Barkov's Hamlet: a Tragedy of Errors

William Shakespeare authorship:
The text of Hamlet contains indications that Shakespeare portrayed himself as an allegedly dead university graduate.

HAMLET: A TRAGEDY OF ERRORS,
OR THE TRAGICAL FATE OF WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE? by Alfred Barkov

To the contents

When the text of
William Shakespeare: a mask for Hamlet - Christopher Marlowe?
William Shakespeare
Hamlet is read attentively, and no details are disregarded, it becomes evident that William Shakespeare included in it something quite different from what has been traditionally interpreted. According to the text, prince Hamlet was not a son to king Hamlet, king Hamlet has never been poisoned, pregnant Ophelia was drowned by prince Hamlet's half-brother. Though that might sound odd, the facts Shakespeare included in the text suggest that the plot of Hamlet has been perceived erroneously.

In what we traditionally consider to be the plot of Hamlet, there exist multiple contradictions and discrepancies which cannot be explained within the established interpretation. Even the age of the hero is not known for sure: Hamlet of the Act I is around twenty while in the Act V he appears to be thirty years old.

If we really rate Shakespeare's talent that highly as we use to proclaim, we have to exercise a different approach to the contradictions in Hamlet. That is, they must be treated as composition means intended by Shakespeare as integral parts of the structure of Hamlet. Attentive reading suggests that the contradictions reflect a sophisticated structure with two plots both containing seemingly the same cast of characters factually possessing with different biographies.

Though the real plot of Hamlet as it was intended by Shakespeare can be comprehended without employment of any theory, there was necessary to develop a version of Literary Theory capable to address the problems of decoding and describing the inner structure of special class of fiction called menippeah. Despite that Hamlet belongs to that class, in my paper, I avoided plunging into the issues of literary theory because the hidden content of any menippeah can be perceived with just attentive reading, Shakespeare's Hamlet being no exception.

Menippeah is different from the three known classes of fiction: the epics, the lyrics, and the drama. It employs a specific way of narrating widely used even in everyday communication (when irony is intended.) The principal structural feature of the 'mysterious' works including Hamlet is a special composition function of special characters, the Narrators with biased attitude towards the events they recount. According to Shakespeare's intention, the whole text of Hamlet is narrated by one of the characters who is Hamlet's half-brother, though we erroneously perceive him as if he were Shakespeare himself.

The nature of the contradictions is explained with the fact that the text of Hamlet contains two different plots, the one depicting the 'real' events in Elsinore (the prosaic passages), and the other being the text of the drama staged in the castle (the pentameter portion.) The plot of the staged pentameter drama features the 'real' persons with changed biographies. That is, the prince's age is twenty within the plot of the staged drama while the 'real' Hamlet who instructs the actors and watches and comments that drama is thirty. Moreover, it appears that he is king Hamlet's son only within the plot of the 'inner' drama. In 'reality', he is a son to king Fortinbras killed by his brother on the very day prince Hamlet was born. This feature was openly manifested in the First Quarto while in the Second Quarto as well as in the Folio it became disguised, and to reveal it, it's necessary to compare facts included in the text and apply some logic.

The character whom Shakespeare made to narrate the text had many reasons to conceal the truth; what has been apprehended as the content of Shakespeare's drama is actually the Narrator's faked account of the events in which he played an evil role.

As the paper is in Russian, I have made an attempt to produce a short summary of every chapter in English (see the Contents.) Below is a summary of the content of Hamlet as it appears when all details of the text are treated as having composition significance intended by Shakespeare.
WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE.
HAMLET: A SUMMARY OF THE CONTENT

Despite outstanding efforts, in the four centuries of the existence of Hamlet there has hardly been achieved any significant success in the apprehension of its content. On the contrary, new contradictions and absurdities are still being revealed in the famous plot. To be more precise, in what has been considered to be the plot of Shakespeare's Hamlet. As it has been established, the plot of Hamlet does not exist as a singular entity.
The contradictions in Hamlet were intended by Shakespeare

Due to wrong comprehension of what is believed to be the plot of Hamlet, even the 'simplest' contradictions have not yet been explained. One of them is the famous discrepancy concerning Hamlet's age: from the first act it is evident that he hardly should be more than twenty, while in the fifth act Hamlet's age is distinctly stated as thirty. Contents

I would like to outline here one more startling paradox which I am afraid has never been scrutinized in scholarly essays. It goes on the scene with the gravedigger which sometimes is labeled as meaningless for the comprehension of the content of Hamlet (it is the very scene in which Hamlet's age is stated as thirty.)

