INTRODUCTION

William Shakespeare was baptized on April 26, 1564, in Stratford-upon-Avon, England. From
roughly 1594 onward he was an important member of the Lord Chamberlains Men company of
theatrical players. Written records give little indication of the way in which Shakespeares
professional life molded his artistry. All that can be deduced is that over the course of 20 years,
Shakespeare wrote plays that capture the complete range of human emotion and conflict.
Known throughout the world, the works of William Shakespeare have been performed in
countless hamlets, villages, cities and metropolises for more than 400 years. And yet, the
personal history of William Shakespeare is somewhat a mystery. There are two primary sources
that provide historians with a basic outline of his life. One source is his workthe plays, poems
and sonnetsand the other is official documentation such as church and court records. However,
these only provide brief sketches of specific events in his life and provide little on the person
who experienced those events.
Though no birth records exist, church records indicate that a William Shakespeare was baptized
at Holy Trinity Church in Stratford-upon-Avon on April 26, 1564. From this, it is believed he
was born on or near April 23, 1564, and this is the date scholars acknowledge as William
Shakespeare's birthday.
Located 103 miles west of London, during Shakespeare's time Stratford-upon-Avon was a
market town bisected with a country road and the River Avon. William was the third child of
John Shakespeare, a leather merchant, and Mary Arden, a local landed heiress. William had two
older sisters, Joan and Judith, and three younger brothers, Gilbert, Richard and Edmund. Before
William's birth, his father became a successful merchant and held official positions as alderman
and bailiff, an office resembling a mayor. However, records indicate John's fortunes declined
sometime in the late 1570s.
Scant records exist of William's childhood, and virtually none regarding his education. Scholars
have surmised that he most likely attended the King's New School, in Stratford, which taught
reading, writing and the classics. Being a public official's child, William would have
undoubtedly qualified for free tuition. But this uncertainty regarding his education has led some
to raise questions about the authorship of his work and even about whether or not William
Shakespeare ever existed.
William Shakespeare married Anne Hathaway on November 28, 1582, in Worcester, in
Canterbury Province. Hathaway was from Shottery, a small village a mile west of Stratford.
William was 18 and Anne was 26, and, as it turns out, pregnant. Their first child, a daughter they
named Susanna, was born on May 26, 1583. Two years later, on February 2, 1585, twins Hamnet
and Judith were born. Hamnet later died of unknown causes at age 11.
After the birth of the twins, there are seven years of William Shakespeare's life where no records
exist. Scholars call this period the "lost years," and there is wide speculation on what he was
doing during this period. One theory is that he might have gone into hiding for poaching game
from the local landlord, Sir Thomas Lucy. Another possibility is that he might have been
working as an assistant schoolmaster in Lancashire. It is generally believed he arrived in London
in the mid- to late 1580s and may have found work as a horse attendant at some of London's
finer theaters, a scenario updated centuries later by the countless aspiring actors and playwrights
in Hollywood and Broadway.
By 1592, there is evidence William Shakespeare earned a living as an actor and a playwright in
London and possibly had several plays produced. The September 20, 1592 edition of
the Stationers' Register (a guild publication) includes an article by London playwright Robert
Greene that takes a few jabs at William Shakespeare: "...There is an upstart Crow, beautified
with our feathers, that with his Tiger's heart wrapped in a Player's hide, supposes he is as well
able to bombast out a blank verse as the best of you: and being an absolute Johannes factotum, is
in his own conceit the only Shake-scene in a country," Greene wrote of Shakespeare.
Scholars differ on the interpretation of this criticism, but most agree that it was Greene's way of
saying Shakespeare was reaching above his rank, trying to match better known and educated
playwrights like Christopher Marlowe, Thomas Nashe or Greene himself.
By the early 1590s, documents show William Shakespeare was a managing partner in the Lord
Chamberlain's Men, an acting company in London. After the crowning of King James I, in 1603,
the company changed its name to the King's Men. From all accounts, the King's Men company
was very popular, and records show that Shakespeare had works published and sold as popular
literature. The theater culture in 16th century England was not highly admired by people of high
rank. However, many of the nobility were good patrons of the performing arts and friends of the
actors. Early in his career, Shakespeare was able to attract the attention of Henry Wriothesley,
the Earl of Southampton, to whom he dedicated his first- and second-published poems: "Venus
and Adonis" (1593) and "The Rape of Lucrece" (1594).
By 1597, 15 of the 37 plays written by William Shakespeare were published. Civil records show
that at this time he purchased the second largest house in Stratford, called New House, for his
family. It was a four-day ride by horse from Stratford to London, so it is believed that
Shakespeare spent most of his time in the city writing and acting and came home once a year
during the 40-day Lenten period, when the theaters were closed.
By 1599, William Shakespeare and his business partners built their own theater on the south
bank of the Thames River, which they called the Globe. In 1605, Shakespeare purchased leases
of real estate near Stratford for 440 pounds, which doubled in value and earned him 60 pounds a
year. This made him an entrepreneur as well as an artist, and scholars believe these investments
gave him the time to write his plays uninterrupted.
William Shakespeare's early plays were written in the conventional style of the day, with
elaborate metaphors and rhetorical phrases that didn't always align naturally with the story's plot
or characters. However, Shakespeare was very innovative, adapting the traditional style to his
own purposes and creating a freer flow of words. With only small degrees of variation,
Shakespeare primarily used a metrical pattern consisting of lines of unrhymed iambic
pentameter, or blank verse, to compose his plays. At the same time, there are passages in all the
plays that deviate from this and use forms of poetry or simple prose.
With the exception of Romeo and Juliet, William Shakespeare's first plays were mostly histories
written in the early 1590s. Richard II, Henry VI (parts 1, 2 and 3) and Henry V dramatize the
destructive results of weak or corrupt rulers, and have been interpreted by drama historians as
Shakespeare's way of justifying the origins of the Tudor Dynasty.
Shakespeare also wrote several comedies during his early period: the witty romance A
Midsummer Night's Dream, the romantic Merchant of Venice, the wit and wordplay of Much Ado
About Nothing, the charming As You Like It and Twelfth Night. Other plays, possibly written
before 1600, include Titus Andronicus, The Comedy of Errors, The Taming of the Shrew and The
Two Gentlemen of Verona.
It was in William Shakespeare's later period, after 1600, that he wrote the tragedies Hamlet, King
Lear, Othello and Macbeth. In these, Shakespeare's characters present vivid impressions of
human temperament that are timeless and universal. Possibly the best known of these plays
