Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T21:40:03.909Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Relations of Hamlet to Contemporary Revenge Plays

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2020

Ashley H. Thorndike
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The revenge tragedy, a distinct species of the tragedy of blood, may be defined as a tragedy whose leading motive is revenge and whose main action deals with the progress of this revenge, leading to the death of the murderers and often the death of the avenger himself.

This type, as thus defined, probably first appeared on the Elizabethan stage in the Spanish Tragedy and the original Hamlet.2 Of these two plays the old Hamlet is not extant and can only be reconstructed conjecturally; the Spanish Tragedy represents, therefore, the origin of the type. Just what the ultimate sources of the type may have been, is not a question which enters our discussion. In the Spanish Tragedy the influence of Seneca is marked as in much early English tragedy,1 and there may be some indebtedness to contemporary French and Italian drama of the Senecan sort.2 We are not, however, to examine the Spanish Tragedy in connection with the influence of Seneca but in connection with a long succession of Elizabethan revenge plays; and for such an investigation it serves well enough as a starting point. Thomas Kyd was the author of this play and probably, as Dr. Sarrazin 3 has shown, of the old Hamlet. He may safely be taken as the introducer of the revenge tragedy upon the English stage, and his work may be considered one of the many dramatic innovations of the Elizabethan period.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , 1902 , pp. 125 - 220
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1902

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Note 1 in page 125 The reader may be referred to my investigation of a similar influence on Shakspere: The Influence of Beaumont and Fletcher on Shakspere. Worcester, O. B. Wood, 1901. Some of the discussions there may seem to lend support to the conclusions of this article.

Note 2 in page 125 The ms. of this article was sent to the printer before it was possible to obtain Professor Boas's edition of Kyd in this country. It has consequently been found impossible to give references to his texts and introduction or to profit—except in a few particulars—from his important discussions of the First Part of Jeronimo, the Spanish Tragedy, and the Ur Hamlet. A knowledge of these discussions would have added to the thoroughness of my investigation but would have not affected its main argument. Some of the points at which I dissent from his conclusions are considered in a review of Professor Boas's book about to be published in the Modern Language Notes.

Note 1 in page 126 Cf. J. W. Cunliffe, The Influence of Seneca on the Elizabethan Drama, London, 1893. R. Fischer, Zur Kunstentwicklung der englischen Tragödie, Strassburg, 1893.

Note 2 in page 126 Cf. Nash's Epistle to Greene's Menaphon: the allusion to Italian sources. Kyd translated Garnier's Cornelia. Note also Hieronimo's acquaintance with French and Italian tragedies. S. T., Act V. Hazlitt's Dodsley, vol. 5. p. 152.

Note 3 in page 126 G. Sarrazin, Thomas Kyd und sein Kreis, Berlin, 1892.

Note 4 in page 126 Fleay is almost certainly right in ascribing this play to about 1590 and to some other author than Chapman.

Note 1 in page 127 Chr. [Chronicle of the English Drama], ii, 75, 264.

Note 2 in page 127 Thomas Kyd und sein Kreis.

Note 3 in page 127 J. Corbin, The Elizabethan Hamlet, London, 1894. Cf. also Harvard Studies and Notes, vol. v.

Note 1 in page 128 See Thomas Kyd und sein Kreis. Fleay thinks Jeronymo was acted soon after Three Ladies of London, because the line at the end alludes to Gerontus in that play (acted 1583). The line—

“So good night kind gentles,

I hope there's never a Jew among you“—

is, of course, the usual quibble between gentle and gentile, and has no allusion to Gerontus. Dr. R. Fischer and Professor Schick have presented evidence that Jeronymo was not written by Kyd, but this evidence seems insufficient in view of the close connection between the play and the Spanish Tragedy.

Note 2 in page 128 Kyd is mentioned as the author in Heywood's Apology for Actors. For date, cf. Fleay, Sarrazin, Schick, and Dekker-Studien by W. Bang, in Englische Studien, 28. 2. Probably the play was acted as early as 1587.

Note 1 in page 129 Hamlet must date before August 23, 1589, when Greene's Menaphon was entered S. R. Nash's prefatory epistle contains a reference to “whole Hamlets.”

Note 2 in page 129 First quarto 1599. Acted by Chamberlain's men and sometimes ascribed to Shakspere. The play is a ‘domestic tragedy,‘ a type which at this time seems to have been as popular as the revenge type.

Note 3 in page 129 Possibly the Spanish Tragedy, but the description of the ghost doesn't quite fit. Probably the passage would fit the old Hamlet equally well, and it seems to me to have a general rather than a specific reference. Fleay, Chr., ii, 321, points out that “Vindicta,” also ridiculed in the Poetaster, occurs in Wily Beguiled, Alcazar, and the old Richard III.

Note 4 in page 129 Acted before 1599; see Fleay, Chr., i, 357.

Note 1 in page 130 First quarto, 1602; acted 1601.

Note 2 in page 130 First part, Works, ed. A. H. Bullen, v. i, p. 201.

Note 3 in page 130 Fleay dates both plays 1600, because he assigns the reinstatement of the Paul's boys to that year. There is, however, no reason for dating this in 1600, rather than 1599. Cf. the Stage Quarrel between Ben Jonson and the So-called Poetasters. R. A. Small, 1899.

