Paul Adrian Fried / HAMLET'S BIBLE

Puritans in Shakespeare’s time had a reputation for being no fun. As Sir Toby Belch says in Twelfth Night 2.3, "Dost thou think, because thou art virtuous, there shall be no more cakes and ale?" The Second Commandment: "THOU SHALT NOT MAKE TO THYSELF ANY GRAVEN IMAGE."  HAMLET AND OPHELIA: In his love letter, Hamlet calls Ophelia “celestial” and addresses her as “my soul’s idol” (2.2.117) [4]. Such rhetoric may have been a convention, but Shakespeare highlights this in a play with other idolatry issues. In a repressed and religiously charged context, Shakespeare may have (in part) been tweaking the preacher’s nose (like Sir Toby to Malvolio).  Sermons warned against idolatry [1] and the wearing of makeup [2], saying as Hamlet does to Ophelia, “God hath given you one face, and you / make yourselves another” (3.1.155-6), equating artifice, painting and “whorish” makeup with graven images, the devil, and idolatry [3].   PAINTINGS:  In 3.4, Hamlet says, “Look here u...

Whether or not Hamlet violates the First or Second Commandment (or none at all) in comparing his father to classical gods, through these comparisons, what might Hamlet's analogies reveal? 1. By comparing his father to four classical gods, this implies that Prince Hamlet is like a son of a god [1]. 2. By starting with Hyperion – among the Titans whose divine reign was overthrown – this echoes his father having been killed by Claudius [2]. 3. The overturning of the old divine order – the rule of Hyperion and the Titans – also echoes the Reformation, which sought to break bonds with Rome and the old Christian order, and to embody a new, reformed order. In this way, English Renaissance fascination with Titans and gods may have been an analogical way to write about what was sometimes forbidden, restricted, discouraged [3]. 4. Comparing his father to Mars, god of war, makes sense, given the dead king’s reputation as a warrior; this also contrasts with Claudius, the cowardly...

The First Commandment, "THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BUT ME,” has both a literal meaning (Don’t worship other deities) and figurative meanings. What matters most? One could say that one’s highest priority is, figuratively, one’s god. In an Elizabethan understanding, one could serve God in many practical ways, but one could also be distracted toward vice or tempted to sin and selfish priorities.  Moses came down from the mountain, but the people had created a golden calf. This was always interpreted figuratively as well as literally: Don’t make hoarding wealth your god. Don’t misplace your priorities.  What matters most to each character? (Do priorities evolve with character arc?) An actor or director’s understanding of character motivation or priorities may vary greatly depending on the cast and the director’s overall vision.  Feel free to comment regarding what you see as character priorities. In the footnotes, see some of my own thoughts on each character… ...

The First Commandment, "THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BUT ME,” doesn’t mention pride, but Christian tradition considered it to be like playing god, the worst of the seven deadly sins from which the others proceed [1].  By apocryphal tradition it was the sin of Satan and the fallen angels, who in their pride believed they were equal to God or might usurp God’s throne [2].  KING HAMLET & OLD FORTINBRAS: Horatio in 1.1 notes pride: […] our last king, [...] Was, as you know, by Fortinbras of Norway, Thereto pricked on by a most emulate *pride,* Dared to the combat… (1.1.92-96)  King Hamlet was “Dared to the combat”; instead of humbly urging peace instead of violence, “pricked on by… emulate pride,” he accepted the challenge and killed the Norwegian king, both of them gambling their lives and sons’ inheritance – and the future of their countries – on pride.  No “sealed compact,” “law” or “heraldry” (1.1.98-101) can excuse this sin of pride, and it may be among t...

Did people in Shakespeare’s time sometimes have good reason for appearing to Puritans as if they were violating the first commandment [1], celebrating and retelling tales from classical mythology, tales about gods from ancient religious cults that Christianity had declared to be false?  If one wished to talk and write about mystery and transcendent meaning, what was a person to do if one hoped to avoid being executed as a heretic, when Christianity was contentious and rigid, with certain topics prohibited, dangerous?  It was safer to re-tell tales from classical mythology involving gods and humans interacting, and possibly to use these as analogies for contemporary events.  Many gods and other classical references are in Hamlet:  1.2: Hyperion, Hercules, Niobe; 1.4: The Nemian lion (defeated by Hercules); 2.2: Pyrrhus, Priam, Hecuba; 3.2: Vulcan, Phoebus, Neptune, Hymen, Hecate; 3.4: Hyperion, Jove, Mars, Mercury;  5.1: The Greek mountains, Pelion, Olympus, and ...