From the episode with Yorick's scull it is evident that Hamlet and the gravedigger must have been acquainted since Hamlet's early childhood. The gravedigger recalls the case when Yorick the jester poured Reinish on his head. It should be taken into consideration that jesters performed their professional duties only among peers, and only in the presence of monarchs. As the gravedigger attended royal receptions and was treated there as a peer, he must have possessed with considerably higher social status than that of a mere sexton.

On the other hand, Hamlet mentions having kissed Yorick's lips (the jester died twenty three years before the scene with Hamlet and the gravedigger took place.) The estimation of these biographical details leads to an inevitable conclusion: the gravedigger and Hamlet must have met when Hamlet was a boy. And yet, despite the compelling situation (Hamlet and the gravedigger discuss their mutual acquaintance Yorick), neither of them would mention their past acquaintance.

Another startling moment hardly mentioned by commentators of Hamlet is that having got to the church yard where his assassinated father must have been buried only few months before that, Hamlet demonstrates no sentiments. Such behavior greatly contrasts with Hamlet's mourning in previous acts. It seems as if he had two fathers: the one whose recent death he mourns, and another one whom he does not remember.

In my essay devoted to the inner structure of Hamlet, (1) it is demonstrated that the existing misconception is merely of psychological nature: what has been perceived as the multiple plot 'discrepancies' is actually an assortment of cues intended by Shakespeare to delineate the true content. To describe Shakespeare's intention, below is a short summary of the content of Hamlet as it comes into view when the multiple 'contradictions' and stylistic 'flaws' are treated as deliberate means of Shakespeare's composition.
The structure of the text of Hamlet

Hamlet appears to be a prosaic novel rather than a versed drama as it is traditionally approached. The primary plot (in prose) features 'real' events while the versed part is the complete text of the staged Mousetrap. The whole text is a collage of two plots representing the content of the staged drama against the background of 'real' events in Elsinore. Contents

The existing misconception owes to the peculiarities of Shakespeares's composition. The thing is that the Mousetrap features 'real' inhabitants of Elsinore, though with somewhat changed biographies. Without appreciation of that, we integrate into singular images the biographies pertaining to different characters featured in different plots. For example, we merge biographical details of 'real' Hamlet, and those of the Hamlet of the Mousetrap into an integrated false image of 'our' Hamlet. (2) That inevitably produces multiple discrepancies erroneously perceived as flaws of Shakespeare's composition.

The traditional [mis]interpretation of the plot of Hamlet (in which prince Hamlet is perceived as king Hamlet's son, and king Hamlet as having been assassinated by king Claudius, and so on) corresponds to the plot of the Mousetrap staged in Elsinore. According to Shakespeare's composition, that is only a fraction of the complete plot of Hamlet. Embodied in the versed part of Hamlet, this 'false' plot does not delineate the 'true' events (that is, what is 'going on really' in Elsinore outside the proscenium.) Contents
The primary plot of Hamlet

The primary plot of Hamlet is being neglected by readers due to its embodiment within the 'ugly' prosaic passages which are perceived as flaws of Shakespeare's composition—that is, as something insignificant on which Shakespeare would not waste time to convert it into iambic verses. Though the prosaic passages in Hamlet were intended by Shakespeare, that misleading interpretation has been taken for granted by the scholars engaged in the Shakespeare studies. (3)

With the consideration of the evidence contained in the prosaic passages, the true events in Elsinore look as follows (the conclusions have been made only by employing the facts contained in the document which is the text of Hamlet; no assumptions have been applied but only strict logic; for the details, see the text of the essay.)
Elsinore: the scenario of Hamlet beyond the stage

... Thirty years before the described events began, there lived three brothers:

1. The king of Norway.

2. King Fortinbras of Denmark married to Gertrude; they had a son prince Fortinbras.

3. The youngest brother Hamlet, a widower. He possessed with some land (not a kingdom, though); his son Hamlet is featured in the plot as Horatio. Contents

Hamlet staked his lands against the whole kingdom of Denmark by proposing his brother Fortinbras a fight the outcome of which was to determine who of the two would rule Denmark. King Fortinbras accepted the bid and was killed by his brother Hamlet.

Having won the fight, Hamlet married his brother's widow Gertrude who acquired the status of jointress rather than that of queen dowager. That is, it was she who inherited the reign rather than her son Fortinbras or her victorious brother in law Hamlet. On having married Gertrude, Hamlet became queen's consort but not king crowned to reign.