Note 4 in page 130 Fleay takes this to refer to a revision of Jeronymo, the first part. The 1605 4to probably represents the play as it was acted by the Children of the Chapel. The phrase, ‘as it was first acted,‘ suggests a revision, but the other passage quoted above makes it seem probable that the Spanish Tragedy itself was referred to.

Note 1 in page 131 First quarto, 1602; acted 1601. See Chr., i, 128.

Note 2 in page 131 Chr., i, 59.

Note 3 in page 131 Life of Sh., p. 215 seq.

Note 4 in page 131 Life of Sh., p. 143, p. 227. H. S., p. 136 ff. Chr., 185 ff.

Note 5 in page 131 Q1, 971. Cf. Hamlet, III, 2, 324.

Note 1 in page 132 Q1, 1247 ff.

Note 2 in page 132 See State Trials, 17 Feb., 1601, and March. See also Nichols, iii, 552.

Note 3 in page 132 See State Trials, vol. 1, p. 10, March 5, 1601.

Note 4 in page 132 H.-P. Outlines, i, 176; H. of S., p. 122.

Note 5 in page 132 H. of S., p. 136.

Note 1 in page 133 See Diary; Collier's ed., p. 78.

Note 2 in page 133 Hamlet. Clarendon Press Series. Introduction.

Note 1 in page 135 Chr., ii, 302. Fleay has various conjectures in regard to the other two plays, but they are, of course, avowedly conjectural.

Note 2 in page 135 The names in Collier for September 7, and 9. “Robin hoodfellowe, and Robin Goodfellow” are forgeries. See Warner's Catalogue of Dulwich. MSS.

Note 1 in page 136 See Motley's United Netherlands, iv, 67; and Camden's Anuales Elizabethae, p. 1019, where a list of twenty-four is given.

Note 2 in page 136 First 4to, 1607. For date, see Chr., 1, 59.

Note 1 in page 137 First 4to, 1607. See Chr., 1, 62.

Note 2 in page 137 Cf. ghosts in Lover's Progress, Prophetess, Humourous Lieutenant, and the story of ghost and revenge in Fletcher's Triumph of Death in Four Plays in One.

Note 1 in page 138 Thomas Kyd und sein Kreis, Chap. v.

Note 1 in page 139 Samlet. Variorum Ed., vol. ii, p. 1120.

Note 2 in page 139 Berichte über die Verhandlungen der Königlich-Sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaft zu Leipzig. 1887. p. 1. “Die Tragödie ‘Der bestrafte Brudermord oder Prinz Hamlet aus Dänemerk’ und ihre Bedeutung für die Kritik des Shakespeare'schen Hamlet.” W. Creizenach. Cf. also Die Schauspiele der Englischen Komödianten. W. Creizenach. Deutsche Nationalist.-Hist.-Krit. Ausgabe. Berlin u. Stuttgart. 1889. 23 Band. Pp. 125 seq. For a criticism of Creizenach's views, and an attempt to prove that the first quarto is the basis of the German play, cf. Shakespeare Jahrbuch. 1888. P. 224 seq. “‘ Der bestrafte Brudermord’ . . . . und sein Verhaltniss zu Shakespeare's ‘Hamlet.‘” Gustav Tanger.

Note 1 in page 140 For evidence that Kyd was the auther, see Boas, p. xlix seq.

Note 2 in page 140 Clarendon Press Hamlet, 1872, pp. x-xii.

Note 1 in page 143 Dr. Sarrazin has pointed out resemblances between the characters of Jeronimo and Polonius—both faithful servitors of their Kings—and both a little of the comic old man type; and also between Horatio and the Horatio in Hamlet. He has also noted resemblances batween the first and second scenes of Jeronimo and the second and third scenes of Hamlet.

Note 2 in page 143 Hazlitt's Dodsley's Old Plays, vol. v, to which all page numbers refer.

Note 1 in page 145 V, p. 160.

Note 2 in page 145 V, p. 152.

Note 3 in page 145 IV, p. 94.

Note 4 in page 145 II, 3, p. 85.

Note 5 in page 145 II, p. 52.

Note 6 in page 145 IV, p. 140.

Note 1 in page 146 V, p. 163.

Note 2 in page 146 V, p. 170.

Note 3 in page 146 I, p. 21.

Note 4 in page 146 II, p. 41.

Note 5 in page 146 III, p. 77.

Note 6 in page 146 IV, p. 123.

Note 7 in page 146 I, p. 21.

Note 8 in page 146 III, p. 68.

Note 9 in page 146 IV, p. 107.

Note 10 in page 146 V, p. 155.

Note 11 in page 146 IV, p. 111.

Note 12 in page 146 IV, 3.

Note 1 in page 147 In Shakespeare's Predecessors, p. 492, Mr. J. A. Symonds has noted that Lazarotto is the precursor of Flamineo and Bosola.

Note 2 in page 147 V, p. 163 seq.

Note 1 in page 148 Epistle to Greene's Menaphon.

Note 1 in page 149 Variorum, edition of Hamlet. Vol. ii, p. 1120 seq. All references will be to this translation of the German play.

Note 2 in page 149 To this extent we shall arrive at Sarrazin's conclusions; but working from a different point of view and by a different method we may hope to add some new force to these. At every step, however, I shall be obliged to repeat material used by Sarrazin in a little different way.