is Hamlet, which explores betrayal, retribution, incest and moral failure. These moral failures
often drive the twists and turns of Shakespeare's plots, destroying the hero and those he loves.
In William Shakespeare's final period, he wrote several tragicomedies. Among these
are Cymbeline, The Winter's Tale and The Tempest. Though graver in tone than the comedies,
they are not the dark tragedies of King Lear or Macbeth because they end with reconciliation and
forgiveness.
Tradition has it that William Shakespeare died on his birthday, April 23, 1616, though many
scholars believe this is a myth. Church records show he was interred at Trinity Church on April
5, 1616.
In his will, he left the bulk of his possessions to his eldest daughter, Susanna. Though entitled to
a third of his estate, little seems to have gone to his wife, Anne, whom he bequeathed his
"second-best bed." This has drawn speculation that she had fallen out of favor, or that the couple
was not close. However, there is very little evidence the two had a difficult marriage. Other
scholars note that the term "second-best bed" often refers to the bed belonging to the household's
master and mistresthe marital bedand the "first-best bed" was reserved for guests.
Controversy and Literary Legacy
About 150 years after his death, questions arose about the authorship of William Shakespeare's
plays. Scholars and literary critics began to float names like Christopher Marlowe, Edward de
Vere and Francis Baconmen of more known backgrounds, literary accreditation, or
inspirationas the true authors of the plays. Much of this stemmed from the sketchy details of
Shakespeare's life and the dearth of contemporary primary sources. Official records from the
Holy Trinity Church and the Stratford government record the existence of a William
Shakespeare, but none of these attest to him being an actor or playwright.
Skeptics also questioned how anyone of such modest education could write with the intellectual
perceptiveness and poetic power that is displayed in Shakespeare's works. Over the centuries,
several groups have emerged that question the authorship of Shakespeare's plays.
The most serious and intense skepticism began in the 19th century when adoration for
Shakespeare was at its highest. The detractors believed that the only hard evidence surrounding
William Shakespeare from Stratford-upon-Avon described a man from modest beginnings who
married young and became successful in real estate. Members of the Shakespeare Oxford Society
(founded in 1957) put forth arguments that English aristocrat Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of
Oxford, was the true author of the poems and plays of "William Shakespeare." The Oxfordians
cite de Vere's extensive knowledge of aristocratic society, his education, and the structural
similarities between his poetry and that found in the works attributed to Shakespeare. They
contend that William Shakespeare had neither the education nor the literary training to write such
eloquent prose and create such rich characters.
However, the vast majority of Shakespearean scholars contend that William Shakespeare wrote
all his own plays. They point out that other playwrights of the time also had sketchy histories and
came from modest backgrounds. They contend that Stratford's New Grammar School curriculum
of Latin and the classics could have provided a good foundation for literary writers. Supporters
of Shakespeare's authorship argue that the lack of evidence about Shakespeare's life doesn't mean
his life didn't exist. They point to evidence that displays his name on the title pages of published
poems and plays. Examples exist of authors and critics of the time acknowledging William
Shakespeare as author of plays such as The Two Gentlemen of Verona, The Comedy of
Errors and King John. Royal records from 1601 show that William Shakespeare was recognized
as a member of the King's Men theater company (formally known as the Chamberlain's Men)
and a Groom of the Chamber by the court of King James I, where the company performed seven
of Shakespeare's plays. There is also strong circumstantial evidence of personal relationships by
contemporaries who interacted with Shakespeare as an actor and a playwright.
What seems to be true is that William Shakespeare was a respected man of the dramatic arts who
wrote plays and acted in some in the late 16th and early 17th centuries. But his reputation as a
dramatic genius wasn't recognized until the 19th century. Beginning with the Romantic period of
the early 1800s and continuing through the Victorian period, acclaim and reverence for William
Shakespeare and his work reached its height. In the 20th century, new movements in scholarship
and performance have rediscovered and adopted his works.
Today, his plays are highly popular and constantly studied and reinterpreted in performances
with diverse cultural and political contexts. The genius of Shakespeare's characters and plots are
that they present real human beings in a wide range of emotions and conflicts that transcend their
origins in Elizabethan England.
Shakespeare's plays
Sir John Gilbert's 1849 painting: The Plays of Shakespeare, containing scenes and characters
from several of William Shakespeare's plays.
William Shakespeare's plays have the reputation of being among the greatest in the English
language and in Western literature. Traditionally, the 37 plays are divided into the genres
of tragedy, history, comedy and tragic comedy; they have been translated into every
major living language, in addition to being continually performed all around the world.
Many of his plays appeared in print as a series of quartos, but approximately half of them
remained unpublished until 1623, when the posthumous First Folio was published. The
traditional division of his plays into tragedies, comedies and histories follows the categories used
in the First Folio. However, modern criticism has labeled some of these plays "problem plays"
that elude easy categorization, or perhaps purposely break generic conventions, and has
introduced the term romances for what scholars believe to be his later comedies.
When Shakespeare first arrived in London in the late 1580s or early 1590s, dramatists writing for
London's new commercial playhouses (such as The Curtain) were combining two different
strands of dramatic tradition into a new and distinctively Elizabethan synthesis. Previously, the
most common forms of popular English theatre were the Tudor morality plays. These plays,
celebrating piety generally, use personified moral attributes to urge or instruct the protagonist to
choose the virtuous life over Evil. The characters and plot situations are largely symbolic rather
than realistic. As a child, Shakespeare would likely have seen this type of play (along with,
perhaps, mystery plays and miracle plays).
The other strand of dramatic tradition was classical aesthetic theory. This theory was derived
ultimately from Aristotle; in Renaissance England, however, the theory was better known
through its Roman interpreters and practitioners. At the universities, plays were staged in a more
academic form as Roman closet dramas. These plays, usually performed in Latin, adhered to
classical ideas of unity and decorum, but they were also more static, valuing lengthy speeches
over physical action. Shakespeare would have learned this theory at grammar school,
where Plautus and especially Terence were key parts of the curriculum and were taught in
editions with lengthy theoretical introductions.
Theatre and stage setup
Archaeological excavations on the foundations of the Rose and the Globe in the late twentieth
century

