim were supposed to be watchful over human affairs; perhaps Hamlet is suggesting that the King cannot hide his purpose from God.”

2006 ard3q2

ard3q2: Booth, Hapgood

2713 Farewell, dear mother] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “Edwin Booth claimed to have been the first Hamlet to address these words directly to the King; the traditional method was apparently to address them offstage to the absent Queen (see Hapgood), though the King’s reply makes more sense if they are addressed to him.”