Note 1 in page 150 Printed 1589. “yet English Seneca read by candlelight yields manie good sentences, as Bloud is a beggar, and so foorth; and if you intreate him faire in a frostie morning, he will affoord you whole Hamlets, I should say handfulls of tragical speaches” etc.

Note 2 in page 150 Printed 1596. “a foule lubber and looks as pale as the visard of ye ghost which cried so miserably at ye theater, like a oisterwife, Hamlet revenge.”

Note 3 in page 150 Printed 1602. “My name's Hamlet's revenge.”

Note 1 in page 151 Two Dissertations on the Hamlet of Saxo Grammaticus and of Shakespear. R. G. Latham. 1872. See p. 147.

Note 2 in page 151 ii. 7, 8.

Note 3 in page 151 The Elizabethan Hamlet. John Corbin. London, 1895.

Note 1 in page 152 The ghost has none of the dignity of Andrea's ghost. He boxes the soldier's ears and opens his jaws to frighten Hamlet. Undoubtedly a good deal of this comic business was added by German players.

Note 2 in page 152 i. 1.

Note 3 in page 152 i. 4.

Note 1 in page 153 F. P. i. 6. S. T. ii. p. 41. Sarrazin has not emphasized the close connection between the two scenes, but Fleay has pointed it out. Chr. ii, p. 31.

Note 2 in page 153 It seems rather probable that in the old Hamlet the ghost spoke from beneath the stage as in the later play. We shall find “the voice in the cellarage” in Antonio's Revenge; so at any rate it was not an invention of Shakspere.

Note 3 in page 153 iii. 2.

Note 4 in page 153 Note the line “from Acheron's dark pit, come I, Maegera, hither.”

Note 5 in page 153 i. 7.

Note 6 in page 153 iii. 1 and 2.

Note 7 in page 153 iii. 5.

Note 8 in page 153 v. 3.

Note 9 in page 153 iv. 1.

Note 1 in page 154 Two Dissertations on Hamlet, etc., p. 147.

Note 1 in page 155 References will be to The Works of John Marston, edited by A. H. Bullen, vol. 1. For a discussion of the two plays, see “John Marston” von Wolfgang von Wurzbach. Shakespeare Jahrbuch, vol. xxxiii, p. 85 seq. Dr. von Wurzbach calls Antonio's Revenge “eine wüste Mischung der Spanish Tragedy und des Hamlet.” We will not try to determine, he adds, “ob dies der ‘alte Hamlet’ (von Kyd) ist, oder ob sich nicht sogar aus Antonio Beweis für die Entstehungszeit des Shakespeare'schen Hamlet ableiten liesse, den einzelne englische Kritiker schon vor 1600 aufgeführt wissen wollen.” “Shakespeare's Einfluss,” he also declares, “ist zu deutlich,” and points out resemblances to Romeo and Juliet and Lear. Equally apart from our purpose is an article in Englische Studien, vol. xxi, “John Marston als dramatiker,” by Ph. Aronstein.

Note 1 in page 158 The reflective soliloquies in the first part of Antonio and Mellida should be noticed, particularly the scene between old Andrugio and Lucio (iii. 1.). Charles Lamb has noted the resemblance of their situation to that of Lear and Kent. “Andrugio, like Lear, manifests a kind of royal impatience, a turbulent greatness, an affected resignation. The enemies which he enters lists to combat, ‘Despair and mighty Grief, and sharp Impatience’ and the Forces (Cornets of Horse, etc.) which he brings to vanish them, are in the boldest style of allegory. They are such a race of mourners as the infection of sorrows loud in the intellect might beget on some pregnant cloud in the imagination.”

Note 1 in page 159 A. R. v. 2. F. P. 1. 1. and 1. 6. Hamlet 1. 2. and v. 2. Cf. also the banquet, triumphs, masque, etc., in the Spanish Tragedy, i. 3, as well as the final scene.

Note 2 in page 159 Compare a similar bit of stage business in the Spanish Tragedy where Hieronimo bites out his tongue. v. p. 170.

Note 3 in page 159 Cf. the Malcontent and Tourneur's Revenger's Tragedy.

Note 1 in page 160 A. R. iii. 1. F. P. i. 4. Cf. also A. R. i. 1, for another scene at night with the clock striking.

Note 2 in page 160 Pandulpho is no ghost, and seems out of place.

Note 3 in page 160 iii. 1.

Note 4 in page 160 iii. 1.

Note 5 in page 160 ii. 2.

Note 6 in page 160 The many resemblances between Antonio's Revenge and the Fratricide Punished furnish corroborating evidence for the hypothesis that the latter was a translation of the old English Hamlet.

Note 7 in page 160 A. R., III, 2. F. P., III, 6.

Note 8 in page 160 III, 2, p. 156.

“And now, ye sooty coursers of the night,

Hurry your chariot into hell's black womb.

Darkness, make flight; graves, eat your dead again:

Let's repossess our shrouds. Why lags delay ?

Mount sparkling brightness, give the world his day!“

Note 1 in page 161 F. P., III, 6. A. R., III, 1. Hamlet, III, 4, 102–139.

Note 2 in page 161 F. P., V, 6. A. R., IV, 1.

