History Headscratchers / Hamlet

** As far as Hamlet was concerned they were Claudius spies, nothing more. It can depend on the production wheter they was happy co-conspirators to Claudius or clueless well-meaners who genuinly tries to figure out why their friend has gone mad. Definetly an KickTheDog Moment.
** This is a left over from the Amlet myth. In that story the child Amlet is sent to England escorted by two unnamed members of the court with orders to have Amlet killed once in England. Amlet manages to use his guile to turn the tables on the two and impresses the english king enough to be married to his daughter. He then grows up to manhod in England before returning do Denmark for the final climax. Shakespeare condenced the plot by having Hamlet be an adult from the beginning and expanded the court members into Hamlets friends in order to give Hamlet someone other than Polonius to run loops around, but keeps the whole "Traveling to England, kills the dudes that is trying to kill him"-bit whitout realizing how his changes to the story screwed up those moments.

** Hamlets father defeated Fortinbras father at the field of battle the same day that Hamlet was born. [Gravedigger scene] Fortinbras used Hamlet Sr's deaths as an chance to reclaim his land and to avenge his fathers death. He and Laertes are used as a {{foil}} to Hamlet, them being sons that try to avenge their fathers death.

* Leartes and Hamlet leap into Ophelia's open grave... while performing on an empty Elizabethian stage. wut?

** [[http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140416-do-shakespeares-poisons-work This article]] suggests several substances - but they wouldn't be fatal unless the tissue inside King Hamlet's ear was damaged (via an infection or some form of hearing loss).

** Claudius himself says a couple of times that the decision is primarily because Hamlet is too popular with the general public in Denmark. Plus, Hamlet's not exactly been subtle about hating his uncle and thinking something suspicious is going on - it depends on the production but often the play scene is shown to have revealed Hamlet's intentions to Claudius as much as it reveals Claudius' guilt to Hamlet. So if he suddenly turned up dead in the exact same manner as his father, it becomes a lot harder to cover up. Hamlet being killed in England is easier to write off as maybe he pissed off the wrong person due to his insanity. Or maybe his death would never be revealed at all and Claudius would have just pretended Hamlet was living in England permanently.

** Given that it's never even mentioned as a potential option for any member of the royal family to be legally arrested, tried and executed, I'm going to guess it ''isn't'' an option. At least, not in the world of the Danish court as it exists within the play. Even when Hamlet gains his proof of Claudius killing his father, he never demands that Claudius be executed. Even when Claudius ''admits'' his crimes at the end of the play, Hamlet still has to kill him himself. So presumably, within the world of the play, there's no legal standing for any monarch to be arrested, let alone tried and executed even for murder. Also, Claudius does mention a few times that Hamlet is popular with the general population in Denmark - arresting and killing him would not endear Claudius to them in the slightest.

** Remember, Hamlet was initially supposed to drink it as soon as it's been poisoned. It's Hamlet's decision not to drink there and then that gives anyone else the opportunity to go near it in the first place. Not only that, but it's also technically Hamlet's cup so Claudius isn't really at liberty to stop anyone from going near it who wants to. As far as Claudius is concerned, he knows Hamlet knows he killed Hamlet Sr, and he knows Hamlet has been trying to expose him at best and kill him at worst, and he also knows Hamlet was smart enough to have avoided being killed (which probably means Hamlet also knows Claudius has now tried to kill him). If Claudius were to start getting possessive over who goes near the cup, for all he knows that's essentially equal to holding up a neon sign saying "Yo, Hamlet, something's '''definitely''' up with this wine!!". Also a lot of it comes down to the staging - it's not uncommon to have him on the other side of the stage with Laertes at the point Gertrude goes to drink so that he can't physically stop her. Other productions do have him try to physically stop her but she fights him off and drinks it anyway.

