William Shakespeare was involved in the murder of his rival. Read how Shakespeare.rose to prominence right after this murder on Kindle "The Masque of William Shakespeare."
@CarricThura Congrats on degrading a serious subject into adsurdity. It's much easier than investigating the Authorship question, which requires time, effort, logic, and common sense, combined with a familiarity with the creative process, and a foundation of knowledge about Elizabethan drama, literature, and history. Let's see, Van Gogh: cut off his ear, JF:, screwed MM, Freud: used cocaine. Let's reduce it all to your level. CHEERS~~~
@edboswell My aren't you touchy. My point was (obviously) that Twain's authority carries little weight when he was guilty of other patent idiocies on a related subject. To put it another way, if your roll-call of shakespearian scholarship has to resort to including the likes of Malcolm X, then you had better leave it out.
@CarricThura Are you a racist as well? Malcolm X was a brilliant person, which is not an opinion solely held by black nationalists. Malcolm X liked the subject BECAUSE it did not involve race. He made a very astute observation, which I have not heard from others. Namely, if James I assembled the finest scholars and writers in the realm to compile the King James Bible, why would Shakespeare not be amoung that group, as the mask from Stratford was alive at the time?( DeVere wasn't)
@edboswell ' if James I assembled the finest scholars and writers in the realm to compile the King James Bible, why would Shakespeare not be amoung that group, as the mask from Stratford was alive at the time?'
Presumably because Shakespeare did not have the right learning. Ben Johnson said of him that he had ''s mall latin and less Greek' . Knowledge of classical languages would be vital to translating the bible so Shakespeare was unqualified so was not called. His skill was in English.
@commonberus1 I cordially invite you to read up on what you speak. "Shake-speare" was, and is, the most classically adept author of all time. Ovid is main inspiration for his works, and he knew it in latin as well as in Edward de Vere's (aka shakespeare) uncles translation. The mention of "small latin and less greek" by Jonson (no H) is misinterpreted. Modernized, it means Jonson inferred that even if he hadn't latin and some greek, he would still exceed the greatest in antiquity.
@edboswell I doubt what you say will turn out to be true because when I have looked into claims by your side in the past they have generally collapsed at once.. Like the claim that a hyphen in Shakespeares name indicated it was a pseudonym despite names of real people being published with hyphens and and a genuine pseudonym being published usually without one.
@commonberus1 hyphenated English names relate to someone who marries into a better family, which is the case of the famous Shakespearean scholar, Halliwell-Philips. He wrote as Halliwell, got married into a upper crust family. No trace of the Shakes marrying into any Spear families in Warwickshire. In fact, kind sir, pseudonyms for anonymous pamphleteers in 16th c England have many such names.
@edboswell But Shakespeare is a recorded name (in documents of the time) for an actual person who was working for the theatre at the time. It makes no sence to use such a man as a pseudonum, for his knowledgeable colleagues, in the theatre, would ask him about 'his plays' for example ask 'what does this line mean?'. He would be found out in no time, particuarly if as Oxfordian's often say he was almost illiterate. Which is why actual pseudonyms are no ones real name.
@commonberus1 Nothing was ever said, not a single sentence, linking the dramatist/poet with the man from Stratford. Anything mentioned was about the poet/author, but nothing like "Stratford's gifted poet"... no link between Stratford and the writer. In fact. Ben Jonson parodies the man from Stratford man as a braggart, who claimed to be the author, when the writers knew it to be B.S. Shaksper or Shagsper.... written out with soft A like in Shack not Shake. So he copped a pen-name.
@edboswell Do you mean to say the man from Strattford had a different name from the play write? Sorry I cannot buy it. In an age of unfixed spellings unsuprisingly the man from Stratford had many spellings for his name, most of them more like Shakespeare or Shakespere then Shagsper.
I am affraid you have not answered my question. If the Earl of Oxford wanted to hide his authorship he would have used a simple pseudonym not the name of one of the actors of 'his' plays.
@commonberus1 58 known spellings of the family name around Stratford. 2 of them are spelled Shakespeare... His birth certificate says Shaxper or Shagspur..... Virtually all spelled with shack not Shake as dictating soft "A". First came the epic poems, then the plays, then the use of his name by the man from Stratford. I admire your ability to doubt. I also like your level of civility. Spelling is not the crux of the case. Just another clue.
