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

Line 3184 - 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 2951-end ed. Hardin A. Aasand

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

3184 But that this folly {drownes} <doubts> it. Exit.	4.7.91

3184 But that this folly drowns it] See n. 621+20-22.

mTBY2 1723-33? ms. notes in POPE1

mTBY2

3184 drowns] Thirlby (ms. notes in Pope, ed. 1723 [1723-33?]): “fsql [probably] douts, ut [as] don, doff, & dup in the song above [2792] fsql [probably] damps v. ad..l32. 28 nb. ambiguum” Thirlby seems to suggest that perhaps damps is the word, based on 32.28 , but then concludes with uncertainty.

1790 mal

mal

3184 But that this folly drowns it] Malone (ed. 1790) : “Thus the quarto, 1604. The folio reads—But that folly doubts it, i.e. douts , or extinguishes it. See p. 221, n. 6 [See n. 621+20-22]

[See Malone’s long note on page 221-2, part of which I transcribe below: ]

“To dout , as I have already observed in a note on King Henry V . Vol. V. p. 552, n. 8, signified in Shakspeare’s time, and yet signifies in Devonshire and other western counties, to do out , to efface, to extinguish. Thus they say, “ doubt the candle, dout the fire,” &c. It / is exactly formed in the same manner as to don , ( or do on, ) which occurs so often in the writings of our poet and his contemporaries.

“I have no doubt that the corruption of the text arose in the following manner. Dout, which I have now printed in the text, having been written by the mistake of the transcriber, doubt, and the word worth having been inadvertently omitted, the line, in the copy that went to the press, stood, ‘Doth all the noble substance of doubt, &c’

“The editor or printer of the quarto copy, finding the line too short, and thinking doubt must want an article, inserted it, without attending to the context; and instead of correcting the erroneous, and supplying the true word, printed—’Doth all the noble substance of a doubt, &c.’

“The very same error has happened in (H5 a.s.l. [0000]), ‘That their hot blood may spin in English eypes, And doubt them with superfluous courage:’ where doubt is again printed instead of dout.”

1793 v1793

v1793 = mal

3184 But that this folly drowns it]

modifies note by xrefing back to its own footnote page as MAL does in his respective edition.

1803 v1803

v1803 = v1793

3184 But that this folly drowns it]

1813 v1813

v1813 = v1803

3184 But that this folly drowns it]

1819 cald1

cald1≈v1821

3184 But that this folly drowns it] Caldecott (ed. 1819) : “Douts, does out. ‘My rage had flamed, if this flood of tears had not extinguished it.’ The quartos and folio of 1632 read frowns for doubts . In this sense, so spelt, it is found in (H5 4.2. ?[0000].Dauph. as was the orthography of that age; and see also (Ham 1.4. ?[621+20-1]) Haml. to Horat.”

1821 v1821

v1821 = v1813

3184 But that this folly drowns it]

1832 cald2

cald2 = cald1 (modified slightly)

3184 But that this folly drowns it] Caldecott (ed. 1832) : “Douts, does out, extinguishes. ‘My rage had flamed, if this flood of tears had not extinguished it.’ The quartos and folio of 1632 read drowns for doubts . In this sense, so spelt, it is found, as was the orthography of that age, (Ham. 1.4. [621+20-21]): but see (H5 4.2.11 [0000] Dauph.”

1843 col1

col1

3184 But that this folly drowns it] Collier (ed. 1843) : “So every quarto after that of 1603 [Q1], which has not the line: the folio ‘doubts it,’ meaning douts it, or does it out.”

1854 del2

del2

3184 folly] Delius (ed. 1854) : “folly sind die Thränen, deren er sich als einter Thorheit schämt. “ [“Folly are the tears, through which he brings shame to himself as a fool.”]

1857 elze1

elze1

3184 drownes] Elze (ed. 1857): "QB folgg. Fs: doubts it ((=douts it, d.h. does it out))." ["Q2ff. Ff ’doubts it ((douts it, that is, does it out))."]

