Ham. A little more than kin, and less than kind.

Ham. A little more than kin, and less than kind.] Kind is the Teutonick word for child. Hamlet therefore answers with propriety, to the titles of cousin and son, which the king had given him, that he was somewhat more than cousin, and less than son. JOHNSON.

In this line, with which Shakspeare introduces Hamlet, Dr. Johnson has perhaps pointed out a nicer distinction than it can justly boast of. To establish the sense contended for, it should have been proved that kind was ever used by any English writer for child. A little more than kin, is a little more than common relation. The king was certainly something less than kind, by having betrayed the mother of Hamlet into an indecent and incestuous marriage, and obtained the crown by means which he suspects to be unjustifiable. In the fifth Act, the Prince accuses his uncle of having popt in between the election and his hopes, which obviates Dr. Warburton's objection to the old reading, viz. that “ the king had given no occasion for such a reflection."

A jingle of the same sort is found in Mother Bombie 1594, and seems to have been proverbial, as I have met with it more than once: -the nearer we are in blood, the further we must be from love; the greater the kindred is, the less the kindness must be."

Again, in Gorboduc, a tragedy, 1565:

"In kinde a father, but not kindelyness."

As kind, however, signifies nature, Hamlet may mcan that his relationship was become an unnatural one, as it was partly founded upon incest. Our author's Julius Cesar, Antony and Cleopatra, King Richard II. and Titus Andronicus, exhibit instances of kind being used for nature; and so too in this play of Hamlet, act ii. sc. the last :

Remorseless, treacherous, lecherous, kindless villain.

Dr. Farmer, however, observes that kin is still used for cousin in the midland counties. STEEVENS.

Hamlet does not, I think, mean to say, that his uncle is a little more than kin, &c. The king had called the PrinceMy cousin Hamlet, and my son."-His reply therefore is،، I am a little more than thy kinsman, [for I am thy step-son ;] and somewhat less than kind to thee, [for I hate thee, as being the person who has entered into an incestuous marriage with my mother.] Or, if we understand kind, in its ancient sense, then the meaning will be-I am more than thy kinsman, for I am thy step-son; being such, I am less near to thee than thy natural offspring, and therefore not entitled to the appellation of son, which you have now given me. MALONE.

"A little more than kin, and less than kind." The word kind is here, I believe, contracted of kindred, and used not as it may have reference to personal affinity, but to that of the mind. It stands for congenial, that is, partaking of the same genius: being of the same intellectual nature. Hamlet would say, we are more than kin or cousins by birth; but far removed from it by disposition. In other language, and as we now express it, we are not of kindred spirit: we are not in agreement or concord. "A little more than kin, but less than kindred."

B.

King. How is it, that the clouds still hang on

you?

Ham. Not so, my Lord, I am too much i' the

sun.

-too much i' the sun.] He perhaps alludes to the proverb, Out of heaven's blessing into the warm sun. JOHNSON.

-too much i' cun.

Meaning probably his being sent for from his studies to be exposed at his uncle's marriage as his chiefest courtier, &c. STEEVENS.

I question whether a quibble between sun and son be not here intended. FARMER.

"King. But now, my Cousin Hamlet, and my sonHow is it, that the clouds still hang on you?

Ham. Not so, my Lord, I am too much i' the sun. The King says "How is it, that the clouds still hang on you?" This is spoken of the Prince's sorrow: of the grief which is manifested by him for the death of his father. Hamlet answers ambiguously—“ Not so; 1 am too much i'the sun;" which expression may by Claudius be supposed to signify, that the sun of majesty darts his rays on one who is unworthy of so much favor, &c. In this sense it must be considered as wholly ironical. Or he may wish to have it thought that by clouds hanging

on him, he had understood the king as obliquely hinting to him, that by continuing to indulge his sorrows, he must necessarily be hid from the view of the people, by whom he was greatly beloved;—and that he was so, we learn by a subsequent passage:

"He's lov'd of the distracted multitude, &c."