showed that all London English Renaissance theatres were built around similar general
plans. Despite individual differences, the public theatres were three stories high, and built around
an open space at the centre. Usually polygonal in plan to give an overall rounded effect, three
levels of inward-facing galleries overlooked the open centre into which jutted the stage
essentially a platform surrounded on three sides by the audience, only the rear being restricted
for the entrances and exits of the actors and seating for the musicians. The upper level behind the
stage could be used as a balcony, as in Romeo, or as a position for a character to harangue a
crowd, as in Julius Caesar.
Usually built of timber, lath and plaster and with thatched roofs, the early theatres were
vulnerable to fire, and gradually were replaced (when necessary) with stronger structures. When
the Globe burned down in June 1613, it was rebuilt with a tile roof.
A different model was developed with the Black friars Theatre, which came into regular use on a
long term basis in 1599. The Black friar was small in comparison to the earlier theatres and
roofed rather than open to the sky; it resembled a modern theatre in ways that its predecessors
did not.
Elizabethan Shakespeare
For Shakespeare as he began to write, both traditions were alive; they were, moreover, filtered
through the recent success of the University Wits on the London stage. By the late 16th century,
the popularity of morality and academic plays waned as the English Renaissance took hold, and
playwrights like Thomas Kyd and Christopher Marlowe revolutionized theatre. Their plays
blended the old morality drama with classical theory to produce a new secular form. The new
drama combined the rhetorical complexity of the academic play with the bawdy energy of the
moralities. However, it was more ambiguous and complex in its meanings, and less concerned
with simple allegory. Inspired by this new style, Shakespeare continued these artistic
strategies, creating plays that not only resonated on an emotional level with audiences but also
explored and debated the basic elements of what it means to be human. What Marlowe and Kyd
did for tragedy, John Lyly and George Peele, among others, did for comedy: they offered models
of witty dialogue, romantic action, and exotic, often pastoral location that formed the basis of
Shakespeare's comedic mode throughout his career.
Shakespeare's Elizabethan tragedies (including the history plays with tragic designs, such
as Richard II) demonstrate his relative independence from classical models. He takes from
Aristotle and Horace the notion of decorum; with few exceptions, he focuses on high-born
characters and national affairs as the subject of tragedy. In most other respects, though, the early
tragedies are far closer to the spirit and style of moralities. They are episodic, packed with
character and incident; they are loosely unified by a theme or character. In this respect, they
reflect clearly the influence of Marlowe, particularly of Tamburlaine. Even in his early work,
however, Shakespeare generally shows more restraint than Marlowe; he resorts to grandiloquent
rhetoric less frequently, and his attitude towards his heroes is more nuanced, and sometimes
more skeptical, than Marlowe's. By the turn of the century, the bombast of Titus Andronicus had
vanished, replaced by the subtlety of Hamlet.
In comedy, Shakespeare strayed even further from classical models. The Comedy of Errors, an
adaptation of Menaechmi, follows the model of new comedy closely. Shakespeare's other
Elizabethan comedies are more romantic. Like Lyly, he often makes romantic intrigue (a
secondary feature in Latin new comedy) the main plot element even this romantic plot is
sometimes given less attention than witty dialogue, deceit, and jests. The "reform of manners,"
which Horace considered the main function of comedy, survives in such episodes as the gulling
of Malvolio.
Jacobean Shakespeare
Shakespeare reached maturity as a dramatist at the end of Elizabeth's reign, and in the first years
of the reign of James. In these years, he responded to a deep shift in popular tastes, both in
subject matter and approach. At the turn of the decade, he responded to the vogue for dramatic
satire initiated by the boy players at Black friars and St. Paul's. At the end of the decade, he
seems to have attempted to capitalize on the new fashion for tragicomedy, even collaborating
with John Fletcher, the writer who had popularized the genre in England.
The influence of younger dramatists such as John Marston and Ben Jonson is seen not only in the
problem plays, which dramatis intractable human problems of greed and lust, but also in the
darker tone of the Jacobean tragedies. The Monrovian, heroic mode of the Elizabethan tragedies
is gone, replaced by a darker vision of heroic natures caught in environments of pervasive
corruption. As a share in both the Globe and in the King's Men, Shakespeare never wrote for the
boys' companies; however, his early Jacobean work is markedly influenced by the techniques of
the new, satiric dramatists. One play, Troilus and Cressida, may even have been inspired by
the War of the Theatres.
Shakespeare's final plays hearken back to his Elizabethan comedies in their use of romantic
situation and incident. In these plays, however, the somber elements that are largely glossed over
in the earlier plays are brought to the fore and often rendered dramatically vivid. This change is
related to the success of tragicomedies such as Phil aster, although the uncertainty of dates makes
the nature and direction of the influence unclear. From the evidence of the title-page to The Two
Noble Kinsmen and from analysis it is believed by some editors that Shakespeare ended his
career in collaboration with Fletcher, who succeeded him as house playwright for the King's
Men. These last plays resemble Fletcher's tragicomedies in their attempt to find a comedic mode
capable of dramatizing more serious events than had his earlier comedies.
STYLE
During the reign of Queen Elizabeth, "drama became the ideal means to capture and convey the
diverse interests of the time." Stories of various genres were enacted for audiences consisting of
both the wealthy and educated and the poor and illiterate. Shakespeare served his dramatic
apprenticeship at the height of the Elizabethan period, in the years following the defeat of
the Spanish Armada; he retired at the height of the Jacobean period, not long before the start of
the Thirty Years' War. His verse style, his choice of subjects, and his stagecraft all bear the
marks of both periods. His style changed not only in accordance with his own tastes and
developing mastery, but also in accord with the tastes of the audiences for whom he wrote.
While many passages in Shakespeare's plays are written in prose, he almost always wrote a large
proportion of his plays and poems in iambic pentameter. In some of his early works (like Romeo
and Juliet), he even added punctuation at the end of these iambic pentameter lines to make the
rhythm even stronger. He and many dramatists of this period used the form of blank
verse extensively in character dialogue, thus heightening poetic effects.
To end many scenes in his plays he used a rhyming couplet to give a sense of conclusion, or
completion. A typical example is provided in Macbeth: as Macbeth leaves the stage to murder
Duncan (to the sound of a chiming clock), he says,
Shakespeare's writing (especially his plays) also feature extensive wordplay in which double
entendres and clever rhetorical flourishes are repeatedly used. Humor is a key element in all of
Shakespeare's plays. Although a large amount of his comical talent is evident in his comedies,
some of the most entertaining scenes and characters are found in tragedies such as Hamlet and
histories such as Henry IV, Part 1. Shakespeare's humor was largely influenced by Plautus.
SOLILOQUIES IN PLAYS
Shakespeare's plays are also notable for their use of soliloquies, in which a character makes a
speech to him- or herself so the audience can understand the character's inner motivations and
conflict.
In his book Shakespeare and the History of Soliloquies, James Hirsh defines the convention of a
Shakespearean soliloquy in early modern drama. He argues that when a person on the stage
speaks to himself or herself, they are characters in a fiction speaking in character; this is an
occasion of self-address. Furthermore, Hirsh points out that Shakespearian soliloquies and
"asides" are audible in the fiction of the play, bound to be overheard by any other character in the
scene unless certain elements confirm that the speech is protected. Therefore, a Renaissance
playgoer who was familiar with this dramatic convention would have been alert to Hamlet's
expectation that his soliloquy be overheard by the other characters in the scene. Moreover, Hirsh
asserts that in soliloquies in other Shakespearian plays, the speaker is entirely in character within
the play's fiction. Saying that addressing the audience was outmoded by the time Shakespeare
was alive, he acknowledges few occasions when a Shakespearean speech might involve the
audience in recognizing the simultaneous reality of the stage and the world the stage is
representing. Other than 29 speeches delivered by choruses or characters who revert to that
condition as epilogues "Hirsh recognizes only three instances of audience address in
Shakespeare's plays, 'all in very early comedies, in which audience address is introduced
specifically to ridicule the practice as antiquated and amateurish.
SOURCE MATERIAL OF THE PLAYS
As was common in the period, Shakespeare based many of his plays on the work of other
playwrights and recycled older stories and historical material. His dependence on earlier sources
was a natural consequence of the speed at which playwrights of his era wrote; in addition, plays
based on already popular stories appear to have been seen as more likely to draw large crowds.
There were also aesthetic reasons: Renaissance aesthetic theory took seriously the dictum that
tragic plots should be grounded in history. This stricture did not apply to comedy, and those of
Shakespeare's plays for which no clear source has been established, such as Love's Labors
lost and The Tempest, are comedies. Even these plays, however, rely heavily on generic
commonplaces. For example, Hamlet (c.1601) may be a reworking of an older, lost play (the so-
called Ur-Hamlet), and King Lear is likely an adaptation of an older play, King Leir. For plays
on historical subjects, Shakespeare relied heavily on two principal texts. Most of the Roman and
Greek plays are based on Plutarch Parallel Lives (from the 1579 English translation by Sir
Thomas North, and the English history plays are indebted to Raphael Holinshed's
1587Chronicles.
While there is much dispute about the exact Chronology of Shakespeare plays, as well as
the Shakespeare Authorship Question, the plays tend to fall into three main stylistic groupings.
The first major grouping of his plays begins with his histories and comedies of the 1590s.
Shakespeare's earliest plays tended to be adaptations of other playwright's works and employed
blank verse and little variation in rhythm. However, after the plague forced Shakespeare and his
company of actors to leave London for periods between 1592 and 1594, Shakespeare began to
use rhymed couplets in his plays, along with more dramatic dialogue. These elements showed up
in The Taming of the Shrew and A Midsummer Night's Dream. Almost all of the plays written
after the plague hit London are comedies, perhaps reflecting the public's desire at the time for
light-hearted fare. Other comedies from Shakespeare during this period include Much Ado about
Nothing, The Merry Wives of Windsor and As You Like It.
The middle grouping of Shakespeare's plays begins in 1599 with Julius Caesar. For the next few
years, Shakespeare would produce his most famous dramas,
including Macbeth,Hamlet, and King Lear. The plays during this period are in many ways the
darkest of Shakespeare's career and address issues such as betrayal, murder, lust, power and
egoism.
The final grouping of plays, called Shakespeare's late romances, include Pericles, Prince of
Tyre, Cymbeline, The Winter's Tale and The Tempest. The romances are so called because they
bear similarities to medieval romance literature. Among the features of these plays are a
redemptive plotline with a happy ending, and magic and other fantastic elements.
Canonical plays
Except where noted, the plays below are listed, for the thirty-six plays included in the First
Folio of 1623, according to the order in which they appear there, with the two plays which were
not included (Pericles, Prince of Tyre and The Two Noble Kinsmen) being added at the end of
the list of comedies.
SUPERNATURAL IN SHAKESPEARE'S PLAYS

