Saxo Grammaticus

I hadn't expected quite such a thrilling read from Saxo, the Danish cleric, born c.1150, whose History of the Danes, as much of it as there was for him to report, contains the Revenge of Amleth, which is recognizably the story masde more famous by Shakespeare.
Saxo wasn't called Grammaticus until the C15th when an editor added the honourable epithet to his name to acknowledge his fine erudition. He wrote a better standard of Latin than the Middle Ages had been accustomed to. And, if it wasn't for having been told that in the introduction, I would find it hard to believe that the translation by Soren Filipski, in The Norse Hamlet from a series called Sources of Shakespeare (Hythloday Press, 2013, 'Printed in Great Britain by Amazon'. Blimey. All credit to them for that).

Amleth feigns madness in his maneouvrings to outwit his wicked Uncle Feng who has murdered his father and married his mother, Gerutha. He is lucky to be able to find his enemies asleep whenever he needs to swap their sword, amend a letter or make any other progress with his plan.
In a more lively episode of the trip to England, he is able to erase the names on the letter that the precursors of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are taking to the King of England and change the message to ask the king to kill the messengers and not their companion, Amleth.
Amleth also persuades his girlfriend to go with him to a 'distant marsh in order to have his desire more safely'. No, I'm giving him too much credit for chivalry, which might not haver been invented by then, it says he 'dragged her off' there.
An unlikely sign that he should do that is a fly with a straw stuck to it, a detail that Shakespeare in his wisdom decided not to use. But there are the ur-Polonius, the ur-sterile prontory and the ur-tribute to Amleth after he is counter-revenged upon in which it says what a fine, noble man he would have made. In fact he would have 'rivalled the Gods in glory'. And I much prefer Saxo's forward look in which 'Wiglek had a long and peaceful rule' to the prospect of Fortinbras in all his right-wing, orderly machismo.
What we don't know is what was added to the story by the Ur-Hamlet, rather disconcertingly not attributed to Shakespeare in the introduction because it appears in about 1564. I wouldn't have thought so, either, until one realizes that is a typo and should say 1594. But we can forgive that in what is otherwise a tremendous book to have.