Hamlet was well persuaded that his uncle had become distrustful, or fearful of the influence which he might have with the multitude; and he therefore (if the latter interpretation be admitted) would willingly keep alive the anxieties of him whom he suspected to be the murderer of his father-and hence his reply-" Not so, my Lord, I am too much i' the sun," i. e. "quite the contrary: I am too prominent an object: I am too much seen."-That is, and as he would indirectly express it,-too much seen by the Danes for you to be at ease, for you to be in fect peace. B.

per

Ham. Seems, madam! nay, it is; I know not

seems.

'Tis not alone my inky cloak, good mother,

Nor customary suits of solemn black,
Nor windy suspiration of forc'd breath,
No, nor the fruitful river in the eye,
Nor the dejected haviour of the visage,
Together with all forms, modes, shows of grief,
That can denote me truly.

"'Tis not my inky cloak alone, good mother," &c. The quarto 1611, reads: ""Tis not my inky cloak could smother :” [for good mother.] Had there been but one copy, how could this strange error have been rectified, but by the boldness of conjecture? MALONE.

The reading of the quarto 1611, and which Mr. Malone has called a "strange error," I would, with a change

in the punctuation, restore to our author, to whom it undoubtedly belongs. The present expression good Mother,' is weak, while the rejected one could smother,' is pointed and strong. To give the necessary correctness to the passage, we have only to remove the word 'that' from the concluding hemistich, and insert it in the second line, substituting e'er in its place. Read:

“Seems, madam, nay it is, I know not seems;

It is :-Not that my inky cloak could smother.-
Nor customary suits, &c.

Can e'er denote me truly."

The repetition of it is gives force to the sentiment which, as I have already hinted, is greatly heightened by the words Not that my inky cloak could smother.' It should be observed that in the speech of Hamlet there is not only a justification of himself, but an indirect censure of his mother. He says, my grief is not seeming it is. It is not affected; it is not that which might be, and in fact often is real joy,-hid, concealed by an inky cloak: a cloak indeed that may not only be worn to conceal joy, but which is by the common observer supposed to denote sorrow. Nor customary' &c. is not spoken as being immediately connected with the foregoing lines; or as marking a regular train of thought. There is a full stop at 'smother.' He then particularizes the 'shows of grief.' Neither customary suits,' &c. Nor windy,' &c. can ever denote me truly. The words 'good mother,' (not again to insist on their nothingness,) are absolutely redundant, as 'Madam' occurs in the preceding line. They are thrown in merely to eke out the verse: the original reading not being understood by the Editors. B.

King. But to perséver

In obstinate condolement, is a course

Of impious stubbornness; 'tis unmanly grief:
It shows a will most incorrect to heaven.

a will most incorrect-] Incorrect for untutor'd. WARBURTON.

"A will most incorrect" Untutored, as set down by Warburton, will give by no means the full, the particular sense of incorrect. A will most incorrect to Heaven,' is a criminal kind of will: a will opposed to the will of Heaven. B.

King. For, let the world take note, You are the most immediate to our throne; And, with no less nobility of love

Than that which dearest father bears his son,

Do I impart toward you.

And with no less nobility of love.] Nobility for magnitude. WARBURTON.

Nobility is rather generosity. JoHNSON.

Nobility of love" may mean, true and virtuous love. B.

Ham. So loving to my mother,

That he might not let e'en the winds of heaven
Visit her face too roughly.

In former editions

That he permitted not the winds of heaven.

This is a sophistical reading, copied from the players in some of the modern editions, for want of understanding the poet, whose text is corrupt in the old impressions: all of which that I have had the fortune to see, concur in reading So loving to my mother,

That he might not beteene the winds of heaven
Visit her face too roughly.

Beteene is a corruption without doubt, but not so inveterate a one, but that, by the change of a single letter, and the separation of two words mistakenly jumbled together, I am verily persuaded, I have retrieved the poet's reading-That