the Plays performed by them during the same period" (London, 1865). The English Comedians' in all probability carried their play to Germany towards the end of the XVI. Century, when a rough German translation was made; but the earliest record of a performance of Hamlet a Prinz in Dennemarck, by " the English actors" belongs to the year 1626.*

66

The intrinsic value of Fratricide Punished is small indeed, but two points of historical interest are noteworthy:-(i.) Polonius, as in the First Quarto, is here represented by Corambus, and (ii.) a prologue precedes the play, the persons represented therein being Night, Alecto, Thisiphone, Miegera. A strong case can, I think, be made out for the view that this thoroughly Senecan Prologue represents a fragment of the pre-Shakespearian play to which Nash and others made allusion: herein lies the chief merit of this soulless and coarse production.

Date of Composition. This question has been indirectly touched upon in the previous paragraphs, and it follows from what has been said that the date of revision, as represented by the Second Quarto, may be fixed at about 1603, while the First Quarto, judging by the entry in the Stationers' Books, belongs to about 1601; at all events a version of Hamlet, recognised as Shakespeare's, was in existence before 1602. It is significant that the play is not mentioned in Meres' Palladis Tamia, 1598. In the matter of the date of the play "the traveling of the players" (Act II. Sc. ii., 343, etc.) is of interest. It must be noted that we have three different forms of the passage in question:-(i.) the reason for the 'travelling'

* In connection with the subject of Hamlet, one must not forget the visit of Lord Leicester's servants to Denmark in 1585; Kempe, Bryan, and Pope, three of the company, subsequently joined the Chamberlain's company, and were actors in Shakespeare's plays. Shakespeare's remarkable knowledge of Danish manners and customs may have been derived from these friends of his.

in Quarto I is the popularity of a Company of Children; (ii.) in Quarto 2 their inhibition comes by the means of the late innovation"; (iii.) in the Folio (the reading in the text) both causes (i.) and (ii.) are combined.

Now it is known that (i.) in 1601 Shakespeare's Company was in disgrace, perhaps because of its share in the Essex Conspiracy; (ii.) that during this year the Children of the Chapel Royal were acting at Blackfriars; (iii.) that towards the end of the year the Globe Company were "travelling." Two views are possible, either that "inhibition" is used technically for "a prohibition of theatrical performances by authority"; and innovation' = 'the political innovation,' or that inhibition=' non-residence,' and 'innovation' refers to the Company of Children (vide Halliwell-Phillipps's Outlines of the Life of Shakespeare; Fleay's Chronicle History of the London Stage).

Over and above these points of evidence in fixing the date there is the intimate connection of Hamlet and Julius Cæsar.*

The Source of the Story. The ultimate source of the plot of Hamlet is the Historia Danica of Saxo Grammaticus (i.e. the Lettered'), Denmark's first writer of importance, who lived at the close of the twelfth century.t Saxo's Latinity was much admired, and even Erasmus wondered "how a Dane at that day could have such a force of eloquence." Epitomes in Latin and Low-German were made during the fifteenth century, and Saxo's materials were utilised in various ways, until at length

* Vide Preface to Julius Cæsar.

There is an allusion to Hamlet in Icelandic literature some two hundred years before Saxo; and to this day "Amlothe" (i.e. Hamlet) is synonymous with 'fool' among the folk there. The history of Hamlet in Iceland' is of great interest (vide the Ambalessaga, edited by the present writer, by David Nutt). According to Zinzow and others the Saga is originally a nature-myth (vide Die Hamletsage).

the first printed edition appeared in the year 1514; a second was issued in 1534, and a third in 1576. The tale of Hamlet, contained in the third and fourth books, is certainly the most striking of all Saxo's mythical herostories, quite apart from its Shakespearian interest, and Goethe, recognising its dramatic possibilities, thought of treating the subject dramatically on the basis of Saxo's narrative. It is noteworthy that already in the fifteenth century the story was well known throughout the North, "trolled far and wide in popular song"; but its connexion with the English drama was due to the French version given in Belleforest's Histoires Tragiques; the Hamlet story first apeared in the fifth volume, published in 1570, and again in 1581, 1582, 1591, etc. A blackletter English rendering is extant, but the date of the unique copy is 1608, and in certain points shows the influence of the play. There is no evidence that an earlier English version existed. The author of the preShakespearian Hamlet, and Shakespeare too, may well have read the story in Belleforest's Histoires.* Few studies in literary origins are more instructive than to examine how the rich barbarous tale" of the Danish historian has become transformed into the great soultragedy of modern literature. In Saxo's Amleth we have at least the frame-work of Shakespeare's Hamlet:-the murder of the father by a zealous uncle; the mother's incestuous marriage with the murderer; the son's feigned madness in order to execute revenge; these are the vague originals of Ophelia and Polonius; the meeting of mother and son; the voyage to England; all these familiar elements are found in the old tale. But the ghost, the play-scene, and the culmination of the play in the death of the hero as well as of the objects of his revenge, these

66

*To Mr. Oliver Elton, Prof. York Powell, and the Folk-Lore Society, we owe the first English rendering of the mythical portion of Saxo's work, and a valuable study of Saxo's sources (published by David Nutt, 1894).

are elements which belong essentially to the machinery of the Elizabethan Drama of vengeance. It is of course unnecessary to dwell on the subtler distinction between the easily understood Amleth and 'the eternal problem' of Hamlet.* Taine has said that the Elizabethan Renaissance was a Renaissance of the Saxon genius; from this point of view it is significant that its crowning glory should be the presentment of a typical Northern hero,— an embodiment of the Northern character;

“dark and true and tender is the North.”

* A resumé of Hamlet criticism is given in Vol. II. of Furness' noble edition of the play (London and Philadelphia, 1877).

Critical Comments.

I.

Argument.

I. Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, is advised by the sentinels of the royal castle of Kronborg, at Elsinore, that an apparition strongly resembling his dead father had appeared on the battlements. Hamlet therefore resolves to encounter the spirit and learn from it, if possible, the true cause of his father's taking-off, about which the Prince has had many suspicions. He meets the Ghost at its next nightly visitation, and in an interview with it his worst fears are confirmed. The late King's brother Claudius, who has ascended the throne and wedded the widowed Queen, has poisoned the King while he slept. Hamlet is enjoined to secrecy and revenge, and the Ghost vanishes.

II. Because of the news and of the dread task to which he is commissioned, Hamlet is seized with a species of madness, largely feigned, whereby he may cloak his designs. He writes incoherent and passionate letters to his lady-love, Ophelia, daughter of Polonius, a court dignitary. At this juncture a company of strolling players arrives at the castle and at Hamlet's suggestion a certain play is given before the King and Queen and members of the court.

III. The play deals with the murder of a Venetian duke, whose wife afterwards weds the murderer. The story closely resembles the circumstances of the King of Denmark's demise. During the play Hamlet is intent not upon the players but upon the countenance and actions of his uncle. The latter, as if struck with a