Hamlet = Hamnet

Why do I use the name Hamlet for Shakespeare's son, in my series of novels?

Because you are being lied to.

Shakespeare scholars want you to think that Shakespeare's son's name is Hamnet.

Why? Because they do not want you to think that his son had anything to do with his most famous play, Hamlet.

They do not want you to know the truth.

They want you to think that the name Hamlet and Hamnet are two different names.

When in fact the name Hamlet and Hamnet are the SAME NAME.

It is important to understand that there was no standardized spelling in the time of Shakespeare. There were no official rules as far as spelling was concerned. It was not until much later, around 1755, that spelling was cleaned up, and words began to have a standard spelling.

In Shakespeare's time, spelling was based on how words sounded. With all of the regional dialects in England, words could be spelled any number of ways.

Shakespeare's own name was spelled many different ways: Shakspear, Shagsper, Saxpere, Shaxbeard, etc.

The name Hamlet and Hamnet were both derived from the name Amleth, which is from the Old Norse name, Amlóði. Latin versions of the name are Amlethus, Amblothæ. The name Amleth is the likely origin of the Irish names, Amhladh, Amhlaidh, Amhlaigh, Amhlaide.

Shakespeare based his Hamlet play on the historical chronicle of Amleth, written by the Danish historian, Saxo Grammaticus, in his work Gesta Danorum.

Therefore, Shakespeare named his son Hamlet and wrote the Hamlet play because of this story of Amleth.

There is another very important reason why Shakespeare named his son Hamlet and why he wrote a play and gave it the title of Hamlet.

I explore much of this in my series of novels, but I will reveal to you a discovery that I have made, at the end of this essay.

This Hamlet/Hamnet name also appeared in Shakespeare's lifetime as Hamletti, Amblet, and Hamolet. All of these names are the same name. They are synonymous, interchangeable, and identical in meaning.

We see this today with names like Rafe and Ralph, which can be pronounced the same way, and have the same meaning. The name Steven and Stephen are the same name.

The Shakespearean scholar, Stephen Greenblatt, in his biography of Shakespeare, wrote about the names Hamnet and Hamlet: "in the loose orthography of the time, the names were virtually interchangeable."

In an article from 2004, Greenblatt was even more clear: "Hamnet and Hamlet are in fact the same name, entirely interchangeable in Stratford records in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries."

So why do scholars pretend that Hamnet is Shakespeare's son's name, and Hamlet is not?

Scholars have pointed to the record of the baptism of Shakespeare's son, which reads: "Hamnet filius William Shakspere"—which means "Hamnet, son of William Shakespeare".

Scholars also have suggested that Shakespeare named his son after his very close friend and neighbor, Hamnet Sadler.

We should not take this baptism record, nor the spelling of the name Hamnet Sadler, as proof that Shakespeare and his wife Anne preferred to call their son Hamnet instead of Hamlet.

When Shakespeare was born, his own baptism record reads: "Gulielmus filius Johannes Shakspere"—meaning "William, son of John Shakespeare".

Should we be calling William Shakespeare by his recorded birth name, Gulielmus?

When Shakespeare got a wedding license to marry Anne Hathaway, it was made out to "Wm Shaxpere" and "Annam Whateley".

Their names at the time were also spelled "William Shagspere and Anne Hathwey".

Why is the boy's name spelled Hamnet in the baptism record, instead of Hamlet? I do not know. It does not really matter, since the names are the same.

When my own mother, Julia, went to get a wedding license, the clerk misspelled her name as Juila. When my mother asked for a correction, she was told that she had to pay for a new license!

Perhaps civil servants have always been horrible at spelling.

Also, is Hamnet Sadler's first name really Hamnet? In the record of his baptism, in 1560, his name is spelled: "Hamlette Sadler".

If scholars insist that we call Shakespeare's son Hamnet because of his baptism record, then we should call Hamnet Sadler by the name Hamlette Sadler because of his own baptism record.

Greenblatt wrote that "Shakespeare evidently named his son after...Hamnet Sadler".

And then in the same paragraph in Greenblatt's book, he wrote that Sadler "was still alive in March 1616 when Shakespeare drew up his will and left 26 shillings, 8 pence to 'Hamlett Sadler…to buy him a ringe.'"

It is hilarious to me that, in the very same paragraph, Greenblatt insists on spelling Sadler's name as Hamnet, only then to offer evidence that Shakespeare himself spelled the name as Hamlett.

