The supernatural is not only a key element in the plot and atmosphere of Hamlet and Macbeth; it is a

key element even though it appears in each of the plays only a very few times and most of its
appearances are not for very long. One way Shakespeares skill as a playwright could be measured is by
how much he makes each of those appearances count in the action and in the audiences imagination.
He gets the most out
of them dramatically.
In Hamlet, the supernatural makes even fewer appearances than in Macbeth and it takes only a single
form, as the ghost of the dead King Hamlet, Prince Hamlets father. Out of the plays total of twentytwo scenes, the Ghost appears in just four (I.1, I.4, I.5, III.4), and in two of them (I.1and I.4) it does not
even speak. Of the plays almost four thousand lines, the Ghost speaks just ninety-one, which does not
seem like much for such a key figure until you remember that it is speaking from the dead, whose words
by their nature generally carry more weight than the words of the living, especially when spoken by a
king.
In the opening scene of the play, set at midnight on the ramparts of the kings castle at Elsinore, it
appears to the two sentinels, Barnardo and Marcellus, and to Hamlets friend and fellow-student
Horatio, who has been asked to come to witness what the other two had witnessed on two previous
nights. At first, Horatio is skeptical about the sentinels report of a ghost looking like the dead king, but
the Ghosts sudden appearance shocks him into belief. The two sentinels urge Horatio to speak to it.
This is what Shakespeares audience would have supposed him better qualified to do than they are
since, as an educated man, he would know what kind of language to use in addressing a spirit and the
verbal formulas that will protect him in case it is a spirit from hell that can harm him. Horatio calls on
the Ghost to speak--what art thou that usurpst this time of night . . . Speak, speak. I charge thee,
speak (46-51)--but instead of
answering, the ghost disappears.
The three men agree on the Ghosts exact resemblance to the dead king, Horatio gives his
opinion that this bodes some strange eruptions to our state (69), and then, in answer to Marcelluss
question why the country is mobilizing for war (70-79), he explains that Denmark is threatened with
invasion by Fortinbras, a Norwegian prince who aims to win back territory that his father had lost to King
Hamlet some time before in single combat (80-107). It is hard to believe that two professional soldiers,
Marcellus and Barnardo, should not know of the reason for their countrys mobilization, and therefore
Marcelluss question is nothing more than a clumsy device of Shakespeares to get in some important
plot information. Horatio suggests that the ghosts appearance
is to warn Denmark of the threat.
At this moment, the Ghost suddenly reappears. Horatio confronts it and, agitated, asks whether he can
do anything to comfort it, if it is trying to warn the country of danger, or if it is restless because it buried
treasure during its lifetime as Shakespeares contemporaries thought this was one of the reasons why a
ghost might come to haunt people. The cock crows and the Ghost vanishes without answering. Horatio

advises Barnardo and Marcellus that they tell young Hamlet what they have just experienced, and
expresses his belief that this spirit, dumb to us, will speak to him (170-171).
The resentment and bitterness towards his uncle--and now his stepfather and his king--and his mother
that Hamlet expresses in the following scene (I.2) prepares the audience for the Ghosts shocking
revelations in its next appearance on stage. In Act I., scene 4, Horatio has brought Hamlet to the castles
ramparts to see if the Ghost will reappear. He has told Hamlet of what he and the sentinels had
witnessed the night before (I.2.189-243), and Hamlet has vowed that

If it assume my noble fathers person,

Ill speak to it though hell itself should gape
And bid me hold my peace.
(I.2.244-246)

To himself he has expressed a belief that All is not well and a suspicion of foul play (I.2.255-256).
The way hell enters Hamlets thoughts here shows that from the very first he recognizes the
possibility that the Ghost may intend to do him harm rather than
good, that it is a bad ghost.
I.4 opens with Hamlet commenting scornfully to Horatio on the kings noisy and vulgar partying (it is a
custom / More honored in the breach than the observance *15-16]). His hostility towards Claudius and
his contempt could not be plainer. Just as he comes to the end of his long and bitter denunciation, the
ghost appears. Hamlet is immediately struck by its resemblance to his dead father, but at the same time
shows that he is aware that it can be a spirit of health or goblin damned, that its purpose in coming
can be wicked or charitable, that it may be accompanied either by airs from heaven or blasts from
hell (40-42). He does not mention the Catholic Purgatory, so that up to this point at least he seems to
be taking the Protestant view of ghosts, that they may come either from heaven or from hell and from
nowhere in between.
Hamlet frantically calls on the ghost to tell why it has come and what should we do? (57) The
Ghost beckons him to follow (stage direction, 57) and, showing a great deal of courag , as it takes
courage to follow a ghost, especially when you know that it may be a spirit from hell, Hamlet does. All of
this in spite of Horatio and Marcellus effort to hold him back and Horatios warning that it may intend
to lead him to his death or to drive him mad. Horatio and Marcellus follow after Hamlet, with Marcellus
famously remarking that Something is rotten in the state of Denmark (40).

