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.

1736 Stubbs

Stubbs

3452 SD ] [stubbs] (1736, p. 38) : <p. 38>“In Hamlet’s leaping into Ophelia’s Grave, (which is express’d with great Energy and Force of Passion) we have the first real Proof of his Love for her, which during this whole Piece has been forced to submit to Passions of greater Weight and Force, and here is suffered to break out chiefly, as it is necessary towards the Winding up of the Piece. It is but an Under-Passion in the Play, and seems to be introduced more to conform to the Plan our Poet built upon, than for any Thing else; tho’ as the whole Play is managed it conduces towards the Conclusion, as well as it diversifies, and adds Beauties to the whole Piece.” </p.38>

1848 Strachey

Strachey

3452-3 this . . . Dane] Strachey (1848, pp. 90-1): <p. 90>“ If there needs any further proof of Hamlet’s speeches being in prose or verse, according as they express abstract speculation or practical sentiment, we have it in the transition in the style of his language when he suddenly learns whose burial is taking place. At first he remains silent:—a long pause, while the Queen and Laertes, speak successively, the former scattering flowers, and the latter ending by leaping into the grave with passionate exclamations: but then with a lover’s jealousy in his grief, he cannot endure to see another pretend to love Ophelia best, and he too leaps into the grave, his words exhibiting a strong effort to restrain and repress his feelings, yet ending with what sounds like a battle-cry,— ‘—This is I, Hamlet the Dane—’ as though he were wildly challenging Laertes to fight, not with swords, but with tears:—’Why, I will fight with him upon this theme, Until my eyelids will no longer wag.’ The being seized by Laertes for a moment diverts his attention, and we see, as usual, the proud and chafing </p. 90> <p. 91> temper of the prince curbed by the mastering hand of the gentleman: but then the torrent of passion returns, in a flood that carries all before it.” </p. 91>

1857 elze1

elze1≈ del2 (see n. 3450)

3452 wonder wounded] Elze (ed. 1857): "Hamlet will den Laertes an Emphase überbieten und bildet daher das Wort ’wonder-wounded’ statt des gewöhnlichen ’wonder-struck’. Delius" [Hamlet desires to surpass Laertes in emphasis and develops therein the word ’wonder-wounded’ in place of the customary ’wonderstruck.’ Delius]

1875 Marshall

Marshall

3452-3 this . . . Dane] Marshall (1875, pp. 97-8): <p. 97>“In these few words Hamlet would seem to say: ‘This is I whom you execrate as the wretch who has killed your father and driven your sister into madness. I confess I did this, but I did it unwittingly. Revile me, curse me, use me as you will. I can bear anything but the mockery of your pretending that your grief is greater than mine.’ Surely in this case the circumstances would excuse in any man, even in one who, unlike Hamlet, was, by habit and nature, endowed with the utmost self-coommand, an outburst of furious passion. The torture of self-suppression had become greater than human nature could bear. In vain had he tried to burn all tenderness out of his heart, to force himself into a deed of just vengeance; through his weakness he had failed; failed utterly to strike one blow against the guilty murderer, while by the irony of fate two innocent lives, one that of her whom he loved best on earth, haed been sacrificed through his unwilling agency. Brought, as it seemed, by the cruel caprice of the same relentless fate, without any warning, to the grave of his love, when it was too late to speak one tender word to her, or to beg her forgiveness for his harshness, he hears her brother, who did he knew never loved her with the same tenderness that he did, calling down ‘full ten times treble woe’ on his head—as if there could be greater woe than what he was enduring then—and demanding to be </p. 97> <p. 98>buried with Ophelia, as if there were no one else in the world who would die for her! Why, Hamlet must have felt that he would gladly die, ten thousand times, the most agonising death, if he could only call her back to life.

“The malignant way in which Steevens has misrepresented Hamlet’s condcut in this scene is pretty well known, chiefly from the indignant remonstrancs it has called forth. But it may be as well to give the passage here:— [cites “He interrupts . . . as a virtue” see n. 3848-49].

“Poor Hamlet! Had you been standing in the Old Bailey dock, and George Steevens counsel for the prosecution, you would have scarce escaped hanging! For good taste and veracity this venomous indictment reminds one of the Old Bailey in its worst days. It was, perhaps, well for Mr. Steevens that no usurper was at hand to punish outrages to decency, on the part of critics, in his day with the same sternness which Claudius found necessary in Hamlet’s case. Seriously speaking, it is hard to believe taht the man who wrote the above criticism had ever read Shakespeare’s ‘Hamlet.’ One would think it referred to the condcut of some misguided young man who had rudely interrupted the funeral ‘designed in honour’ of some distinguished person in Westminster Abbey. The whole circumstances of the case, the character, situation, and calamities of Hamlet—in fact, all that has happened, or has been told us, in the former part of the play, is ignored. It is sufficient to observe here that when Hamlet told Ophelia ‘he loved her not,’ he wa speaking in the character of a madman; while, in this case, it is real passion which completely overcomes his self-control.” </p. 98>

1877 v1877

v1877: White (Hamlet the Younger); Werder (paraphrased)

3452-3 this . . . Dane] White (apud Furness, ed. 1877): “With a tremendous revulsion of feeling Ham. breaks forth into passionage exclamations of love and grief; and then, too, at this strange unfitting time he claims his royal rank, and announces himself as ‘The Dane.’”