Maybe the most important feature of the true content of Hamlet is that 'king' Hamlet has not been killed in the 'real' plot. On the contrary, having killed his brother, Hamlet has been living with queen Gertrude for 'thirty dozen moons'. The character we erroneously perceive as 'king Claudius' who allegedly killed king Hamlet happens to be 'still alive' king Hamlet. (4) The text of Hamlet sugests it was him who had killed his brother king Fortinbras. (5)
Prince Hamlet: a claimant to the throne

Should Gertrude deliver a son in her marriage with Hamlet, that would have been a crown prince eligible to succeed the throne. There having been no issue born in that marriage, the son of the late king Fortinbras remained the most legitimate claimant. As king Hamlet's son Hamlet-Horatio was born before his father became queen's husband, he had no chance to inherit the throne. Contents

The chances of Hamlet-Horatio are still more diminished with the fact that exactly on the day when former king Fortinbras lost his life, his spouse queen Gertrude delivered another legitimate claimant to the throne, prince Hamlet. Though prince Hamlet lost his father on the day he was born, he was a son of the king thus becoming another legitimate claimant. Besides, despite having become king's widow, Gertrude upgraded her standing from queen consort to the position of the ruling 'imperial jointress to this warlike state' (I, ii).
The paradox with the 'two fathers' of prince Hamlet

As within the integrated plot of Hamlet there exist two princes bearing that name, the paradox is explained simply. The 'true' prince Hamlet of thirty lost his father king Fortinbras on the day he was born, therefore he cannot remember him. The Hamlet mourning the death of king Hamlet acts within the plot of the Mousetrap staged in Elsinore. Contents

The explanation of this paradox immediately evokes new ones. There appears still another Hamlet whom we know as Horatio though he is mentioned once as Claudio. That is the source of another misconception (still unnoticed by the scholars), this time with the authorship of the letter addressed to Ophelia and signed Hamlet.

And at last, there exists yet one more character erroneously perceived as 'king Claudius' but whose actual name is Hamlet as well. This feature is maybe the most serious of all adding to the misapprehension of the content of Hamlet.

So, within the text of Shakespeare's Hamlet and Hamlet's Mousetrap there exist at least four characters bearing the same name Hamlet. Though that being quite enough to explain the reasons of the four century long misinterpretation of the content of Hamlet, there should be added to this list still another character: the Ghost of allegedly late king Hamlet.

This example with the five characters bearing the same name Hamlet and coexisting within the same text illustrates that Shakespeare's texts are not that simple to be approached superficially. Though the scholars avoid commenting this issue, they will have to acknowledge Shakespeare's genius as deserving more respectful attitude.
When did prince Hamlet's father die?

A keen reader of my essay pointed out what looks like a serious disproof of the reconstruction of the true plot of Hamlet. Citing the passage:
HAMLET

O God, your only jig-maker. What should a man do

but be merry? for, look you, how cheerfully my

mother looks, and my father died within these two hours.
OPHELIA

Nay, 'tis twice two months, my lord.
HAMLET

So long? Nay then, let the devil wear black, for

I'll have a suit of sables. O heavens! die two

months ago, and not forgotten yet? she noted that the 'two hours' and '[twice] two months' periods after the death of Hamlet's father have been mentioned in the prosaic part of Hamlet. Therefore, the thesis of the prosaic portion being the carrier of the 'true' plot becomes questionable. Contents

Indeed, although statements made by allegedly mad Hamlet might be disregarded, the assertion made by Ophelia should be interpreted as 'true'. That looks as contradicting to the reconstruction of the 'real' plot within which Hamlet's father was killed thirty years earlier.

And yet, there is nothing obliterating the structure of Hamlet described here. On the contrary, the cited passage validates the reconstruction according to which the text of Hamlet describes the act of staging a drama in Elsinore. However paradoxical that might look, but even Hamlet's 'insane' assertions on the 'two hours' and the 'two months' are no less true than my assertion to which these statements seemingly contradict.

The thing is that as spectators of numerous present-day performances of what has been considered as Shakespeare's Hamlet, we see something different from what Shakespeare's contemporaries saw and perceived at reading.

Virtually every popular edition of Hamlet describes what a typical theatre of the Shakespeare era looked like. The prosceniums were hardly ever separated from the spectators, and there were no curtains screening idle actors. They stood beside the stage in few yards from those engaged in a scene, and practically among the public. It is astonishing that the same commentators fail to imagine all that as the background against which the events described in Hamlet take place.

We have to keep in mind that the gist of Hamlet's content is rather the act of staging the inner drama. To comprehend Shakespeare's intention, we have to imagine a typical Elizabethan theatre with two princes Hamlet at the same site, two Gertrudes, 'still alive' king Hamlet in only few yards from 'his own' ghost, etc.