The Ghost commands Hamlets attention, saying that it must shortly return to sulphrous and
tormenting flames, which at first sounds as though the flames must be the fires of hell. But then it
goes on to identify itself as thy fathers spirit,

Doomed for a certain term to walk the night,

And for the day confined to fast in fires,
Till the foul crimes done in my days of nature
Are burnt and purged away.
(I.5.9-13)

and this sounds just like a description not of hell but of Purgatory.
Abruptly, the Ghost orders Hamlet to avenge his fathers foul and most unnatural murder (25). To
Hamlets horror, it goes on to relate how Claudius first seduced Gertrude (my most seeming-virtuous
queen *46+) and then poisoned his brother: Thus was I sleeping by a brothers hand / Of life, of crown,
of queen at once dispatched (74-75), all this without King Hamlet having had the chance to confess his
sins and receive the churchs last rites that would have helped settle his account with

God (76-77).
The Ghost again commands Hamlet to revenge (81), but this time puts the emphasis not on the murder
but on the adultery:

Let not the royal bed of Denmark be

A couch for luxury and damned incest.
(82-83)

And it goes out of its way to warn Hamlet not to harm his mother in the process but to leave her to be
judged by heaven and her own conscience (84-88). This seems to suggest that the Ghost does not
believe that Gertrude was a party to her husbands murder and was only guilty of adultery. Urging
Hamlet to Remember me (91), the

Ghost vanishes.
Hamlet passionately agrees to fulfill the ghosts commandment (105). When Horatio and Marcellus
catch up with him, he first confuses them with wild and whirling words (133), then declares that it is
an honest ghost (138; that is, a genuine spirit and not a devil), and finally makes them swear to keep
the events of the night secret, with the Ghost echoing from Beneath (that is, from the cellarage
*154+, the space underneath the stage), Swear (158). The scene, and Act I, ends with Hamlet swearing
Horatio and Marcellus not to give him away even if he perchance hereafter shall think meet / To put an
antic disposition on, that is, to pretend to be mad (174-175). The ghosts echo from beneath the stage,
Swear by his sword (164), is the last he is heard from until III.4, the scene in Queen Gertrudes
boudoir, fifteen hundred lines later.
A great many things happen between this scene and the Ghosts next appearance in the play,
which is also its last. There is the meeting of Hamlet and Ophelia which Polonius has arranged in order
to demonstrate to Claudius and Gertrude that Hamlet is, literally, mad with love for his daughter. It is
hard to know whether Hamlets strange behavior at this meeting is really part of his earlier announced
antic disposition, or is at least partly genuine and the result of real disturbance of mind, it is very
convincing. After all, he has had a lot of upsetting things to deal with and he is depressed. There is
Claudiuss anxious setting-on of Hamlets former friends and schoolmates, Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern, to spy on Hamlet to try and discover what is behind his stepsons transformation (II.2.5).
There is Hamlets arrangement with the troupe of visiting players to perform The Murder of Gonzago,
whose plot mirrors the Ghosts account of King Hamlets murder. Hamlet suggests that he inserts some
dozen or sixteen lines so that, by watching Claudiuss response, he will know whether or not the Ghost
was telling the truth. Whether it was a good ghost or a bad ghost.
Most important of all, there is Claudiuss guilty reaction at the moment when the Player
Lucianus Pours the poison in *the Player Kings+ ears (stage direction, III.2.256), and Hamlets moment
of certainty: O good Horatio, Ill take the ghosts word for a thousand pound (III.2.281). At this point,
the many members of Shakespeares audience who would have fully understood Hamlets doubts about
the Ghosts nature, and shared them, would also have been satisfied that it is in fact an honest ghost.
And of course a modern audience, ignorant of Elizabethan ghost beliefs,
is satisfied, too.
The Ghosts last appearance comes in the middle of Hamlets feverish interview with his mother in her
boudoir (III.4). It is different from the others because only Hamlet sees and hears the Ghost. His mother
does not, and she understand the speech he addresses to the Ghost as further proof of his madness. Is
the audience supposed to think that this appearance is a hallucination, a product of Hamlets
melancholy, and the spirit of Act I, which Horatio, Barnardo, and Marcellus also see, a real ghost? Or
has Shakespeare simply been careless?
The stage time between Hamlets confirmation of Claudiuss guilt and the Ghosts appearance in
the boudoir scene is short but it is filled with drama. Hamlet has been called to see his mother, first by
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern (III.2.324-325) and then by Polonius (III.2.367-368). Claudius, who is now

aware of the danger Hamlet represents, has called Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to escort Hamlet to
England (III.3.1-7), making it sound as though the reason for his order is the threat of Hamlets madness
to his own safety and not Hamlets knowledge of his crime. Polonius has gone off to hide behind a
tapestry in the queens apartment so that he might overhear her meeting with her son. And the
audience witnesses Claudius kneeling in solitary prayer, trying to atone before God for his sin and
knowing that he fails, and Hamlet, who has happened to enter, passing by the chance to kill his uncle
and revenge his father out of concern that Claudius, unlike King Hamlet, would die confessed and so go
to heaven (III.3.36-98).
There is even more drama than this when Polonius overhears Hamlets threatening speech to
his mother and from behind the arras echoes her cry of alarm, causing Hamlet, who thinks it is
Claudius and that his life is in danger, to thrust his sword through the tapestry and kill the old man
(III.4.21-33). Before the audience can catch its breath, Hamlet processes into a fit of bitter accusation
against his mother over her adultery (41-88). It is at the height of this outpouring of accusation and
verbal abuse, and as a kind of climax to the series of dramatic events that have just taken place on stage,
that the Ghost suddenly enters. The long span of time since it last appeared makes its entrance seem
that much more explosive.
This time it is dressed not in battle armor but in his nightgown, that is, in a dressing gown (stage
direction, 101). What this change in dress is supposed to signify is hard to guess. Does the Ghost dress
according to the occasion and setting, with armor being thought as much out of place in a wifes boudoir
as a dressing gown would be on the castles ramparts? And this time it speaks only a very few lines. The
first two reproach Hamlet for not yet having carried out the Ghosts command to revenge his fathers
murder:

Do not forget. This visitation

Is but to whet thy almost blunted purpose.
(III.4.110-111)

Clearly the Ghost has been keeping an eye on things. The Ghosts unhappiness with Hamlet here may
strike an audience as unfair. So far as the audience knows, the only opportunity for revenge that Hamlet
has had, once he became convinced of the truth of the Ghosts story, was when Claudius was praying.
The Ghosts rebuke of Hamlet must be based on its knowing of Hamlets failure to take advantage of
that opportunity. But the audience knows that Hamlet had a very good reason for not avenging his
fathers murder at that moment, a reason which the Ghost would have to have approved of (just as,
earlier, Hamlet had a very good reason for testing the truth of what the Ghost said). Hamlet, who is
depressed, may blame himself for being slow in carrying out the Ghosts dread command (III.4.108),

but the audience knows better. He has, in fact, been very active, while taking sensible precautions. To
make sense of all this, the Ghost, from Purgatory, knows what Hamlet does or does not do but, unlike
the audience, cannot enter into Hamlets mind to know why he does or does not do it. Admittedly, this
calles for a lot of mental gymnastics on the part of the audience.
No sooner has the ghost chided Hamlet than it directs him to observe his mothers
bewilderment and to comfort her:

But look, amazement on thy mother sits.

O step between her and her fighting soul!
Conceit in weakest bodies strongest works.
Speak to her, Hamlet.
(III.4.112-115)

Is Gertrudes bewilderment over Hamlets speaking to vacancy *III.4.117+ or over his bitter
accusations, or both? These are the Ghosts last words in the play and its last appearance, if it is an
appearance and not a hallucination. It remains on stage, though (or, if the director has chosen to have it
speak from the cellarage again, at least before the eye of Hamlets imagination), for another few
minutes, first glaring (Look you, how pale he glares *125+) and then by its expression calling on
Hamlet to be merciful to his mother (127-129). For the rest of Hamlet it will not even be mentioned.

Ghost or supernatural plays an important role in the plays written during Renaissance orElizabethan age.
The Elizabethan age greatly believed in the super natural. Thepresentation of ghosts, fairies, witches,
portents, omens uncommon happenings,disturbances in nature was quite and common phenomenon
on the Elizabethan stage. Itwas a traditionally recognized instrument in the dramatic art. People liked to
see thesupernatural elements on the stage and fully enjoyed them. Shakespeare possibly yielded tothe
demands of the people and gave them what they wanted. Shakespeare makes aneffective use of these
popular superstitions and beliefs of his time. But unlike hiscontemporaries, his use of the supernatural is
neither crude nor gross, nor is it extraneousto the action of he plays. According to Moulton,
Supernatural agency has a place in theworld of Shakespeare.In hamlet the supernatural appears in
the form of the ghost. In the first act, five hundredand fifty lines out of the eight hundred and fifty lines
are concerned with the ghost.Therefore, it may be said that if we remove it, the play falls to pieces. The
ghost in Hamlethas at least a three fold dramatic significance. It contributes to the general
tragicatmosphere of the play, it motivates the entire action of the play, and it shows up thecharacter
and derives home a certain moral effect.First, in this play, Shakespeare has introduced the supernatural
element in order to createatmosphere of mystery, horror and suspense It diffuses an atmosphere of
awe throughwhich tragedy becomes more impressive The appearance of the ghost in Hamlet chills
ourblood with horror, or to be more correct, with, terror. Horatio does not believe in ghostsbut the
appearance horrors him with fear and wonder. This introduction of the deadking in the first scene
immediately creates an atmosphere which is a forewarning that un-natural deeds are either to take
place or to be disclosed. Hamlet himself comes to believe insome calamity or evil about to be faced
when he says:

