Notes for lines 2951-end ed. Hardin A. Aasand
| 3581 <For by the image of my Cause, I see> | 5.2.76 |
|---|
3582 <The Portraiture of his; Ile count his fauours:>
3583 <But sure the brauery of his griefe did put me>
3584 <Into a Towring passion.>
3585 <Hor. Peace, who comes heere?> 3585
1617 Minsheu
Minsheu
3582 fauours] Minsheu (1617, rpt. 1978, a favour): “or countenance, à Lat: fauore, qui ex vultu facilè cognoscitur. Vi. Countenance.”
1744 han1
han1
3582 fauours] Hanmer (ed. 1744, 6:Glossary): “countenance, visage.”
1760 John2
John2
3582 fauours] Johnson (2nd ed. 1760, favour, 1, 9) ): “1. Countenance; kindness; kind regard. 9. Feature; countenance.”
1770 Gentleman
Gentleman
3579-84 but . . .
passion]
Gentleman (1770, I:29-30): <p. 29> “Another faint apology is made in a scene with Horatio, where the prince seems to be sorry that the
bravery of Laertes’s grief should so far provoke him; but all this scene, except a very few lines, is left out in the representation; and indeed, though meant to account for Hamlet’s coming back, it draws such a strange pciture of his getting at the King’s dispatches, and forging others, to turn the design of his death upon Rosencraus and Guil-</p. 29> <p 30>denstern, that we lament such low chicanery in a character of dignity; one who had no occasion, but much to the contrary, to appear a volunteer in his uncle’s proposition of sending him to England; however, as the transaction of his speedy return should be accounted for, I wish somewhat more like a narrative was preserved in action.” </p. 30>
1773 jen
jen :
3582 count]
Jennens (ed. 1773) : “The fo’s read
count, i.e. make account of, or value.
R[owe] alters this to
court, followed by all the rest.
Court is not so proper a word for
Hamlet, when applied to his inferior
Laertes.”
1778 v1778
v1778
3582 count his fauours] Steevens (ed. 1778) : “Thus the folio. Mr. Rowe first made the alteration, which is unnecessary. I’ll count his favours is-- I will make account of them, i.e. reckon upon them, ualue them. STEEVENS”
1784 ays1
ays1 ≈ v1778 (only “Or I will make . . . value them”) w/o attribution
3582 count his fauours]
1785 Mason
Mason
3582 count his fauours]
Mason (1785, p. 397) : <p. 397> “What favours has Hamlet received from Laertes, that he was to make account of?—I have no doubt but we should read, ‘I’ll
court his
favour.’ M. MASON”</p. 397>
1785 v1785
v1778 = v1778
3582 count his fauours]
1787 ann
ann = v1785 (minus “Mr. Rowe first made the alteration, which is unnecessary.”)
3582 count his fauours]
1790 mal
mal = v1785 + magenta underlined
3582 count his fauours] Malone (ed. 1790) : “ Mr.Rowe for count very plausibly reads court. MALONE”
1791- rann
rann
3582 count his fauours] Rann (ed. 1791-) : “be reconciled to him— count his favours“
3583 brauery] Rann (ed. 1791-) : : “the ostentatious display”
1793 v1793
v1793 = mal ; Mason
3582 count his fauours]
v1793 = mal ; Mason
3582 count his fauours] Steevens (ed. 1793) : “Hamlet may refer to former civilities of Laertes, and weigh them against his late intemperance of behaviour; or may count on such kindness as he expected to receive in consequence of a meditated reconciliation. STEEVENS”
[Ed: This note is added at the end, following Malone’s short 1790 note.]