In the time of William Shakespeare there was a strong belief in the existence of the supernatural.
Thus, the supernatural is a recurring aspect in many of Mr. Shakespeare plays. In two such plays,
Hamlet and Macbeth, the supernatural is an integral part of the structure of the plot. It provides a
catalyst for action, an insight into character, and augments the impact of many key scenes. The
supernatural appears to the audience in many varied forms. In Hamlet there appears perhaps the
most notable of the supernatural forms, the ghost. However, in Macbeth, not only does a ghost
appear but a floating dagger, witches, and prophetic apparitions make appearances. The role of
the supernatural is very important in Hamlet and Macbeth. A ghost, appearing in the form of
Hamlets father, makes several appearances in the play. It first appears to the watchmen,
Marcellus and Bernardo, along with Horatio near the guardsmens post. The ghost says nothing
to them and is perceived with fear and apprehension; it harrows me with fear and wonder. It is
not until the appearance of Hamlet that the ghost speaks, and only then after Horatio has
expressed his fears about Hamlet following it, What if it tempts you toward the flood, my lord, or
to the dreadful summit of the cliff. The conversation between the ghost and Hamlet serves as a
catalyst for Hamlets later actions and provides insight into Hamlets character. The information
the ghost reveals incites Hamlet into action against a situation he was already uncomfortable
with, and now even more so. Hamlet is not quick to believe the ghost, the spirit that I have seen
may be a devil... and perhaps out of my weakness and my melancholy. Abuses me to damn me,
and thus an aspect of Hamlets character is revealed. Hamlet, having no suspicion of the ghost
after the production by the players, encounters the ghost next in his mothers room. In this scene
the ghost makes an appearance to whet Hamlets almost blunted purpose. Hamlet is now
convinced of the ghost and he no longer harbors any suspicion. He now listens to it, Speak to
her, Hamlet. In Hamlet, the supernatural is the guiding force behind Hamlet. The ghosts ask
Hamlet to seek revenge for the Kings death and Hamlet is thus propelled to set into action a
series of events that ends in Hamlets death. The supernatural occurs four times during the course
of Macbeth. It occurs in all the appearances of the witches, in the appearance of Banquos ghost,
in the apparitions with their prophesies, and in the air-drawn dagger that guides Macbeth towards
his victim. Of the supernatural phenomenon evident in Macbeth the witches are perhaps the most
important. The witches represent Macbeths evil ambitions. They are the catalyst which unleash
Macbeths evil aspirations. Macbeth believes the witches and wishes to know more about the
future so after the banquet he seeks them out at their cave. He wants to know the answers to his
questions regardless of whether the consequence be violent and destructive to nature. The
witches promise to answer and at Macbeths choice they add further unnatural ingredients to the
cauldron and call up their masters. This is where the prophetic apparitions appear. The first
apparition is Macbeths own head (later to be cut off by Macduff) confirming his fears of
Macduff. The second apparition tells Macbeth that he cannot be harmed by anyone born of
woman. This knowledge gives Macbeth a false sense of security because he believes that he
cannot be harmed, yet Macduff was not of woman born, his mother was dead and a corpse when
Macduff was born. This leads to Macbeths downfall. A child with a crown on his head, the third
apparition, represents Malcolm, Duncans son. This apparition also gives Macbeth a false sense of
security because of the Birnam Wood prophesies. The appearance of Banquos ghost provides
insight into Macbeths character. It shows the level that Macbeths mind has recessed to. When he
sees the ghost he reacts with horror and upsets the guests. Macbeth wonders why murder had
taken place many times in the past before it was prevented by law -statute purged the gentle
weal- and yet the dead are coming back. The final form of the supernatural is the air-drawn
dagger which leads Macbeth to his victim. When the dagger appears to him, Macbeth finally
becomes victim to the delusions of his fevered brain. The dagger points to Duncans room and
appears to be covered in blood. The dagger buttresses the impact of this key scene in which
Macbeth slays King Duncan. The supernatural is a recurring aspect in many of the plays by
William Shakespeare. In Hamlet and Macbeth the supernatural is an integral part of the structure
of the plot. In these plays the supernatural provides a catalyst for action by the characters. It
supplies insight into the major players and it augments the impact of many key scenes. The
supernatural appeals to the audiences curiosity of the mysterious and thus strengthens their
interest.