Note 3 in page 161 Q1, 1. 1822. Samlet, IV, 7, 167.

Note 4 in page 161 One passage in the report of Antonio's death (IV, 1) directly recalls the report of Ophelia's death in the Fratricide Punished.

“Distraught and raving, from a turret's top,

He threw his body in the swollen sea.“

F. P., V, 6. “Ophelia went up a high hill, and threw herself down, and killed herself.” Cf. also the Spanish Tragedy, V, p. 150:

“Marry thus, moved with remorse of his misdeeds;

Kan to a mountain top and hung himself.“

The hanging is the fate of Bruser, one of the corresponding characters in the novel of Soliman and Persida, but the running to a mountain top is Kyd's addition.

Note 5 in page 161 A. R., IV, 2.

Note 1 in page 162 A. R., II, 2, Rich. III, I, 2. Not in the dumb show in Fratricide Punished.

Note 2 in page 162 Cf. Hamlet's “I must be idle.” III, 2, 85.

Note 3 in page 162 A. R., V, 1. S. T., IV, p. 123.

Note 4 in page 162 Jeronimo. Dodsley 1825 ed. I, 3, p. 63.

“Jer. Peace. Who comes here ? News. News, Isabella.

Is. What news, Jeronimo ?

Jer. Strange news:

Lorenzo has become an honest man.

Is. Is that your wondrous news ?

Jer. Is it not wondrous

To have honesty in hell:“ etc.

A. R., II, 2, p. 137.

“Ant. Hark ye; I'll tell you wondrous strange, strange news.

Maria. What, my good boy, stark mad ?

Anl. I am not.

Maria. Alas !

Is that strange news ?

Ant. Strange news? Why, mother, is't not wondrous strange.

I am not mad—I am not frantic, ha ?“ etc.

Note 1 in page 163 A. R., III, 1. F. P., III, 2.

Note 2 in page 163 A. R., III, 1. “No, not so.

This shall be sought for; I'll force him feed on life

Till he shall loath it. This shall be the close

Of vengeance' strain.“

Note 3 in page 163 A. R., III, 1. F. P., III, 5. S. T., V, p. 170. The murder of Julio is possibly intended to be excused by the frenzy which possesses Antonio.

Note 4 in page 163 S. T., IV, p. 123. A. R., II, 1. Hamlet reads a book in both the first and second quartos.

Note 5 in page 163 S. T., I, p. 21. A. R., IV, 2. Cf. also Antonio and Mellida, Part I, IV, 1, where Andrugio in the midst of a soliloquy throws himself on the ground; in the same scene Antonio falls on the ground twice. This soliloquizing from the floor was in fact common in early plays.

Note 6 in page 163 A. R., IV, 1. S. T., III, p. 90.

Note 7 in page 163 A. R., I, 1. S. T., I, p. 52.

Note 8 in page 163 S. T., last scene.

Note 9 in page 163 A. R., IV, 2. S. T., II, p. 41. IV, p. 111.

Note 1 in page 164 Where the queen is more obviously guiltless than in the final Hamlet.

Note 1 in page 165 II, 2, pp. 137, 138. IV, 1, passim.

Note 2 in page 165 IV, 1.

Note 3 in page 165 The Works of John Manton. Edited by A. H. Bullen, B. A. Vol. 1. Introduction, pp. xxvi and xxvii.

Note 1 in page 166 Antonio and Mellida. Part 1. III, 1.

Note 2 in page 166 See Bullen's edition of Manton. Vol. 1. Introd., p. xxiv seq.

Note 3 in page 166 The Influence of Seneca on Elizabethan Tragedy. J. W. Cunliffe, London, 1893, p. 68 seq.

Note 1 in page 167 Introduction to A. and M., 1st part. Matzagente, “a modern braggadoch,” is thus ridiculed:

“Rampum, scramputo, mount tufty Tamburlaine !

What rattling thunderclap breaks from his lips ? “

In A. R., II, 2, Antonio says:

“Madam, I will not swell like a tragedian.”

Again, A. R., I, 2, Pandulpho asks:

“Would'st have me cry, run raving up and down

For my son's loss? Would'st have me turn rank mad

Or wring my face with mimic action;

Stamp, curse, weep, rage, and then my bosom strike ?

Away, 'tis aspish action, player-like.“

Marston seems to he ridiculing the extravagancies of passion which his own work exhibits in abundance.

Note 1 in page 168 Prologue to Antonio and Mellida. Part ii.

Note 2 in page 168 New Variorum Edition of Hamlet. Vol. ii. Appendix. All line numbers refer to this text.

Note 1 in page 169 Most important, perhaps, is the introduction of the scene in which Hamlet repulses Ophelia in the middle of Act II, scene 2 of Q1.

Note 1 in page 171 The Two Hamlets. Atlantic Monthly, October, 1881. Reprinted in the Bankside Shakespeare. Vol. xi.

Note 2 in page 171 In Q1 in soliloquy four, Hamlet is introduced “pouring upon a book” just as Hieronimo and Antonio enter reading when they begin their soliloquies. The appearance of this theatrical convention (which is not in Q2) suggests that it may go back to the early Hamlet and that the soliloquy may have had an original form in the early play. In any case this introduction of the soliloquy by Hamlet's reading is probably not as Mr. White took it, a ridiculous mistake of a “Fluellen of Pirates.” Cf. Bankside Shakespeare. Vol. xi, p. cxxxiv.