1803 v1803
v1803 = v1793 + magenta underlined
3582 To count his fauours] Steevens (apud Reed, ed. 1803) : “ It should be observed, however, that in ancient language to count and recount were synonymous. So, in the Troy Book , (Caxton’s edit.) ‘I am comen hether unto yow for refuge, and to telle & count my sorowes.’ STEEVENS”
3579-84 Richardson (1808, p. 63): <p. 63> “Neither is his conduct at the funeral of Ophelia to be constructed into any design of insulting Laerts. His behaviour was the effect of violent perturbation; and he says so afterwards, not only to Laertes, but to Horatio: [cites 3579-84]
“To this he alludes in his apology: ‘If Hamlet from himself be ta’en away, And, when he’s not himself, does wrong Laertes, Then Hamlet does it not; Hamlet denies it.’[3686-8]. “</p. 63>
1819 Jackson
Jackson: Mason [whom Jackson identifies as MALONE
3581-2 For . . .
fauours]
Jackson (1819, pp. 360-1) : <p. 360> “That this passage, in its present state, is corrupt, I have not the smallest doubt: and that the elucidations are forced, and the word
court for
count absurd, I shall strive to prove.
“The origin of Hamlet’s grief was the loss of his father: that of Laertes arose from a similar cause.— </p. 360> <p.361> Hamlet wishes to revenge his father’s death: Laertes enters into a diabolical plot to effect a similar revenge. Thus, as Hamlet cannot forgive him who killed his father, he, in the image of his own cause, sees the portraiture of the other’s; and concludes, that he cannot expect forgiveness from Laertes. How, then, can we, for a moment, suppose that Hamlet would count upon favours from Laertes? or, as Mr. Malone [MASON] very justly observes,—’What favours has Hamlet received from Laertes, that he was to make acount of? And can it be supposed that the dignified Hamlet would stoop to court the fauours of a man whose father he has so recently slain? Impossible!”—
“I am convinced that, by expunging a colon and an apostrophe, we obtain the original. I read ‘For by the image of my cause, I see the portraiture of his: I’ll count his fervour:’
“Hamlet denotes sorrow for having suffered his passion tog et the better of him when he met Laertes at the interment of Ophelia. In testifying his love, Hamlet gave the first cause of offence; but Laertes, in the feruour of his passion, gave the first insult. Hamlet, therefore, on reflection, perceiving that Laertes had a justifiable reason for displaying his resentment, is willin to attribute it to heat of passion, notwithstanding that Laeres, in the brauery of his grief, insulted him, who, as a prince, was his superior.
“The word fauour for feruour might be easily mistaken in sound by the transcriber, or by similarity of character by the compositor. This latter, I think the original meaning.” </p. 361>
[Ed: If this is in fact from MASON, where does he get the second line, which is not to be found in MASON’s note.]
1819 cald1
cald1
3581 image of my Cause] Caldecott (ed. 1819) : “ Representation , character, colour. See ‘image of a murder,’ [3.2.? (0000)] Haml.”
3582 count his fauours] Caldecott (ed. 1819) : “Note, make a due estimate or reckoning of. The modern editors substitute court ; which certainly gives a more obvious and satisfactory sense: and it may have been a misprint.”
1821 v1821
v1821 = v1813
3582 To count his fauours]
v1821
3582 fauours] Boswell (ed. 1821, 21:Glossary): “countenance.”
1822 Nares
Nares
3582 fauours] Nares (1822; 1905): “Look, countenance. ‘For surely, Sir, a good favour you have, save that you have a hanging look.’ [MM 4.2.33 (1888)] ‘But there’s no goodness in thy face: If Antony Be free and healthful,—so tart a favour To trumpet such good tidings.’ [Ant 2.5.39(1067)].
“‘A tart favour, is a sour countenance.’ See Todd, Favour, 9.
“‘Appearance in general: ‘And she had a filly too that waited on her, Just with such a favour.’B&F Pilgrim, 5.6”
1826 sing1
sing1 : v1821 (minus v1803 ; v1793 accretions)
3582 To count his fauours] Singer (ed. 1826) : “Rowe changed this to ‘I’ll court his favour;’ but there is no necessity for change. Hamlet means, ‘I’ll make acccount of his favours,’ i.e. of his good will; for this was the general meaning of favours in the poet’s time.”
