# Talk:Hamnet Shakespeare

I see the article has amassed further speculation on the similarity of Hamnet's name to that of the eponymous character of the play Hamlet since last I looked at it. The relevant change is here.
I've read the cited Greenblatt article and it boils down to Greenblatt saying he feels there must be a connection given the similarly sounding names, and he then spends over six thousand words making speculation and supposition that sound plausible, but of which none is actually supported by any facts (I particularly like the part where he describes the scene at Hamnet's burial — down to the details of the tears on John, Anne, and Judith and Susanna's faces! — and how his supposition that Shakespeare and his immediate family had Catholic sympathies, but were forced into a Protestant burial, proves that Hamlet is a covert Catholic Mass for Hamnet). Eloquently as Greenblatt paints this picture for the reader, in the absence of new facts, here Chambers must trump Greenblatt. Also, somewhat beside the point, I just plain don't find his speculation plausible; the mother's lament in King John I'll buy, but I see no thematic or specific echo of Hamnet's death in Hamlet.
So I'm going to get rid of the parts that were added that relies on Greenblatt (which is essentially all of this theory).
Further, the added bits of nuggets make reference to Will's will and the spelling of Hamnet Sadler's name. Aside from the fact that Will didn't write his own will — that would have been Francis Collins, his lawyer, or more likely Collins' hired scribe — and that the will was not in final form (it was a crude and much amended draft), so any given spelling of the name has at least three possible sources of typos and misunderstandings, the cited transcription of Will's will — and all other transcriptions of it that I've so far seen on the web — are just plain wrong. The one cited here is a better attempt than most, but I still found mistakes within 30 seconds of casual study.
IOW, I'm going to get rid of the bits that support themselves on that particular reference (which is the last bit of the added text).
Are there any better sources than Greenblatt around that might justify keeping this? Preferably something supported by objective facts and not appeals to a mother's tear-streaked face and a father's desperate regret at having abandoned his only son, now dead, in infancy.--Xover (talk) 09:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm. I'm always a bit sceptical of dismissing the ideas of the guys who write the reliable sources just because we disagree with their ideas. That seems to me to be what the original research policy is there to discourage. Also, I have seen writers who are more sympathetic to the idea of a Hamnet/Hamlet connection than you have just been, and than the comment added by Wrad a few months ago to the Hamlet article. Having said that, I'm sympathetic to the view you've expressed above, I'm very much in the "don't edit with your brain switched off" camp, and I don't object to your proposed removals. I'll keep an eye out while reading in the next few weeks, though, and if I see anything good that will add balance to this piece, I'll add it in. AndyJones (talk) 20:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
As the editor who made this change, let me offer some arguments against reverting it.
1.  It is supported by reliable sources.  In addition to Greenblatt's works, I believe a similar position is taken by Park Honan, Shakespeare:  A Life (Oxford:  Oxford UP, 1998), p. 236 (although, admittedly, I haven't seen Honan's work myself, and therefore didn't cite it).  Also taking a broad view of the importance of Hamnet's death is Richard P. Wheeler, "Deaths in the Family:  The Loss of a Son and the Rise of Shakespearean Comedy," Shakespeare Quarterly (Summer 2000), Vol. 51, pp. 127 - 53, although Wheeler is more focused on Hamnet's influence on other plays than Hamlet.
2.  It is supported by the known fact that "Hamlet" and "Hamnet" were interchangeable names.  This is not just based on Shakespeare's will, where the text refers to "Hamlett Sadler," but Sadler himself, a witness, signed as "Hamnet Sadler."  (In this regard, I consider it irrelevant that the will itself would have been set down by a solicitor or scrivener, not Shakespeare himself.  Multiple transcriptions of the will give these spellings, so I don't think they're the result of transcription errors.)  We know virtually nothing of poor Hamnet Shakespeare other than his baptism and death (on which occasions his name was spelled "Hamnet" both times), but Sadler's name occurs several times in the Stratford Register, where it is spelled as "Hamnet" three times, "Hamlet" three times, "Hamletti" once, and "Hambnet" once.  (My source here is the article on the Stratford Register in this 1821 edition of Shakespeare's plays and poems, Vol. II, pp. 612 - 13.  I haven't had a chance to compare to the more recent version of the Register, which I believe was published in scholarly form a few years ago.)  Both "Hamnet" and "Hamlet" derive from the Norman name "Hamo" or "Hamon," according to Notes and Queries, Sept. 21, 1907.
3.  It is consistent with our intuition.  We know that the loss of an only son is a shattering development.  If anything, it would have been more so in Shakespeare's time, when it was considered all-important to have a male heir.  While the names of Shakespeare's son and the Prince of Denmark may be coincidental, it's hard to imagine that Shakespeare did not have his son on his mind when he wrote the play.  Writers in the 19th and early 20th centuries were far too free with their speculations, leading to a reaction by writers like Sisson and Chambers to avoid all such speculation.  More recent scholars are trying to find a middle ground.  I am not, of course, suggesting that Wikipedia should indulge in speculation as to the effect of Hamnet's death on Shakespeare, just that it is appropriate to discuss the scholarly sources who address the subject.  John M Baker (talk) 23:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
As a neutral party, I'm reminded of the many arguments our project has had over Shakespearean authorship. In most cases, the idea that Shakespeare wrote his works wins out, because that's what scholars say. When the authorship crowd is challenged to bring up academic, peer reviewed sources, their pickings are very slim. For this debate, though, it seems that the Hamnet = Hamlet crowd have a proportionally larger support among academics. I think the information should stay in, making it clear that it is very much a minority opinion. Wrad (talk) 00:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Greetings:
Another source is provided here for the child's name having spelling variations and an impact on the play, Hamlet, and possibly King John.
In preparation for a virtual book club event at the Folger Shakespeare Library, a reading of Maggie O'Farrell's historical novel, Hamnet, there are several resource pages provided.
On this webpage, the Folger Theater writes:
Written around 1600, Hamlet not only shares a name with the deceased boy, spelling variations at the time making the two forms interchangeable, but addresses themes of grief, mourning, and memory. There is, however, an earlier work that may also reflect the playwrights’ feeling on the loss. Tentatively dated the same year as Hamnet’s death—though whether before or after we can’t tell—King John contains a moving scene wherein Constance mourns the loss of her son, Arthur, reflecting how “Grief fills the room up of my absent child.” [My emphasis.]
Collection Connections: ‘Hamnet’ -- [1]https://www.folger.edu/blogs/folger-spotlight/collection-connections-hamnet-by-maggie-ofarrell/
Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 18:56, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

