Paul Adrian Fried / HAMLET'S BIBLE

Divine right of monarchs is challenged by Shakespeare's scripture allusions, especially in Hamlet. 1. When Hamlet spares Claudius at prayer [1], this echos of 1 Samuel 24 and 26, where David has chances to kill King Saul, but will not raise a hand against “God’s anointed.” - But years before Saul’s death, Saul acted badly and fell to disfavor with God, whose prophet chose David as successor (1 Sam 16) while Saul was still alive. This challenges unrestricted divine right.  2. St. Paul in Romans 13 urges obedience to rulers, as it is their job to maintain civil order, but does not include obedience to immoral orders of tyrants [2]. 3. Darren Freebury-Jones recently noted key ideas from John Neville Figgis’ book on the Divine Right of Kings, [3], including that the monarch is accountable to God alone. 4. More fundamentally, however, scriptures quote Jesus as saying, “whatever you do unto the least of these, you do unto me” [4]. By this logic, when monarchs treat “the least” badly, t...

How do we understand an allusion, such as Shakespeare's Hamlet using a play to catch the conscience of the king, like the prophet Nathan catching the conscience of King David? Especially after the New Critics, the "death of the author," and disillusionment with “old historicism,” there was a tendency to ignore many aspects of historical-cultural contexts in favor of only what is immediately clear in the text. This may have seemed a more objective, even empirical approach: If the text doesn't say "Nathan" or "David" or "Bathsheba," or use the same phrasing as the Bible, shall we assume there is no such biblical allusion present? The more subtle the allusion, the more reason to doubt it? What if we know that many other writers in Shakespeare's time were alluding to or retelling the David story? Did that allow for a kind of shorthand in making allusions? Last week’s post [1] noted that Shakespeare didn't always have to be explicit;...

Shakespeare didn’t need to be too explicit about some biblical allusions: He knew his Bible-influenced audiences would experience his play through lenses of scripture. When modern critics split hairs about whether something is explicit enough to count as an allusion [1], they're imposing modern expectations on Elizabethan texts. This is true of Hamlet’s Davidic influences: In 1599 George Peele’s popular play “David and Bathsebe” was published in quarto after stage success (c. 1595-9). David was a trending topic [2]. In this context Shakespeare wrote his Hamlet (1599-1601-04): King Hamlet fought Old Fortinbras in single combat, as David fought Goliath [3]. Claudius killed King Hamlet to take his wife Gertrude, as King David arranged for Uriah’s death to steal his wife, Bathsheba [4]. The sentinels and Horatio [5], and also the Danish public [6] may have thought Prince Hamlet the rightful heir denied the throne, like David, chosen by God via the prophet Samuel to be the next king...

How old is the death letter motif in Hamlet, where did it come from, and is there anything special about the way Shakespeare uses it? In Hamlet, Shakespeare retains the motif of the death letter from the Danish source. Claudius sends a letter with Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, and Hamlet on their journey to England [4.3.67-77], but they don’t know that it orders Hamlet’s death. People in Shakespeare’s time knew this death letter motif by way of the biblical story of David’s affair with Bathsheba (circa 10c. BCE). King David sends Bathsheba’s husband Uriah to the battlefront with a letter that he is to be placed at the front of battle, and others should pull back. He is killed [1]. A later Greek version of the motif comes from the 8th century BCE myth of Bellerophon [2]. The reluctance of kings to violate rules of hospitality plays a key role in delaying fatal plans and helping Bellerophon prevail in the end. For anyone who is sad to hear of Uriah’s fate, a faithful soldier deceived b...

At least four biblical echoes in Hamlet besides the fall of Adam and Eve involve delay, and Elizabethans would have known each story[1]: 1. After King David’s affair with Bathsheba and arranging for the death of her husband, the prophet Nathan could have simply confronted David with his sins, but delayed to use a story to catch the king’s conscience (2 Sam 12:1-7). [2] - This is echoed in Hamlet’s use of the play to catch the conscience of the king [2.2.634]. ~~ 2. David spared King Saul when he had two chances to kill him, which delayed David’s ascension to the throne [3]. - These David-Saul tales are echoed (with a dark twist) in Hamlet’s choice not to kill Claudius at prayer [3.3.80-100]. ~~ 3. Jonah fled west to Tarshish when he was called to prophesy to Nineveh (Jonah 1:1-3), delaying his prophecy. After a storm and being thrown overboard, Jonah is swallowed by a fish God sends to take him back east to do his task [4]. - Jonah’s westward voyage and east-bound transfer from ship ...

Paul and Agrippa, not Becket? Fifth Day of Christmas, December 29: Bible readings for morning and evening prayer in Shakespeare’s England followed their own schedule, unrelated to feasts such as St. Thomas Becket (removed by Henry VIII and the English Reformation) [1]. Morning: Psalm 29 - Geneva Introduction: “The Prophet exhorteth the princes and rulers of the world (which for the most part think there is no God.)” [2]. Lesson 1: Isaiah 61 speaks of God’s anointed (which Christians interpreted to be Jesus) setting prisoners free. - At least six Shakespeare plays involve prisoners, real or figurative, some set free only in death [3]. - The point here is not that each of these plays alludes to Jesus as liberator of prisoners, but that the Bible readings in English churches (where Shakespeare’s attendance was required by law) shaped and influenced the development of religious and literary motifs related to prisoners and their liberation. Lesson 2: Acts 26 - Prisoner St. Paul encoun...

The First Sunday after Christmas is a movable feast: Sundays fall on whatever dates in December they fall on, depending on the year. It falls on the 29th this year (also the Fifth Day of Christmas; see Part 5.a.). One theme of the day’s Matthew 1 gospel is the royal bloodline of Jesus. On his father Joseph’s side, the gospel claims there were 14 generations from Abraham to King David; 14 from David to the Babylonian captivity; and 14 from that to Jesus. Seven was considered a number of perfection, so fourteen is double perfection, here times three. On his mother’s side, Jesus was also (figuratively) of royal (heavenly) blood, conceived out of wedlock by the Holy Spirit, but an angel appears to Joseph in a dream, explains, and tells him to marry her anyway (mentioned in a previous post [1] as possibly related to Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure ). On the one hand, King David was considered a great king. He also seems a disaster. He had an affair with Bathsheba and arranged for the deat...

How might we best grasp (“get a handle on”) Hamlet’s “Mousetrap,” the play-within-the-play? Thirteen handles (see also more lengthy endnotes corresponding to numbered list): 1. Hamlet asks the first player if he can play “The Murder of Gonzago.” This points to Francesco Maria I della Rovere, Duke of Urbino; whose wife was Eleonora Gonzaga, and who was marginalized (like Essex and Lord Strange, and poisoned like Strange).[1] 2. “The play’s the thing / Wherein I’ll catch the conscience of the King.” — Hamlet says he will do this by reproducing events like his father’s murder with the help of the players.[2] 3. This conscience-trap echoes the prophet Nathan catching King David’s conscience in a story, after David’s affair with Bathsheba and arranging for the death of her husband.[3] 4. The play-within-the-play begins as a trap for the conscience of his mother, Queen Gertrude. — Later in Gertrude’s closet scene, it’s clear that Hamlet wants his mother to repent, a...