Why did Hamlet compare his father to Greek and Roman gods - at a time when Elizabeth was often compared to goddesses? In Shakespeare’s England, churches had the Ten Commandments posted prominently. The first commandment: "THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BUT ME." Literally: Don’t worship deities of other religions. Hamlet worries that heaven forbids suicide (“self-slaughter,” 1.2.136), but (oblivious to other biblical prohibitions?) compares his father to a Greek god, the titan Hyperion (1.2.144), and in 3.4, to more gods: See what a grace was seated on this brow, Hyperion’s curls, the front of Jove himself, An eye like Mars’ to threaten and command, A station like the herald Mercury New-lighted on a heaven-kissing hill, A combination and a form indeed Where every god did seem to set his seal To give the world assurance of a man. (3.4.65--72) The ghost says he’s being purged in an afterlife, as in purgatory of Catholic teaching, not Greek or Roman mythology. Is Hamlet confused...

Dives and Pauper [1] was an English text from early 1400s, probably by a Franciscan, and although there are no direct allusions in the play to this Middle English text, it has interesting connections to Shakespeare and Hamlet, as well as representing the general influence of the Ten Commandments [2] on the evolution of English religious culture. The title is an allusion to Luke 16:19-31 in which a rich man (Latin: "Dives") neglects the beggar Lazarus and suffers eternal punishment while Lazarus goes to heaven [3]. Lazarus, whose body had sores that were licked by dogs, was often thought to have been a leper (hence "Lazar houses," hospitals for lepers in England). The ghost in Hamlet 1.5 thinks a “leperous distillment” of poison that his brother poured in his ear made his skin all "lazar-like" [4]. Ophelia's reference to the story of the owl and the baker's daughter is a folktale retelling, where a baker is rich in bread, but his daughter is r...

IN THE PERSON OF HAMLET, DOES SHAKESPEARE ASSOCIATE ELIZABETHAN ICONOCLASM WITH DEMONIC POSSESSION?  In Reformation England, images that recreated scenes from familiar religious and biblical tales were destroyed, removed, or painted over as allegedly idolatrous (as described in the 2nd commandment, which prohibited making any “graven image”).  In their place? Commandment boards.  It is frequently noted that Shakespeare’s father, John, was charged with having to paint over images in their church in Stratford. People who loved religious statues and images in their local churches often had to be content with the Ten Commandments, and words, not images.  By placing on Hamlet’s lips a little speech that seems to make him an iconoclast by analogy – and at the very moment when Hamlet seems tempted to revenge by a possibly demonic ghost – this seems to associate English iconoclasm with the demonic [1].  Consider Hamlet’s little speech after his first encounter with the ...

Because Francisco has the watch and is not yet relieved by Bernardo, many observe that Bernardo is speaking out of turn when he says the opening line of the play, "Who's there?" Francisco rightly refuses to answer, and demands that Bernardo "unfold himself" -- identify himself to Francisco instead. Is it acceptable for one soldier or sentinel to demand reform of another? Bernardo violated the rules of the watch: In a time of war or potential war, following such rules carefully can mean life or death. Hamlet is a play in which many rules (such as the Ten Commandments) are broken, and lives are lost. Bernardo doesn't really answer Francisco's question: Francisco guesses Bernardo's identity, and Bernardo confirms it. Rather than be a stickler for military protocol (rules for their own sake), Francisco backs off. Bernardo's approach didn't represent a sneak attack from an enemy, but merely a mistake by another nervous sentinel. Relieved of his ...

At the end of the first scene of Hamlet, Horatio says that their failure to get the ghost or apparition to speak is a problem that should be referred to the prince: Horatio: "This spirit, dumb to us, will speak to him" (1.1.186). This echoes a tale in the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) following the story of the transfiguration [1]. Horatio uses the words “dumb” and “spirit” in describing the ghost. Note similar language in the 1599 Geneva translation of Mark 9:17-19: 17 [...] Master, I have brought my son unto thee, which hath a dumb spirit : 18 And wheresoever he taketh him, he teareth him, and he foameth, and gnasheth his teeth, and pineth away: and I spake to thy disciples , that they should cast him out , and they could not . 19 Then he answered him, and said, O faithless generation, how long now shall I be with you! how long now shall I suffer you! Bring him unto me . Note the progression: “dumb spirit” (v.17); “thy disciples [...] should cast him out, and the...

GENERAL INFORMATION: Ten Commandments in Hamlet (Series) [1] Much attention has been given to iconoclasm (destruction of sacred or allegedly idolatrous images) in England during the reformation, but less to how such images and artifacts were effectively replaced by royal injunctions of Elizabeth I in 1561 requiring the Ten Commandments (Decalogue) to be posted on the eastern wall of every church [2]. Statues, carvings, wall paintings, and stained glass had once shown angels, demons, scenes from biblical stories and the lives of saints, appealing to collective memory and to the imagination. In iconoclastic acts of erasure, these were replaced by the Decalogue, appealing more to the logical mind, the superego, the rule of law, and fear of punishment.  Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet , not only demonstrates the violation of all of these, but also may refer to the sometimes resented replacement of icons with commandment boards.  Commandments were posted for all the faithful to see, ...