Note 3 in page 171 Even the addition in Q2, “'Tis now the very witching time of night,” etc., is a bit of conventional phrasing, if not suggested by the old play.

Note 1 in page 172 Knight's Introductory Notice to Hamlet, quoted in the New Variorum Edition of Hamlet. Vol. ii, p. 18.

Note 2 in page 172 Another passage may be noted. The passage in the final Hamlet beginning, “I have of late—but wherefore I know not—lost all my mirth,” appears in Q1 (11. 958–961) in this form:

“Yes, faith, this (great) world you see contents me not,

No nor the spangled heavens, nor earth, nor sea,

(No) nor man that is so glorious a creature,

Contents not me, no nor woman too, though you laugh.“

The two omissions indicated and a slight change in the fourth line make this into blank verse of a sort. One may surmise that the shorthand reporter was trying to transcribe verse. He could hardly have been listening to or recalling Shakspere's prose.

Note 3 in page 172 Q1 1. 33 and l. 94. F. P., I, 1 and 2.

Note 1 in page 173 Q1 l. 30. F. P., I. 3.

Note 2 in page 173 Q1 l. 402. F. P., I, 4. A. R., III, 1.

Note 3 in page 173 Q1 l. 401. F. P., I, 4.

Note 4 in page 173 Q1 l. 466 seq. F. P., I, 5. A. R., III, 1.

Note 5 in page 173 Q1 l. 490. F. P., I, 5. A. R., III, 1. S. T., IV, p. 124.

Note 6 in page 173 Q1 l. 612. F. P., I, 6. S. T., IV, p. 124.

Note 7 in page 173 Q1 l. 591. F. P., I, 6. S. T., II, 41.

Note 8 in page 173 Q1 592 seq. F. P., I, 6. A. R., III, 1.

Note 9 in page 173 Q1 l. 1501. F. P., III, 6. A. R., III, 2.

Note 10 in page 173 Q1 l. 1260 seq. F. P., II, 8. S. T., V, end.

Note 11 in page 173 Q1 l. 1018 seq. F. P., II, 7. S. T., V, p. 152.

Note 12 in page 173 One or two verbal similarities may be noticed. In the Fratricide Punished (II, 9), Hamlet tells Corambus: “Their theatre is a little world wherein they represent nearly all that happens in the great world.” Apparently the original Hamlet contained some passage to suggest the lines in Q1 (1084):

“I tell you they are the chronicles

And brief abstracts of the time.“

“Comedy” is substituted for “tragedy” in the final Hamlet. In this connection it may be mentioned that the allusion to feathers in the actors' hats - in Hamlet (III, 2, 85) occurs in F. P. (II, 7).

Note 1 in page 174 Q1 l. 329 seq. F. P., I, 7. Jer., I, 2. See also Atheist's Tragedy, I, 2.

Note 2 in page 174 Q1 l. 837 seq. F. P., II, 4. See Mr. Corbin's The Elizabethan Hamlet.

Note 3 in page 174 F. P., III, 9, 11. IV, 7. Cf. S. T., pp. 94 ff., 154 ff.

Note 4 in page 174 Q1 l. 1822. F.P., V, 6. A. R., IV, 1.

Note 5 in page 174 For an example of the mad girl ante-dating Q1, see Lyly's A Woman in the Moon, Act V, where Pandora sings and talks incoherently and childishly.

Note 1 in page 175 Q1 l. 1424 seq. F. P., III, 2. A. R., III, 1.

Note 2 in page 175 Q1 l. 1445 seq.

Note 3 in page 175 A. R., III, 2. S. T., V, 144 seq.

Note 4 in page 175 Q1 l. 1457 seq.

Note 5 in page 175 A. R., III, 1.

Note 6 in page 175 Q1 l. 2017 seq.

Note 7 in page 175 Q1 l. 1469 seq.

Note 8 in page 175 Q1 l. 140 seq.; l. 727 seq.

Note 9 in page 175 Q1 l. 140; l. 2056.

Note 10 in page 175 Q1 l. 173 seq.

Note 11 in page 175 Q1 l. 2050 seq.

Note 12 in page 175 Q1 l. 400.

Note 13 in page 175 Q1 l. 809.

Note 14 in page 175 Cf. Corbin's The Elizabethan Hamlet, p. 15.

Note 1 in page 176 Cf. Boas., xlix seq.

Note 1 in page 177 Hazlitt's edition of Dodsley's Old Plays, Vol. 5, to which page numbers refer. These additions are in a style very different from that of Jonson's comedies written at about the same time (1601), hence some have questioned his authorship. The evidence of Henslow's diary, however, seems decisive.

Note 1 in page 178 A. R., III, 1.

Note 2 in page 178 A. and M., V, 1. The resemblance is unmistakable, but Johnson's treatment is so much more elevated and elaborate that one would say the scene in Antonio and Mellida was a burlesque on Jonson. The evidence, however, is decisive that Antonia and Mellida was the earlier.

Note 1 in page 180 Symonds suggests that Shakspere was thinking of this retort when he wrote.