Indeed, Hamlet and Ophelia conduct the cited dialogue in 'reality', among other spectators: Gertrude, her husband Hamlet, the son of the later Hamlet-Horatio, Polonius, and so on. In just few yards from them, they see among the cast the male actor playing Gertrude; (s)he looks cheerful because 'her' husband 'died within these two hours' only in the plot of just rehearsed play. According to the plot Hamlet and Ophelia discuss, the father of 'that' Hamlet died two or four month 'ago' which provides 'real' Hamlet with the grounds for joking. Moreover, Hamlet even declares that his remarks are jokes: O God, your only jig-maker. What should a man do but be merry? Contents

To outline the perspective from which the dialog of Hamlet and Ophelia has been carried out, few lines earlier Shakespeare depicted a similar situation:
POLONIUS

I did enact Julius Caesar: I was killed i' the

Capitol; Brutus killed me.
In this case Polonius narrates from a position inside the plot of the drama in which he acted before. Hamlet and Ophelia carry out their conversation exactly in the same manner, that is, as if they were not among the spectators but rather within the plot of the drama they discuss. (6)

In that way Shakespeare unveils to the readers the meaning of Hamlet's enigmatic expression The time is out of joint. According to the sophisticated structure of Hamlet, verily it is.
Which Hamlet wrote the letter to Ophelia?

There has never been questioned the authorship of the letter signed 'Hamlet' in which its author confessed he was poor at numbers. It has been taken for granted that the letter was written by 'our' Hamlet. That presents just another contradiction: from the scene with the actors we know that Hamlet's mastering in versification was outstanding. Besides, he appears to be the author of the Mousetrap, and we have its complete text before us: it is the pentametre portion of Hamlet. Contents

Now that we are aware of the existence of other character whose name was also Hamlet (it's Horatio, king Hamlet's son,) (7) it is clear that the letter was ritten by Hamlet's half-brother. Within the traditional interpretation of Hamlet, such assertion would be considered inapt. On the other hand, the traditional interpretation is at a loss at explaining the awkward situation in which Hamlet demonstrates extreme rudeness to Ophelia and her father. He calls Polonius fishmonger (8), compares Ophelia to a carrion with maggots inside, and hints at Ophelia's pregnancy:
HAMLET

Let her not walk i' the sun: conception is a

blessing: but not as your daughter may conceive.

Friend, look to 't.( 9)

It is evident Hamlet guessed that Ophelia lost her innocence with Horatio, and that was the reason of his rudeness to her. The comprehension of that eliminates the otherwise unavoidable grave contradictions in the image of Hamlet existing within the traditional interpretation. No, Hamlet was not mad; he was just scared with Ophelia's infidelity.
At whom Hamlet's Mousetrap was aimed?

It has been considered that Hamlet initiated the staging of the Mousetrap in order to get certain if the king really murdered his father. That is true only within the imaginary Mousetrap plot but not 'in reality'. Contents

'In reality', prince Hamlet was aware that his father was not poisoned by king Hamlet few months before that but rather was killed with sword thirty years earlier. So, there was no reason for Hamlet to verify king Hamlet's guilt. He created and staged the Mousetrap in order to verify his guess about the character of relations between Ophelia and Hamlet-Horatio-Claudio.
Hamlet's (Shakespeare's) composition of the Mousetrap

By employing a special method of composition, Hamlet satirically depicted Horatio (10) as his subtle antagonist. He endowed this character with narrating functions, that is, made Horatio a proxy author. It was according to Hamlet's intention that Horatio depicted him in a satirical way. Nevertheless, Hamlet included in the text of the Mousetrap details suggesting the true (negative) characteristics of Horatio and Ophelia. For example, though Horatio as the 'proxy author' attempts to conceal the true character of his relations with king Hamlet and Ophelia, an attentive reading reveals the truth. It becomes obvious that being very close to the King, he enjoys very high position in the castle. (11) Besides, Hamlet included in the Mousetrap indications suggesting that Ophelia was pregnant.
Hamlet's Mousetrap and Shakespeare's Hamlet: identical composition

The sophisticated composition of the Mousetrap with 'Hamlet's' authorship replicates that of the whole Shakespeare's Hamlet. In that way Shakespeare associated himself with his hero. Contents

Another common feature is that as Shakespeare's Hamlet features staging the Mousetrap in Elsinore, 'Hamlet's' Mousetrap features staging the same Mousetrap as well. The major difference is that in 'Hamlet's' Mousetrap, the staging was interrupted while in Shakespeare's Hamlet it still goes on, and we have before us the complete text of the play 'created' by Hamlet.

