2781 did go] Steevens (ed. 1793): “Corrected by Mr. Pope. Steevens.”

2781 did not go] Knight (ed. [1839] nd): “Did not go. So all the old copies—‘corrected by Mr. Pope,’ says Steevens. Ophelia’s song had reference to her father. He was not a youth—he was not bewept with true-love showers.”

2781 Verplanck (ed. 1847): “The quarto, 1603, and the folio have ‘grave,’ the other quartos ground; but all authorities read ‘did not go,’ which Pope considered an error; but she alters the song in reference to her father’s ‘obscure funeral,’ as mentioned by Laertes and the King.”

2781-2 beweept . . . showers] Delius (ed. 1854): “with true-love showers gehört zu bewept. Der Zusammenhang des Liedes verlangt offenbar did go, wie auch die Herausgeber meistens die Lesart der alten Ausgaben did not go emendiren. Wahrscheinlich singt aber Opelia did not go in Erinnerung an ihren Vater, dessen Leichnam keine “mit Liebesregen beweinten Blumen” zur Gruft geleiteten.” [with true-love showers belongs to bewept. The context of the song clearly requires did go, to which editors generally emend the reading of the old editions did not go. But Ophelia is probably singing did not go in memory of her father whose body was not accompanied to the grave by any flowers rained on with tears of love.]

2781 beweept . . . go] Keightley (1867, p. 295): “bewept to the grave did not go] Pope, who has been generally followed, struck out ‘not;’ but though the printers often omitted the negative (as once already in this play) they rarely added it. We have, however, an instance in Ado [4.1.255 (1920)], and it might be better to suppose the same to be the case here. We might also read ‘unwept,’ which occurs in R3 [2.2.65 (1339)], or, as I have done, ‘unbewept,’ as the initial un is at times omitted. See on Cym. 1.7 [0000]”

2781 did not go] Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “Da man den Inhalt des g a n z e n Liedes nicht kennt, ist es offenbar gewagt not zu streichen, wie die Herausgeber seit Pope gethan, und wie auch Dyce allzu hartnäckig will. Elze behält not bei, doch kann ich seinen Motiven nicht beistimmen. Ist das Ganze, wie zu vermuthen, ein Volkslied, und steht die dritte Strophe mit den beiden andern im Zusammenhange, so scheint der ritterliche Pilgrim (he is dead and gone, lady), den unglückliche Liebe (true love) in die Ferne getrieben, einsam in den Einöden des Hochlandes gestorben zu sein, wo ihn Erde nicht deckt, sondern blos zu seinen H ä u p t e n ein Rasenstück, zu seinen F ü s s e n ein Stein liegt. Ein wandernder Sänger bringt die Nachricht seines Todes, daher die Anrede: lady. Sein Leichentuch ist der Schnee des Gebirges und Vöglein bespicken es mit Blumen, wie in Vittoria Corombona: Call for the robin red-breast and the wren, Since o’er shady groves they hover, And with leaves and flowers do cover The friendless bodies of unburied men. In diesem Falle ist aber auch nur jenes “ground” der Q2 für “grave” der Fs. u. Q1 richtig, und grade diese Abweichung unterstützt meine Vermuthung, dass wir eine alte Volksballade von dem oben angegebenen Inhalt vor uns haben. Es handelt sich also um eine Jungfrau, die den Geliebten hat ziehen lassen und bei der Nachricht seines Todes von innigem Mitleid ergriffen ihre That bereut, im Munde der O. offenbar von grosser bedeutung, wenn wir uns ihres Verhaltens gegen H. erinnern. Auf des V a t e r s Tod ist die Stelle wenigstens nicht ausschliesslich zu beziehn, obwohl dieser in die getrübte Vorstellung der Unglücklichen mit hineinspielt. Es ist daher ein entschieden ungerechtfertigter Einwurf Rümelius, wenn er behauptet, die von O. gesungenen Lieder wären blos l e i c h t f e r t i g und s i n n l o s.” [Since we do not have the complete text of the song, it is clearly presumptuous to delete not as editors since Pope have done, and as Dyce does all too insistently. Elze keeps not, but I cannot support his motives. If the whole is, as it seems, a folksong, and if the third verse is connected to the two others, then it appears that the noble pilgrim, driven away by unhappy love (true love), has died in the highland wilderness (he is dead and gone, lady), where the earth does not cover him, but only a bit of meadow supports his head and a stone lies at his feet. A wandering minstrel brings the news of his death, hence the address lady. His grave cloth is the mountain snow, and birds decorate it with flowers, as in Vittoria Corombona: Call for the robin red-breast and the wren, Since o’er shady groves they hover, And with leaves and flowers do cover The friendless bodies of unburied men. In this case, however, only that ground of Q2 for grave of the Fs. and Q1 is correct, and just this variation supports my feeling that we have an old folk ballade with the above indicated content. It is thus the story of a girl who has sent her lover away and who is seized by deep sympathy and regrets her action at the news of his death. This is clearly very significant when sung by O., when we recall her relationship to Hamlet. The passage is at least not exclusively connected to her father’s death, although in the troubled mind of the unfortunate girl he is included. It is therefore a decidedly unjustified comment of Rümelius, when he asserts that the songs sung by Ophelia are just frivolous and senseless.]

