The subject of this paper is not, on the whole, one to which scholars have devoted much attention, and the results of this lack of interest have in some ways been unfortunate. Shakespeare’s tragedies seem to conform outwardly to the conventional Aristotelian triangle well enough to foster on the one hand the impression that the triangular scheme is the only possible one and that playwrights such as Fletcher who have worked on other principles are lacking in form, while on the other certain un-Aristotelian tendencies, such as the frequent disappearance of the hero during the decline, or the rather abrupt episodic nature of the structure, have been overlooked and even, for instance in discussing the doubtful plays, been regarded as un-Shakespearian while in fact they are typical.

Of the four great tragedies it is Hamlet that seems to exhibit the Shakespearian pattern most perfectly. The opening scene is a wonderful piece of atmosphere: a solitary sentry pacing up and down, muffled in an inky cloak to suggest the dark and the cold; to him another figure, similarly muffled, a hasty snatch of conversation in muffled tones, betraying a sense of uneasiness—then more figures, more talk, and out of it, abruptly dropped, the cause of the uneasiness—"What, has this thing appear'd again to-night?"