1832 cald2
cald2 = cald1
3581 image of my Cause]
3582 count his fauours]
cald2
3584 Into a Towring passion]
Caldecott (ed. 1832) : “i.e. the high flights in the expression of his feeling or poignant sorrow communicated to me as strong an excitement, wrought meto a pitch,a degree of passion correspondingly extravagant
1833 valpy
valpy ≈ standard
3582 count] Valpy (ed. 1833): “i.e. make account of, value.”
[1839] knt1 (nd)
knt1
3577ff] Knight (ed. [1839]) closes his text with some general commentary on scenes from this play. He refers to this moment as one of Hamlet’s moments of decision: “In actions that appear indirectly to advance the execution of the great ‘commandment’ that was laid upon him, he has decision and alacrity enough. His relation to Horatio (we are somewhat anticipating of his successful device against Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, would appear to come from a man who is all will. His intellectual activity revels in the telling of the story. Coleridge has admirably ointed out in ‘The Friend,’ how ‘the circumstances of time and place are all stated with equal compression and rapidity;’ but still, with the relater’s general tendency to generalise. The event has happened, and Hamlet does not think too precisely of its consequences. The issue will be shortly known. [TLN 3577-3579]. This looks like decision, growing out of the narrative of the events in which Hamlet had exhibited his decision. But even in his own account, the beginning of this action was his ‘indiscretion,’ proceeding from sudden and indefinable impulses:—’Sir, in my heart there was a kind of fighting/That would not let me sleep.’ [TLN 3503ff] Wonderfully, indeed has Shakspere managed to follow the old history—’How Fengon devised to send Hamlet to the king of England, with secret letters to have him put to death, and how Hamlet when his companions slept, read the letters, and instead of them, counterfeited others, willing the king of England to put the two messengers to death,’—without destroying the unity of his own conception of Hamlet.”
1843 col1
col1≈sing1 without attribution
3582 count his fauours] Collier (ed. 1843) : “Rowe reads court for ‘count,’ with considerable plausibility; however,’count’ may be the word in the sense of count upon.”
1844 verp
verp = COL1 w/o attribution ; ≈ sing1
3582 count his fauours]
Verplanck (ed. 1844): “[cites COL1 w/o attribution]
or as Singer interprets, ‘make account of his good-will.’”
1844 Dyce1
Dyce1 : col1
3582 count his fauours]
Dyce (1844, p. 219) : <p. 219>“ ‘Rowe reads
court for ‘count,’ with considerable plausibility; however, ‘count’ may be the word in the sense of
count upon.’
Collier
“So also Messrs. Malone and Knight.
“I have no doubt that Rowe gave what Shakespeare wrote. Steevens’s defence of ‘count’ (in reply to M. Mason) is a beautiful specimen of trifling.” </p. 219>
1846 Ulrici
Ulrici
3579-84 Ulrici (1846, p. 217): <p. 217>“How profound is his sorrow, (Act V. Sc.2,) for having forgotten himself in the quarrel with Laertes at Ophelia’s grave, and how earnestly, in his interview with his mother, does he struggle to restrain himself, and guard against being carried away by passion! With all his power does he strive to controul the adverse circumstances in which he is placed; with all his strength he labours to raise himself from the position assigned to him by fate, and by his own energy to mould the business which tha tposition furnishes, or rather enjoins upon him, into a
spontaneous and
independent undertaking. By an internal impulse, he is continually aiming at his own idea of man, whom he calls ‘a work of wonder, noble in reason, infinite in faculties, in
action like to an
angel, in apprehension like a god.’ And accordingly, because it is, on this account, repugnant to his nature to adopt any course of conduct upon external compulsion, there arises a conflict between the inward bias of his mind, and the pressure of
outward circumstances. He is unable to enter upon the enjoined work, not simply because it is too great and weighty for him, but because he cannot transmute it into an
inward spontaneous impulse of his own. Hence comes his vacillation, his hesitating and procrastinating, and his fluctuating purpose, now advancing and now falling back: hence, too, the vehemence of his self-accusation, with which he would goad himself into prompt measures, without however being able to controul time and its flight; hence too the inconsistency and irresolution of his proceedings, and apparently also of his character.” </p. 217>
1854 del2
del2 : standard
3582 The Portraiture of his] Delius (ed. 1854) : “Wie Hamlet einen Vater zu rächen hat, so auch Horatio.” [ “As Hamlet has to avenge a father, so also Horatio [sic]”
[Ed:It’s clear DELIUS means Laertes for Horatio here in this note 3582.]