consider including this logical conclusion: There is also the fact that Shakespeare clearly felt Hamlet/Hamnet was a good name, having named his son this, so would therefore be likely to have also wanted this name for his protagonist.92.24.136.100 (talk) 09:56, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

It is impossible to come to a "logical conclusion" based on speculations regarding authorial intent; there is no way (much as we may wish for one) to know how Shakespeare "felt" about the names Hamlet and Hamnet, so it is not a fact. Cfsibley (talk) 20:08, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hamnet Shakespeare is almost completely lost in this article. This article seems to be about 15% Hamnet Shakespeare and 85% William Shakespeare and his works. An article about Hamnet should be mostly about Hamnet, not about how his death might have affected his dad's work. All of that speculation belongs elsewhere. If Hamnet is only notable for having a famous father and for dying young, does he even meet notability requirements? I know very little is known about Hamnet Shakespeare, and his impact on posterity hardly registers except by the possibility that his father might have reflected his own feelings of grief in his writings, and that it meant the end of his father's male line, but that's not about Hamnet - it's about Will. William Shakespeare and his writings are the subjects of other articles. I think mention of those speculations is appropriate for this article, but I think this article should be about Hamnet Shakespeare, and no longer than reliable information warrants. Either that or make this article about the possible impact of Hamnet's death on his father's writing, and incorporate the biographical information given as background. In its current state, I marvel that it still maintains GA status. Has it been reviewed lately? Dcs002 (talk) 22:29, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

The article text gives no indication of how Hamnet died, however the page is included in Category:16th-century deaths from plague (disease).  My understanding from a few minutes of searching is that the cause of his death is not known, but perhaps I have misunderstood.  If the cause of death is given in a reliable source, the article should include it; if it's not known reliably, the category should be removed.  Unfortunately, I'm not sure which is the case. 185.219.110.178 (talk) 22:32, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

It has been a while since this article has been reviewed, so I took a look and noticed lots of uncited statements, including most of the "Life" section and several entries in the "Popular culture" section. The lead is also quite short and does not summarise all major aspects of this article. Should this article go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 15:20, 1 September 2025 (UTC)


### Hamnet Shakespeare