Paul Adrian Fried / HAMLET'S BIBLE

Among the Ten Commandments posted prominently at the front of every church in Shakespeare’s England, the Fourth Commandment was to “KEEP HOLY THE SABBATH DAY." There is one mention of the sabbath in Hamlet :  MARCELLUS: Good now, sit down, and tell me, he that knows, Why this same strict and most observant watch So nightly toils the subject of the land, And why such daily cast of brazen cannon And foreign mart for implements of war, Why such impress of shipwrights, whose sore task Does not divide the Sunday from the week. What might be toward that this sweaty haste Doth make the night joint laborer with the day? Normally days were for work, while nights and the Sabbath were for rest; but preparations for war with Norway, stemming from an old feud based on pride, have not only affected the monarchy and soldiers, but have disrupted the entire social fabric. While Claudius orders cannons to be fired as he plays his drinking game, normal boundaries for work, rest, and worship have b...

WHY "SWOUNDS" in Hamlet 2.2 and 5.1?  Third Commandment (series) In recent posts in this series, I offered that perhaps there are good reasons why Shakespeare has characters use specific “minced oaths” such as “Marry” (Mary, mother of Jesus) [1], or “God’s Bodkins” (God’s little bodies, or Eucharist) [2], even if in so doing they violate the third commandment against taking in vain the name of God (or other holy persons or things) [3].  In 2.2 and 5.1, Hamlet uses the minced oath “Swounds,” or in other words, “Christ’s wounds” or “God’s wounds,” a popular focus of medieval and even renaissance piety (see image notes). Why does he use "Swounds" in these two scenes, instead of any number of others used elsewhere in the play [4] by Hamlet or other characters?  Both of these scenes either use more violent rhetoric, or foreshadow stronger physical violence, so associating the moment with “Swounds” makes sense:  In 2.2, Hamlet speaks only to himself, but scolds himself ...

HAMLET, Polonius, Marry, and the THIRD COMMANDMENT (series) Polonius wins at cursing the most in a single scene in Hamlet [1], and the forms of cursing he chooses to use convey irony. Characters in Hamlet swear or curse (taking the name of God or saints or religious things in vain) [2] as many as 21 times [3]. In a single scene, Polonius swears more than any other character in the play does in a single scene: Twice in the play he swears "by the Mass!" (in 2.1 and 3.2). Six times he swears "Marry" (twice in 1.3, and four times in 2.1), a reference to St. Mary, virgin mother of Jesus. (“Marry” occurs 12 times in the play.)  Instead of saying "for Christ's sake!", to exclaim "Marry" was like saying, "oh, by the virgin mother of Jesus!"  “Marry” is appropriate: When Polonius gives Ophelia a book to read in 3.1, he tells her:  Read on this book, That show of such an exercise may color Your loneliness.—We are oft to blame in this (’Tis...

Queen Elizabeth is said to have sworn like a sailor. Her favorite, “‘s’death!” (God’s death) invoked the crucifixion, perhaps projecting power as a woman in what was thought to be a man’s job [1]. In Tudor England, “A Sermon Against Swearing and Perjury" [2] was seventh in the First Book of Homilies (1547). It warned against taking God’s name in vain (Third Commandment), abusing holy names and words, and breaking oaths. Judging by how often characters in Hamlet abuse holy names and words, you’d think that the sermon was not working.  Characters invoke God, Jesus (Gis), saints, Jesus’ mother Mary (Marry), wounds (s’wounds) and blood (s’blood) of Christ, and Catholic Mass (by the mass) which claimed that the body of Jesus was present in Eucharist (little bodies, “God's bodkin”) [3]. Some swear on the cross-handle of a sword (1.5). Polonius (often thought to be a satire of William Cecil [4]) swears the most in a single scene (five times in 2.1). Such words and phrases occur in th...

“Words, words, words”: Hamlet, the Second Commandment & Idolatries of Reformation Literalism In Shakespeare’s lifetime, Protestants accused Catholics of idolatry, taking too literally their Eucharist (“this is my body”). Protestants claimed that more figurative meanings had been intended. To them, Catholics - like the ghost in Hamlet - went through the motions mechanically, without sincerity. To Protestants, this was artificial and idolatrous [1]. Shakespeare scholar Jennifer Rust (2003) [2] has noted that the mechanical reproduction of translated Bibles created new, similar problems of idolatry for Protestants, citing Greenblatt (1980) [3] regarding what he calls a fetishism of the printed word (94). Instead of a Latin Bible interpreted by the authority of bishops alone, greater access resulted in an exponentially higher number of contentious disagreements and potential idolatries [4]. Many factions claimed that they possessed true interpretations, and that others did not. B...

The ways that different Christian groups numbered the Ten Commandments may mean little to us today, but these meant a great deal in Shakespeare’s lifetime and may have left its marks on Hamlet. Catholics and Lutherans followed the numbering of St. Augustine (5th century):  1. THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BUT ME - and - THOU SHALT NOT MAKE TO THYSELF ANY GRAVEN IMAGE.  The second half emphasizes the first: Worship God alone, not other gods or graven images.  But reformed churches (including Calvinist Scottish and English churches) used an older numbering of Origen (3rd Century):  1. "THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BUT ME."  2. "THOU SHALT NOT MAKE TO THYSELF ANY GRAVEN IMAGE."  Graven images included icons, statues, paintings: targets of Elizabethan iconoclasm.  To reformed churches, Catholics were idolators, worshiping statues, rosaries, and paintings of saints instead of God alone. Following the older numbering from Origen made it easier to justify...

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… ...

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 ...

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...