3452-3 this . . . Dane] Furness (ed. 1877): “Werder (p. 202) interprets this as the answer to the question Ham. has just asked.”

1906 nlsn

nlsn

3452 wonder wounded] Neilson (ed. 1906, Glossary): “struck with wonder.”

1936 cam3

cam3

3452 SD Wilson (ed. 1934): “It is obvious from ll. 254-58 [3456-60] that Q1 preserves the stage-business. Rowe read ‘Grappling with him’ and (at l. 259) [3461+1] ‘The Attendants part them’ to which latter Capell and Malone added ‘and they come out of the grave.”

3452-3 this . . . Dane] Wilson (ed. 1934): “It is noteworthy that at this first announcement to the Court of his return from England Ham. assumes the royal title; cf. liegemen to the Dane’ (1.1.15).”

1936 cam3b

cam3b

3452-3 this . . . Dane] Wilson (2nd ed. 1936, Additional Notes): “Adams, p. 319, also notes this.”

Ed. note:: Wilson refers to J.Q. Adams’s 1929 edition of Hamlet from Houghton Mifflin.

cam3b

3452 SD] Wilson (2nd ed. 1936, Additional Notes): “Cf. from A Funerall Elegye on ye Death of the famous Actor Richard Burbedge, 1618 (cited C.M. Ingleby, Shakespeare, the Man and his Book, ii. 169, and E. Nungezer, A Dictionary of Actors, 74): ‘Oft haue I seene him leap into the Graue, Suiting the person which he seem’d to haue Of a sadd Louer, with soe true an Eye That theer I would haue sworne he meant to dye’— a vivid memory of how Burbage acted at this point.”

1939 kit2

kit2= wh2 (see n. 3453)

3452-3 this . . . Dane] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “Cf. [1.2.44 (224)]. Only the First Quarto has the stage direction: Hamlet leapes in after Leartes.”

1980 pen2

pen2

3452 wonder wounded] Spencer (ed. 1980): “awe-struck.”

3452 this is I] Spencer (ed. 1980): “Presumably he throws off his cloak or seagown [3513].”

1982 ard2

ard2

3452 this is I] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “Cf. ‘What is he’ [3449].”

1984 chal

chal :cam3a; kit2

3452-3 this . . . Dane]

1985 cam4

cam4 ≈ Granville Barker

3452-3 this . . . Dane] Edwards (ed. 1985): “Traditionally, Hamlet jumps into the grave at this point, and the two men struggle. The authority for this is the Bad Quarto, ‘Hamlet leaps in after Leartes.’ Q2 and F are silent. Shakespeare cannot have intended Hamlet to leap into the grave and so become to the attacker. It is manifest from his words that he is set upon (([3459, 3488])). The regret he expresses to Horatio ((5.2.75-80)) is for his verbal not physical attack. To couple Hamlet’s defiant confrontation of Laertes and Claudius with a jump into the grave and a scuffle is unthinkable. Laerts scrambles out of the grave when he sees Hamlet advancing and rushes upon the man who killed his father.

“An anonymous elegy on Burbage ((who died in 1618)) says, ‘Oft have I seen him leap into the grave/Suiting the person which he seemed to have/Of a sad lover with so true an eye/That there I would have sworn he meant to die’ ((Shakespere Allusion-Book, 1932, I, 273)). This is assumed to refer to Hamlet, but the sad lover meaning to die sounds more like Romeo. The evidence of Q1 certainly indicates stage practice in 1603, however, whether at the Globe or not. Neither Irving nor Booth observed the business of leaping into the grave. Granville Barker, in his Preface to Hamlet ((1937)), argued eloquently that Shakespare intended Laertes to leap out of the grave and attack Hamlet. See the drawing by C.Walter Hodges, p. 57.”

1987 oxf4

oxf4

3452 wonder wounded] Hibbard (ed. 1987): “wonder-struck ((Shakespearian compound)).”

oxf4 ≈ cam3b

3452-3 this . . . Dane]

oxf4 ≈ cam4

3452-3 this . . . Dane] Hibbard (ed. 1987): “Q1 is very definite about what happens here; and so, in agreement with it, is the author of the elegy on Burbage quoted at p. 14 [see introduction]. A ‘grave’ that was both shallow and wide would seem to have been essential.”

1993 dent

dent

3452 wonder wounded] Andrews (ed. 1993): “struck with amazement, from ‘wqand’ring’ ((orbiting)) to arrested ‘Wonder’ at such a display of hubris ((overweening pride)).”

dent: standard

3452-3 this . . . Dane] Andrews (ed. 1993): “Hamlet’s phrasing echoes earlier uses of ‘the Dane’ by Claudius, and implies that Hamlet is not only asserting his superiority to Laertes but staking his claim to the Crown itself.”