My fathers spirit in arms! All is not well,I doubt some foul plays.Secondly the ghost initiates the entire
action of he play. Verity has pointed out without theghosts initial revelation of truth to Hamlet; there
would be no occasion for revenge, inother words no tragedy of Hamlet. The main theme of the play is
revenge. The motive of this revenge theme is provided by the ghost when it says:Let not the royal bed
of Denmark beA couch for luxury and damnd incest.The ghosts appearance accounts for two other
important developments in the play.Hamlets mind is occupied with the thought of the ghosts reality.
To confirm the truth of its word he puts on an antic disposition and then he gets enacted the Mousetrap playto Catch the conscience of the king.Thirdly, the presence of ghost in Hamlet has a moral
significance also. The play shows thatwe cannot conceal the truth for a long time. It must appear, and
Murder speak with mostmiraculous organ. The ghost, we feel, is a representative of that hidden and
ultimatepower that rules the universe; it is a messenger of the divine justice. Hamlet says:Foul deeds
will riseThough all the earth oer them, to man eye.The ghost reminds us that even the greatest earthly
strength is still subject to thecontrolling Influence of spiritual powers. The ghost speaks of Its Prison
house and of thefires of hell for his crimes in life which is so horrible that it is denied to mortal ears.
HereShakespeare combines classical and Christian concept with the popular superstitions of
hisage.About the nature of the ghost, there exists a controversy. Some critics are of the view thatthe

ghost is a subjective (existing within) phenomenon, a hallucination springing fromimagination. Others

believe that it is an objective (existing outside) phenomenon. The

2
source of this controversy is the second appearance of the ghost in Gertrudes room. InMacbeth, the
ghost of Banquo is subjective because it appears only to Macbeth and to noone else in the court. In
Julius Caesar the ghost of Caesar appears only to Brutus. Butthis is not so in Hamlet. In the beginning,
Hamlet, Marcellus, Bernardo and Horatio see theghost. They not only see it but also address it. In this
sense, the ghost is objective and has areal existence. If it were a product of Hamlets fancy, other people
could not have seen itand heard it simultaneously. But in closet scene, Hamlet sees the ghost and talks
to it; theQueen is unconscious of the presence of the ghost and cannot hear it speak. In this sense,the
ghost is subjective. To reconcile this subjective-objective controversy, two explanationshave been
offered. Koble says that the first apparition was real and the second wasimaginary: the first was
initiative and the second was inhibitive. Verity has offered anotherexplanation. The fact that the ghost is
not seen by the Queen has its moral ring, suggestingthat the woman has stayed so far from the path of
honour that she is unable to receiveSpiritual visions. Coarsening of her nature has dulled her sense of
things non-material. Thesecond explanation seems to be more plausible.To sum up, the presentation of
the ghost in Hamlet is an artistic triumph. With out it, therewould have been no tragic suspense or
curiosity, no suitable atmosphere and consequentlyno interest. This artistic treatment of the
supernatural reveals Shakespeares universaldramatic gift.Written&Composed By:Prof.
A.R.SomrooM.A.English&Education

0661-610063

The supernatural elements that are apparent in most of Shakespeares plays,significantly in

Hamlet
and
Macbeth
, which we are going to elaborate further,have their roots in the Elizabethan era and their beliefs in
supernaturalcreatures, such as witches, ghosts and fairies. The Elizabethan era was poured into beliefs
of the existence of thesesupernatural creatures and phenomena or as they mostly treated them asthe
unseen creatures. Their beliefs on the unseen beings dated backfrom the medieval times and spread
their existence boughs through theElizabethan era all the way to the 20
th
century.Shakespeare, the master playwright of all the times, the supernaturalwordsmith, used the
supernatural themes and elements into his plays inorder to express the concerns of the Elizabethan
society on thesupernaturalism and their attitude towards them. He also used them to makehis plays
more tragic and also to reach the catharsis of his masterful plays onthe scene. As we mentioned earlier,
we have selected two of Shakespearestragedies;
Hamlet
and
Macbeth
in order to elaborate and compare theutilization of the supernaturalism and the supernatural elements
in his plays.In both of these tragedy plays we encounter the usage of the supernaturalelements; the
ghost of King Hamlet in
Hamlet
, and the ghost of Banqou, thevision of the bloody dagger and the three witches in
Macbeth
. One mightwonder as to why Shakespeare used these supernatural beings andphenomenon into both
of these tragedies as well as others. The response isthat he wanted to input some of the
supernaturalism of the time into hisplays, to make them be treated as the plays of the time for the
people of the time, as we know that his idea was always treated as such and to treatthe concerns of his
society into his plays though make them more easilyaccessible. Another important reason regarding this

was that he used thesupernatural creatures, in this particular case the ghosts, in order to revealthe truth
behind the characters actions without having to revenge against aparticular person for revealing that
truth, therefore be able to enclose theplay in a tragic way and make his spectators more attentive
andenthusiastic.In
Hamlet,
Claudius has inherited the throne of Denmark after having killedhis own brother, King Hamlet, by
pouring the poison into his ears, andthereafter marrying his brothers widow Queen Gertrude.
Fortunately KingHamlet had a son named after his own name, Prince Hamlet, who, after the

The very first lines of Hamlet seem to be designed to prepare the audience for the ideas that will
develop as the play progresses.

BARNARDO

Whos there?

FRANCISCO

Nay, answer me. Stand and unfold yourself. (1.1.1-2)

This opening exchange is set upon the gloomy, gothic battlements of the castle as the watchmen
stumble through the dark, afraid of meeting the ghost that the audience will discover has already
appeared twice before. As an opening image, this immediately introduces an element of the
supernatural in order to unnerve the audience and convey the sense of uncertainty that runs
throughout the play. As well as this, the dialogue hints at the way in which the dark battlements can be
read as a metaphor for the way in which Hamlet is struggling with his own sense of identity, which his
fathers ghost later forces him to unfold in order to restore a natural order to the usurped throne.

