I'm really sorry. The last two sentences in my last post shouldn't be there because you already checked them.

I really apologize for that.

It's OK.

That issue of "elect" or "select" or "choose" is an interesting one. In the 1200s, popular elections were not held. At most, there may have been "election by acclamation" among the noblemen, but that's about all. Hamlet gave his approval to Fortinbras' taking the Danish throne, but I think there was already a relationship there (maybe a cousin-relationship) that would have given the throne to Fortinbras anyway. Since Hamlet was the only one left to succeed to the elder Hamlet's throne (as he thought, illegally grabbed by Claudius when he, Hamlet, was away at university), then Hamlet's naming of Fortinbras carried lots of weight. But as it turned out, Fortinbras declared himself King of Denmark (reread that ending if you didn't catch this), and no one was around to challenge him.

Did you remember the rumblings at the very beginning of the play?
http://nfs.sparknotes.com/hamlet/page_8.html
Horatio is almost prophetic here: He refers to the elder Hamlet in his armor as the Danes were fighting the Norwegians and the Poles. At the bottom of that page and onto the next two pages, Horatio and Marcellus end up discussing all this AND the elder and younger Fortinbras and how the younger Fortinbras is threatening their land.

So Fortinbras is threatening at the beginning of the play ... and he ends up with the throne of Denmark at the end ... without having to attack!

Can you tell this play fascinates me??!

No problem at all! Apologies accepted. Is there anything else I can assist you with?