"Supernatural Soliciting" in Shakespeare

There are two methods of using the supernatural in literature. It may be used to work out results
impossible to natural agencies, or it may be employed simply as a human belief, becoming a
motive power and leading to results reached by purely natural means. The first may be fitly
called the poetical method and examples of its use may be found in most of the great poets,
conspicuously in Tasso, Milton, and Spenser. The second may be justly called the dramatic
method. In this Shakespeare stands alone and it is thus used by him only in the two great dramas
Of "Hamlet" and "Macbeth."

A fair illustration of the poetic method is found in Goethe's "Faust," his great dramatic poem,
where Mephistopheles, by supernatural power, turns back the tide of life, makes young again the
aging Faust, and fills the new-made man with all the fire and quick-speeding wine of a new life.
If a spirits medium should tell one that a certain very stable stock would suddenly and greatly
fluctuate, and he should act upon that statement, moved neither by knowledge of the market, nor
by his own judgment, but solely by superstitious confidence in the spiritistic power and
knowledge of the medium, it would afford a fair example of what I have called the dramatic
method of using the supernatural. While Shakespeare has also made use of the supernatural as a
subtitle and mysterious poetical atmosphere, cast like a spell-working autumn haze about his two
greatest dramas, yet, viewing it from the purely dramatic standpoint, as a motive force to human

action, he has used it precisely and only as in the example just given.