When the ghost of King Hamlet eventually speaks to the Prince, Shakespeare seems to ensure that the
feelings of uncertainty are not removed as an audience may expect. Instead, the ambiguity of the
ghosts intent and role within the play are only increased, which is again something that is reflected on
stage through Hamlets own reactions. Despite the apparition taking his fathers form, Hamlet is
cautious of the spirits intentions and finds himself unable to act upon his promise to avenge his father
due to conflicts with his moral and religious characteristics. Arguably, Shakespeare is exploring the idea
of the conflicts between morality and a greater sense of duty, something that is reflected in Hamlets To
be, or not to be soliloquy where he contemplates the difference between life and death as an analogy
for taking action or being passive. Campbell and Quinn argue that:

The soliloquies are the passages that most clearly reveal Hamlets struggle on the one hand to obey the
Ghosts sacred injunction and on the other to follow the dictate of his own natureThey relate what is
passing through his mind to moral imperatives and religious principles. In the To be or not to be
speech Hamlet considers the implications of his undertaking the career of an avenger to which he has
just dedicated himself. (1966, 288)

Shakespeare is therefore using the supernatural as a dramatic device through which he can convey
Hamlets uncertainty to the audience by forcing them to consider his predicament from their own
perspective. In this sense the ghost is used as a powerful device that crosses the divide between actors
and the audience, affecting both worlds and crucially blurring the audiences perception of what is

presented as real and what is a representation of Hamlets internal struggle. This would have been
especially significant to an Elizabethan audience whose Christian beliefs would have suggested that King
Hamlets spectre was a product of Prince Hamlets deranged mind, for as Campbell and Quinn point out:

Hamlet is no pagan avenger of Icelandic saga, but a Christian Elizabethan who adopted the current
confused beliefs of his age about ghostsThe Protestants, having banished purgatory from their
theology, held that a man once dead could find no exit from heaven or hell. Therefore, such spectres as
the ghost of Hamlets father were either illusions of minds unhinged by melancholy or devils
masquerading as spirits of the departed in order to lure the persons they address to damnation. (1966,
288)

However, from the very beginning the audience has been told that other characters are able to see the
ghost and Horatio is even able to describe him in detail:

MARCELLUS

Is it not like the King?

HORATIO

As thou art to thyself.

Such was the very armour he had on

When he thambitious Norway combated.(1.1.57-60)

This raises important questions about the objectivity of King Hamlets ghost. Just as Hamlet questions
whether it is really the spirit of his father who is visiting him, so does the audience, again taking
advantage of the ambiguous nature of the supernatural imagery to link the audiences state of mind to
that of the protagonist. Robert West argues that if:

the pneumatological evidence in Hamlet is ambiguous, it is either because Shakespeare thought it

unimportant to post the audience by its means on the ultimate nature of the ghost, or because he
thought it desirable to keep the audience a little uncertain about it. (1955, 1111)

The pneumatological evidence mentioned here, is a reference to the established ideas and laws that an
audience of the time would have expected ghosts in drama to adhere to. However, as I have already
mentioned, the concept of the ghost is far too vague to be fixed to a set of laws. Therefore, by
suggesting that Shakespeare is purposefully ignoring the established pneumatological evidence, West

seems to be confirming that he is indeed being deliberately ambiguous about his supernatural
characters in an attempt to subvert the audiences expectations.

Therefore the identity of the ghost in Hamlet is certainly not as easy to define, as an Elizabethan
audience may have liked it to be. If King Hamlet is a product of Hamlets deranged state then why is it
that the watchmen are also able to see him? Furthermore, to add to this confused identity, we are later
shown that Gertrude is unable to see the apparition. These constant contradictions deny the audience
an easy way of identifying the ghost as real, or a product of Hamlets disturbed state of mind. As West
points out, the supernatural is being used to increase the dramatic impact of the play by distorting the
audiences own ideas of death and identity and therefore allowing them to identify with Hamlets
situation.

*Shakespeare+ knowingly gave precedence to dramatic considerations over pneumatological ones, and
that, for Hamlet particularly, this required a confusion of pneumatological dogma. (1955, 1113)

In Macbeth the supernatural also plays a large role in exploring the theme of identity. However, the
supernatural elements of the play differ greatly from those found in Hamlet; the most important
difference being that the witches do not have any wrong doing for Macbeth to put right. This
apparently random interference of the witches and the subsequent chaos it causes in the kingdom is
likely to stem from the fact that Shakespeare was writing the play to be performed for King James, who
was notorious for his belief in the evils of witchcraft:

These witches conform exactly to King James beliefs. Their every act confirms the truth of his
suspicionsBy seeking and accepting their aid Macbeth becomes guilty, albeit indirectly, of trafficking
with the Prince of Darkness. This vivid way of dramatizing a mans bondage to evil has enthralled every
spectator or reader of the tragedy, as, in a peculiar sense, it must have enthralled King James.
(Campbell and Quinn 1966, 484)