“I loved Ophelia; forty thousand brothers

Could not with all their quantity of love

Make up my sum.“

Shakespeare's Predecessors, p. 498.

Note 2 in page 180 Shakespeare's Predecessors, p. 494.

Note 1 in page 181 I think it is owing to this fact that passages here and there in Jonson's additions recall Handel. I doubt if there was specific imitation or even reminiscence on either side.

Note 2 in page 181 “Chettle's Hoffman und Shakspere's Hamlet.” Nicolaus Delius. Shakespeare Jahrbuch, ix, 166 ff. 1874. Reprinted in Abhandlungen zu Shakspere, Eibenfeld, 1878. R. Ackermann, in a careful edition of the play, has also briefly considered the connection between the two plays and agrees with the conclusion of Delius. The Tragedy of Hoffman. Bamberg, 1894.

Note 1 in page 182 The fact that the closest parallelisms exist with King John and Titus Andronicus suggests that Chettle was in the main using old conventions. The trouble with the arguments of Professor Delius is that he constantly relies on the assumption that whenever the slightest parallelism occurs between Shakspere and another writer it indicates imitation of Shakspere. For example, note his induction from the fact that in Hoffman Lorrique proposes to strangle the duchess with a napkin—“This almost justifies the conjecture (lässt beinahe vermuthen) that in December, 1602, when Chettle was writing his drama, Shakspere's Othello may have been on the stage.”

Note 2 in page 182 The use of disguises in the play is paralleled in many earlier plays, and the disguise of a hermit seems probably suggested by two plays in which it served an important part, the Blind Beggar of Alexandria, and Look About You.

Note 1 in page 183 The Tragedy of Hoffman, etc. London, 1831. First quarto. The Tragedy, etc., ed. Richard Ackermann. Bamberg, 1894. Line references are given to Ackermann's edition, but my quotations were taken from the first quarto, with some obvious corrections and modernizing I have not seen the edition of 1851 by H(enry) B(arrett) L(ennard). It is described and frequently quoted by Ackermann.

Note 2 in page 183 The sources have not been determined. See Ackermann, xvii.

Note 1 in page 184 IV, 1617 ff.

Note 2 in page 185 The suspended body recalls the corpses exhibited in the Spanish Tragedy, II, p. 52, and V, end; and the similar exhibition of Feliche's body in Antonio's Revenge, I, 2. Thunder and lightning interrupt Hoffman's speech; so in Fratricide Punished, III, 6, it lightens when the ghost comes on the stage.

Note 3 in page 185 Hoff., I, 1, 72 ff.

Note 4 in page 185 S. T., II, p. 41. F. P., I, 6. A. R., IV, 2.

Note 1 in page 186 Hoff., I, 2, 260.

Note 2 in page 186 Wittenberg is not infrequently referred to in Elizabethan literature. See Lyly's Euphues, ed. Arber, p. 148; and Marston's Faustus, sc. 14.

Note 3 in page 186 Hoff., I, 2, 320. See also V, 1720.

Note 4 in page 186 Hoff., II, 1, 447. Hamlet, V, 2, 305.

Note 5 in page 186 F. P., V, 3.

Note 6 in page 186 Hoff., III, 2. Much Ado, III, 3. Endy., IV, 2. S. T., III, p. 79. The Dumb Knight, Dodsley, X, p. 182. See also the Famous Victories of Henry V, sc. 2, and the old Leir, act V. The scene in Hoffman with “the rabble of poor soldiers” (III, 2) has a little similarity to the burlesque of Falstaff's army and to the insurrection of Laertes, as noted by Ackermann.

It is a comic treatment of a popular insurrection such as occurs in Julius Cæsar and Henry VI, part 2.

Note 7 in page 186 Hoff., IV, 2, 1556.

Note 8 in page 186 Hoff., V, 1. Hamlet, Q1, 1. 1962. A. R., IV, 2.

Note 9 in page 186 Hoff., IV, 3.

Note 10 in page 186 Delius notes King John, III, 1. Cf. S. T., I, p. 21. A. R., III, 2. I, A. and M., IV, 1. Hoffman, I, 131; III, 1029.

Note 1 in page 187 Hoff., v, 2.

Note 2 in page 187 Ackermann has noted that one of Delius' resemblances rests on a stage direction added by H. B. L. in the edition of 1851. See Ackermann's note to l. 957. Delius also notes the resemblance (certainly, very slight) between Lodowick's placing his head on Lucibella's knee and Hamlet's conduct before the play, and a few trivial verbal similarities. Ackermann has added a number of other verbal parallels (p. xxii) which show the same careful observation which he has applied with better effect to his editing of the text. A few may be noted to illustrate the absurdities which usually result from this kind of criticism.

“A little more than kin, and less than kind.” Hand., I, 2, 65.

“But thou art even kilt after kind.” Hoff., I, 4, 70.

“And what's untimely done.” Hand., IV, 1, 40.

“In memory of his untimely fall.” Hoff., V, 1874.

The occurrence in both plays of the words “hobby horse” and “strumpet” is also noted as an indication of imitation. The latter word in Hamlet is applied to Fortune, in Hoffman to Lucibella. The name Lorrique is also paralleled with Yorick. As Ackermann says—“Diese Vergleichungen Hessen sich noch vielfach vermehren.”

Note 3 in page 187 Hoff., IV, 1. A. R., III, 1.