2781 beweept] Furness (ed. 1877): “Keightley: We might read unwept, as in R3: [2.2.65 (1339)]; or as I have done unbewept, as the initial un is at times omitted.”

2781 did not go] Furness (ed. 1877): “did go] Caldecott: His ‘shroud,’ or corpse, ‘did not go bewept with true-love showers,’ for his was no love-case; his death had the tragical character of fierce outrage, and this was the primary and deepest impression on her lost mind; she felt that something more than the ceremonial forms, insisted on by Laer., was wanting. Collier: The QqFf read ‘did not go,’ which Pope considered an error, and it probably was so. Dyce: That any one should fail at once to perceive that the original reading, ‘did not go,’ is utterly irreconcilable with the preceding, ‘Larded with sweet flowers’! And that any one should have the folly to suppose that the ballad now sung by Oph. must apply in minute particulars to her father! Enough for her that it is a ditty about death and burial; no matter that its hero is a youthful lover,—he was cut off by a sudden fate, and so far resembled Pol. Keightley: Though the printers often omitted the negative (as once already in this play), they rarely added it. We have, however, an instance in Ado [4.1.255 (1920)], and it might be better to suppose the same to be the case here.”

2781 did not go] Maclachlan (ed. 1888): grave did not go] “Pope struck out the not. So read, the line is not of the same measure with the first line of the stanza. Besides, the king tells us the burial was done hugger mugger.”

2781-2 Deighton (ed. 1891): “the shroud of him who went to his grave bewept with showers of tears by his faithful lover.”

2781 did not go] Dowden (ed. 1899): “It seems rash—Q1, Q, F agreeing—to adopt Pope’s emendation ;did go,’ lest Shakespeare may have meant a distracted allusion to the ‘obscure burial’ [4.5.214-6 (2964-6)]of Polonius.”

2781 did not go] Verity (ed. 1904): “All the original editions have “did not go.” The negative makes the sense inconsistent with that of line 37, and mars the rhythm. Most editors reject it as inserted by some error. (F.)

“Still, it is a curious error, to which there is no clue in the neighbouring words, as where a word in the line above or below catches the printer’s eye and gets repeated or inserted out of place. Dowden retains not, on the ground that Shakespeare may have meant a distracted allusion to the “obscure burial” (194) of Polonius.”

2781 Subbarau (ed. 1909): “It seems to me that ‘did not’ go; is the correct version, did not being pronounced as one syllable: the antecedent of which is not ‘shroud,’ but ‘flowers.’ The idea is that the pilgrim-lover died in a distant and strange land and was accorded a poor man’s burial, and though his corpse was ‘larded with sweet flowers,’ yet these did not go to the grave, accompanied with showers of true-love tears.”