Aside from the rather sweeping statements made at the end of this quotation, it should be noted that
Macbeth never actually seeks the witches help until after their first meeting. In fact, it is the witches
that seek Macbeth at the beginning of the play. However, his instant and incautious commitment to
fulfilling the prophecy is a stark contrast to Hamlets slow battle with his morality, showing how the
supernatural is used differently in the plays to expose vastly different character traits. Furthermore, the
sudden change in Macbeth from the seemingly likeable and noble character to an immoral, villainous
one, can either be seen as another damning account of the evils of witchcraft, or a subtle warning of

powers ability to corrupt. After all, it is Lady Macbeth who finally convinces her husband to actively
pursue the prophecy and kill the King in his sleep (1.7.61-72). She condemns Macbeth for his cautious
character, challenging his manhood: When you durst do it, then you were a man (1.7.49), whilst
adopting a more masculine mode herself:

LADY MACBETH

unsex me here,

And fill me from the crown to the toe top-full

Of direst cruelty. Make thick my blood,
Stop up thaccess and passage to remorse,
That no compunctious visitings of nature
Shake my fell purpose nor keep peace between
Theffect and it. (1.5.39-45)

She even takes it upon herself to ensure that what needs to be done is seen through:

MACBETH

Ill go no more

I am afraid to think what I have done

Look ont again I dare not.
LADY MACBETH Infirm of purpose
Give me the daggers
Ill gild the faces of the grooms withal,
For it must seem their guilt (2.2.48-55).

Despite this, both protagonists remain fully responsible for their actions, or inaction, throughout the
play. Macbeth may have many different influences acting upon him, but it is not the knowledge of his
fate that drives him to murder, it is his submission to his ambition and lust for power. In both plays, the
ghosts and witches are only able to provide information on what has happened, and in both
circumstances the protagonists seek proof before taking action. Hamlet sets up the play within a play,
and Macbeth waits for confirmation of his new title before plotting to pursue the witches prophecy.

Crucially, the witches do not specify how Macbeth will become King, nor can King Hamlets ghost take
his own revenge on Claudius. To actively take part in such events would not only change the plots
dramatically but also destroy the protagonists underlying struggle to come to terms with their actions
and humanity.

Time is another theme that Shakespeare explores through the use of the supernatural in both plays.
Hamlet is haunted by a ghost of the past, who demands that the wrongs of the past are avenged and
restored to normal. In contrast, Macbeth is concerned about his future, hence his submission to his
violent ambition. As I have mentioned, his rise to power is meaningless in the face of his inability to
leave behind a successor, who can continue to reign once he has died. This is perhaps why the ghost of
Banquo haunts Macbeth, for it is Banquo who will represent the future line of kings, rather than King
Duncan. Finally, of course, Macbeth begins to realise the futility of his struggle to maintain power in the
face of an uncertain future.

MACBETH

Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow

Creeps in this petty pace from day to day

To the last syllable of recorded time,
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle. (5.5.18)

Hamlet also discusses the way in which great men are returned to nothing more than dust when they
pass away:

HAMLET

Imperial Caesar, dead and turned to clay,

Might stop a hole to keep the wind away.

O, that that earth which kept the world in awe
Should patch a wall texpel the winters flaw! (5.1.196)

This may at first appear to be a similar feeling to that of Macbeths; however, in remembering the deeds
of Caesar and Alexander, Hamlet is showing how it is possible to live on through memory of great deeds
performed in a lifetime. This is furthered by his comment that he knew Yorick (5.1.171-80). Even though

he is disturbed at the way humans return to dust, the audience is shown how memory can keep
preserve life, something that Macbeth neglects in his blind ambition to secure power.

The use of the supernatural is therefore very different for both characters, however it serves the same
dramatic purpose of externalising the internal mental struggles each character goes through. In Hamlet
the focus on past events and the clash between Hamlets moral standards and his sense of duty is
externalised by the memory of his father. Whereas, by hearing his fate through the witches self-fulfilling
prophecy, Macbeths ambition is awakened as he desperately tries to secure a future, spurred on by the
futility of having no offspring like Banquo. Hamlet therefore struggles with his humanity, whilst in
contrast Macbeth neglects to think about his through his concerns over his mortality.

Another interesting difference is the appearance of the ghosts themselves. Horatio describes the ghost
of King Hamlet as wearing the armour from a previous ferocious battle, perhaps to emphasise his anger
at being murdered without the chance to confess his sins and then buried without the appropriate
religious ceremony. In contrast, Banquo appears to Macbeth covered with twenty trenched gashes on
his head (3.4.80), suggesting that, unlike King Hamlet, only Macbeth is able to see the ghost, which the
audience is likely to interpret as a physical representation of his own guilty conscience. At the feast,
Macbeth seems to be able to exert some power over his conscience, forcing the ghost hence and
recovering himself. Shakespeare is again using the ghosts as a dramatic device that force the internal
thoughts of the characters outwards, showing the audience, both on and off stage, that his struggle to
come to terms with what he has done is making it difficult for him to control his guilty conscience. Elmer
Stoll maintains that:

the words of Macbeth are words of impiety, of a classical Infatuation and Insolence, and they are
answered from the other world. They fly in the face of Heaven, andare hurled back upon the speakers
head. (1907, 209)

Just like the ghost of King Hamlet however, the subjectivity of Banquos ghost is still debateable. Stolls
essay, Objectivity of the Ghosts in Shakespeare,argues against the idea of Banquos ghost as a vision
conjured only by Macbeths guilty conscience.

