Irony & anxiety in Hamlet about the missing body of Polonius: Three Marys at the Tomb
In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, three characters express anxiety about the missing body of Polonius: Rosencrantz (with Guildenstern), and Claudius.
Strangely, this echoes what, in Christian tradition, came to be known as “the three Marys” at the tomb of Jesus, with Mary Magdalene in John 20:11-15 being especially verbal about her anxiety about the missing body.
[More information below on these three images.]
[Left:
العربية: أيقونة المريمات الثلاثة.
Icon of The Three Marys.
11th century,
Nea Moni of Chios (Byzantine monastery, Greece). Public domain. Via Wikipedia. Right: Three Marys at the Tomb (Polski: Trzy Marie u grobu). Circa 1470, Nicolaus Haberschrack (1454–1484). National Museum, Kraków. Public domain. Via Wikipedia.]
This perhaps offers an ironic and even humorous feminizing of Claudius, Rosencrantz, and Guildenstern in the comparison.
If Shakespeare offers such an ironic and playful contrast to evoke something in his audiences, what is the purpose?
First, if feminizing the three male characters in the comparison seems strange, consider that the play already toys with gender references: Because man and wife become one flesh, Hamlet calls Claudius “mother” three times (4.3.58-61);
Laertes tries not to cry upon news of his sister’s death because it would be too feminine, but when he fails and begins to cry anyway, he says his tears will cry the woman out of him: “When these are gone,
The woman will be out.” (4.7.214-15).
Shakespeare created many strong female characters in his plays, arguably better and stronger than many of his male characters, yet he (like Laertes) also knew that the stereotype of the male as weak or emotional and therefore feminine was an effective insult.
Various critics since the play was first performed have noted the similarity between Polonius and William Cecil, Elizabeth’s Lord Treasurer, involved in spycraft, and many have noted that Cecil may have been, in many ways, more powerful than Elizabeth I, and for this reason, he was unpopular in certain circles, which in large part was the motivation for the Essex rebellion.
So consider: The killing of Polonius, in the middle of an act of spying (perhaps therefore considered "hell-bound," not a "good death"), might be offered as a fantasy of justice, how some may have wished Cecil had come to his end.
Having his body missing, with all the comparisons to Jesus and the empty tomb, offers a stark ironic contrast: As Stephen Greenblatt has noted, the body of Polonius is a far cry from the body of Christ. (Footnote needed; related to Greenblatt's claims in Hamlet in Purgatory, 2001, 240-241).
Since people in Shakespeare's England were required by law to attend church, they would be familiar with the story of the empty tomb and much less likely than people today to miss the ironic allusion.
Claudius speaks of Hamlet’s upcoming sea-voyage to England, and Hamlet replies, “Good.”
Claudius says, “So it is, if thou knew’st our purposes.”
Hamlet replies, “I see a cherub that sees them” (4.3.48-57).
The cherub of which Hamlet speaks recalls the images of the angel, usually present in paintings of the women at the empty tomb.
[Image: Oil on canvas, circa 1590s, by Annibale Carracci (1560–1609); now held in the Hermitage Museum, St. Petersberg. Public domain, via Wikimedia.]
[Image: Fresco (circa 1441), by Fra Angelico, Museum of San Marco. Public domain, via Wikimedia.]
[Image: Lorenzo Monaco, "The Three Marys at the Tomb" (manuscript illumination of a 1396 antiphonary), on vellum, Musée du Louvre, Paris. Public domain, via Wikimedia.]
In more detail:
Consider the passage from John. The Geneva translation that was available to Shakespeare renders it this way:
13 And they said unto her, Woman, why weepest thou?
She said unto them,
They have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him.
14 When she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing,
and knew not that it was Jesus.
15 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou?
She, supposing that he had been the gardener, said unto him,
Sir, if thou hast borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.
It is also good to recall that especially in Matthew's gospel, there is mention of the guards (Jewish temple guards? or Roman guards?) who were terrified at the splitting of the stone blocking the doorway: These guards seem to have been posted because of rumors that Jesus had spoken in advance of how he would rise (in general, or perhaps specifically on the third day), and so it seems they did not want the corpse to be stolen by Jesus' followers in advance of a faked resurrection.
[There is a larger theological point here as well, and a literary one regarding the developing literature of the various gospels:
Perhaps the empty tomb was initially meant to signify that the "body" of Jesus is not to be found in a tomb, but rather, to be found in those who break egalitarian bread in his memory and who live changed by his teaching. Only later would this be reified, or taken much more literally, (I believe).
- The point of the story of the appearance in the upper room may have been that Jesus was already in the room because all of the disciples present had been changed by Jesus' teaching, and had partaken in the bread and wine at the Last Supper, so Jesus was already present in the room, though not apparent to them in their mourning at first.