Before the staging began, Hamlet, Ophelia, Polonius, the King, and Gertrude are featured as 'real' spectators for their remark are rendered in prose. Beginning from the dumb scene and the prologue, we read again the text of the inner drama with occasional prosaic passages featuring 'real' events beyond the stage.
Hamlet-Horatio: the narrator of Shakespeare's Hamlet

The details Hamlet included in the plot of the Mousetrap suggest that pregnant Ophelia was drowned by Horatio. Unlike other spectators, Hamlet-Horatio grasped the hidden satirical content of the Mousetrap. As the following prosaic passages are scarce, it might seem that Horatio's further actions as well as the fate of the heroes of Shakespeare's drama remain unknown. Contents

Indeed, the death and burial of Ophelia as well as the following tragic events including the death of Hamlet take place only in the plot of the Mousetrap. The composition of Hamlet provokes an impression that Hamlet just disappears.

As it happens, the relatively short prosaic passages of Shakespeare's Hamlet feature considerably longer period than the plot of Hamlet's Mousetrap. In 'reality', between the staging of the Mousetrap and Hamlet's encounter with the gravedigger there have passed at least three years. (12) Therefore, Hamlet is alive though in an unusual way.

The narrator of Shakespeare's novel (Hamlet-Horatio-Claudio) composes his discourse so as to impress on the readers that Hamlet is dead. The proxy of Shakespeare has succeeded in that, and the humanity still believes that within the plot of Shakespeare's novel, Hamlet died. The situation Shakespeare depicted in Hamlet looks as if being alive, the real author of Hamlet has been considered by the public as dead.

Another important thing with the real content of Hamlet is that its text suggests that besides being published with false authorship data, this same work would be heavily censored by the person whom the public would consider to be the only true Hamlet's friend. That is, by Hamlet's cousin and half-brother Horatio who was not interested in disclosing either his real role in Hamlet's fate or the sole fact of having amended Hamlet's story before the publishing. Contents

This suggestion is contained in the final scene of Hamlet's Mousetrap which precisely coincides with the final of Shakespeare's Hamlet: Horatio is explicitly indicated there as the narrator of the story of Hamlet. (13)

To conceal the truth, Horatio employs in his discourse the text of Hamlet's Mousetrap representing it as the true story.
The fate of Hamlet

The identical sophisticated composition of Hamlet's Mousetrap and Shakespeare's Hamlet suggests that Shakespeare intended to portray himself as Hamlet. The scene with the gravedigger adds to that association some new features. Contents

In the plot of Shakespeare's Hamlet the encounter of Hamlet with the gravedigger takes place three years after the cessation of the described events in Elsinore (to be more precise, after the staging the Mousetrap depicting those events from Hamlet's point of view.) Actually, this scene might be considered as a kind of an epilogue in which Shakespeare describes the fate of his hero Hamlet. (14) His own Shakespeare's fate, as that follows from the ultimate aggregated content of Hamlet.

In Shakespeare's novel, the gravedigger appears to be a very special character carrying unique composition functions: he hints to the readers the cues necessary to understand the true content of Hamlet despite Horatio's attempts to conceal the truth. From the point of view of the structure of Hamlet, the gravedigger's composition function is superior to that of Horatio's. As the only position superior to the narrator's is that of the titular author, by endowing the gravedigger with his own exclusive functions, William Shakespeare identified himself with the character who has got his grave but does not lie in it.

The last conclusion does not contradict to the previous one according to which Shakespeare identified himself with Hamlet. The thing is that Hamlet and the clown represent different halves of the same character, the Hamlet's part representing what he had been before he disappeared, while the clown's part depicting Hamlet's life after his disappearance. That is, as having got his grave and yet not lying in it; or, as being associated with the graveyard forever. Contents

Though this conclusion might seem absurd, it should be taken into consideration that the multiple absurdities pertaining to the gravedigger are present in the genuine Shakespeare's text. A sexton with a university education — does not that sound absurd? (The gravedigger fluently operates with the law rhetoric and uses specific Latin expressions.) A sexton attending in the past royal receptions is just another absurdity. There is an incredible situation in which Hamlet and the gravedigger discuss their mutual acquaintance but neither would ever mention that having communicated with Yorick at the same receptions in Elsinore they must have been acquainted in the past. On the other hand, all those incredible situations were created by Shakespeare, so they must be treated as carrying some important information necessary for the comprehension of the true content of Hamlet.

Horatio is aware of Hamlet's out-of-the-grave existence. He even contacts him at his graveyard where Hamlet speaks from his grave. (15)

Does not Shakespeare-Hamlet's expression The rest is silence characterize that way of existence?
William Shakespeare: the Tanner not lying in his grave since 1593?

