Page 359 - Hamlet: The Cambridge Dover Wilson Shakespeare

*5* NOTE S 5.2.

of the English short sword; my Introd. to the same;
Egerton Castle's Schools and Idas ters of Fence, 1892; and
corresp. in T.L.S. Jan. 11, r8, 25, Feb. 1, 1934.
223. S.D. Johnson reads 'King puts the hand of
Laertes into the hand of Hamlet.'
229. nature, honour and exception i.e. filial duty (cf.
00
note 4. 5. 161-63), g ^ name, and personal dislike.
230. / here proclaim was madness Dr Johnson and
others take this to be a falsehood. Bradley (pp. 420-21)
excuses it on the ground that there is' no moral difference
.. .between feigning insanity and asserting it.' E.E.Stoll
{Art and Artifice in Sh. p. 120) declares that Ham.'s
explanation contradicts that given to Hor. at 11. 75-80.
I believe the two passages are not inconsistent and that
Ham. means what he says, which is not that he is insane
but merely that he is subject to fits of madness. Cf.
Introd. p. Ixiv and notes 3. 1. 137-52; 3. 4. 107, 180;
5. I. 278. If there is a suspicion of falsehood or decep-
tion, our sympathy with Ham. (which at this moment
of the play Sh. is most concerned to enlist) is weakened.
242-44. in nature.. .honour Cf. note 1. 229 above.
'Ham. has referred to "nature" and "honour"; Laer.
replies to each point' (Dowden). He also deals
(hypocritically) with 'exception' in 11. 248-50. But
Ham.'s frank statement and affectionate appeal, and his
own treacherous reply make him uncomfortable, as is
clear from 1. 294.
244-48. in my terms of honour.. .name uxgared
Laer. is not speaking idly; in an age when a gentleman's
'honour' was as important (even financially) as a busi-
ness man's 'honesty' is in ours, some kind of formal
acquittal was a necessary precaution. Further, his
reference to the decision of 'some elder masters' was
ace. to custom; cf. Saviolo {op. cit. note 1. 222 S.D.,
sig.Aa, 4r):
Touching all such matters whereon anye controuersie or
dissencion maye growe, men ought specially to beware, not