del2 : standard
3582 count his fauours] Delius (ed. 1854) : court ist eine Emendation Rowe’s für die alte Lesart count, was bedeuten würde: ich will seine Gunst schätzen. Da aber in den alten Drucken r und n sehr häufig verwechselt werrden, hat das deutlichere court grosse Wahrscheinlichkeit für sich: ich will mich um seine Gunst bemühen. To court ist ungefähr, was eben vorher (vgl. Anm. 25.) to make loue hiess. [“court is Rowe’s emendation for the old reading of count , which would mean: I will appreciate his favor. But then in the old print the r and n become very frequently confused, the common court has great probability for it: I desire to endeavor for his favor. To court is approximate, which names even before (see note 25 and the idea of R&G “making love to their employment”) to make love .”]
1855 Wade
Wade
3579-84 Wade (1855, p. 28): <p. 28> “Thus does Hamlet start away from consideration of the main business of his earthly being!—thus instinctively does he shrink from setting foot upon even the mere threshold of action!” </p. 28>
1856 hud1 (1851-6)
hud1 = sing1 without attribution
3582 count his fauours]
1856 sing2
sing2
3582 count his fauours] Singer (ed. 1856) : “The folio has, “I’ll count his favours.’ Rowe corrected it.”
[Ed: SINGER has opted for Rowe’s emendation in 1856, quite to the contrary of his Ff reading in 1826. This note reflects his changed attitude towards the folio. see his 1826 note above in which he criticizes Rowe’s emendation.]
1857 dyce1
dyce1 : col2; mcol1
3582 count his fauours] Dyce (ed. 1857) : “I’ll court his favours]] Rowe’s correction.—The folio has ‘Ile count his fauours ,’ &c.—From ‘To quite him with this arm’ in the preceding speech but one to ‘Peace! who comes here/’ inclusive, is not in the quartos.”
1857 elze1
elze1 : rowe ; theo
3582 court]
Elze (ed. 1857, 252): <p. 252>"
court]]So hat Rowe richtig emendirt und Theobald u.A. sind ihm gefolgt, während die Drucke lesen: I’ll count his favours." ["So ROWE properly emended it and Theobald and others followed him, while the printed text reads: ’I’ll count his favours.’"]
1858 col3
col3
3582 court] Collier (ed. 1858) : “Rowe reads ‘court,’ for count of the 4tos. and folios, and most likely he was right, though in our former edition we were too unwilling to abandon the old copies here.”
[Ed: I’m not sure what Collier means here, since COL2 does in fact follow ROWE through the medium of mCOL1 to read court .]
1859 stau
stau: standard
3582 count his fauours] Staunton (ed. 1859) : “I’ll court his fauours]] A correction due to Rowe; the folio, in which alne the speech is found, reading, “Ile count his favours,”
1860 Walker
Walker
3582 Ile count his fauours] Walker (1860, 3:273): “Carew, Clarke, p. 113,— ‘While Delphic priests, enlighten’d by their theme, In amorous numbers count thy golden beam.’ Of course, court.