In the Quarto-2 the gravedigger explains that a tanner would

Christopher Marlowe: the man who created Shakespeare's Hamlet?
Christopher Marlowe last for nine years after his death. The text of Hamlet was registered in 1602. By deducting from that date the nine years of the tanner's lasting, we get 1593 as the presupposed year of the death. Is the gravedigger the tanner not lying in his grave since 1593? Contents

It is remarkable that in the text of Hamlet published a year earlier (the First Quarto, Q1), the period of tanner's lasting after his death was indicated as eight years rather than nine. That confirms that Shakespeare intended special significance by mentioning some tanner and by correlating this seemingly insignificant plot element with the dates of actual publication.

It was in 1593 that a famous playwright known as the Tanner was allegedly killed in a brawl. Two weeks later there appeared the first ever edition bearing the name of William Shakespeare. (See Chapter VI: He who does not lie in his grave (Christopher Marlowe).
Contents
Remarks

1. The complete text in Russian: shakespeare.kiev.ua. Back

2. There exists the famous contradiction with prince Hamlet's age: according to Act I, he must be twenty while in V.i it is clearly stated that Hamlet is thirty. The explanation is simple: within the plot of Hamlet, there exist two princes with the same name Hamlet. The thirty year old Hamlet is a 'real' inhabitant of Elsinore while the twenty year old one is a character of the drama staged in the castle. Moreover, the thirty year old Hamlet is the author of the staged drama in which he depicted himself as prince Hamlet of twenty.

For a quick reference:

In the prosaic part featuring the 'reality', Hamlet is thirty, he is a son to the late king Fortinbras who was killed by his brother Hamlet on the very day prince Hamlet was born.

In the versed part (the Mousetrap), prince Hamlet is about twenty, his father king Hamlet was killed just recently by his brother Claudius — etc. according to the traditional interpretation.

That Hamlet is not king Hamlet's son becomes evident from the grave-digger's statement that prince Hamlet was born on the very day king Hamlet overcame Fortinbras — see Did Shakespeare mean Prince Hamlet was a son to king Hamlet? The logic is simple: Hamlet was born by queen Hertrude in Elsinore which on the day of the combat was still in the possession of Fortinbras. Therefore, before marrying king Hamlet, Hertrude was the spouse of Fortinbras. As prince Hamlet was born on the day of the battle in the castle still belonging to Fortinbras, he must be a son to the previous host rather than to king Hamlet.

In the First Quarto, Shakespeare provided the readers with even more explicit evidence:
Quarto 1

Ham. And why a tanner?

Clowne Why his hide is so tanned with his trade,

That it will holde out water, that's a parlous

Deuourer of your dead body, a great soaker.

Looke you, heres a scull hath bin here this dozen yeare,

Let me see, I euer since our last king Hamlet

Slew Fortenbrasse in combat, yong Hamlets father,

Hee that's mad.

In Q2 and Folio editions of Hamlet, that explicit statement was substituted with the one demanding some logical work:
Quarto 2

Clow. Of the dayes i'th yere I came too't that day that our last king

Hamlet ouercame Fortenbrasse.

Ham. How long is that since?

Clow. Cannot you tell that? euery foole can tell that, it was that

very day that young Hamlet was borne: hee that is mad and sent into

England.

This issue has been deliberated in other work on Hamlet (in Russian). Back

3. Shakespeare has created an evidence proving that the prosaic passages in Hamlet were intended as being of compositional importance. In the very first edition of Hamlet (the 'bad quarto' Q1, 1603), Hamlet's dialogues with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, then with Polonius and the actors, all were drawn in verse (II, ii.) As those passages were meant to describe the 'real' events, they should be rendered in prose. Indeed, in 'the good quarto' Q2, Shakespeare replaced hundreds of iambic lines with prose, though preserving specific lexical expressions and the sequence of the recital. The Q2 prosaic version of the passage was included into the 1623 Folio text of Hamlet.

It should be noted that the Q1 version of Hamlet (the 'bad quarto') is considered to have been pirated and edited in a corrupt form without Shakespeare's consent. To be consistent, it should be admitted that at the the mastery of versification, Shakespeare was excelled by some 'pirates' who managed to radically improve his defective passages. Shakespeare choose to convert them into prose, anyway. Back

4. There is no such person as King Claudius among the 'real' inhabitants of Elsinore. That is a character of only the inner drama staged in the castle.

The misconception with that character's identity has been aggravated by the scholars who at their discretion introduced into the canonized text of Hamlet multiple remarks King Claudius instead of mere King as that was the case in the genuine Shakespeare's texts. In the Q2 edition of Hamlet, that character was referred to as Claudius in only two instances, while in the Folio that number was cut to a single case. In the Q1 edition, the name Claudius was not mentioned at all.