Note 4 in page 187 Hoff, I, 2269.

Note 5 in page 187 Hoff., IV, 3.

Note 6 in page 187 V, 2204.

Note 1 in page 188 Hoff., V, 2. S. T., II, p. 85. A. R., IV, 1.

Note 2 in page 188 The scene (V, 3) has also, as Delius notes, a close resemblance to the scene between Tamora and Aaron. Titus Andronicus, II, 3.

Note 3 in page 188 Hoff., IV, 1. The reference to flowers recalls Ophelia in the German play as well as in the Hamlets of the quartos. Cf. also S. T., IV, p. 94. Cf. Ackermann, p. xxii.

Note 4 in page 188 [sings] “I'm poor and yet have things

And gold rings, all amidst the leaves green, a—

Lord, how d'y'e.—“Well ? I thank God! Why that's well!

And you my lord, and you, too !—ne'er a one weep ?

Must I shed all the tears?“

Her method of addressing each in return may be compared with Ophelia's manner in F. P., IV, 7. Cf. also her talk with that of Isabella. S. T., IV, p. 94.

Note 1 in page 189 F. P., III, 11.

Note 2 in page 189 F. P., IV, 6. Hoff., 1537–8.

Note 3 in page 189 Hoff., V, 1.

Note 4 in page 189 Cf. Hamlet, IV, 5, 170, and Q1, 1711, where Ophelia refers to this burden, which seems to have been a familiar one.

Note 1 in page 190 For another instance of the mad girl in an earlier play, cf. Pandora in Act V of Lyly's The Woman in the Moon. She talks childishly and sings snatches.

Note 2 in page 190 Neverthess, Delius says that Lucibella is a slavish copy of Ophelia. His error comes, I think, from his point of view, which the following quotation will sufficiently illustrate. “Die Frage, die allein hier zur Entscheidung kommen muss, wenn wir, wie H. B. L. thut, einmal von allen sonstigen Aehnlichkeiten zwischen Shakespeare's Hamlet und Chettle's Hoffman absehen wollen, kann nur die sein: Welcher Wahnsinn, der der Ophelia oder der der Lucibella, ist besser motivirt, mit feinerer psychologischer Berechnung von dem betr. Dichter herbeigeführt worden ?”

Note 1 in page 191 H. L. B. in his edition of Hoffman (quoted by Delius) thinks it hard to decide whether Ophelia or Lucibella was the original. “While the character of Ophelia neither contributes to nor advances the progress of the tragedy and is entirely episodical, Lucibella, in her fit of madness, is made the unconscious instrument by which the denouement of the tragedy is promoted.”

Note 2 in page 191 The wide variation of his treatment from that of Lyly or Kyd or Shakspere suggests that such mad scenes were not uncommon. At all events the mad girl has had since then a notable career on the stage and in fiction; and Chettle's lead has often been followed. For an example of the insane girl in situations very similar to those in Hoffman, see The Drunkard, or The Fallen Saved. Boston, 1847. This play was first produced at the Boston Museum, February 12, 1844; and is still sometimes acted in this country. The mad girl, Agnes, like Lucibella, taunts the villain, Cribbs (Act I, sc. 3), and later discloses his villany (V, 1) and brings about the happy ending. She also sings and talks childishly. The author especially disclaims any originality for Agnes or Cribbs; and it is my impression that situations closely paralleling those of Lucibella are still rather common in melodrama. For a somewhat similar use of a mad girl in modern fiction, compare Matilde in Mr. Gilbert Parker's the Seats of the Mighty.

Note 1 in page 192 Note his speech to Otho whom he is about to murder (I, 1) and the speech in which he begs Ferdinand to pardon the people (III, 2); his sympathetic replies to Lucibella's taunts (IV, 1); and his approval of Mathias' determination to be Lucibella's guardian—“a virtuous and noble resolution.” In III, 1, he declares, “There is villany, practice, and villany;” the villany being, of course, entirely of his own manufacture.

Note 2 in page 192 See the dying speech of Lodowick, III, 1.

Note 1 in page 193 See title-page of 1631 quarto, which states that it was acted with great applause at the Phoenix.

Note 2 in page 193 The Mermaid Series. Webster and Tourneur. Page references will be to this edition.

Note 1 in page 194 A. T., V, 2.

Note 1 in page 195 I, 2, p. 250–251 (Mermaid ed.).

“We have obtained it—ominous! in what ?” etc.

Note 2 in page 195 IV, 3, p. 314–315.

“Why dost thou stare upon me ? Thou art not —”

Note 3 in page 195 V, 1, 323 seq.

“Cease that harsh music. We are not pleased with it.”

Note 4 in page 195 V, 2, p. 336.

“There was the strength of natural understanding.”

Note 1 in page 196 III, 1, p.292.

“Of all men's griefs must mine be singular ?”

Note 2 in page 196 IV, 3, p. 307, 308.

“How fit a place for contemplation is this dead of night.”

Note 3 in page 196 A. T., II, 6.

Note 4 in page 196 See Hoff., I, 1. F. P., III, 6.

Note 5 in page 196 See Hoff., IV, 2.

Note 6 in page 196 His speech, II, 6, p. 286, recalls some of Hamlet's meditations.