3582 Ile count his fauours]
Lettsom (
apud Walker, 1860, 3:273): <p. 273>“The erratum in Carew is found in ed. 1640.”</p. 273>
[Ed: This note by Lettsom is a parenthetical annotation of Walker’s previous note on Carew.]
1864 ktly
ktly : standard
3582 fauours] Keightley (ed. 1864 [1866]: Glossary): “countenance.”
1864-68 c&mc
c&mc ≈ standard
3582 count] Clarke & Clarke (ed. 1864-68, rpt. 1874-78): “Rowe and others altered ‘count’ to ‘court;’ but it appears to us that ‘I’ll count his favours’ is a following up of the previous sentence, and means, ‘I’ll reckon up the favourable points of his cause.’ Hamlet has been enumerating all the grounds of his own injuries received from his uncle, and will count those which Laertes has undergone as those which favourably plead for him—his father killed, his sister deranged and destroyed, himself insulted.”
3583-84 Clarke & Clarke (ed. 1864-68, rpt. 1874-78): “The manly regret for his late violence to Lartes, the generous allowance he makes for the young man’s resentment against himself, together with this recurrence to the excusing cause of his own indignation, expressed in confidence to his bosom-friend Horatio, form beautifully characteristic touches of Hamlet’s disposition; and at the same time tend strongly to confute the (to our mind) unsound theory that he is really insane. Through all the agitated account of the counter-plot on board ship there is visible a collected mind, with a rational and vindicated course of procedure; while this summing-up of the confidence reposed in his friend by self-rebuke, and by mentioning his ‘towering passion’ as a thing of the past, bespeak a temper capable of cool reflection and staid introspection. It is observable that Hamlet never once here alludes to the lost Ophelia, even though he is pouring out his thoughts to hi s faithful and cherished friend. The fact is, as it appears to us, that Hamlet said the truth in its sad and full extent, when he told her, ‘I did love you once.’ See Note 26, Act iii [1770]. He loved her passionately, intensely, with all the warmth and earnestness of his intense nature, but this was while he believed her guileless, artless, incapable of caprice or inconstancy. When he finds her, as he thinks (unknowing that it is from her father’s and brother’s instigation), capable of rejecting him without apparent cause, his love for her is crushed and buried within his own heart; and he allows it to lie there extinct, speaking of it as dead and gone, acquiescing, moreover, in the necessity forced upon him by fate of including it among those ‘trivial fond records’ which he had vowed to ‘wipe away from the table of’ his ‘memory,’ when binding himself to his vowed duty of avengement.”
1866 dyce2
dyce2 ≈ dyce1
3582 count his fauours]
1867 Ktly
Ktly
3582 count his fauours]
Keightley (1867, p. 297) : <p. 297> “It is best to reed, with Rowe, ‘I’ll
court his favour.’” </p. 297>
1869 stratmann
stratmann
3582 count his fauours] Stratmann(ed. 1869): “Instead of ‘count’, Rowe, Theobald, and Dyce print ‘court’.”
1869 tsch
tsch
3581 I see] Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “Man übersehe nicht, dass der Dichter das Verhalten des Laertes gewissermassen als die Kehrseite zu dem des Prinzen betrachtet wissen will.” [“One doesn’t overlook that the poet wants to use Laertes’s conduct, so to speak, as a counter to that of the Prince.”]
1870 Miles
Miles
3579-82 but . . .