1858 col3

col3 = col1

3184 But that this folly drowns it]

1864-68 c&mc

c&mc ≈ standard

3184 drownes] Clarke (ed. 1864, Glossary, dout)

c&mc ≈ standard

3184 drownes] Clarke & Clarke (ed. 1864-68, rpt. 1874-78): “‘Does it out,’ ‘puts it out,’ ‘extinguishes it.’ The First Folio here spells the word thus, ‘doubts.’ See Note 112, Act I. The Quartos give drownes’ instead of ‘douts.’”

1869 Stratmann

Stratmann : Nares

3184 drownes] Stratmann (ed. 1869): “If ‘doubts’ is = douts, it will suit the context better than ‘drownes’. Nares (Glossary 254) produces ‘it douts the light’ from Sylvester, and ‘dout a candle’ is still used in Dorsetshire, Somersetshire, Gloucestershire, Herefordshire, Shropshire and Yorkshire.”

1869 tsch

tsch

3184 drownes] Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “drowns passt zu this folly, welches seine fliessenden Thränen bedeutet. But that giebt häufig den Ausnahmefall an; es vergleicht sich mit la. nisi quod. Die Construction ist al. So Caedm. 1397. [Th]â se égorhere call eor[th]an tuddor âcvealde bûton [thä]t earcebord heóld heofona fred.—Tunc undarum exercitus (mare) omnem terrae progeniem interemisset, nisi coelorum dominus archam tenuisset.. So auch Heliand 8721.” [“drowns admirably suits this folly, which means the flowing tears. But that indicates frequently the exception; it corresponds with the Latin nisi quod. The construction is old. So Cadem. 1397: [cites Old English and Latin].”

1872 del4

del4 = del2 +

3184 drownes] Delius (ed. 1872) : “Für douts (irrig gedruckt doubts) der Fol. lesen die Qs. drowns. —to dout ist to do out=auslöschen.” [“For douts, irregular printing doubts of the Folio, the Qs. read drowns. To dout is to do out, release.”]

1872 cln1

cln1 : standard (CALD1-2?)

3184 drownes] Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): “douts]] ‘Dout’ is a contraction of ‘do out.’ See [H5 4.2.11 (0000): ‘That their hot blood may spin inEnglish eyes. And dout them with superfluous courage.’”

1872 hud2

hud2

3184 drownes] Hudson (ed. 1872): “So the quartos; the folio has douts instead of drowns. Dout was sometimes used for do out, destroy.”

1877 col4

col4 ≈ col3 + magenta underlined

3184 But that this folly drowns it] Collier (ed. 1877) : “So every quarto after that of 1603 [Q1], which has not the line: the folio ‘doubts it,’ meaning douts it, or does it out, which may be right: see 1.4.? [621+20-21]; but in this scene the folio seems scarcely so trustworthy as the 4tos.”

1877 v1877

v1877 : ≈ cald2 [only “Douts, does out, extinguishes.”] ; ≈ col3 ; ≈ stratmann ; coleridge [see n. 3158 for this reference from L.R.]

3184 But that this folly drowns it] Stratmann (apud Furness, ed. 1877): “If doubts is equivalent to ‘douts,’ it suits the context better than drowns.”

3184 But that this folly drowns it] Coleridge (apud Furness, ed. 1877): “That Laer. might be excused in some degree for not cooling, the Act concludes with the affecting death of Oph.,—who in the beginning lay like a little projection of land into a lake or stream, covered with spray-flowers, quietly reflected in the quiet waters, but at length is undermined or loosened, and bcomes a fairy isle, and after a brief vagrancy sinks almost without an eddy.”

1879 Herr

Herr

3184 drownes] Herr (1879, pp. 123-4) : <p. 123>“As to drown, it is used by Shakespeare in the sense of ‘o’erwhelm,’ ‘extinguish,’ and can be justified by reference to [Ham 4.7.189 (3183-4)], where, by the way, a similar error or point needs correcting: ‘I have a speech of fire, that fain would blaze, But that this folly douts it.’