@edboswell 58 known spellings of the family name around Stratford. 2 of them are spelled Shakespeare... His birth certificate says Shaxper or Shagspur..... Virtually all spelled with shack not Shake as dictating soft "A".
My statistics count 61 (non London) spellings of his name that begin Shake or Shacke as with play write. Also have you considered the influence of abreviation on spelling? Some hand written notes list the writer with spellings that miss the first e at least.
here are some clues: William the Shepard was the symbolic poet, hence "William". Athena , goddess of drama, held a spear. So the pen name equates to: Poet Dramatist. 2. In 1609, Sonnets are published and quickly suppressed. (only 15 copies exist) with no dedication from the "ever-living poet". Poems talk about a man of high rank, so high he "held the canopy for the Queen", he is over 40, lame, with a disgraced name, but says his work will outlive monuments" Only DeVere fits this profile
@commonberus1 Quite right. Both the pseudonym theory and the front-man theory raise far, far more doubt in me of Oxenford's authorship than all the supposed "holes" in Shakespeare's history raise about his authorship (they aren't even holes when looked at with some contextual knowledge.
If I were secretly writing screenplays, say, 'Pirates of the Carribean', and I needed to keep it secret (for decades), I wouldn't choose Johnny Depp as my pseudonym.
@commonberus1 Did you know that during the exact time frame of the 1st folio, the Prince of Wales was leaning towards marrying a Spanish princess, putting the fear of God into all the anti-catholic Lords? De Vere's family would have been in deep trouble had England swing back to the church in Rome. Shakespeare's play are anti-catholic, and served the family well by being published at that point in time. Just as Hamlet came out AFTER Burghley died, as he was parodied as Polonius.
@edboswell It is good idea to find facts by orthodox scholars on this subject, people w/o an agenda. Halliwell-Philips, in mid-19th c described Stratford as being a dirty provincial town with filth in their ditches that reeked to high heaven. Recent research has discovered many more instances of using pen-names than thought to be. Stratfordians hate Oxford with a vengenence, pounching on his shames and checkered name, which actually buttresses the case. Read sonnets 109 110 and 121.
@edboswell Malone, in his exhaustive Varorium 1821 Edition of the Shakespeare Canon, mentions that the myth of Shakespeare getting his start by holding horses is simply that. No one rode to the theatres, they walked. It's all BS, the stories about Will Shaksper. Why did deVere/Oxford's relatives receive the dedication in the 1st folio? Did you know the 2 actors who claimed to have provided the blotless manuscripts were employees of de Vere's relatives?
@CarricThura RE: Twain, I think he brought a few valid points into the argument. Namely, that he also came from a small town. No one in Stratford knew of WS as a poet or dramatist. Damn near every person from Hannibal had a story to tell about Twain. Shaksper had a son-in-law, an Oxford graduate , Dr. John Hall, who had a journal. He mentions tending to a poet, Michael Drayton. Even though he lived in New Place, NO MENTION OF FATHER in LAW as poet or dramatist. How strange?
@CarricThura I invite you to search WALT WHITMAN SHAKESPEARE where you can read how the poet of the common man declares the Historical plays of WS to be created out of the fullest heat and passion of feudalism. As Whitman died before the ID of Edward de Vere as the man behind the pen-name "shake-speare", I have to give profound credit to Walt Whitman's astuteness. He theorized that only "one of the wolfish earls so plentious in the plays themselves" was the true author. SPOT ON, Walt!!!
DeVere seems the likely candidate. The plays said to have been written after his death were actually only published after DeVere's demise, but written sometime before. Lots of other corroborating evidence.
@Capt777harris I agree. 17 of the plays were not published until 1623. Using Stratfordian logic, that excludes the man from Stratford as well. Have you ever seen the "PROOF" which excludes de Vere? It's the use of the word bermoothes in a Tempest shipwreck description, which leads one to deduce it was a description of a famous shipwreck in the bermudas in 1611. Not mentioned is the fact that in the 1590's another famous shipwreck occurred, which was written about in London at the time.
@Capt777harris There are too many unique facts that tie in de Vere with WS not to take serious notice. After digesting hundreds of tie-ins, its like the OJ trial. It's one person's voice, and its de Vere. He blew money on projects, and could have had Lyly, Munday, Marlowe and others help with certain parts. Also, the editing in 1623, with a possible assist from Bacon (he had Jonson as Personal.secretary) is possible. What's not possible is a Warwickshire lad making it all up sans experience
this is all a bunch of bullshit if you ask you me. no one wrote Shakespeare's plays other than the man himself. I think history has down whatever it can to try and de-glorify him.