fauours]
Miles (1870, p. 76): <p. 76>“His subsequent regret, is but another grace of his ‘most generous’ nature. [cites ‘but I . . . fauours”]
“He has
then had time for reflection: time for conversation with his invaluable friend; time to realize the heart-rending fact that Ophelia must have believed him the
wilful murderer of her father, and that Laertes and all the world, except his mother, were justified in so regarding him. It was under the spell of conscious innocence and ignorant or forgetful of this constructive guilt that he leaped into the grave. He now comprehends and pardons the indignation of Laertes; but his own conduct was far less influenced by the violence of the son, </p.76> <p.77> than by the base mouthing and ranting of the brother. For he cannot help adding, with a glow of re-animated disdain: [cites 3583-4].”</p.77>
Miles
3585 Miles (1870, pp. 80-1): <p. 80>“Horatio starts at the coming footstep, as if he had been listening to treason: ‘Peace! who comes here?’ As the vexed stream of Hamlet’s life approaches the abyss, the foam and </p. 80> <p. 81>anguish of the rapids subside; and just over the level brink of calm and light that edges the fall, hovers the ‘water-fly,’ Osric. Hamlet is patient with him—almost as patient as with the sexton—although constitutionally merciless to a fool; whether a fool circuitous like Polonius, a fool rampant like Laertes, or a fool positive like Osric. It is the last of his intellectual engagements, this singular duel between a dunce on the threshold of existence, and the stately gentleman but three steps from the grave. All forms and degrees of intellect have been dwarfed beside this most sovereign reason: the final contrast is between godlike apprehension and sheer fatuity. The King’s ‘Give them the foils, young Osric,’ inclines us to think that Osric was even more knave than fool. The creature appointed to
shuffle those unequal foils could hardly have failed to detect the
one unbated point. But he is too slight for dissection.” </p. 81>
1872 del4
del4 = del2
3582 The Portraiture of his]
3582 count his fauours]
1872 cln1
cln1 : standard
3582 count] Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): “court]] Rowe’s emendation for ‘count,’ the reading of the folios.”
cln1
3583 brauery] Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): “ostentatious display. Compare [JC 5.1.10 (2339)]: ‘They could be content To visit other places; and come down With fearful bravery, thinking by this face To fasten in our thoguhts that they have courage.’”
1872 hud2
hud2
3582 The Portraiture of his] Hudson (ed. 1872): “Hamlet and Laertes have lost each his father, and both have perhaps lost equally in Ophelia; so that their cause of sorrow is much the same.”
hud2 ≈ hud1
3582 To count his fauours] Hudson (ed. 1872) : “Hamlet means, ‘I’ll solicit good will; ‘the general meaning of favours in the poet’s time.”
1873 mob
mob
3573-74 come In further euill] Moberly (ed. 1873): “Commit farther crimes.”
3583 brauery] Moberly (ed. 1873): “His braving me so in grief.”
1875 Marshall
Marshall
3579-84 Marshall (1875, p. 102): <p. 102>“It only remains to notice the words in which he expresses to Horatio his sorrow for his outburst of passion over the grave of Ophelia. Not that he alludes to Ophelia in any way either directly or indirectly; he carefully avoids doing so, which confirms what I have suggested as regards his reticence, even to Horatio, on the subject of his love. [cites 3579-84] Nothing can be more becoming than the tone of this speech; he is the more sorry for his display of passion, because, now that he is calm, he can understand, from his own feelings with regard to his fathr, what those of Laertes must have been: but it was the ‘bravery’ or ‘ostentation’ of th latter’s grief which enraged him. Hamlet is very probably going to say something more, when they are interrupted by the entrance of Osric.” </p. 102>
1877 col4
col4 : col3
3582 court] Collier (ed. 1877) : “Rowe reads ‘court,’ for count, with considerable plausibility; however, ‘count’ may be the true word, in the sense of count upon.”
1877 v1877
v1877 : ≈ v1778 (STEEVENS subst) ; ≈ cald2; clarke
3582 count his fauours]
Furness (ed. 1877): “
Steevens, Caldecott, and
Clarke justify
count in the sense of
make account of, reckon up, value.”
v1877 : Dyce (Glossary)
3583 brauery]
Dyce (
apud Furness, ed. 1877): “Bravado.”
