Could it be that Hamlet was schizophrenic?

As we have seen in classes, in the movie, and of course in the book itself, Hamlet is a very complex play, as well as, some other plays written by Shakespeare. But Hamlet particularly has a more complex story and of course a more interesting character (Hamlet himself.)

To be honest I have problems making deep interpretations of the play, but I must say that I found really interesting the mental processes of The Prince of Denmark because as the play develops, he, I would say, goes in a spiral of madness that captures everybody in the play making them going crazy as he is. At first in act 1 secne 5 with the “apparition” of his father’s ghost, Hamlet was alone when he saw it. In that occasion the ghost of his father demands to be avenged by Hamlet because he says that Claudius poisoned him and killed him.  Taking into consideration that specific scene, and the fact that Hamlet was alone during that dialogue, I started thinking that probably that whole dialogue occurred in Hamlet’s mind. If that’s the case then probably Hamlet was a schizophrenic because as I found out, people that suffers from this mental disorder may hear voices in his head, may have visual hallucinations, may have problems separating fictions from reality, among other symptoms that Hamlet in a way showed during the play.
At the same time throughout the play, Hamlet acts to be mad, but I thinks that he does it as a way of hiding that he’s not mentally healthy. Even though the information that Hamlet received from his father’s ghost was true and correct, probably he got it from another part and he imagined as his dead father gave it.Simultaneously Hamlet gets paranoiac arguing that everybody is doing wrong and wants to harm him. If we pay attention to those aspects we can see another symptom of schizophrenia that is the fear of imagine another people plotting against them.

Moreover I found an essay (Findaly A. 1997) that analyzes the same topic, and the author uses an excerpt of the play in which Hamlet talks about his own madness:

What I have done

That might your nature, honour, and exception

Roughly awake, I here proclaim was madness.

Was't Hamlet wrong'd Laertes? Never Hamlet.

If Hamlet from himself be ta'en away,

And when he's not himself does wrong Laertes,

Then Hamlet does it not, Hamlet denies it.

Who does it then? His madness. If't be so,

Hamlet is of the faction that is wrong'd;

His madness is poor Hamlet's enemy.

(V. ii. 226-35)

Hamlet refers to his madness as a `sore distraction' with which he is currently afflicted (V. ii. 225), so his self-analysis is not a retrospective one except in the narrowest sense. He speaks both inside and outside his malady, as he had done earlier, making use of syntactic modification to explain and control his mental state. (Finlay A. 1997 )

To conclude I would say that Hamlet knew he wasn't mentally healthy and for that reason he acted as a mad men trying to avenge his father without thinking in the consequences of his acts. But we all know how everything ended and the deaths that occurred by those acts.
I would like to know what do you think about this, and if you have another hypotheses. Feel free to comment.

References: 

National Institute of Mental Health (n.d) What Is Schizophrenia? retrieved from: http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/schizophrenia/index.shtml

Findlay A. (1997) HAMLET: A DOCUMENT IN MADNESS  2007 Gale, Cengage Learning

Is Hamlet's Madness Real?

There is much evidence in the play that Hamlet deliberately pretended to be mad in order to confuse and disconcert King Claudius and his attendants. His declared intention to act "strange or odd" and to "put an antic disposition on" (I. v. 170, 172) is not the only indication.

The latter phrase, which is of doubtful interpretation, should be taken in its context and in connection with his other remarks that bear on the same question. To his old friend, Guildenstem, he intimates that "his uncle-father and aunt-mother are deceived," and that he is only "mad north-north-west." (II. ii. 360.) But the intimation seems to mean nothing to the dull ears of his old school-fellow. His only comment is given later when he advises that Hamlet's is "a crafty madness." (III. i. 8.) 

When completing with Horatio the arrangements for the play, and just before the entrance of the court party, Hamlet says, "I must be idle." (III. ii. 85.) This evidently is a declaration of his intention to be "foolish." Then to his mother he refers to the belief held by some about the court that he is mad, and assures her that he is intentionally acting the part of madness in order to attain his object:

"I essentially am not in madness,

But mad in craft." (III. iv. 187-8.)

In the play the only persons who regard Hamlet as really mad are the king and his followers, and even these are troubled with many doubts. Polonius is the first to declare him mad, and he thinks it is because Ophelia has repelled his love. He therefore reports to the king that "Your noble son is mad" (II. ii. 92), and records the various stages leading to his so-called madness. No sooner, however, has he reached this conviction than Hamlet's clever toying leads him to admit that "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't." (II. ii.203-4.)

Though it suits the king's purpose to accept this pronouncement of Polonius, he is never quite convinced of its truth. His instructions to his followers, "Get from him why he puts on this confusion" (II. i. 2), imply that he understands it as simulation and not real lunacy. He soon admits that Hamlet's actions and words do not indicate madness but melancholy:

"What he spake, though it lack'd form a little.

Was not like madness."

(III. i. 163-4.)

But it serves his wicked purpose to declare him a madman, and to make this the excuse for getting rid of him by sending him to England. In this as in everything the king is insincere, and seeks not the truth but his own personal ends.

Ophelia's view that Hamlet has gone mad for love of her is of no value on the point. She is herself, rather than Hamlet, "Like sweet bells jangled out of tune, and harsh." (III. i. 158.) The poor distracted girl is no judge of lunacy, and knows of real sanity. She cannot enter into the depth of his mind, and cannot understand that it is her own conduct that is strange and incoherent.

There is no doubt then that Hamlet's madness was really feigned. He saw much to be gained by it. To understand the madness as real is to make of the play a mad-house tragedy. There is dramatic value in such madness, Shakespeare never makes of his dramas mere exhibitions of human experience, wise or otherwise, but they are all studies in the spiritual life of man. His dramas are always elaborate attempts to get a meaning out of life, not attempts to show either its mystery, or its inconsequence, or its madness.

REFERENCES

Crawford, A. Hamlet, An Ideal Prince, and Other Essays
Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of Hamlet Prince of Denmark. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2003.