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.

1710 Gildon

Gildon

3256-3404 Has this . . . but soft] Gildon (1710, p. 404): “The Discourse betwixt Hamlet and the Grave Maker is full of moral Reflections and worthy minding, tho’ that Discourse it self has nothing to do there, where it is, nor of any use to the Desigm, and may be as well left out; and what ever can be left out has no Business in a Play, but this being low Comedy has still less to do here. p. 2450-2453.”

1818-19 mclr2

mclr2

3256 Coleridge (ms. notes 1819 in Ayscough, ed. 1807; rpt. Coleridge, 1998, 12.4:859): <p. 859>“Sh. seems to mean all Hamlet’s character to be brought together before his final disappearance from the scene—his med. excess in the grave-digging--his yielding to passion—his Love for Ophelia blazing out—his tendency to generalize on all occasions in the dialogue with Horatio—his fine gentlemanly manners with Osrick—”</p. 859>

Also see 3664-5, where Verplanck cites this quotation directly from Literary Remains.

1856 Ramsay

Ramsay

3256-3306 Ramsay (1856, pp. 119-20): <p. 119> “The contrast between the imaginative spirit of Hamlet and the practical </p. 119> <p. 120> understanding of Horatio, runs through the whole play. For imagination to revel in philosophizing on the littleness to which all the sensible greatness of man may be reduced, and to trace ‘to what base uses we may return,’[3390] Horatio think ‘were to consider too curiously.’ [3393] Some of Hamlet’s sublime speculations he reduces to ‘Custom hath made it in him a property of easiness;’[3258-59] others he takes no interest in, merely answering with ‘It might, my lord,’ [3272] ‘Ay, my lord.’[3277] In the church-yard he obviously dislikes the whole scene by which he is surrounded. To Hamlet’s question ‘Is not parchment of sheep-skins,’ he replies, with the most technical gravity, ‘Ay, my lord, and of calves-skins too.’ This question he can resolve, but it is plain that Hamlet’s beautiful address to the skull of Yorick makes little or no impression on his mind. And yet, though in Horatio the Understanding does predominate over the Reason, still it has not wholly extinguished the latter. Nay, it would seem that his sensualistic philosophy was in a great measure learnt in the schools, and was, perhaps, rather the external result of his education, than the internal law of his own mind; as it is, every now and then he gives utterance to a note-worthy truth, of a nature not to be expected from him.” </p. 120>

1882 elze2

elze2

3257 a sings in grave-making] Elze (ed. 1882): “The agreement of [Q1] and [F1] with respect to that, and the agreement of [Q1] and [Q2] with respect to in is decisive.”

1885 macd

macd

3257 graue-making] MacDonald (ed. 1885): “Note Hamlet’s mood throughout what follows. He has entered the shadow of death.”

1934 Wilson

Wilson

3256-7 a] Wilson (1934, 2:251) sees the Q2 reading as reflecting a “probable” omission of the Ff reading. He also notes that CAP and v1821 agree with the Q2 reading.

3257 in graue-making] Wilson (1934, 2:265) in graue-making Cap, Jen

1947 cln2

cln2

3256-57 Rylands (ed. 1947): “It is dramatic irony that Hamlet reproaches the sexton for indifference when he is himself unaware that this grave is the grave of the girl whose heart his own indifference broke.”

1980 pen2

pen2

3256 Spencer (ed. 1980): “response to the sombre nature of his job.”

1982 ard2

ard2 : contra Cam3 (see n. 3250)

3255 Enter Hamlet and Horatio] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “Dover Wilson, following a suggestion of Wm. Poel, has Hamlet ‘clad in sailor’s garb’. [see 3250 and n. there]. But though this is plausible enough, it is not necessary to account for a grave-digger’s failure to recognize the Prince.”

ard2

3257 a] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “equivalent to that he, with which F smooths out the colloquialism.”

1984 chal

chal : standard

3256 feeling of] Wilkes (ed. 1984): "sensitivity to."

1993 dent

dent ≈ standard (PEN2)

3256 Andrews (ed. 1989): “no sensitivity to the kind of work he does.”