This essay examines William Shakespeare's Hamlet through the lens of Elizabethan cosmology, specifically the Great Chain of Being, arguing that Hamlet's personal and family struggles both reflect and ultimately help restore the kingdom's political disorder. The paper analyzes Hamlet's deliberate approach to revenge, his complex relationship with Ophelia, and the contrasting family dynamics represented by Polonius's household. Drawing on scholars such as Roland Mushat Frye, Eleanor Prosser, and Alan Hobson, the essay contends that Hamlet's actions are driven not by simple revenge but by a deeper sense of cosmic justice, individual conscience, and social integrity — themes central to Elizabethan moral thought.
In the play Hamlet by William Shakespeare, the role and plight of Hamlet in his family mirrors the state of the kingdom and then becomes a means of restoring order to a world in turmoil. This is in keeping with the Elizabethan idea of the Great Chain of Being, so that the fate of the world and the fate of kings are tied together — turmoil in the heavens, in the form of storms and similar portents, reflects the turmoil the kingdom faces politically and socially at the same time. In addition, Hamlet's character and family situation are illuminated by contrast with the family of Polonius, his father's trusted if foolish adviser.
The fact that the kingdom is in turmoil is reflected not just in the tensions at court and the storm that may be brewing outside, but even more pointedly in the appearance of Hamlet's father's ghost. Hamlet is told what to do by the ghost of his father, whom he meets on the ramparts at night — a portent to all of the things to come. Hamlet is called upon to kill Claudius and thereby revenge his father's death; this act will also restore order to the kingdom. Some see the ghost as a demonic influence who should not be trusted, and Hamlet himself hesitates as if unsure that the ghost is telling the truth. Hamlet may want revenge, but his actions are not simply attempts to obtain it. In the Elizabethan era, the person committing revenge endangered his own soul no matter how righteous his motives may have been (Prosser 3–7).
Justice for kings and would-be kings operates at a cosmic level. Claudius is destroyed at the instigation of supernatural forces. The order he has challenged is greater than he is — greater than any given monarch, yet it protects the idea of monarchy and the order that flows from it. It is greater than Hamlet himself, and Hamlet's hesitation should be seen as part of this sense of cosmic justice. Hamlet hesitates first because of the enormity of what he is about to undertake, and he hesitates also because he needs to expose Claudius in some public sense. He uses the play-within-a-play to assert his own knowledge of what happened and to put Claudius on notice that he knows, after which he can act publicly to set things right. This idea is echoed by Roland Mushat Frye, who notes that Hamlet deliberates rather than acting rashly, and that being deliberate and judicious is not necessarily a bad thing in a prince:
"As a liberally educated Christian humanist, Hamlet approaches his problems by thinking about them, by attempting to reason them out, before taking action." (Frye 171)
"Ophelia's real madness contrasts Hamlet's feigned grief"
"Hamlet's duty restores order; suicide contrasted"
You’re 42% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.