** Shakespeare was writing what he knew and what he knew was that it was absurdly common in his time for bones from old graves (except those from a wealthy enough family to guarantee a plot of burial land for themselves) to be simply dug up and removed to make room for the newly dead, which is presumably what's happening in this scene. Ophelia is getting buried on unsanctified ground so she would be being buried in an overcrowded paupers' graveyard which would be practically filled to bursting with unmarked graves. Most productions play it so that the grave being dug is either adjacent to or is outright replacing Yorik's.

* Leartes and Hamlet leap into Ophelias open grave... while performing on an empty Elizabethian stage. wut?

** Very likely Gertrude discovered Ophelia after a MUCH more gruesome suicide and is just prettying up the story for the benefit of the victim's Brother.

** A villain not above killing his brother is also not above cheating his nephew out of the throne, either by marrying his mother the queen (thereby outranking the prince) or by pulling the old act-as-temporary-regent-for-the-younger-inexperienced-heir-with-no-plans-to-turn-over-power strategy (that's how [[Literature/TheChroniclesOfNarnia Miraz]] did it, anyway).

** To the OP: I believe that idea was quite common, at least, among Victorian scholars -- because Queen Gertrude did marry quickly, and she apparently ''did'' enjoy a good time. And [[SarcasmMode obviously a woman who enjoys sex and remarries quickly is a fallen, depraved whore who would have no qualms about being an accomplice in her husband's murder.]]

* So . . . why exactly do people think of Hamlet as being flighty and indecisive? For fuck's sake, he's trying to decide whether or not to kill his own family based on what may or may not be a hallucination! Would you be able to do better in his place? This isn't an action movie, people, a bit of thinking about things is required in a situation like that?

--> Everyone else: Why did you murder the king?! Why did you barge into your mother's room and thrash her all over her bed?! Why did you murder the advisor in that same bedroom?!

--> Hamlet: Because a ghost told me to!

--> Everyone Else: He is either insane and should be locked up, or a criminal and should be jailed/executed!!

** Hamlets father defeated Fortinbras father at the field of battle the same day that Hamlet was born. [Gravedigger scene] Fortinbras used Hamlet Sr's deaths as an chance to reclaim his land and to awenge his fathers death. He and Laertes are used as a {{foil}} to Hamlet, them being sons that try to awenge their fathers death.

* Why was Yorik's skull apparently just lying around in the gravedigger scene? Shouldn't the skull be in the ''grave'', with the rest of his body? And the gravedigger isn't digging Yorik's grave, either. He's digging Ophelia's grave. There's no reason why Yorik's grave should be disturbed at all, unless the gravedigger is also a grave ''robber''. I know there are catacombs where people's skulls are preserved, but the scene isn't in a catacomb; it's in a graveyard! Is there something I don't know about Danish burial practices??

* Why does Claudius send Hamlet to England to be killed? Why not just kill him right here in Denmark? He could just poison him the same way you poisoned his father.
* Hamlet killing Polonius gives Claudius a golden opportunity. He could have Hamlet arrested on charges of murder and sentence him to death. Why doesn't he do that?

** The short answer to this and a lot of the other questions on this page is that there's a lot of ambiguity and nuance in the original text of Hamlet, which is one of the things that makes it (and Shakespeare in general) so interesting to stage and watch. A ridiculous number of valid AlternateCharacterInterpretations exist, and different directors, actors, and commentators approach the text different ways.

->''"Oh, I know ''Theatre/{{Hamlet}}''. And what he might say with irony, [[ShoutOut/ToShakespeare I say]] [[SincerityMode with conviction]]: 'What a piece of work is man! How noble in reason! How infinite in faculty! In form, in moving, how express and admirable! In action, how like an angel! In apprehension, how like a god!'"''

** A villain not above killing his brother is also not above cheating his nephew out of the throne, either by marrying his mother the queen (thereby outranking the prince) or by pulling the old act-as-temporary-regent-for-the-younger-inexperienced-heir-with-no-plans-to-turn-over-power strategy (that's how [[TheChroniclesOfNarnia Miraz]] did it, anyway).

** That Gertrude remarried so quickly is suspicious really only to [[YoureNotMyFather Hamlet]]; no other characters seem disturbed by the decision.