nly would be a complex investigation into the circumstances of the King's death immediately after. Claudius having the most convincing motive for murder would be the prime suspect then prosecuted and convicted for treason. Therefore Hamlet would not have gone through all the drama of proving his uncle's guilt himself, and a lot more lives would have been spared. This concept makes it difficult to judge how a modern day society would view Hamlet because the circumstances and procedures surrounding death especially of royalty are very different to those 400 years ago.
             In both modern and past times hamlet would have been viewed completely different if he had survived. He would be looked down upon and ridiculed for acts of treason by killing the King not to mention Polonius. He would however have the chance to personally defend his own name and explain his motives for killing his uncle and Polonius. Hamlet is royalty, the son of the Queen and rightful heir to the thrown. He would have a chance to prove that Claudius is guilty. In present time members of the royal family usually have the best lawyers money can buy. A possible defense case might be that as Hamlet was getting too close Claudius's secret shame his life was in danger. This forced him to kill Claudius and Polonius in self-defense, as he feared that if he didn't that day would have been his last. Proof that Claudius was behind a plot to kill Hamlet lay in the original letter Claudius had written to the King of England requesting Hamlet's assassination. Further proof of Claudius's involvement is seen through Laertes's testimony against the king "the King –the King's t
             ...