In dealing with this element after the first method, creative genius is chiefly employed in
construction of the supernatural machinery. That once wrought, the master may work out what
results he will. Having once transcended the bounds of natural life and means, he is limited only
by his own taste and judgment. In the use of the second method, the creator works within the
realm of the human soul, dealing with desires, thought, will, motive, beliefs and their
consequences, working out into action. In the first case, the poet brings the forces of another
world to bear upon this world; in the second, he deals strictly with the forces of this world,
including man's beliefs respecting another world, without regard to whether such beliefs are true
or false.
Shakespeare, in two groups of two plays each, has exhibited marvelous skill in the use of both
methods. This is so apparent that one is almost tempted to believe that the dramatist intended a
contrast which is so patent.
[
In "Hamlet" and "Macbeth," while seeming to tread upon the very boundaries of an unknown
and unfathomable world, he has really confined himself rigidly to the phenomena of superstitious
beliefs working out to solution purely moral and psychological problems. Discounting poetical
illusions and waving aside the delicious spell of mystery, there is nothing left in "Hamlet" and
"Macbeth" but human beliefs translated into human action. In "A Midsummer Night's Dream,"
and in "The Tempest," where he ascends to the heights of almost pure poetry, he gives the
imagination full scope in the creation of supernatural agencies and a free, but firm-held rein in
driving on to grotesque results impossible to natural agencies.

In "Macbeth" the witches hail the returning warrior as Glam is and the thane of Cawdor and king
that shall be. Banquet they hail as father to a line of kings. Of the "two truths" told as "prologue
to the swelling act of the imperial theme," Macbeth knows that he is thane of Glam is and the
spectator knows, although Macbeth does not, that he is thane of Cawdor. Banquets wholesome
soul, believing with mind as superstitious and ear as credulous as Macbeth's, hears and heeds
not. The darkly brooding soul of Macbeth hears, heeds and acts. Through a complicated train of
causation, moral, psychological and external, first, his own black desires and dream of murder,
and afterward the witch suggestion and the powerful aid of his wife, acting upon a weak nature,
culminating in assassination Macbeth becomes king. Again, the witches tell him that he need
not fear till Barman wood shall come to Dunsinane, nor then until he shall be assailed by one not
of woman born. Barman wood never does come to Dunsinane and he is never assailed by one not
of woman born, and yet he perishes miserably. This, briefly and meagerly told, is the sole part of
the apparent supernatural in "Macbeth." It plays a far other and more important part as a poetical
agency and it serves to suggest the profoundest problems that have ever vexed human
philosophy, including the great problem of free-will and fixed fate two worlds "twixt which
life hovers like a star." Considered from a purely dramatic standpoint, it is merely superstitious
belief acting upon a weak, wicked and waling soul, moving to results. Considered from the
poetic standpoint, it enchains, charms and appals the spectator.

It is true that there is a further prophecy by the witches which deserves consideration. They hail
Banquet father to a line of kings and actually show that royal line to the anxious Macbeth. If this
be taken for actual prophecy, it much be remembered that its part in the drama is still solely the
effect it has upon the mind of Macbeth, driving him to seek safety in further wrong-doing, and
thus impelling him more swiftly and more surely to ruin. Within the bounds, however, of that
little world for which it exists, the drama itself, it is not prophecy, for it is not fulfilled within the

limits of the action.
The temptation of Macbeth by the weird sisters is very like the temptation of Eve by the serpent,
in Genesis. It is merely suggested to our first parents that they make the delights of the Garden of
Eden complete by eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The witches only
suggest to the soldier, flushed with victory and hurrying home in the hey-day of success, a
glittering prize, fitted to round off and complete his glory and power. It is merely, in both cases,
shining bait cast out to free moral agents. There is no supernatural power or constraint in either
case.
Two classical instances are identical with the use of this element in "Macbeth." When the people
of Eira consulted the oracle as to their fate, they were told that their city would fall when a he-
goat drank of the waters of the Neda. In the Messenian dialect the same word means a he-goat
and a wild fig tree. When a wild fig tree, growing upon Neda's banks, had grown down until its
branches drank of the river's waters, a soothsayer announced the oracle fulfilled. The Spartans
attacked and the disheartened inhabitants fell easy prey, not because of any truth in the oracle,
but because of their own superstitious beliefs and fears.

When the people of the Messenia town of It home appealed to the oracle, they were told that
whichever of the contending powers Messenia or Sparta should first lay before the shrine
of Jove in It home a hundred tripods, would be conqueror in the pending strife. For lack of
means, the means were hindered in preparing such tripods as they deemed a suitable offering.
The Spartans, being of a practical turn of mind, hastily prepared a hundred small tripods, stole
into it home by night, and laid them before Jove's altar. As soon as this was noised abroad in it
home, the Spartans assaulted and took the town. The means yielded to their own superstitious
fears, scarcely resisting.

In "Hamlet," the dramatist is at great pains to give his ghost thorough verification. It appears
thrice to three persons, and the third time also to Hamlet, to whom it makes ghostly impartment
of the manner of his father's death. Equal pains are taken to surround the ghost and its
appearance with all that is ordinarily circumstantial to superstitious beliefs and ghostly
appearances in popular legend. The ghost walks at midnight, and starts like a guilty thing at
cock-crow. The talk of the guard is of old-time ghostly visitations, when the "sheeted dead did
squeak and gibber in the Roman streets," and of the superstitions concerning the crowing of
cocks all night long near the time of our Saviors birth. When it appears to the guard upon the
post of martial watch, the ghost is fitly clad in soldier's garb. When it appears to Hamlet, and to
him alone, in his mother's chamber, it is becomingly clad in night robes "My father in his
habit as he lived !" The stage direction in the quarto is, "Enter ghost in his night-gown."

