INTRODUCTION THIS edition of Hamlet aims in the first place at giving a trustworthy text. Secondly, it attempts to exhibit the variations from that text which are found in the primary sources-the Quarto of 1604 and the Folio of 1623-in so far as those variations are of importance towards the ascertainment of the text. Every variation is not recorded, but I have chosen to err on the side of excess rather than on that of defect. Readings from the Quarto of 1603 are occasionally given, and also from the later Quartos and Folios, but to record such readings is not a part of the design of this edition. The letter Q means Quarto 1604; F means Folio 1623. The dates of the later Quartos are as follows:-Q 3, 1605; Q 4, 1611; Q 5, undated; Q 6, 1637. For my few references to these later Quartos I have trusted the Cambridge Shakespeare and Furness's edition of Hamlet. Thirdly, it gives explanatory notes. Here it is inevitable that my task should in the main be that of selection and condensation. But, gleaning after the gleaners, I have perhaps brought together a slender sheaf. Thus, I am not aware that I have been antici pated in my explanation of Hamlet's question about Alexander's body, in the Churchyard scene (v. i. 218); of his swearing by St. Patrick (I. v. 136); of the name Lamord (IV. vii. 93). I hope I may have done something towards the solution of the "dram of eale" crux (I. iv. 36-38), and of "stand a comma 'tween their amities" (v. ii. 42). I have noted a curious parallel between Jonson and Shakespeare (II. ii. 210-214). With the aid of the New English Dictionary I have perhaps removed any doubt as to the meaning of "mortal coil" (III. i. 67), and given its correct sense (though this is doubtful) to "anchor's cheer" (III. ii. 231). I have perhaps explained why Polonius classes "fencing" with drinking and drabbing (II. i. 25). I have made what I suppose to be new —perhaps erroneous-suggestions as to "Take this from this" (II. ii. 156) and "tender me a fool" (I. iii. 109). If ingenuities are anywhere pardonable, it is in conjecturing the meaning of Hamlet's riddling speeches; it was not his cue ever to talk sheer nonsense; accordingly I have ventured to throw out, doubtfully, suggestions-possibly darkening counsel with words-on "fishmonger" (II. ii. 174), “mad... handsaw" (II. ii. 401-403), "suit of sables" (III. ii. 139), “soul of Nero" (III. ii. 413), “the body is with the king" (IV. ii. 30), “drink up eisel, eat a crocodile" (V. i. 298). I, very doubtfully, suggest a new reading of "select and generous" (I. iii. 74), and a modification of Mr. Tovey's emendation of the "Yaughan crux (v. i. 67). Occasionally, as in the "Nunnery" scene with Ophelia (III. i.), I have tried to explain Hamlet's thoughts rather than verbal difficulties. When what is worthless has been sifted away, a little that is a |