Banquos Ghost, then, rises not because Macbeth remembers the words of the murderer, but because
the ghost must be like the corpse. It is no matter of psychology of symbolism, but the exceedingly
simple matter of a story hanging together. (1907, 216)

However, this conclusion appears a little weak if it is taken into account that Banquo appears just as the
murderer has described him, and very shortly after this description. Also, given the way that
Shakespeare has demonstrated a disregard for pneumatological rules, it is unreasonable to think that
the ghost appears as it does just because it must conform to the same law as the Ghost of Hector in the
Aeneid, who, by stark contrast, appeared in a dream. Again, it is probable that the apparition is meant
to be deliberately ambiguous, both to the audience and to Macbeth, making physical (or perhaps
metaphysical) his fears of Banquos children retaking the throne while he has no power to create his
own line of Kings and pointing out the cruel irony of a man who is told his future, bit is incapable of
sustaining it.

Therefore, whether it is Hamlets objective ghost from the past or Macbeths subjective visions of the
future, it is clear that the supernatural elements of both plays are essential to the way in which the key
themes of identity and mortality are conveyed to the audience. Contradictions in the concept of the
ghosts, such as who is able to see them, as well as the ambiguous way in which they can be interpreted
as real or representations of internal struggles, mean that the audience is prevented from settling on a
comfortable, easy explanation for them. This disturbs their sense of identity, just as it does the
characters in the play, blurring the boundaries between actor and audience and forcing them to
confront the same questions that Hamlet and Macbeth face as they struggle to find a sense of purpose
in their corrupted worlds.

Usually explanations of supernatural figures tend to reduce their proper effect of awe and mystery, but
the indecisive explanations Shakespeare gives and the standard questions he raises rather tend to
create awe and mysteryIn contemporary consciousness such experience kept a preponderance of
terror and doubt that overrode normal confidence in pneumatological rationalizations. We see just this
overriding take place in the sceptical Horatio, and Shakespeare meant, perhaps, that it should take place
in the audience too. (West 1955, 1114)

Shakespeare uses the supernatural in these plays a metaphor for many different things, from the
physical manifestation of Macbeths immoral acts and guilty conscience, to Hamlets sense of duty
toward his family and the natural order. However, what is arguably most important about Shakespeares
use of the supernatural is not the form it takes, but the way in which it is used as a dramatic device that
disrupts the audiences expectations and forces them into engaging with the plays central themes and
issues.

Supernaturalism is a manifestation of intellectual curiosity. Modernity has prohibited such curiosity with
technological inquisition. But while it can be avoided phylogenetically, it cannot be avoided
ontogenetically. With modern theatre, this aspect of mythology and the treatment of the supernatural
elements, bear a direct inclination towards politics. But this tendency to profess political ideas is not
modern but penetrates deep into the ancient world.

Shakespeares tragedies are flagship plays of all such constitutions. His treatment of supernaturalism,
whether in Julius Caesar or Hamlet, has both the political and personal elements. Far from being a
feudal poet, observes Wyndham Lewis in The Lion and the Fox,1 the Shakespeare that Troilus and
Cressida, The Tempest, or even Cariolanus shows us is much more a bolshevik (using this little word
popularly) than a figure of conservative romance. As a dramatist, Shakespeare was bound to provide
entertainment for his audience. But, in Hamlet, his hatred for mere entertainment becomes evident in
one of Hamlets famous dialogues:

HAMLET. Be not too tame neither, but let your own discretion be your tutor. Suit the action to the word,
the word to the action, with this special observance: that you oerstep not the modesty of nature. For
anything so overdone is from the pur- pose of playing, whose end, both at the first and now, was and is
to hold as twere the mirror up to nature, to show virtue her own feature, scorn her own image, and the
very age and body of the time his form and pressure. Now this overdone, or come tardy off, though it
make the unskilful laugh, cannot but make the judicious grieve; censure of the which one must in your
allowance oerweigh a whole theatre of others (3.2.16-28). This, is what precisely, happens in Hamlet: a
play within the play is staged, an extensive decoy, which would reveal the...

The supernatural is a recurring aspect in many of William Shakespeare's

plays. In Hamlet there appears, perhaps the most notable of the supernatural
forms, the ghost. However, in Macbeth, not only does the ghost appear, but a
floating dagger, witches, and prophetic apparitions. In both Hamlet and
Macbeth, the supernatural plays an intricate and very important role in the two
plays. In two such plays, Hamlet and Macbeth, the supernatural is an
essential part of the structure of the plot.
The information the ghost reveals motivates Hamlet into action against a
situation he is already uncomfortable with. In scene V of act I, Hamlet and the
ghost appear together. The ghost confesses to Hamlet that "A serpent stung
me, so the whole ear of Denmark/Is by a forged process of my death/Rankly
abus'd"(I.v.36-38). The ghost's words make it clear that he was not poisoned
by a snake but murdered by his own brother. In Hamlet, if he had not seen the
ghost of his father, he would not have known that Claudius had killed his
father to claim the throne. The ghost asks Hamlet to seek revenge for the
King's death and Hamlet is thus propelled to set into action a series of events
that ends in Hamlet's death.
The core of the play then unfolds from the actions and words of this ghost. In
the famous "To be or not to be" soliloquy (III.i.56-89), Hamlet makes it clear
he is unsure of what action to take. Hamlet encounters the ghost once more in
his mother's bedroom. The ghost reminds him to avenge his father's death.
Hamlet's revenge against his uncle, Claudius is certainly stimulated by the
ghosts' words. His father's murder is forcing Hamlet to take action.