This thorough verification was meant to enthrall the spectator with ghostly environment; but
enough of the usual concomitants of superstitious appearances are suggested to preserve it from
suspicion of actual supernatural power or knowledge. As in "Macbeth," it was intended that the
drama should run its course under a subtitle canopy of the weird and mysterious. Thus each is
made, not only a rigidly practical drama of human life, motive and action, strictly governed by
natural laws of daily force and operation, but each is also invested with a rare poetic charm such
as no dramatist save Shakespeare has ever been able to cast about his work, with the single
exception of Goethe, in "Faust," in which, however, the purely poetic supernatural element is
employed. The poet's warrant for thus surrounding his two great dramas with a subtitle
atmosphere of the occult, the mysterious, the supernatural, is found in the fact that human life
itself is so invested. Man's life is lived out with the physical eye guiding his way through this
natural world, and with the mind's eye fixed upon and ever glancing fearfully at the thick-
crowding shadows of an unknown world around him.
For all the witness that may testify to the appearance of the ghost, the suggestive point is that it is
of no importance to any but Hamlet. With the rest, merely some strange apparition, like many
strange appearances, accounted for or unaccountable, all thought of it would have faded utterly
within a brief time. To Hamlet, already brooding over his father's death, already more than
suspecting his uncle, it is revelation. To him it can speak. What is more, to him it can speak truly,
because he needs no ghostly messenger to tell him how his father died. His exclamation, "Oh !
my prophetic soul, mine uncle !" is conclusive of his belief in murder. What would have been to
Marcellus, Bernardo, and Horatio the wonder of an hour, to Hamlet imparts the manner of his
father's death nothing more. Wonderful as is the complete investment of the entire drama with
a very "Sleepy-Hollow" spell of enchantment, the ghost actually comes from the other world
merely to tell Hamlet, that, instead of having been stung by a serpent while sleeping in his
orchard, the king was slain by a subtile poison poured into his ear. Place, circumstances, and the
agent, Hamlet knew and suspected already. The ghostly disclosure is of the slightest. It is enough
for the dramatist's purpose, which was chiefly to invest the drama with a mysterious spell of
supernaturalism, also using the superstitious beliefs of Hamlet as dramatic forces creating human
action.
Thence on the ghost works only through Hamlet's belief. Even that is not without some mingling
of doubt. Hamlet's mind, suspicious and darkly brooding, treading upon the border line between
sanity and madness, is not wholly given up to hallucinations. He doubts it may be a foul fiend he
has seen. The play within the play, framed and acted before the court, whether like the scene of
his father's death or not, is near enough to "catch the conscience of a king." "I'll take the ghost's
word for a thousand pound." From the end of the third act on to the end Hamlet is wholly
absorbed in the fact of murder and the duty of vengeance, and forgets the ghost entirely.

The ghost appears twice to Hamlet and the second time to him alone. When he is wrought to
passion's highest tension in the terrific scene with the queen mother, it comes again for the sole
purpose of reminding him of his duty. His mother sees nothing although her attention is
especially called to it. It appears as it appeared in the first scene, as a ghost of the mind should
appear, clad fitly with time and place. The dramatist's purpose in the second introduction was for
its effect upon the spectator, to continue the spell of mystery, for it really plays no other part.

The ghost is introduced, fulfills its part as a motive power conducive to action, and its far larger
and subtiler poetical part comes again merely as a passing reminder to the spectator that it
was, and then fades out entirely and is seen no more, heard of no more. While it still
mysteriously affects the spectator to the very close of the drama, it has no other or further effect
upon Hamlet, or part in the play. Curiously, it is not even mentioned in the two concluding acts,
not when Hamlet is alone, when the over-wrought mind would have given out some note of it, if
it were still remembered, not even in the friendly communing of Hamlet and Horatio, not even in
the suggestive graveyard scene. There is in "Hamlet" and "Macbeth" neither veritable ghost nor
witch, but only a semblance of these; there is a subtitle working out of results through human
belief in such agencies and in their presence and potency.
In "A Midsummer Night's Dream," and in "The Tempest," pitched far above the ordinary
dramatic plane, in the realm of almost pure poetry, Shakespeare draws nearer to the method of
the great poets, in their purely poetical works, at the same time keeping a carefully drawn
dramatic line between his supernatural forces and his unfolding dramatic facts. Where he might
have allowed the supernatural to run riot in results impossible to natural agencies, he yet
preserved temperance and a moderation which are remarkable, when we consider the character
of his creations and how a man of meaner mould might have been tempted to revel in
supernatural results. In "Jerusalem Delivered," in "Paradise Lost," and in the "Fairy Queen," we
are not shocked as the spectator of a drama would be and the reader of a novel ought to be
by monstrous creations producing monstrous results. In these two dramas, in which Shakespeare
has most wrought with supernatural agencies, he has been considerately careful about the manner
of their use. His supernatural agencies are so filmy and insubstantial, or so grotesque, that the
spectator almost feels that he has dozed, nodded and dreamed some light airy dream when
Puck has flitted across the stage when Caliban has crawled into the scene, during some
momentary nightmare when the senses were benumbed by summer drowsiness, leaving the
eyes yet open and the brain still conscious.
In "The Tempest" the dramatist weaves a delicious web of magic about a solid tissue of fact. The
play opens with a bit of practical navigation no expert can find flaw in. In the next scene
Prospero appears in wizard robes with magic wand. Thence on the drama runs its course under
the spell of a weird and pervasive charm that fills us with all the delights of dreamland. Prospero
raises and lays the storm, calls spirits from the vasty deep, sends his minions to plague Caliban,
to lead the shipwrecked mariners hither and thither about the enchanted isle, to bring prince and
maid together, to confound treason, to daze and mislead Caliban and his drunken companions, to
provide celestial music, serve celestial feasts, summon gods and goddesses, and to call nymphs
and naiads to featly dance upon the yellow sands of the shelving shore. Magical events upon a
magic island! All magic and mystery! And yet for all the sweet haze of an overhanging spirit of
incantation, investing the entire drama, through which we see every event distorted, at bottom
lies a firm, well-constructed substratum of dramatic fact, a practical chain of unfolding human
life relations, about which all this magic is thinnest gossamer web of mere delightful frill and
fringe.
In "A Midsummer Night's Dream," there is more of magic and less of dramatic fact; in "The
Tempest," there is more of dramatic fact and less of magical result. While events shape
themselves which Prospero assigns directly to his occult powers, yet there is no event of any
great dramatic importance that might not have fallen out in due course of nature. The usurpation
of Antonio, the banishment of Prospero and Miranda and their landing upon a desert island, the
hymeneal voyage of the king of Naples, the storm, the shipwreck, the escape, the dispersal upon
the island, the conspiracies of Antonio and Caliban, the sweet and natural courtship of Ferdinand
and Miranda, and the denouement, romantic in themselves, are but ordinary facts of life that
might well have run the same course without magical intervention. Although the events are in
themselves romantic, how dry and barren they would seem if now divested of all the exquisite
poetry of that magic ! Prospero invests the facts with a subtitle charm and then blows it away
with a breath at the end into air, into thin air leaving a solid basis of fact. It is like the
making of the ring in "The Ring and the Book:"
The train of human motive, desires, purpose, and action has all the time worked itself out just as
these might have done in ordinary life. Except as a poetic investiture none of that wondrous
supernatural, with its weird creations, from the light, delicate Ariel down to the grotesque and
earthy Caliban, is absolutely necessary to the dramatic results sought of natural creations,
running from the pure and graceful Miranda down to the swinish Trinculo and Stephano.
In "A Midsummer Night's Dream," the dramatist revels in a wild, poetic debauch, a very
midsummer nightmare, beginning m the capital and ending in the capital, leading the bewildered
and enchanted spectator, meantime, through wild wood and tangled grove, by moonlit bank, into
fairy bower shadowed with lithe vine, rank weeds and lush grass, dewy and fragrant beneath the
starlight, to repose upon flowery meads, or in leafy forest, listening to the music of hound and
horn. An exuberance of magic about a thin dramatic thread ! From the time we leave the suburbs
of Athens with the lovers until we return to Athens with the merry royal hunting and bridal party,
we are in an enchanted land, where all is grotesque and distorted, wild and extravagant. Not
merely the atmosphere and setting is magical as in "The Tempest," all is spell, charm and
incantation. The most essential parts of the meagre plot are worked out by actual supernatural
means. When we awake upon the clear morrow of all this enchantment, we rub our eyes and look
about us to find it all vanished Bottom merely an ass without the ass's head, the lovers, who
left Athens all at cross purposes, now sweetly congenial and agreed, but no fairy king, queen, nor
court, nor sportive Puck anywhere. There is this difference, however, between "A Midsummer
Night's Dream " and "The Tempest."
When Prospero had blown off the iridescent bubbles of his magic and drowned his wizard arts
with his book, magic robe and staff, the fact-fabric was left just like any ordinary fact-fabric of
this world of intermingling men and women. When the spectator wakes upon the morrow after a
midsummer night's dream in fairyland, with Oberon, Titania and sportive Puck, where men and
women wander exposed to strange metamorphoses, due to the kindly or jealous fancies of the
royal fairy, or to the malicious mirth of fun-loving Puck, all in a land of dewy, sweet-smelling
flower and shrub, one essential fact the love of Demetrius and Helena remains as an effect
due solely to supernatural power. In both plays there is an exuberance of fancy and imagination.
In both the dramatist leans strongly towards a highly poetical use of the supernatural. The
differences between them, with respect to this element, are chiefly differences of degree.
In other plays Shakespeare makes minor use of the supernatural. In two cases the denouement is
made to depend upon the prophecy or vision and pregnant disclosures. Even in these the
supernatural plays but small part in the drama. Except in the four plays mentioned there is no
investing atmosphere of supernaturalism such as is actual in "A Midsummer Night's Dream," and
"The Tempest," and only apparent in "Hamlet" and "Macbeth."


