Hamlet's Ghost: Issues in Historical Accuracy, Dramatic Motivation and Characterization

History and literature are inseparable. While the purpose of each varies, in any literary work the reader inevitably asks, does it or does it not reflect the history and values of the times, does it reflect the historic life experiences of the author, is it influenced by or did it influence the changing thought of the time? This questioning is more pertinent in a historic play where the degrees of historic accuracy and historic consistency are obviously evident. What latitude or license is the author to be given with historic facts? Shakespeare's play Hamlet, a play based on an old Norse legend, and the dramatic role of the ghost in the play provide a good example of the challenges, insights, expectations and limits that a historical examination of a literary work can raise. The paper will begin with a look at the Norse legend that Hamlet is based upon and what the historical relationship of England and Denmark was at the supposed time of the play. We will then explore the variance that Shakespeare takes both from his predecessors and from historical fact and for what purpose. The ghost's cry for revenge certainly presents theological issues of how the deceased king, a soul in purgatory, could ask for such a deed of his son; further the questionable reality of the ghost and the theological inaccuracy open the door to a Freudian Oedipal interpretation of Hamlet that Shakespeare would not have been aware of, but still works dramatically. While certain schools of criticism claim that a play should be considered independent of author, history and context, the dramatic working of the play we will see, and the motivation and presentation of the character Hamlet are impossible without a historical context. While this is true, paradoxically, the very twisting of those historic facts and beliefs provides a richer interpretation of the play by Shakespeare than that of any of his predecessors' plays on the same legend.