Context (OCR A-Level English Literature): Revision Notes
Context
Historical background
Hamlet was written during a period of significant political uncertainty in England. The play was probably first performed in 1602, at a time when the nation faced an unclear future regarding royal succession. Understanding this historical context helps us appreciate how Shakespeare's play reflected and explored the anxieties of his contemporary audience.
The early 1600s were a particularly anxious period in English history. Queen Elizabeth I's advanced age without an heir meant that everyone - from nobles to common people - lived with the daily uncertainty of not knowing what would happen to their country when she died.
Queen Elizabeth I's decline and the succession crisis
Elizabeth's refusal to name an heir
When Hamlet was written, Queen Elizabeth I was 68 years old. Despite her advanced age, she had never married and had no children to inherit the throne. Most critically, Elizabeth refused to name an heir, even though doing so would have resolved the growing political uncertainty. This refusal contributed to a widespread belief that the once-popular queen had become irresponsible in her old age.
The succession question created real fear among ordinary English people. Without a clear heir, the country faced potential civil war, foreign invasion, or political chaos when the queen died.
Parallels in Hamlet's Denmark
Shakespeare directly mirrors this political uncertainty in the play's setting. In Denmark, the royal succession is similarly unclear:
- Claudius has hastily married Queen Gertrude to secure his claim to the throne
- Prince Hamlet, the old king's legitimate son, is openly unhappy about these arrangements
- The new king spends his time drinking rather than governing responsibly
- Rumours circulate that a foreign invader plans to exploit the kingdom's weakness
These elements capture the contemporary English fear that irresponsible rulers and uncertain succession threatened to destroy the country.
The ruler as embodiment of the kingdom
Elizabethan political philosophy
Shakespeare's contemporaries held a specific belief about monarchy: the health of a kingdom depended entirely upon the wellbeing of its royal family. This wasn't merely symbolic. Elizabethans believed that the ruler was the literal embodiment of the country itself.
The Body Politic Concept
Elizabeth I wasn't just the Queen of England - she was England. Her physical body and the body politic were understood as one and the same. Therefore, as the queen aged and grew sick without producing children, many felt that England itself was dying. Her family line would end with her death, and Shakespeare's audience believed that a period of English prosperity would end alongside it.
Denmark's decline mirrors England's
A similar mood of decay pervades Hamlet's Denmark. The royal family's problems become the kingdom's problems:
- The heir apparent, Prince Hamlet, wishes to kill both Claudius and himself, which would leave Denmark completely without an heir
- Hamlet shows no interest in having children himself, asking Ophelia: "Why wouldst thou be a breeder of sinners?" (3.1)
- Queen Gertrude, like Elizabeth I, is now too old to bear children
- The royal family is no longer healthy, so neither is the kingdom
This connection is captured in Marcellus's famous observation: "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark" (1.4). The rottenness isn't just political corruption - it reflects the fundamental decay of the royal line itself.
The phrase "rotten in the state of Denmark" has become one of Shakespeare's most famous quotes. In its original context, "state" refers not just to the government but to the entire condition of the kingdom - its physical, political, and moral health all intertwined with the royal family's fate.
Ambitious noblemen and political instability
Threats to Elizabeth's rule
Elizabeth's refusal to name an heir created dangerous opportunities for ambitious young noblemen. This was a significant source of political anxiety in Shakespeare's England.
Several threats emerged:
-
James VI of Scotland was a close relative of Elizabeth's and the most likely heir. However, as a Scot, he was considered a foreigner under English law, and foreigners could not legally inherit English land. Rumours suggested he planned to invade and seize the kingdom by force.
-
The Earl of Essex, a favourite of Elizabeth's, led an attempted rebellion in 1601. Elizabeth was forced to execute him, demonstrating how ambitious young courtiers could threaten national stability.
The Danger of Ambitious Youth
Without a clear line of succession, ambitious young noblemen became genuine threats to national security. Each one represented a potential trigger for civil war, as they might gather supporters and attempt to seize power by force rather than waiting for a legitimate succession process.
Parallel threats in Hamlet
The play includes similar threats from ambitious young men:
- Prince Fortinbras of Norway is preparing to invade Denmark, exploiting the kingdom's weakness following the old king's death
- Laertes leads a rebellion against Claudius, storming the castle with an angry mob
- Hamlet himself claims to have political ambitions and questions Claudius's right to rule
These characters embody the fear that ambitious young noblemen posed real danger to ordinary people when succession was unclear. Without a stable line of inheritance, such men might plunge the country into violence and chaos.
Historical Parallel: The Earl of Essex's Rebellion
In 1601, just a year before Hamlet was likely first performed, the Earl of Essex - once Elizabeth's favourite - attempted to lead a coup against her government. He marched through London with armed followers, trying to raise the city against the queen. The rebellion failed, and Essex was executed for treason.
When Shakespeare's audience watched Laertes storm the castle with his mob, or saw Fortinbras march his army toward Denmark, they would have immediately thought of Essex's rebellion and the real danger such actions posed to their own safety.
Exam tips
Writing About Historical Context
When writing about Hamlet's historical context:
- Connect specific events in the play to Elizabethan political concerns
- Use the quotes about Denmark's rottenness to discuss how Shakespeare presents political decay
- Consider how contemporary audiences might have viewed characters like Claudius, Fortinbras, and Laertes through the lens of their own political anxieties
- Remember that for Shakespeare's audience, these weren't abstract political themes - they reflected real fears about their immediate future
Remember!
Key Points to Remember:
- Hamlet was written around 1602 when Queen Elizabeth I (aged 68) had no heir and refused to name one, creating political uncertainty
- Elizabethans believed the ruler was the literal embodiment of the country - Elizabeth I was England, so her decline meant England's decline
- The play mirrors contemporary fears: Denmark's uncertain succession, weak leadership, and threats from ambitious noblemen reflected real anxieties in Shakespeare's England
- The famous line "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark" (1.4) connects the royal family's decay directly to the kingdom's deterioration
- Understanding this historical context helps explain why characters like Fortinbras, Laertes, and Hamlet himself would have seemed particularly threatening to Shakespeare's original audience