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

Line 3329-30 - 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.

3329-30 equiuocation will vndoo vs. By the \| Lord Horatio, {this} <these> three yeeres I

1755 Johnson

Johnson

3329 equiuocation] Johnson (1755, equivocation): “n.s. [œquivocatio, Latin] Ambiguity of speech; double meaning. ‘Reproof is easily misapplied, and, through equivocation, wrested.’ Hooker, ii.8. ‘I pull in resolution, and begin To doubt the equivocation of the fiend, That lies like truth.’ [Mac. 5.5.43 (2367)].”

1774-79? capn

capn

3330 these three years] Capell (1779-83 [1774]:1:1:146) : “ Just so many years had king James been in England, bringing with him a Danish queen, when the quarto that is our guide in this play made it’s appearance; the aspect of the court was much different from that it wore in the days of Elizabeth, as is noted by all historians, and, it is likely, was not so polish’d: by combining these circumstances together, the editor is led to imagine,— that the play, in it’s new dress, and that the observation in this place has allusion to that time’s manners.”

1854 del2

del2

3329 equivocation]Delius (ed. 1854) : “equivocation ist ein Spiel mit Worten in ihren doppelten Bedeutungen, wie es der Clown eben geübt hatte.” [a play with words in their opposite meanings, as the clown had even used it.]

1857 elze1

elze1

3330 this three yeeres] Elze (ed. 1857): "QA: this seaven yeares.—’This seven year’ ist eine formelhafte Redensart ohne bestimmten Zeitbegriff; vgl. Z.B. Beaumont und Fletcher The Woman-Hater I,1 und V,1. K. Lear III,4. Auch in der deutschen Volkspoesie kommen die sieben Jahre in gleicher Weise vor: Sieben Jahr muss ich noch wandern u.s.w. Der Umstand, dass diese sprüchwörtliche unbestimmte Zeitangabe in den rechtmässigen Drucken in eine bestimmte verwandelt worden ist, trägt nicht wenig zur Bestätigung unserer in der Einleitung XxiI entwickelten Ansicht bei." ["Q1: this seaven yeares.—’This seven year’ is a formulaic expression without determined conception of time. Compare, for example, Beaumont and Fletcher The Woman Hater I,1 and 5.1 [Lr. 3.4.138] Even in German folk-poetry the seven years appears in a similar way: I must still wander seven years, and so on. The circumstance that this spoken indeterminate date became transformed into legitimate texts into the determinate may yield not a little to the confirmation of our developed opinion in the introduction XXII."]

1868 c&mc

c&mc

3330 this three yeeres] Clarke & Clarke (ed. 1868): “Here ‘three years’ is used as one of those idioms of indefinite time, of which we have pointed out instances in Shakespeare. See Note 51, Act ii[1193].”

1872 del4

del4 ≈ del2 see n. 3328

3329 equiuocation]

del4

3330 this three yeeres] Delius (ed. 1872) : “this three years der Qs. ist Sh.’sch—jetzt drei Jahre.” [“this three years of the Qs. is Shakespearean for three years now.”]

1877 v1877

v1877 : capn (minus the aspect of the court . . . time’s manners.”)

3330 this three years]

1882 elze2

elze2

3330 this three years] Elze (ed. 1882): “The agreement of [Q1] and [Q2] decides with respect to this, and that of {Q1] and [F1] withrespect to yeares.”

1885 macd

macd

3330 these three years] MacDonald (ed. 1885): “Can this indicate any point in the history of English society?”

1899 ard1

ard1

3329 equiuocation] Dowden (ed. 1899): “ambiguity in the use of terms, not necessarily with a view to mislead.”

ard1 :

3330 these three years] Dowden (ed. 1899): “Q1 has ‘this seaven yeares.’ It is, perhaps, worth asking whether any allusion can be intended here to the great Poor Law legislation of 1601, when the principle of taxation for the relief of the poor was fully and finally established. The date is exactly three years before the words appeared in 1604. The purses, if not the kibes, of needy courtiers were galled by the assessments of the overseers. The Act is that of 43 Eliz.; the earlier Act of 39 Eliz. preceded the second Q b seven years, the first Q1 by six.”

