When you dive deeply into Shakespeare’s works, you may begin to notice differences between editions of his texts. These are not errors or arbitrary editorial choices. Shakespeare’s words can feel as if they are etched in stone, especially since so much of his language has become ingrained in everyday speech, with his most famous lines quoted (and misquoted!) in everything from movies and political speeches to the lyrics of Taylor Swift and Tupac. Contrary to popular belief, there are no definitive versions of Shakespeare’s plays! If we look closely, we will find differences that are the result of both centuries-old publishing practices and ongoing scholarly debates about how best to edit Shakespeare’s plays.
We here at myShakespeare often field questions from users about the textual differences in our edition of Hamlet. Users often and understandably think we have made an error, but in fact, we have made intentional decisions to omit lines often found in other
classroom editions of the play. The introduction to the Folger edition of Hamlet notes, “The play we call Hamlet was printed in three different versions in the first quarter of the seventeenth century,” and that “it is impossible in any edition to combine the whole of [different] forms of the play, because they often provide alternative readings that are mutually exclusive.” For the most part, we have chosen to adhere to the First Folio edition of Hamlet, convinced by the historically informed argument that the Folio version of the text likely reflects the text of the play as it was being performed at the time (and may very well include edits Shakespeare made to the text before his death). For the sake of clarity, let’s take a look at two of our most frequently noticed edits.
Hamlet: Act 1, Scene 1
In Act 1, Scene 1 of Hamlet, we have omitted the following exchange between Horatio and Bernardo:
BERNARDO
I think it be no other but e’en so.
Well may it sort that this portentous figure
Comes armed through our watch so like the King
That was and is the question of these wars.
HORATIO
A mote it is to trouble the mind’s eye.
In the most high and palmy state of Rome,
A little ere the mightiest Julius fell,
The graves stood tenantless, and the sheeted dead
Did squeak and gibber in the Roman streets
In our research, we were compelled by The Oxford editors’ argument that “These eighteen lines were probably omitted from the text that lies behind [the] F[olio] because they do not advance the action in any way. Moreover, if Horatio's speech was, as seems likely, intended to serve as an advertisement for Julius Caesar, there would be no point in including it when Julius Caesar was not being performed” (page 355). As RSC’s timeline of Shakespeare’s plays notes, Hamlet was likely written just after Julius Caesar, which suggests that when Shakespeare penned his earliest version of the play, he had a vested interest in advertising Julius Caesar, which was being staged at the time. But perhaps reevaluating the text in different circumstances necessitated eliminating the lines.
Hamlet: Act 4, Scene 4
Additionally, our Act 4, Scene 4 of Hamlet is shorter than other common classroom versions of the text and does not feature the Hamlet’s seventh and final soliloquy—a significant omission that changes the interpretation of the scene. The following lines, which only appear in the Second Quarto, have been left out of our primary edition:
Hamlet
Good sir, whose powers are these?
Captain
They are of Norway, sir.
Hamlet
How purposed, sir, I pray you?
Captain
Against some part of Poland.
Hamlet
Who commands them, sir?
Captain
The nephew to old Norway, Fortinbras.
Hamlet
Goes it against the main of Poland, sir,
Or for some frontier?
Captain
Truly to speak, and with no addition,
We go to gain a little patch of ground
That hath in it no profit but the name.
To pay five ducats, five, I would not farm it;
Nor will it yield to Norway or the Pole
A ranker rate should it be sold in fee.
Hamlet
Why, then, the Polack never will defend it.
Captain
Yes, it is already garrisoned.
Two thousand souls and twenty thousand ducats
Will now debate the question of this straw.
Hamlet
This is th’impostume of much wealth and peace,
That inward breaks, and shows no cause without
Why the man dies. I humbly thank you, sir.
Captain
God buy you, sir.
[Exit Captain]
Rosencrantz
Will’t please you go, my lord?
Hamlet
I’ll be with you straight. Go a little before.
[Exit all but Hamlet]
How all occasions do inform against me,
And spur my dull revenge. What is a man,
If his chief good and market of his time
Be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more.
Sure He that made us with such large discourse,
Looking before and after, gave us not
That capability and godlike reason
To fust in us unused. Now whether it be
Bestial oblivion, or some craven scruple
Of thinking too precisely on th’event —
A thought which, quartered, hath but one part wisdom
And ever three parts coward — I do not know
Why yet I live to say this thing’s to do,
Sith I have cause, and will, and strength, and means
To do’t. Examples gross as earth exhort me:
Witness this army, of such mass and charge,
Led by a delicate and tender prince,
Whose spirit, with divine ambition puffed,
Makes mouths at the invisible event,
Exposing what is mortal and unsure
To all that fortune, death, and danger dare,
Even for an eggshell. Rightly to be great
Is not to stir without great argument,
But greatly to find quarrel in a straw
When honor’s at the stake. How stand I, then,
That have a father killed, a mother stained,
Excitements of my reason and my blood,
And let all sleep; while to my shame I see
The imminent death of twenty thousand men
That for a fantasy and a trick of fame,
Go to their graves like beds, fight for a plot
Whereon the numbers cannot try the cause,
Which is not tomb enough and continent
To hide the slain? O, from this time forth,
My thoughts be bloody, or be nothing worth.
[Exit]
Folger notes, “The Second Quarto, often called the ‘good quarto,’ is dated in some copies 1604, in others 1605. Although it has exactly the same title as the First Quarto, the Second Quarto’s title page goes on to represent it as ‘Newly imprinted and enlarged to almost as much againe as it was, according to the true and perfect Coppie.’” However, we were persuaded to follow the First Folio’s lead in omitting this bit of text by the argument that including the soliloquy makes for a very particular kind of Hamlet — a character who is resolved at this point in the play — and that the omission of this soliloquy in the Folio offers a messier character whose motives and resolution are, at this point, still very much open to interpretation. We have included an Appendix page, which is linked to in the first popup note of our main Act 4, Scene 4 page (as well as the Play Menu at the top of each page) that features the full text of the Quarto scene, with textual supports. There are several other discrepancies throughout our edition of Hamlet, some of which we’ve noted in popups or animated videos.
Like with everything Shakespeare, the key is interpretation. There are those who will disagree with the editorial decisions we have made in our editions of the plays, and we always welcome differing perspectives in this debate. In fact, learning about the textual differences between Shakespeare editions can lead to fruitful classroom discussions that explore the slippery nature of literary interpretation, highlighting how things like language, author intent, and reader perspective can all shape analysis. Like Shakespeare’s texts themselves, myShakespeare is always in conversation with the current moment, and we will continue to base our decisions on the best information available so that we can provide the most engaging and up-to-date Shakespeare textbook to our users.