1881 hud3
hud3 = hud2
3582 The Portraiture of his]
hud3
3582 Ile count his fauours] Hudson (ed. 1881): “This is not in the quartos, and the folio has count instead of court. Corrected by Rowe.”
hud3 = hud2
3582 Ile count his fauours]
1885 macd
macd
3582 The Portraiture of his] MacDonald (ed. 1885): “The approach of death causes him to think of and regret even the small wrongs he has done; he laments his late behaviour to Laertes, and makes excuse for him: the similarity of their condition, each having lost a father by violence, ought, he says, to have taught him gentleness with him. The 1st Quarto is worth comparing here:—[cites CLN 2084-7]”
macd
3582 Ile count his fauours] MacDonald (ed. 1885): “‘I will not forget,’ or, ‘I will call to mind, what merits he has,’ or ‘what favours he has shown me.’ But I suspect the word ‘count’ ought to be court.—He does court his favour when next they meet—in lovely fashion. He has no suspicion of his enmity.”
macd
3583 brauery] MacDonald (ed. 1885): “the great show; bravado.”
macd
3584 MacDonald (ed. 1885): “with which fell in well the forms of his pretended madness. But that the passion was real, this reaction of repentance shows. It was not the first time his pretence had given him liberty to ease his heart with wild words. Jealous of the boastfulness of Laertes’ affection, he began at once—in keeping with his assumed character of madman, but not the less in harmony with his feelings—to outrave him.”
1885 mull
mull
3581 my Cause] Mull (ed. 1885): “my father’s death.”
mull ≈ standard
3583 brauery]
1889 Barnett
Barnett
3583 brauery] Barnett (1889, p. 63): <p. 63>“
showy display. Cf. [
JC 5.1.10 (2339)]—’And come down With fearful
bravery’” </p. 63>
1890 irv2
irv2
3572-85 Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “[These] are omitted inQq., a curious omission, as, according to Ff., it makes Hamlet’s speech break off in the middle of a sentence.”
irv2
3582 count] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “court ]]This emendation is Rowe’s—court for count. It is so very probable that I have not hesitated to introduce it into the text; but at the same time I do not deny that the original may after all be the right reading, and count mean make account of.”
irv2 : standard
3583 brauery] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “ostentatious display.”
1899 ard1
Ard1 : standard
3583 brauery]
1906 nlsn
nlsn : standard
3582 fauours] Neilson (ed. 1906, Glossary)
3583 brauery] Neilson (ed. 1906, Glossary)
1929 trav
trav
3582 Ile count his fauours]
Travers (ed. 1929):”Humane and courteous feelings, by no means foreign to Sh.’s Prince of Denmark, and the expression of which was necessary to smooth the way to his acceptance of the fencing-match, too crudely improbable otherwise.”
1931 crg1
crg1 ≈ standard
3583 brauery]
1934 Wilson
Wilson
3572-85 Wilson (1934, 1:97): Wilson suggests that this is one of the many examples of the compositor deliberately omitting Q2 lines: “a passage which breaks off in the middle of a sentence, and can have been omitted by the compositor alone, accidentally or in order to abridge his labours. . . . It is, moreover, probable, I think, that the Q2 compositor was alone responsible for all five omissions [the five omissions in 2.2.244-76; 2.2.352-79; 4.5.161-3; 5.1.39-42; 5.2.68-80].”
1934 rid1
rid1 : standard
3583 brauery] Ridley (ed. 1934, Glossary):
1934 cam3
cam3 : standard
3582 fauours] Wilson (ed. 1934, Glossary): “(a) beauty, (b) face, aspect.”
3583 brauery] Wilson (ed. 1934, Glossary)
1936 cam3b
cam3b
3581-2 For . . . his] Wilson (2nd ed. 1936, Additional Notes): “Cf. Span. Trag. III. xiii.84-5: ‘Whiles wretched I in thy mishaps may see The liuely portrait of my dying selfe.’”