2781 Wilson (1934, rpt. 1963, 2:292-3): <2:292> “Dowden cautiously notes: ‘It seems rash—Q1, Q2, and F1 agreeing—to adopt Pope’s emendation ‘did go,’ lest Shakespeare may have meant a distracted allusion to the ‘obscure burial’ of Polonius. We can be certain, I think, that Shakespeare did mean this. Dr Greg writes ‘Ophelia is suddenly struck by the inappropriateness of the words she is singing and twists them to a harsh discord.’2 But I fancy her mind is supposed to be moving a little less deliberately. It should be noted that the previous line of the song is also metrically deranged in Q2, which reads </2:292><2:293> ‘Larded all with sweet flowers’ [2780], and though all modern editors have followed F1 and omitted the ‘all,’ they have scarcely more right to do this than to omit the ‘not’ in the following line.1 The truth is, surely, that some kind of mad fit is coming upon the hapless girl, which shows itself in the text in her disorderly speech and to which the King alludes in the solicitous question ‘How do you, pretty lady?’ that follows immediately at the end of the song [2783].” </2:293>

<n><2:292> “2Emendation, p. 26.” </2:292></n>

<n><2:293> “1Vide 1:75.” </2:293></n>

2781 did not go] Wilson (ed. 1934): “(Q2, F1, Q1) Pope omitted ‘not’ and most edd. follow, which ‘seems rash . . . lest Sh. may have meant a distracted allusion to the “obscure burial” (l. 211) of Pol.’ (Dowden). The unmetrical ‘not’ would direct the attention of the audience to her wandering.”

2781 did not go] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “All the Quartos and Folios have ‘not.’ We are to regard it as Ophelia’s insertion in the verse. She suddenly remembers that the words of the song do not quite agree with the facts of her father’s burial, which was hasty and without the usual ceremonies. See [4.5.84 (2821), 4.5.214-6 (2964-6)]. For this reason not (omitted by Pope and most editors, but defended by Caldecott) is retained by Dowden and Wilson.”

2781 did not go] Munro (ed. 1958): did—not go] “Like Ophelia’s other snatches, the correct words must have been known to the audience. Greg: PE, 26, 27, remarks that ‘Ophelia is suddenly struck by the inappropriateness of the words she is singing and alters them to a harsh discord.’ Recurrently throughout these utterances Ophelia shows herself distressed by ideas of death and the grave in connection with her father’s end. She is about to sing the orthodox did go, but with revulsion pauses and cries with anguish did—not go.”

2781 not] Evans (ed. 1974): “Contrary to the expected sense, and unmetrical; explained as Ophelia’s alteration of the line to accord with the facts of Polonius’ burial (see [4.5.84 (2821)]).”

2781 did not go] Spencer (ed. 1980): “It has been suggested that the original song had ‘did go’ (which would give an easier rhythm) and that Ophelia inserts not because of her father’s not having received an adequate funeral ceremony (In hugger-mugger to inter him, [4.5.84 (2821)]).”below).”

2781 not] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “This of course violates both the metre and the expected sense, and has been thought an error. But (with all three texts agreeing) we must rather suppose it a deliberate interpolation by the singer, who recalls and so emphasizes that the pattern celebrated in the song is contradicted by the instance in her mind. The song thus reflects the actual shortcomings of her father’s burial [4.5.84 (2821), 4.5.214-6 (2964-6)] but still more, since it concerns a ‘true love’, her fantasies of Hamlet’s death. Cf. [4.5.23-40 (2769-82)] LN.”

2781 did not go] Edwards (ed. 1985): “It seems very likely that Ophelia inserts the ‘not’ into the original song, to suit the fate of Polonius.”

2781 not] Hibbard (ed. 1987): “As she sings Ophelia suddenly realizes that her father was not buried in the manner by her song; hence the intrusive not.”

2781-2782 Andrews (ed. 1993): “Ophelia’s song implies that the ’True-love’ who has died has not been properly mourned. Spoken in the Queen’s presence, these words are a reminder of the insufficiency of her devotion to the elder Hamlet. But they have a more direct bearing on another recent burial whose circumstances are hinted at in [4.5.83-84 (2820-21)].”

2781 ground] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “Q1 and F have ’graue’, adopted by Jenkins. Ophelia uses ground again at 70.”

2781 not] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “This unexpected and extrametrical negative occurs in all three texts and is usually explained as Ophelia’s deliberate alteration of the song to suit her own experience.”