I. In "A Winter's Tale," III, 2, an oracle tells what the spectator already knows, its chief part
being its effect upon the mind of Leones, furnishing also a reason for his sudden conversion after
the death of his son.


II. In "Henry VI," Part I, V. 3, the English and the prevailing French view of the demoniac
character of Joan's power is indicated by fiends, which appear to her upon the field of battle.
Except to enfeeble her powers, they play no part.


III. In "Henry VI," Part II, I, 4, Eleanor, of Gloster, consults witches and dabbles in magic. The
incident is brief and plays but little part.

IV. In "Richard III," V., 3, ghosts appear to both Richard and Richmond. In both cases the
supernaturalism is merely a convenient stage expedient for representing the dreams of good and
bad men upon the eve of battle.

V. In "Henry VIII," IV, 3, Catherine's dream of peace is presented in the form of a vision. This is
a mere stage expedient.

VI. In "Cymbeline," V, 4, a vision of gods and mortals appears to Posthumus, and a written
tablet is left, upon whose interpretation depends the denouement. While this is otherwise one of
the most delightful dramas the master has left us, both the vision and the interpretation are
unworthy the great dramatist, apparently a mere clumsy invention to get the play ended. It is pure
supernaturalism of the poetic kind.

VII. In "Troilus and Cressida," Cassandra prophesies in II, 2, and in V, 3.

VIII. In "Julius Caesar, IV, 3, the ghost of Caesar appears to Brutus. This is such stage expedient
as we have in "Richard III." It is mere personification of the inner thoughts and sentiments.

IX. Diana appears to Pericles, V, 2, and gives him such directions as bring about the
denouement.

X. The ghost of Banquet, "blood-bolstered," appears to Macbeth. This is mere personification,
for stage purposes, of the diseased fancies of Macbeth. It is presentable and is sometimes
presented, without the actual appearance, although not best presented so to any modern audience.
It differs in no essential way from the dagger soliloquy, which is giving, in words and actions,
the assassin's thoughts and feelings upon the threshold of murder. No man ever speaks as Hamlet
and Macbeth speak in their two great soliloquies; but the dramatist therein unfolds with fine art
their inmost selves.
I know of no other writer who has made such use of man's belief in the supernatural as
Shakespeare has done in "Macbeth" and "Hamlet." Bulwer has dealt in it suggestively and
effectively, but he was merely dealing with the spirits problems of the day, rather than using the
supernatural for its artistic value after either the poetical or dramatic method; while Shakespeare,
strangely, as rigidly practical as he was profoundly poetical, was merely dealing with humanity
in another of the many phases he touched in such infinite and picturesque variety. Latter day
novels, and especially many of third, fourth and fifth rate none of first rate are full of
theosophy, spirits, mesmerism, and especially of hypnotism.