1931 crg1

crg1 ≈ standard (ard1)

3329 equiuocation]

crg1 ≈ standard (ard1)

3330 these three years]

1934 Wilson

Wilson

3330 these three years] Wilson (1934, 2:265) this three CAM1; these v1821, GLO, “most”

1934 cam3

cam3

3329 equiuocation] Wilson (ed. 1934): “A reference to the Jesuit doctrine of ‘equivocation,’ much discussed 1600-1601, owing to the famous ‘Archpriest Controversy.’ v. Harrison Last Eliz. Journ. pp. 111, 218-19. For ‘by the card’ v. G. ‘card.’”

cam3 : standard +

3329 equiuocation] Wilson (ed. 1934, Glossary): “v. note [see above].”

cam3 ≈ ard1

3330 this three yeeres] Wilson (ed. 1934): “This [Dowden’s theory] seems likely. The act was actually passed late in 1597 (v. E.P. Cheyney, Hist. of Eng. 1588-1603, ii. 262, 270) and only re-enacted in 1601 with slight changes, which makes the ‘Three years’ precise if the passage was written in 1600 or 1601.”

1939 kit2

kit2 ≈ standard

3329 equiuocation] Kittredge (ed. 1939, Glossary):

1957 pen1a

pen1a : cam3a

3329 equiuocation]

1947 cln2

cln2 ≈ standard

3329 equiuocation]

1951 crg2

crg2=crg1

3329 equiuocation]

crg2=crg1

3330 this three yeeres]

1957 pel1

pel1 : standard

3329 equiuocation]

1970 pel2

pel2=pel1

3329 equiuocation]

1974 evns1

evns1 ≈ standard

3329 equiuocation]

1980 pen2

pen2

3329 equiuocation] Spencer (ed. 1980): “deliberate use of ambiguity in words. It was notorious in Shakespeare’s time as a device, attributed to the Roman Catholics, for taking oaths with mental reservations and double meanings.”

1982 ard2

ard2 ≈ cam3 (Harrison’s Last Elizabethan Journal)

3329 equiuocation] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “ambiguous use of words ((1)) in the plain sense, but ((2)) also in the sinister sense, with intent to deceive, which, though the practice had not yet acquired the notoriety that came with the trial of Garnet in 1606 ((see Arden Mac. xviii ff.)), was already familar enough ((cf. R. Scot, Discovery of Witchcraft, 1584, XIII, ch. 15, ‘How men have been abused with words of equivocation’; Harrison Last Elizabethan Journal, pp. 111, 218-19)). Hence will undo us.”

ard2: contra ard2 ; cam3

3330 this three yeeres] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “. . . it is hard to see why the Poor Law acts of 1597 and 1601 ((proposed by Dowden and Dover Wilson)), even if they galled the courtier with the poor rate, should involve the diminution of social differences, which appears to be the point of the passage.”

1984 chal

chal : pen2

3329 equiuocation]

1985 cam4

cam4 ≈ standard

3329 equiuocation]

1993 dent

dent ≈ standard +

3329 equiuocation] Andrews (ed. 1989): “Hamlet is a master of equivocation himself, and in the world of this play equivocation is a way of life and death.”

dent ≈ standard +

3330 this three yeeres] Andrews (ed. 1989): “during the last three years I have noticed.”

1998 OED

OED

3329 equiuocation]OED 1. The using (a word) in more than one sense; ambiguity or uncertainty of meaning in words; also [cf. Sp. equivocacion], misapprehension arising from the ambiguity of terms. Obs. c 1380 WYCLIF Serm. Sel. Wks. I. 61 Bi this may we se hou argumentis gone awei bi equivocacion of wordis. [etc.]