Paul Adrian Fried / HAMLET'S BIBLE

HOW IS SHAKESPEARE’S HAMLET A REFORMATION PLAY, pointing to efforts by Catholics and Protestants to reform Christian institutions and hearts? 1. First on stage is Francisco. Francis of Assisi was a famous church reformer [1] (demonstrating that "reformation" - reforming the church - was a popular  topic centuries before Martin Luther). 2. Second is Bernardo. Bernard of Clairvaux was a famous Cistercian monastic reformer [2]. 3. Hamlet goes to university at Wittenberg, where Martin Luther nailed his theses to the door [3]. 4. The ghost tells Hamlet that he is being purged of sins (purgatory, believed in by many Catholics, doubted by many Protestants) [4]. 5. Hamlet tells the players not to overact. The actors say they have "reformed" that; Hamlet replies, "reform it altogether" [5], reformation wordplay. 6. Hamlet mentions a "convocation of politic worms," ‘your only emperor for diet” [6]: A council, the “Diet of Worms,” questioned Luther’s orthod...

In Shakespeare’s time, people discussed and debated the Eucharistic controversy, and some think there are references to it in Hamlet (in things such as the chalice of poison wine as a "black mass"; or, as I have argued in this series, an Emmaus plot echo in the graveyard scene [1]).  In the biblical account, when Jesus at the Last supper told the twelve to eat and drink the bread and wine as his body and blood, what did he really mean? The way we choose to understand Jesus’ appearance to the disciples on the road to Emmaus might be viewed as resembling the Eucharistic controversy. Also, in some ways, debates about what the gospel writers meant by things like virgin births, Eucharist, resurrections, and resurrection appearances (as on the road to Emmaus) have been described as debates about semiotics [2]. [Image: Titian (1490–1576), "Pilgrims at Emmaus" (Français: LE SOUPER A EMMAUS), circa 1535. Louvre Museum. Public domain, via Wikipedia .] What had the dis...

Bread and wine. Wine and bread. To-MAY-to, To-MAH-to. [1] Does it matter what we emphasize or begin with? In previous posts, I’ve explored echoes in Hamlet 5.1 of the Emmaus tale from Luke 24:13-35 [2]. [Image: Altar of the Sienese cathedral, reverse, main register with scenes from Christ's passion, scenes: Christ appears to two pilgrim apostles in Emmaus. 1308-1311. Artist: Duccio di Buoninsegna (1255–1319). Collection: Museo dell'Opera del Duomo, Siena. Public domain, via Wikipedia .] Between Luke’s version of the tale and Shakespeare’s in Hamlet, we noted a difference of bread and wine: In the original story from Luke, the stranger on the road to Emmaus is not recognized as an appearance of the risen Jesus until they break bread with him. But in Hamlet 5.1 we noted that broken bread is replaced with spilled wine: Hamlet had been holding an unrecognized skull, and asked the gravedigger whose it was. The gravedigger replied, saying it belonged to Yorick, and ...

Have you eyes? Could you on this fair mountain leave to feed, And batten on this moor? - Hamlet , 3.4.2449-2451 In Patricia Parker's 2003 essay, "Black Hamlet Battening on the Moor" ( Shakespeare Studies , Vol. 31), she masterfully discusses the line from Hamlet 3.4 in which, for his mother's benefit, the prince compares his dead father to a "fair mountain" and his Uncle Claudius to a swamp or "moor," analyzing many implications of the phrase as "part of the racialized lexicon of color" (144) in this and other plays. She notes that others before her like Dover Wilson have picked up on at least the double meaning in this passage, a first meaning being geographical (mountain vs. swamp), and a second being a racialized meaning (a fair and good Nordic Arian vs. a dark and evil "moor"). ~~~~~ [Postscript 7 November, 2025: It is possible that when Hamlet calls Claudius a "Moor" in Gertrude's closet scene (3.4.76-77...