In my paper on the structure of Hamlet, I argue that the inclusion of the name Claudius in Q2 and Folio was meant by Shakespeare as a composition means. The thing is that along with that, Shakespeare introduced the name Claudio referring to Horatio. A comparison of these two names suggests that Horatio-Claudio was a son to 'king Claudius' (Hamlet).

It is surprising that the scholars specializing in the Shakespeare studies and publishing multiple academic editions of Hamlet keep amending Shakespeare's text with numerous remarks king Claudius, and by introducing that name into the Dramatis Personae.

It is no less surprising that the presence in the text of the name Claudio has been disregarded: does there exist a copy of Hamlet with that name mentioned in the Dramatis Personae?

It should be noted that Shakespeare mentioned the name Claudius only in the remarks but never in the main text. On the contrary, the name Claudio was uttered in the main text by the messenger reporting to the king. The most startling thing is that the name Claudius has been prominently highlighted while no less important name Claudio remains neglected.

Shakespeare included in the texts of Q2 and F1 a subtle hint that the name of the 'alive' King was Hamlet. Answering Hamlet who just had called him 'mother', the King corrects him (Q2, line 2714):

King. Thy louing Father Hamlet.

The absence of a comma after 'Father' creates an impression that within this phrase, the name Hamlet is meant as belonging to the King. A comparison with the text of the first edition Q1 (IV, iii):

King Your louing father, Hamlet.

suggests that the deletion of the comma in Q2 and F1 as well as the consequent ambiguity might have been intended by Shakespeare

With that comma in the very first version of the text, Shakespeare made it clear that the name Hamlet was meant as belonging to the Prince to whom the phrase was addressed. The elimination of the comma in the further editions brought double meaning to the whole phrase. Back

5. The exact wording Shakespeare employed suggests that the 'King' (Hamlet) did not poison his brother but rather killed him with sword:

... What if this cursed hand

Were thicker than itself with brother's blood (III, iii)
Here, the King mentions his hand in singular; should poisoning be meant, plural would be more appropriate. Back

6. For more detailed deliberation of the narrating position of Hamlet and Ophelia, see: w-shakespeare.narod.ru/hamlet-4.htm (in Russian) Back

7. The issue of Horatio-Claudio being king Hamlet's son has been given more detailed consideration in: shakespeare.kiev.ua/hamlet_03.htm (in Russian); for a summary in English, see: Chapter III: King Hamlet's son. For a discussion if the name Claudio really belongs to Horatio, see: w-shakespeare.narod.ru/hamlet-1.htm (in Russian.) Back

8. Fishmonger: ... The term 'fishmonger' was sometimes applied to a man who benefited from the earnings of prostitutes... — York Notes on Hamlet, by Loreto Todd. 1980, p.37. For a detailed discussion on Ophelia's pregnancy, see (in Russian):

(i) w-shakespeare.narod.ru/hamlet-3.htm (Polonius as a fishmonger: Shakespeare's fault or Hamlet's mistake?)

(ii) w-shakespeare.narod.ru/hamlet-6.htm. (The meaning of the maxims uttered by allegedly mad Hamlet and Ophelia.)

(iii) w-shakespeare.narod.ru/hamlet-9.htm (On Shakespeare's intention: Hamlet accuses Ophelia of being defiled.) Back

9. In the second Quarto of Hamlet (1604) the issue of Ophelia's pregnancy was expressed by Hamlet even more explicitly:

Ham. Let her not walke i'th Sunne, conception is a blessing,

But as your daughter may conceaue, friend looke to't. Back

10. The issue of Hamlet's satire in the Mousetrap aimed at Horatio has been detailed in shakespeare.kiev.ua/hamlet_04.htm (in Russian; for a summary in English, see: Chapter IV: The Mousetrap for the Narrator of W. Shakespeare's Hamlet.) Back

11. In the Q2 edition of Hamlet, the privileged position of Horatio was indicated more prominently. For example, in the scene with Ophelia's madness, Gertrude refused receiving Ophelia, but Horatio canceled queen's instructions (in her presence!) and ordered to let Ophelia in. His order was executed while queen's refusal disregarded (lines 2744-2766) . Back

12. That may be concluded from the scene in which Hamlet and Horatio talk at the churchyard:

HAMLET

How absolute the knave is! we must speak by the

card, or equivocation will undo us. By the Lord,

Horatio, these three years I have taken a note of

it; the age is grown so picked that the toe of the

peasant comes so near the heel of the courtier, he

gaffs his kibe. How long hast thou been a

grave-maker?
Hamlet's statement suggests that he was away from the country for three years. Back

13. Hamlet stressed in the Mousetrap that Horatio was endowed with the functions of the narrator:

HAMLET

Thou livest; report me and my cause aright

To the unsatisfied.

...