“In the quarto and later folios the word douts of the last line reads drowns. Now it is clear and evident the quartos and later folios are right, insofar as Laertes’ figurative language naturally implies that the ‘speech of fire,’ or ‘blaze’ is ‘drown’d’ ‘extinguish’d,’ ‘overwhelm’d,’ by ‘this folly,’ i.e. the weak and womanly tears that spring to his (Laertes’) eyes at the drowning of Ophelia. It is likewise indirectly substantiated by his remark in the sixth line </p. 123> <p. 124> above [3178], where he speaks of ‘water’—a word equally associated with ‘drowns:’—’Too much of water hast thou, poor Ophelia, And therefore I forbid my tears: but Yet it is our trick; nature her custom holds.’ [3178-80]

“In this case, why then should not drowns be restored to the text, since it is the better word, and besides is found in the quartos and later folios? In hundreds of instances the quarto readings have been preferred and adopted to those of the first folio; why not then here? why this exception? So if it be established that drown should properly supersede douts in this case, it should likewise take its place in the passage at issue, where ‘douts or doubts’ have already been pointed out in [H5 4.2.12 (2180)]; and [Tmp 2.1.122 (793)]; and as in all of these instances ‘drown or drowns’ is plainly more suitable, it may hence reasonably be questioned whether Shakespeare ever wrote doubts in either, all being typographical blunders. These are the only four passages in Shakespeare where the word ‘douts or doubts’ occurs, and in all of them it is wrong. But where ever else the genuine word—doubts—is met with, it will be found used by the poet in its proper place and sense, there and then, and easily recognizable by the reader; as, for instance, in this play 2.2.? (1144-47], where it is right: ‘Doubt thou the stars are fire: Doubt that the sun doth move; Doubt truth to be a liar; But never doubt I love.’

“So without doubt we should read the couplet—’I have a speech of fire, that fain would blaze. But that this folly drowns it.’” </p. 124>

1881 hud3

Hud3 ≈ hud2

3184 drownes] Hudson (ed. 1881): “drowns it]] So the quartos. Instead of drowns, the folio has doubts, which Knight changes to douts.”

1883 wh2

Wh2

3184 drownes] White (ed. 1883): “douts]] does out, extinguishes.”

1885 macd

macd

3184 drownes] MacDonald (ed. 1885): “douts]] ‘this foolish water of tears puts it out.’ See Q. reading [drownes].”

1885 mull

mull ≈ standard

3184 drownes] douts]]

1889 Barnett

Barnett

3184 drownes] Barnett (1889, p. 58): <p. 58>“douts]] dout is a contraction of doouts. In [H5 4.2.11 (0000)], dout means extinguish.” </p. 58>

1890 irv2

irv2 : standard

3184 drownes] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “puts it out.”

3184 drownes] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “F1 has doubts, which Knight, with great probability, altered into douts, i.e. extinguishes (dout=do out, as dup=do up). In [H5 4.2.10,11 (0000)] the same word is almost certainly meant though the Ff. again spelt it doubt: ‘That their hot blood may spin in English eyes, And dout them with superfluous courage.’ Qq. print the word in the text drowns, which the later Ff. conjecturally follow.”

1899 ard1

ard1 : standard (Irv?)

3184 drownes] Dowden (ed. 1899): “douts]] does out, extinguish. In [H5 4.2.11 (0000)], where dout seems to be the verb, F[1] has doubt.”