The supernatural occurs four times during the course of Macbeth. It occurs in
all the appearances of the witches, in the appearance of Banquo's ghost, in
the apparitions with their prophecies, and the floating dagger that guides
Macbeth towards his victim. In Macbeth, the supernatural plays a si...

The genesis of Hamlet's angst is the visitation of his father's ghost, a fact that he refuses to
accept at first, which causes him great anxiety tinged with filial guilt. Also represented in the
presence of the ghost is the possibility that he is not Hamlet's father at all, but a manifestation
of the devil trying to trick Hamlet into taking revenge on those who are suspected of killing
the king.
Therefore, Hamlet must consider whether the ghostly image is a temptation designed to
allow him to forfeit his own mortal soul, or his father, beseeching his son to avenge his
murder.
The supernatural in this play is a way for Shakespeare to introduce the presence of evil or
evil doings, to give us a clue that dark forces are at work. It creates an unsettling atmosphere
filled with fear and trepidation for Hamlet and the reader. Supernatural forces are
unpredictable, we never know how they will strike or at which character.
Hamlet is also consumed with the deep and mysterious question of contemplating the nature
of death. He becomes entangled in his own mind, procrastinating about what he should do
regarding the murder of his father as he wanders the recesses of his mind looking for answers
to the timeless questions regarding the meaning of human existence and the purpose of life.
"Not only is death pervasive, its occurrence is a product of chance and circumstance. True,
Hamlet anticipates his death, while Claudius and, perhaps, Laertes deserve theirs, but
Polonius dies by accident as does the Queen, while Ophelia's suicide seems to be beyond her
control. Life inevitably yields death and a wormy grave, and its occurrence cannot be
foreseen or avoided"
In any case, Hamlet is surrounded by death and its reminders, which in and of itself, is
supernatural.
In Shakespeare's time, the supernatural, witches and spells and the tinkering with men's lives
was a reality of everyday life. The King at the time, King James I, was very interested
in witches and witchcraft, that is why Shakespeare put the three witches in his tribute play
Macbeth, where he honors the lineage of King James's ancestors and his succession to the
throne.

renoa | Elementary School Teacher | Salutatorian

Posted June 12, 2012 at 1:39 PM (Answer #2)

dislike0like

Hamlet is a tragic play that discuss the theme of revenge and hate. Shakespeare used the
supernatural element throughout Hamlet's father ghost and that was a smart move to convey
the unknown secret the father had .

Hamlet's father died and it said that a snake bit him but that wasnt the truth . the ghost told
Hamlet the sour truth by telling him that his father soul is arrested in the earth because it was
killed . Hamlet's uncle killed his father and the ghost of his father is seeking revenge from
the uncle .

The new king who is Hamlet's uncle didn't just kill the father , it also married Hamlet's
mother and that made Hamlet furious and full of hate .

The role of the ghost is important in the play because it appeared many times in front of
Hamlet and spoke to him asking him to take revenge .

The ghost is one of the characters in the play which rise the events by creating the inspiration
of taking revenge . The ghost plays an important role in the in Hamlet because it would not
have had such a significant effect on his character and play.

In conclusion, the ghost plays an extremely significant role in the play and brings enjoyment
to all audiences. Shakespeare gave us a wonderful play that still has its value .

References

Berry, Ralph. 1986. Hamlets Doubles, Shakespeare Quarterly 37.2, 204-212.

Campbell, Oscar James and Edward G. Quinn (eds). 1966. A Shakespeare Encyclopaedia.London:
Methuen.

Cartelli, Thomas. 1983. Banquos Ghost: The Shared Vision, Theatre Journal 35.3, 389-405.

Hill, Susan. 1983. The Woman in Black. London: Vintage, Random House.

Johnson, Samuel [1745]. 1975. Johnson on Shakespeare.London: Yale University Press.

Joseph, Miriam. 1961. Discerning the Ghost in Hamlet, PMLA 76.5, 493-502.

Knights, L. C. 1959. Some Shakespearean Themes. London: Chatto & Windus.

Shakespeare, William. Hamlet and Macbeth quoted from Greenblatt et al (eds) 1997. The Norton
Shakespeare.London: W. W. Norton, 1659-1759 and 2556-2618.

Siegel, Paul N. 1963. Discerning the Ghost in Hamlet, PMLA 78.1, 148-149.

Stoll, Elmer Edgar. 1907. The Objectivity of the Ghosts in Shakspere, PMLA 22.2, 201-233.

West, Robert H. 1955. King Hamlets Ambiguous Ghost, PMLA 70.5, 1107-1117.

Zucker, Jerry (dir). 1990. Ghosts Paramount Pictures.