- The point of the Emmaus story, Jesus appearing to two disciples on the road, might be the realization that the could find the "stuff" of Jesus present in a stranger who did for them things like Jesus had done: Listen to their fears and concerns, break open the wisdom of the scriptures for them, comfort them, correct them, and break bread with them. The point is not that the Jesus who appeared on the road to Emmaus was a shape-shifter, or a man who could do Jedi mind-tricks, to cloud their minds so that he would go unrecognized at first, but that it was really a stranger who just happened to do Jesus-like things for them. This made them realize that the grace of God and the stuff of Jesus was still available to them in the world, although their teacher had been crucified. Jesus the master and teacher was not to be found in a tomb or a corpse, but in other disciples, and even in strangers.
- It's not unusual for these nuances to be lost over time and through translations, because their nuanced experiences of Jesus being present to them after his crucifixion was mysterious and strange. So it was reified, thing-i-fied, and taken more literally over time.
- Still, the stories include claims that the body was stolen, that the resurrection was therefore faked, a pack of lies, and this made the Christian cult seem a threat to both the Jerusalem temple establishment and to the Romans.
- Might Shakespeare have grasped any of this? In the graveyard scene, he certainly has great fun with the first gravedigger/clown taking scripture taking scripture too literally.
- But in general, not only did the disciples experience anxiety about the empty tomb, but the authorities may have as well. Some of this may be combined and reflected a bit in the anxiety of the men over the missing body of Polonius.]
In 4.2, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern enter and Rosencrantz asks,
“What have you done, my lord, with the dead body?” (v.5).
And later,
“My lord, you must tell us where the body is and go with us to the King” (v.25-6).
In 4.3.1 Claudius says,
“I have sent to seek him and to find the body.” (v.1)
and Rosencrantz soon reports,
“Where the dead body is bestowed, my lord,
We cannot get from him” (v.13-14).
When Hamlet is brought in, Claudius asks,
“Now, Hamlet, where’s Polonius?”
to which Hamlet jokes about how he is at supper, being eaten by worms, with allusions to Martin Luther and the Diet of Worms.
Finally Hamlet gives in and tells where the body can be found, and Claudius speaks of Hamlet’s coming sea-voyage to England:
Therefore prepare thyself.
The bark is ready, and the wind at help,
Th’ associates tend, and everything is bent
For England.
HAMLET
For England?
KING
Ay, Hamlet.
HAMLET
Good.
KING
So is it, if thou knew’st our purposes.
HAMLET
I see a cherub that sees them. But come, for England. (4.3.48-57)
If there is an echo of the women at the tomb, it is certainly an ironic one, because again, and Stephen Greenblatt notes, the body of Polonius is not the body of Christ.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Disclaimer: If and when I quote or paraphrase bible passages or mention religion in many of my blog posts, I do not intend to promote any religion over another, nor am I attempting to promote religious belief in general; only to point out how the Bible and religion may have influenced Shakespeare, his plays, and his age.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks for reading!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My current project is a book tentatively titled Hamlet’s Bible, about biblical allusions and plot echoes in Hamlet.
Below is a link to a list of some of my top posts (“greatest hits”), including a description of my book project (last item on the list):
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2019/12/top-20-hamlet-bible-posts.html
I post every week, so please visit as often as you like and consider subscribing.
Strangely, this echoes what, in Christian tradition, came to be known as “the three Marys” at the tomb of Jesus, with Mary Magdalene in John 20:11-15 being especially verbal about her anxiety about the missing body.
This perhaps offers an ironic and even humorous feminizing of Claudius, Rosencrantz, and Guildenstern in the comparison.
If Shakespeare offers such an ironic and playful contrast to evoke something in his audiences, what is the purpose?
First, if feminizing the three male characters in the comparison seems strange, consider that the play already toys with gender references: Because man and wife become one flesh, Hamlet calls Claudius “mother” three times (4.3.58-61);
Laertes tries not to cry upon news of his sister’s death because it would be too feminine, but when he fails and begins to cry anyway, he says his tears will cry the woman out of him: “When these are gone,
The woman will be out.” (4.7.214-15).
Shakespeare created many strong female characters in his plays, arguably better and stronger than many of his male characters, yet he (like Laertes) also knew that the stereotype of the male as weak or emotional and therefore feminine was an effective insult.
Various critics since the play was first performed have noted the similarity between Polonius and William Cecil, Elizabeth’s Lord Treasurer, involved in spycraft, and many have noted that Cecil may have been, in many ways, more powerful than Elizabeth I, and for this reason, he was unpopular in certain circles, which in large part was the motivation for the Essex rebellion.
So consider: The killing of Polonius, in the middle of an act of spying (perhaps therefore considered "hell-bound," not a "good death"), might be offered as a fantasy of justice, how some may have wished Cecil had come to his end.
Having his body missing, with all the comparisons to Jesus and the empty tomb, offers a stark ironic contrast: As Stephen Greenblatt has noted, the body of Polonius is a far cry from the body of Christ. (Footnote needed; related to Greenblatt's claims in Hamlet in Purgatory, 2001, 240-241).
Since people in Shakespeare's England were required by law to attend church, they would be familiar with the story of the empty tomb and much less likely than people today to miss the ironic allusion.
