The key issue regarding Hamlet and the line of succession hinges on whether primogeniture (the right of the firstborn son to inherit the throne) was the established custom in Denmark at the time. While primogeniture eventually became the norm throughout most of Europe by the late Middle Ages, its adoption was slower and more uneven in Scandinavia.
A close reading of the text reveals several pieces of evidence suggesting that in the world of the play, the Danish monarchy may have followed a system of elective monarchy rather than automatic primogeniture. In Act 5 Scene 2, Hamlet gives his “dying voice” to Fortinbras and says “He has my dying voice. So tell him, with th’ occurents, more and less, which have solicited.” This implies the monarchy is not automatically inherited, but that the dying king has a say in choosing his successor, and an election of some sort takes place.
Earlier in Act 4 Scene 5, Claudius remarks to Laertes “You shortly shall hear more. I loved your father, and we love ourself, and that, I hope, will teach you to imagine–” before they are interrupted by a messenger. Claudius seems to be on the verge of naming Laertes as his successor, suggesting the king has the power to choose, rather than it automatically going to the son.
Additionally, Hamlet is repeatedly referred to as “Prince” and never as “Crown Prince” or “heir apparent,” further indicating his succession to the throne was not guaranteed. And when describing his father’s death, Hamlet says Claudius “Popped in between th’ election and my hopes,” confirming that an election occurred and Hamlet merely “hoped” to win.
So in a system where the new monarch is chosen by election, with the previous king’s choice carrying weight, it’s clear why Claudius became king over Hamlet. Old Hamlet may have nominated Claudius rather than young Hamlet. The court likely saw Claudius as the safer choice than the untested, mercurial prince Hamlet. And Claudius, described as a savvy politician, surely outmaneuvered Hamlet, gaining the support of the court and the electors.
This explains why everyone, including Hamlet himself, sees Claudius as the legitimate king, albeit gaining the crown through underhanded means. The republic in Elsinore elected Claudius according to customary law, even if Hamlet feels cheated out of his “hopes.” Thus, the central conflict of the play arises from the disconnect between what Hamlet believes he deserves and what the realpolitik of Danish succession dictates.
In summary, a system of elective monarchy in Denmark, rather than primogeniture, provides a fascinating and novel lens for analyzing the core questions of succession, legitimacy and Hamlet’s “stunted ambition” (as Claudius puts it) in Shakespeare’s famous tragedy. The textual evidence, though subtle, is certainly there to support this reading and allows us to re-examine the play’s central conflicts in a new light.
Leave a Reply