1905 rltr

rltr : standard

3184 drownes] douts]]

1906 nlsn

nlsn : standard

3184 drownes] Wilson (ed. 1934, Glossary, dout)

1931 crg1

crg1 ≈ standard

3184 drownes] douts]]

1934 Wilson

Wilson

3184 drownes] Wilson (1934, 1:51):<p. 51> “This last [compositorial error] is a particularly interesting example, the substitution of ‘drownes’ for ‘doubts’ or ‘douts’ being clearly due to the influence of ‘drownd’, which appears three times in ll. 184-5 above. I suspect, however, that a press-corrector was actually responsible for the change.1”</p. 51>

<n> “1 Vide below, p. 137”

3184 drownes] Wilson (1934, 1: 137): <p. 137>“Still more plausible, if we had nothing but the Q2 text to go upon, would be ‘drownes’ for ‘douts’ at 4.7.192 [3184]. And yet it is easy enough to guess the origin of the variant. Misreading a Shakespearian spelling like ‘dowts’, the compositor set it up as ‘dowes’ or as ‘downes’ (e:t and minim misreadings), and the corrector, noting the talk of drowning in the context, imagined that an ‘r’ had been omitted.” </p. 137>

3184 drownes] Wilson (1934, 2:280) : cites F1 doubts over ROWE, v1821 drownes. He also presents the following pairs of F1/Q2 variants: <p. 281>

crimefull :criminall

doubts (=douts) : drownes

intill : into

rude : madde

sage : a

wisenssse : wisedome

vnseale : vnfold

Beauy : breede

affear’d : sure

Wilson concludes: “Inspecting this list no one, I think, can reasonably doubt that the first word in each pair belongs to Shakespeare, while the fact that the inferior redaings here come from the better text [Q2] should not, I hope, trouble readers who have followed the argument up to this point; some of them have already been explained as misprints, misreadings or miscorrections, and the rest may be with confidence assigned to the same categories. In a few instances the balance does not tilt so definitely on the side of F1, though since the latter gives an easier reading, attested by the votes of most editors, and since the Q2 variant is readily explicable in every case, there need be no hesitation in following the 1623 text.” </p. 281>

1934 rid1

rid1 : standard

3184 drownes] Ridley (ed. 1934, Glossary, douts):

1934 cam3

cam3 : standard

Wilson refers to Knight for the reading of “douts” and gives F1/Q2 variants, referring to his Manuscript of Sh’s Hamlet, pp. 51, 137. Also refers to H5 as previous sources have. and n. 621+2--22

Cam3 : standard +

3184 drownes] Wilson (ed. 1934, Glossary, dout): “dout]] v. note 1.4.37.”

1939 kit2

kit2

3184 Kittredge (ed. 1936): “this natural weakness (my weeping) puts it out. Laertes can no longer control himself. He rushes from the stage in a passion of tears.”

kit2 ≈ standard

3184 drownes] Kittredge (ed. 1936, Glossary):

1942 n&h

n&h ≈ standard

3184 drownes] douts]]

1947 cln2

cln2 ≈ cln1

3184 drownes] douts]]

1951 alex

alex ≈ standard

3184 drownes] douts]] Alexander (ed. 1951, Glossary)

1951 crg2

crg2=crg1

3184 drownes] douts]]

1954 sis

sis ≈ standard

3184 drownes] douts]] Sisson (ed. 1954, Glossary):

1956 Sisson

Sisson

3184 drownes] Sisson (1956, 2:226): <p. 226>“Folio reads doubts, and recent editors all read douts. The Quarto reading is entirely satisfactory and much more in </p. 226> <p. 227> character for Laertes, who like his father is given to pursuing a conceit to the last tasteless ditch, as here. It is an obvious sequel to ‘Too much of water’, and ‘my tears’.”

1980 pen2

pen2

3184 this folly] Spencer (ed. 1980): “these foolish tears.”

pen2 ≈ standard

3184 drownes] Spencer (ed. 1980): “So Q2; F reds ‘doubts’, which could be interpreted as ‘douts’ (puts out).”

1985 cam4

cam4 ≈ standard

3184 drownes] douts]]

1987 oxf4

Oxf4 ≈ kit2 w/o attribution

3184 drownes] douts]]

1988 bev2

bev2: standard

3184 drownes] douts]]

1993 dent

dent

3184 folly] Andrews (ed. 1993): “Laertes refers to his ‘foolish’ lack of manly self-control. He exits because he can no longer suppress his tears. Hamlet appears to use Foolery with the same implications ((womanish)) in V.ii.226.”