So, it can be true that Shakespeare did name his son Hamnet, because the name Hamnet is the SAME NAME as Hamlet.

It can also be true that Shakespeare named his son after his best friend and neighbor, because regardless of how the name is spelled, his son's name and his friend's name are the SAME NAME.

There is a better question to ask: Did Shakespeare and Anne prefer to call their son Hamnet or Hamlet? Did they prefer one spelling and pronunciation over another?

If we take Shakespeare's own last will and testament, which he wrote with his own hand, he spelled the name "Hamlett Sadler".

Shakespeare wrote and edited his Hamlet play, likely over a period of many years. There is no evidence that it was ever known as the Hamnet play.

Taken together, these two pieces of evidence would seem to put to rest the question of how Shakespeare himself spelled the name, and what spelling he preferred.

As I mentioned, there is a very important reason why Shakespeare named his son Hamlet and why he wrote a play and gave it the title of Hamlet.

To the best of my knowledge, no one has ever discovered the truth behind the name Hamlet before. I am very pleased to reveal this discovery to you now.

Hamlet means Camelot—the castle and court of King Arthur, which symbolizes chivalry, unity, and an idealized medieval kingdom.

In my series of novels, I will fully explain how these words, which are spelled differently, are in fact the same word. For now, suffice it to say that the letter "H" in Hamlet is like the "H" in Hanukkah, which can also be spelled Chanukkah.

On the surface, it might not seem like the Hamlet play and the Camelot story have anything to do with each other. But there are some similarities. Both stories deal with power, betrayal, and how even the very best royal court can be destroyed from within.

But there is even deeper meaning behind Hamlet and Camelot.

Amleth and King Arthur may have lived at the same time. Today, both of them are considered to be legendary, and not historical, figures.

This is a big part of my series of novels—the fact that Shakespeare believed that Amleth and King Arthur were actually real. In Shakespeare's lifetime, there was a debate about who and what was real and historically true.

I doubt that Shakespeare scholars want you to think that Shakespeare's son Hamlet and his Hamlet play have anything to do with Camelot. That is something they likely have no answer for. And they probably do not believe that Amleth and King Arthur were real people.

You may not believe in Amleth or King Arthur. You may not believe everything that is written in the Bible, for example.

Shakespeare believed in them. He believed in people and things and events that many people today entirely reject. He believed that Jonah was swallowed by a whale. He believed that Moses parted the Red Sea. He believed that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, and will return soon.

Shakespeare believed that Amleth really did live, that he really did travel to Britain. And Shakespeare would have believed that Amleth might very well have met and known King Arthur. For all Shakespeare knew, Amleth might have gone on a quest for Arthur.

One of the reasons why Shakespeare was such a great writer, and why we still read and watch and study his works, is because of the power of his beliefs.

We may not believe that Hamlet was a real Prince of Denmark. But as soon as we watch Shakespeare's play about him, we begin to believe what the Bard believed.

You may not believe me that Hamlet means Camelot.

But as you read my series of novels, it is my intention to help you believe it, beyond a shadow of a doubt.

When Shakespeare discovered the truth, that Hamlet means Camelot, around the year 1589, he began to see that belief is a very powerful force. He began to firmly believe in things that many other people did not believe. He began to see that everyone in the world is in desperate need of such a powerful belief.

He wanted to reveal the truth about history, about language, and about all the people and events of the past.

There is a great story about Alexander the Great, who crossed the strait known as the Hellespont, into Asia Minor, in 334 BCE.

As soon as he arrived on the shore, Alexander threw a spear into the sand. This was meant to symbolize how he had every intention of conquering the Persian Empire, which he did in fact conquer.

Alexander had an overwhelming faith in his, and his army's, ability to fight and to win. In his mind, he had already conquered the Persian Empire, long before the battles began.

Throwing the spear into the sand was a declaration that the land was already his "spear-won prize."

When Shakespeare discovered that Hamlet means Camelot, he probably felt very much like Alexander, in that moment, on the shore of the Hellespont.

Shakespeare knew that he had discovered a piece of truth that would set us all free.

He had discovered that the power of belief would make him, and everyone else who believes, even greater than Alexander.

With this powerful belief, we can be more than any conquerors—and in fact even more than Alexander.

If we begin to believe, as Shakespeare believed, then there is an even greater "spear-won prize" for us to claim.

I hope you enjoy this essay.

I invite you into the true story of Shakespeare's life—to walk in his shoes, and to walk on a path of discovery that will take you to Camelot, to Hamlet, and beyond.

Sincerely,