@andrika1990 Any explanation for Shaksper not owning a single book? Ever wonder how he knew Venice so well? Ever wonder how he knew the French spoken only by royals? Ever wonder why De Vere's family is depicted in Hamlet? Ever wonder how he had access to rare books before public libraries existed? Ever wonder why WS rails against money lenders, when the man from Stratford was a money lender? Ever wonder why Walt Whitman predicted it was really an Earl close to the Queen? Curious? maybe not
@edboswell Well conspiracy theories in history will always try to bring up something that MAY seem to fit. But however nothing can be proven without solid evidence. Now you tell me where the evidence is? I have heard this story vaguely before about Shakespeare not being the real author of all his stories because he borrowed them from various mythologies of the ancient world. BUT if you claim he was not a real author then how the hell did he go down in history after all these centuries as one.
@andrika1990 Kindly note that de Vere married into the Cecil family, who were official "keepers of the records". As he died in disgrace, having squandered a fortune, and because Cecils viewed actors and drama as "lewd", they kept the good part, being elevated to the peerage thru Oxford, and ditched the disgraceful part of him ditching his wife to hang out with transients and drunk poets. De Vere's Geneva bible is closest to "smoking gun". Shaksper was a money lender who died without a book
rdward de Vere, Earl of Oxford, obviously wrote Shakespeare. he was a well-known ghost in Jacobean times and even came back during the nineteenth century in order to write all of Dickens' work. some people think that salman rushdie is the earl of oxford. I, for one, am disinclined to believe that.
@morphybum I wonder if you know anything at all about Edward de Vere? How his in laws are the accepted models for Polonius, Laertes and Ophelia If you go back and read WS's work, it is OBVIOUSLY written by a highly educated person, with access to rare texts when NO public libraries existed. Men such as Walt Whitman, Malcolm X, Sigmund Freud and Mark Twain. smelled BS in the case of a rustic "genius" who made it all up. de Vere's life meshes perfectly with WS, so read about it, then talk.
@morphybum I think it would be Elizabethan. She died in 1603. De Vere's lifetime was from 1550 to 1604. So he only lived one year during the reign of James I. Your humor is only surpassed by your lack of intellect and curiousity. You obviously have invested little or no time on the Shakespeare Authorship Question. Good guess on my part?
i think it makes the playwrites and writers who have lived since shakespeare feel less inadequate that somebody else was so far ahead of them on so many creative levels if all work attributted to the man is seen as written by many persons. if just by 1 man it will force subsequent writers to strive harder and in return we will be left with a greater amount of genius and superior literature. writers who pursue the many hands theory are just insecure and egotistical of their writing talents IMAO
shakespeare must have written some of it or had the initial concepts for the plots, if he did or didnt get others to assist it's no biggeey. as the great artists got their apprentices to do the backgrounds and boring bits, clothes and furniture etc of their masterpieces and no ones saying they've been part of a conspiracy.
@bryngOneOn Kindly note that the Earl of Oxford employed two major personages of the Elizabethan stage, John Lyly and Anthony Munday, as personal secretaries. I doubt if he wrote the plays in a vacuum. The later plays that are often attributed to Fletcher are an example of the mystery. We are left in the dark about a number of things, including to what point others assisted the Earl of Oxford. I've spent 1500 hours on this, and I'm content that it was Edward de Vere who wrote as WS.
The Marlowe-Shakespeare Connection book by Samuel L. Blumenfeld answers the question. Check out a Cable TV interview "Blumenfeld on Shakespeare" on YouTube with part 3 on Google.
Incorrect "information" about the Earl of Oxford. He did not attend either Oxford or Cambridge. He received, as did many other young nobles, honorary degrees from both universities. He was educated at home (tutored). His early poetry does not resemble the great sonnets in the Shakespeare canon at all.
In fact, de Vere did attend Oxford. Degrees were honorary with royals, granted. He also attended Gray's Inn, explaining the legal expertise of the Bard. He wrote in the Sonnet format as a teen, and wrote a poem on the fickleness of women, making him evocative of "shake-speare" in both format and subject matter. His uncle, the Earl of Surrey, was the first man to write in the English Sonnet format, along with Thomas Wyatt. You stand corrected.
