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

Line 2743+54 - 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.

2743+54 {The iminent death of twenty thousand men,}	4.4.61

1869 tsch

tsch

2743+54 twenty thousand men] Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “Das Beispiel von 20,000 Kriegern regt H. in ähnlicher Weise an, wie oben das des Schauspielers. Auch jetzt rafft er sich wieder zum Entschluss einer That empor, die zunächst in der schleunigen Beseitigung seiner perfiden Freunde, die ihn als Wächter nach England begleiten, besteht, und ihn seinem eigentlichen Ziele wieder einen Schritt näher führt, zumal, da die F ü g u n g d e s H i m m e l s ihn begünstigt.” [The example of 20,000 warriors stirs Hamlet in a way similar to that of the actors. Here too he pulls himself up again to a decision for action, which consists at first in the speedy rejection of his false friends who accompany him to England as guards. a decision that leads him again a step closer to his real goal, especially since the decree of heaven favors him.]

1904 ver

ver

2743+54 twenty thousand] Verity (ed. 1904): “it marks his excitement that he confounds the numbers of the soldiers and of the ducats.”

1929 trav

trav: xref.

2743+54 twenty] Travers (ed. 1929): “Only a responsible War Secretary would need to try and reconcile the figure here with that in [4.4.25 (2743+18)].”

1980 pen2

pen2 ≈ ver (xref.)

2743+54 twenty thousand men] Spencer (ed. 1980): “Hamlet has confusedly transferred the number of ducats in [2.2.366 (1412)] to the men (who were then only Two thousand).”

1982 ard2

ard2: contra Ver

2743+54 twenty thousand] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “Contrast [4.4.25 (2743+18)]. I fear we must ascribe the confusion to Shakespeare, often lax with numbers, rather than (with Verity) to Hamlet.”

1987 oxf4

oxf4 ≈ ard2

2743+54 twenty thousand] Hibbard (ed. 1987, Appendix): “Shakespeare, casual about numbers, seems to have attached the figure for ducats [2.2.366 (1412)] to the men.”

2006 ard3q2

ard3q2: 1980-1, 331 xrefs; H5 //; Jenkins

2743+54 twenty thousand] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “’Contrast [24]. I fear we must ascribe the confusion to Shakespeare, often lax with numbers rather than. . . Hamlet’ (Jenkins); see, for example, H5 1.2.57, where he copies a fairly obvious error from Holinshed. Or perhaps Hamlet is exaggerating again, as in his claims that his father has been dead for only A little month (1.2.147 [331]) or two hours (3.2.120 [1980-1]).”