Note 1 in page 197 A. T., III, 2.

Note 2 in page 197 A. T., V, 1.

Note 3 in page 197 IV, 3.

Note 4 in page 197 IV, 3, p. 314.

“Why dost thou stare upon me ? Thou art not

The soul of him I murdered. What hast thou

To do to vex my conscience ? Sure thou wert

The head of a most doggèd usurer,

Th' art so uncharitable . . . .“ etc.

This soliloquy of D'Amville's is at least boldly imaginative; for example:

“The trembling motion of an aspen leaf

Would make me, like the shadow of that leaf,

Lie shaking under 't.“

Note 1 in page 198 The churchyard scene in Antonio's Revenge, III, 1, offers some resemblances.

Note 2 in page 198 A. T., II, 4, p. 278 seq.

Note 3 in page 198 A. T., II, 1. A. R., V, 1. See also wedding celebration at end of Spanish Trugedy and banquet scenes in Hamlet.

Note 4 in page 198 A.T., IV, 3, and IV, 5.

Note 5 in page 198 A. T., IV, 2; IV, 3; and IV, 5.

Note 6 in page 198 A. T., IV, 5.

Note 7 in page 198 A. T., III, 1.

Note 8 in page 198 Hoff., IV, 1.

Note 9 in page 198 A. T., I, 2. Jer., I, 2. Ham., I, 3.

Note 10 in page 198 A. T., IV, 3.

Note 11 in page 198 In II, 4, p. 279, as well as on appearance of ghost, II, 6.

Note 12 in page 198 A. T., V, 2.

Note 13 in page 198 A. T., IV, 3.

Note 1 in page 200 See D'Amville's two speeches in the last scene, beginning

“Whether it be thy art or nature, I

Admire thee, Charlemont.“

And “There was the strength of natural understanding.”

Note 1 in page 202 It is interesting to glance at the opinions held by Shakspere's contemporaries about Hamlet. Allusions to Shakspere have been fortunately collected in Shakespeare's Centurie of Prayse (N. S. S., series iv, 2) and Fresh Allusions to Shakspere (N. S. S., iv, 3). Fifteen allusions to Hamlet before 1642 are noted in the first volume, and thirty additional allusions in the second; of these forty-five, twenty-one (C. of P., pp. 73, 171, 185; F. A., pp. 12, 27, 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 39, 53, 61, 99, 105, 112, 113, 116, 12p, 130, 151 (?)) are verbal reminiscences, some of them very doubtful, some certainly familiar phrases, all very slight. Taken together they may illustrate the undoubted popularity of Hamlet, but they do not bear any definite testimony in regard to contemporary appreciation of the play. Three others (F. A., pp. 41, 85, 98*) are bits of Ophelia's songs, and one (F. A., p. 26) a similar bit of talk about rue and rosemary. Curiously the editors seem to have overlooked Hoffman, which would have furnished similar parallelisms; we have already seen that Ophelia's songs and bits of mad talk cannot be surely credited to Shakspere's invention. Three other references (C. of P., p. 187, F. A., 11, 72), including the scene in the Atheists Tragedy, are churchyard scenes: two (C. of P., pp. 67, 79) are mere mentions of the play; one (F. A., p. 80) is a quotation; and one (F. A., p. 335), “A trout, hamlet with foure legs,” is hard to explain.

Thirteen allusions are left to supply us with evidence of the character of the contemporary estimate of the play. Of these, five (C. of P., pp., 66, 69, 72, 117, F. A., 29) are burlesques of passages in Hamlet; six (C. of P., pp. 66, 72, 135, 159, 160, F. A., p. 102) allude to the ghost, four in particular to the business in the cellar; three (C. of P., 64, F. A., 52, 55) allude to Hamlet's madness; and three (C. of P., 131, 160, F. A., 55) couple Hamlet with Hieronimo. In these allusions, Hamlet was looked upon as a popular ghost play, in which the dodging about of the ghost was especially noticeable; as a play to be placed beside old Hieronimo; and as a play whose popularity warranted a little pleasant burlesque. So far as Hamlet's character is touched upon at all, his salient features seem to have been his madness and furious action.

The evidence of these few allusions is not very conclusive. They do, however, indicate that Hamlet was famous as a play dealing with revenge and a ghost, and they do not hint that it seemed to differ greatly from other revenge plays. There is no appreciation of its artistic significance.

Note 1 in page 207 See Act I, sc. 2.

Note 1 in page 208 William Shakspere, p. 255.

Note 1 in page 211 Q1, l. 1532.

Queen. “But as I have a soul I swear by heaven

I never knew of this most horrid murder.“

Note 1 in page 212 S. T., II, p. 95.

Note 2 in page 212 A. R., I, 1.

Note 3 in page 212 Q1, l. 669.

Note 4 in page 212 III, 1, 160, 161.

Note 1 in page 213 At least, so Jonson's Hieronimo after discovering the murdered Horatio.

Note 1 in page 215 III, 4, 205–210. Not in 1623 folio, nor in Q1.

Note 1 in page 216 III, 2, 405. Cf. The Atheist's Tragedy, IV, 3. D'Amville in the midst of a midnight soliloquy says:

“I could now commit

A murder were it but to drink the fresh

Warm blood of him I murdered. . . .“

Ashley H. Thorndike.