You forgot the most likely candidate, the one who has the most qualifications that are documented and serious -- Mary Sidney Herbert, the Countess of Pembroke. Check out the book, Sweet Swan of Avon: Did a Woman Write Shakespeare?
The most likely candidate is probably a man under whose name these works were actually published. Could it be a man named William Shakespeare who wrote the works of a man named William Shakespeare? Or are you Brits stuck in your caste-system so bad you can't afford to believe anyone not born into social standing could be a genius?
The most likely is definitely not Mary Sidney, considering that her defense was based on current day sources from her kin. Obviously, the most likely candidate is Sir Francis Bacon, but we all know that Shakespeare is the author of Shakespeare.
According to the 1975 edition of E.B. the primary candidate is Edward de Vere. Her two sons were tied in with de Vere, one was his son-in-law, the other was tentatively engaged to another of his 3 daughters. Without doubt, the real story, if it ever came out, would have her very close to the center of the mystery. But it's de Vere, without doubt in my small mind.
@edboswell I think you're in good company. Mark Anderson's book, exhaustingly researched, really brings things full circle to shed the light on the inspiration for the canon we call Shakespeare.
This has been flagged as spam show
William Shakespeare was involved in the murder of his rival. Read how Shakespeare.rose to prominence right after this murder on Kindle "The Masque of William Shakespeare."
donSatalic 1 month ago
I heard that Francis Bacon faked the moon landings. And Edward de Vere shot JFK.
No smoke without fire, after all.
I mean, you got to wonder.
CarricThura 1 year ago
@CarricThura Congrats on degrading a serious subject into adsurdity. It's much easier than investigating the Authorship question, which requires time, effort, logic, and common sense, combined with a familiarity with the creative process, and a foundation of knowledge about Elizabethan drama, literature, and history. Let's see, Van Gogh: cut off his ear, JF:, screwed MM, Freud: used cocaine. Let's reduce it all to your level. CHEERS~~~
edboswell 1 year ago
@edboswell My aren't you touchy. My point was (obviously) that Twain's authority carries little weight when he was guilty of other patent idiocies on a related subject. To put it another way, if your roll-call of shakespearian scholarship has to resort to including the likes of Malcolm X, then you had better leave it out.
CarricThura 1 year ago
@CarricThura Are you a racist as well? Malcolm X was a brilliant person, which is not an opinion solely held by black nationalists. Malcolm X liked the subject BECAUSE it did not involve race. He made a very astute observation, which I have not heard from others. Namely, if James I assembled the finest scholars and writers in the realm to compile the King James Bible, why would Shakespeare not be amoung that group, as the mask from Stratford was alive at the time?( DeVere wasn't)
edboswell 1 year ago
@edboswell ' if James I assembled the finest scholars and writers in the realm to compile the King James Bible, why would Shakespeare not be amoung that group, as the mask from Stratford was alive at the time?'
Presumably because Shakespeare did not have the right learning. Ben Johnson said of him that he had ''s mall latin and less Greek' . Knowledge of classical languages would be vital to translating the bible so Shakespeare was unqualified so was not called. His skill was in English.
commonberus1 8 months ago
Comment removed
commonberus1 8 months ago
@commonberus1 I cordially invite you to read up on what you speak. "Shake-speare" was, and is, the most classically adept author of all time. Ovid is main inspiration for his works, and he knew it in latin as well as in Edward de Vere's (aka shakespeare) uncles translation. The mention of "small latin and less greek" by Jonson (no H) is misinterpreted. Modernized, it means Jonson inferred that even if he hadn't latin and some greek, he would still exceed the greatest in antiquity.
edboswell 8 months ago
@edboswell I doubt what you say will turn out to be true because when I have looked into claims by your side in the past they have generally collapsed at once.. Like the claim that a hyphen in Shakespeares name indicated it was a pseudonym despite names of real people being published with hyphens and and a genuine pseudonym being published usually without one.
commonberus1 8 months ago
@commonberus1 hyphenated English names relate to someone who marries into a better family, which is the case of the famous Shakespearean scholar, Halliwell-Philips. He wrote as Halliwell, got married into a upper crust family. No trace of the Shakes marrying into any Spear families in Warwickshire. In fact, kind sir, pseudonyms for anonymous pamphleteers in 16th c England have many such names.