Absent thee from felicity awhile,

And in this harsh world draw thy breath in pain,

To tell my story.

...

HORATIO

And let me speak to the yet unknowing world

How these things came about: so shall you hear

Of carnal, bloody, and unnatural acts,

Of accidental judgments, casual slaughters,

Of deaths put on by cunning and forced cause,

And, in this upshot, purposes mistook

Fall'n on the inventors' reads: all this can I

Truly deliver.

PRINCE FORTINBRAS

Let us haste to hear it,

And call the noblest to the audience.

Horatio has been made the Narrator in both Shakespeare's Hamlet and Hamlet's Mousetrap. Back

14. This feature perfectly explains the meaning of Hamlet's expression The time is out of joint. Indeed, psychologically, the readers perceive the time span between the staging of the Mousetrap and the final as lasting several days, and the scene at the grave-yard as fitting into that sequence of events. Now that it has become clear that due to special composition employed by Shakespeare, the events described within two plots are not necessarily consequent, they may take place at different time, at different place, and feature different characters.

As far as I know, Shakespeare was the second writer who employed the very complicated method of composition which we call in Russian menippeah. The very first writer to employ this structure was Christopher Marlowe whose Doctor Faustus and The Jew of Malta possess with precisely the same structure William Shakespeare employed in Hamlet, Othello, The Merchant of Venice, etc. For information on the Theory of menippeah, see: Literary Theory: The Hidden Intention of Shakespeare and Marlowe. Back

15. For more detailed information, see a summary: Hamlet-Shakespeare does not lie in his grave (Marlowe?). Back

The contents of the paper: Hamlet: A Tragedy Of Errors, Or The Tragical Fate Of William Shakespeare?

Preface

In Hamlet, Shakespeare employed special composition producing a multi-plot structure in which the prosaic text represents the primary plot.

Chapter I: Did Shakespeare mean Prince Hamlet as a son to king Hamlet?

Shakespeare created two images of prince Hamlet pertaining to different plots. Perceiving them as a single image, we interpret the discrepancies in Hamlet as Shakespeare's inaccuracies.

Chapter II. Shakespeare, Hamlet, Ophelia, and Eliot: no lack of objective correlative

According to Shakespeare, Hamlet guessed Ophelia was pregnant. So, there is no lack of objective correlative in the image of Hamlet as it was defined by T.S. Eliot in The Sacred Wood.

Chapter III: King Hamlet's son

Shakespeare depicted Horatio as Hamlet's half-brother, king Hamlet's son. Having drowned Ophelia, Horatio narrates in Hamlet a false story of the fate of Prince Hamlet.

Chapter IV: The Mousetrap for the Narrator of W. Shakespeare's Hamlet

The versed part of Hamlet is the text of the Mousetrap created by Prince Hamlet. Its inner structure replicates that of the whole Shakespeare's novel of Hamlet.

Chapter V: He who reports Hamlet and his cause aright To the unsatisfied

Nearly all events predicted by Hamlet in the Mousetrap came true, though within the plot of Shakespeare's novel Hamlet, the fate of Shakespeare alias Prince Hamlet remains unknown.

Chapter VI: Hamlet-Shakespeare does not lie in his grave (Marlowe?)

In Hamlet, Shakespeare identified himself with some Tanner, a university graduate not lying in his grave since 1593. Which are a nickname and surmised biography of Christopher Marlowe.

Chapter VII: What was Queen Elizabeth to Marlowe, or Marlowe to Elizabeth?..

The Shakespeare mystery was maintained at the state level as a top state secret. Queen Elizabeth personally tackled two cases threatening the fate of Christopher Marlowe.

Chapter VIII: The second Virgin in the history of human civilization?

Christopher Marlowe taught Arabella Stuart, a prospective queen. The parliament adopted a decision the throne should be succeeded by Queen Elizabeth's 'natural' rather than 'legitimate' issue.

Chapter IX: Is Christopher Marlowe The Swan of Avon?

Shakespeare-Hamlet: is Marlowe the Swan of Avon? The place Queen Elizabeth delivered a child in April 1564 is situated on river Avon. That might attribute Ben Jonson's definition to Marlowe.

Related pages:

Shakespeare Authorship. Hamlet and Marlowe's works: same structure

Hamlet by William Shakespeare, and Christopher Marlowe's dramas possess with identical very sophisticated structure. Hamlet, a summary (The complete version, in Russian) Roberta Ballantine's site dedicated to Christopher Marlowe William Shakespeare Authorship Roundtable

Alfred Barkov ut5ab [e-mail] P.O. Box 36 Kiev 01103 Ukraine

Copyright © Alfred Barkov 2000, 2003
Last updated: Nov. 23, 2003