Claudius speaks of Hamlet’s upcoming sea-voyage to England, and Hamlet replies, “Good.”
Claudius says, “So it is, if thou knew’st our purposes.”
Hamlet replies, “I see a cherub that sees them” (4.3.48-57).
The cherub of which Hamlet speaks recalls the images of the angel, usually present in paintings of the women at the empty tomb.
In more detail:
Consider the passage from John. The Geneva translation that was available to Shakespeare renders it this way:
13 And they said unto her, Woman, why weepest thou?
She said unto them,
They have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him.
14 When she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing,
and knew not that it was Jesus.
15 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou?
She, supposing that he had been the gardener, said unto him,
Sir, if thou hast borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.
It is also good to recall that especially in Matthew's gospel, there is mention of the guards (Jewish temple guards? or Roman guards?) who were terrified at the splitting of the stone blocking the doorway: These guards seem to have been posted because of rumors that Jesus had spoken in advance of how he would rise (in general, or perhaps specifically on the third day), and so it seems they did not want the corpse to be stolen by Jesus' followers in advance of a faked resurrection.
[There is a larger theological point here as well, and a literary one regarding the developing literature of the various gospels:
Perhaps the empty tomb was initially meant to signify that the "body" of Jesus is not to be found in a tomb, but rather, to be found in those who break egalitarian bread in his memory and who live changed by his teaching. Only later would this be reified, or taken much more literally, (I believe).
- The point of the story of the appearance in the upper room may have been that Jesus was already in the room because all of the disciples present had been changed by Jesus' teaching, and had partaken in the bread and wine at the Last Supper, so Jesus was already present in the room, though not apparent to them in their mourning at first.
- The point of the Emmaus story, Jesus appearing to two disciples on the road, might be the realization that the could find the "stuff" of Jesus present in a stranger who did for them things like Jesus had done: Listen to their fears and concerns, break open the wisdom of the scriptures for them, comfort them, correct them, and break bread with them. The point is not that the Jesus who appeared on the road to Emmaus was a shape-shifter, or a man who could do Jedi mind-tricks, to cloud their minds so that he would go unrecognized at first, but that it was really a stranger who just happened to do Jesus-like things for them. This made them realize that the grace of God and the stuff of Jesus was still available to them in the world, although their teacher had been crucified. Jesus the master and teacher was not to be found in a tomb or a corpse, but in other disciples, and even in strangers.
- It's not unusual for these nuances to be lost over time and through translations, because their nuanced experiences of Jesus being present to them after his crucifixion was mysterious and strange. So it was reified, thing-i-fied, and taken more literally over time.
- Still, the stories include claims that the body was stolen, that the resurrection was therefore faked, a pack of lies, and this made the Christian cult seem a threat to both the Jerusalem temple establishment and to the Romans.
- Might Shakespeare have grasped any of this? In the graveyard scene, he certainly has great fun with the first gravedigger/clown taking scripture taking scripture too literally.
- But in general, not only did the disciples experience anxiety about the empty tomb, but the authorities may have as well. Some of this may be combined and reflected a bit in the anxiety of the men over the missing body of Polonius.]
In 4.2, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern enter and Rosencrantz asks,
“What have you done, my lord, with the dead body?” (v.5).
And later,
“My lord, you must tell us where the body is and go with us to the King” (v.25-6).
In 4.3.1 Claudius says,
“I have sent to seek him and to find the body.” (v.1)
and Rosencrantz soon reports,
“Where the dead body is bestowed, my lord,
We cannot get from him” (v.13-14).
When Hamlet is brought in, Claudius asks,
“Now, Hamlet, where’s Polonius?”
to which Hamlet jokes about how he is at supper, being eaten by worms, with allusions to Martin Luther and the Diet of Worms.
Finally Hamlet gives in and tells where the body can be found, and Claudius speaks of Hamlet’s coming sea-voyage to England:
Therefore prepare thyself.
The bark is ready, and the wind at help,
Th’ associates tend, and everything is bent
For England.
HAMLET
For England?
KING
Ay, Hamlet.
HAMLET
Good.
KING
So is it, if thou knew’st our purposes.
HAMLET
I see a cherub that sees them. But come, for England. (4.3.48-57)
If there is an echo of the women at the tomb, it is certainly an ironic one, because again, and Stephen Greenblatt notes, the body of Polonius is not the body of Christ.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Disclaimer: If and when I quote or paraphrase bible passages or mention religion in many of my blog posts, I do not intend to promote any religion over another, nor am I attempting to promote religious belief in general; only to point out how the Bible and religion may have influenced Shakespeare, his plays, and his age.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks for reading!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My current project is a book tentatively titled Hamlet’s Bible, about biblical allusions and plot echoes in Hamlet.
Below is a link to a list of some of my top posts (“greatest hits”), including a description of my book project (last item on the list):
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2019/12/top-20-hamlet-bible-posts.html
I post every week, so please visit as often as you like and consider subscribing.
Comments
Post a Comment