1939 kit2
kit2
3580 Kittredge (ed. 1936): “Hamlet’s own account of his behaviour refutes the theories both of those critics who think he was then acting the madman and of those who think that he was really insane.”
kit2
3581-82 For . . . his] Kittredge (ed. 1936): “A clear indication that Laertes the revenger was meant to be the foil to Hamlet the revenger.”
kit2
3583 brauery] Kittredge (ed. 1936): “ostentation.”
1938 parc
parc ≈ standard
3583 brauery]
1947 cln2
Cln2 = v1877 w/o attribution
3583 brauery]
1951 crg2
crg2 = crg1
3583 brauery]
1974 evns1
evns1
3581 image] Evans (ed. 1974): “likeness.”
evns1 ≈ standard
3583 brauery]
1980 pen2
pen2 ≈ standard
3582 fauours]
3583 brauery]
1982 ard2
ard2
3581-2 image . . . his] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “The irony, which Hamlet does not remark on but which we can hardly miss, is that the image which shows Laertes as a revenger like Hamlet must also show Hamlet as revenge’s object.”
ard2 : standard +
3583 brauery] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “See [v.1.244-50, 278-9].”
1984 chal
chal : standard
3581-82 For . . . his]
chal : kit2
3583 brauery]
1985 cam4
cam4 ≈ standard
3583 brauery]
cam4 : ard2
3581-2 For . . . his] Edwards (ed. 1985): “i.e. I recognize in my situation the essential features of his. ((As a bereaved son, I could have remembered that grief makes one act strangely.)) ‘my cause’ cannot mean his vengeance because it is clear that ((as Jenkins points out)) he simply does not recognize himself as a proposed victim of Laertes’ revenge. Presumably he cannot equate his accidental killing of Polonius with the premeditated murder of his father.”
1987 oxf4
oxf4
3572-85 Hibbard (ed. 1987): “These lines, not found in Q2, are probably an addition made during the preparatio of the text that lies behind F. See Textual Introduction pp. 110-12.”
3572-85 Hibbard (ed. 1987, Introduction, pp. 110-1): <p. 110>“. . . [Jenkins] eventually concludes that ‘’the incomplete sense </p. 110> <p. 111>and sentence ((whereby ‘“is’t not perfect conscience?”[3571] lacks its necessary complement)’ is decisively in its favour. . . . It is undeniable that ‘is’t not perfect conscience’ lacks its necessary complement, but Hamlet has said enough to leave one in no doubt as to what that complement would have been had his speech not been interrupted by the entry of Osric. The question mark following ‘conscience’ was probably supplied by Compositor X [one of two compositors, X and Y, conjectured by John Russell Brown in 1955].” </p. 111>
3582 count his fauours] Hibbard (ed. 1987): “take note of, think about, his favourable characteristics ((OED favour sb. 8)).”
oxf4 ≈ standard
3581-2 For . . . his]
oxf4 : OED (1)
3583 brauery] Hibbard (ed. 1987): bravado, ostentatious defiance.”
oxf4 : OED[4. Rising to a high pitch of violence or intensity.]
3584 Towring passion] Hibbard (ed. 1987): “earliest instance of this phrase cited by OED—towering ppl.a. 4)).”
1988 bev2
bev2: standard
3583 brauery]
1992 fol2
fol2≈ standard
3581-2 For . . . his]
3583 brauery]
1993 dent
dent ≈ standard
3582-84 and . . . one]
dent ≈ standard
3583 brauery]
dent ≈ standard
3584 Towring passion] Andrews (ed. 1993): “Hamlet uses Tow’ring with nice precision here. To avoid having Laertes ‘out-face’ him ((V.i.292)), he engaged his opponent in a match to see whose rage could be more ‘Giant-like.’”
dent ≈ standard +
3581-2 For . . . his] Andrews (ed. 1993): “Like the Latin word causa, cause can mean both ‘cause’ and ‘case.’”
dent ≈ standard +
3582 count his fauours] Andrews (ed. 1993): “Modern editons normally ement count to court.”
3581 3582 3583 3584 3585