edboswell 8 months ago
@edboswell But Shakespeare is a recorded name (in documents of the time) for an actual person who was working for the theatre at the time. It makes no sence to use such a man as a pseudonum, for his knowledgeable colleagues, in the theatre, would ask him about 'his plays' for example ask 'what does this line mean?'. He would be found out in no time, particuarly if as Oxfordian's often say he was almost illiterate. Which is why actual pseudonyms are no ones real name.
commonberus1 8 months ago
@commonberus1 Nothing was ever said, not a single sentence, linking the dramatist/poet with the man from Stratford. Anything mentioned was about the poet/author, but nothing like "Stratford's gifted poet"... no link between Stratford and the writer. In fact. Ben Jonson parodies the man from Stratford man as a braggart, who claimed to be the author, when the writers knew it to be B.S. Shaksper or Shagsper.... written out with soft A like in Shack not Shake. So he copped a pen-name.
edboswell 8 months ago
@edboswell Do you mean to say the man from Strattford had a different name from the play write? Sorry I cannot buy it. In an age of unfixed spellings unsuprisingly the man from Stratford had many spellings for his name, most of them more like Shakespeare or Shakespere then Shagsper.
I am affraid you have not answered my question. If the Earl of Oxford wanted to hide his authorship he would have used a simple pseudonym not the name of one of the actors of 'his' plays.
commonberus1 8 months ago
@commonberus1 58 known spellings of the family name around Stratford. 2 of them are spelled Shakespeare... His birth certificate says Shaxper or Shagspur..... Virtually all spelled with shack not Shake as dictating soft "A". First came the epic poems, then the plays, then the use of his name by the man from Stratford. I admire your ability to doubt. I also like your level of civility. Spelling is not the crux of the case. Just another clue.
edboswell 8 months ago
@edboswell 58 known spellings of the family name around Stratford. 2 of them are spelled Shakespeare... His birth certificate says Shaxper or Shagspur..... Virtually all spelled with shack not Shake as dictating soft "A".
My statistics count 61 (non London) spellings of his name that begin Shake or Shacke as with play write. Also have you considered the influence of abreviation on spelling? Some hand written notes list the writer with spellings that miss the first e at least.
commonberus1 8 months ago
here are some clues: William the Shepard was the symbolic poet, hence "William". Athena , goddess of drama, held a spear. So the pen name equates to: Poet Dramatist. 2. In 1609, Sonnets are published and quickly suppressed. (only 15 copies exist) with no dedication from the "ever-living poet". Poems talk about a man of high rank, so high he "held the canopy for the Queen", he is over 40, lame, with a disgraced name, but says his work will outlive monuments" Only DeVere fits this profile
edboswell 8 months ago
@commonberus1 Quite right. Both the pseudonym theory and the front-man theory raise far, far more doubt in me of Oxenford's authorship than all the supposed "holes" in Shakespeare's history raise about his authorship (they aren't even holes when looked at with some contextual knowledge.
If I were secretly writing screenplays, say, 'Pirates of the Carribean', and I needed to keep it secret (for decades), I wouldn't choose Johnny Depp as my pseudonym.
StaggerLee70 1 month ago
@commonberus1 Did you know that during the exact time frame of the 1st folio, the Prince of Wales was leaning towards marrying a Spanish princess, putting the fear of God into all the anti-catholic Lords? De Vere's family would have been in deep trouble had England swing back to the church in Rome. Shakespeare's play are anti-catholic, and served the family well by being published at that point in time. Just as Hamlet came out AFTER Burghley died, as he was parodied as Polonius.
edboswell 8 months ago
@edboswell It is good idea to find facts by orthodox scholars on this subject, people w/o an agenda. Halliwell-Philips, in mid-19th c described Stratford as being a dirty provincial town with filth in their ditches that reeked to high heaven. Recent research has discovered many more instances of using pen-names than thought to be. Stratfordians hate Oxford with a vengenence, pounching on his shames and checkered name, which actually buttresses the case. Read sonnets 109 110 and 121.
edboswell 8 months ago
@edboswell Malone, in his exhaustive Varorium 1821 Edition of the Shakespeare Canon, mentions that the myth of Shakespeare getting his start by holding horses is simply that. No one rode to the theatres, they walked. It's all BS, the stories about Will Shaksper. Why did deVere/Oxford's relatives receive the dedication in the 1st folio? Did you know the 2 actors who claimed to have provided the blotless manuscripts were employees of de Vere's relatives?
edboswell 8 months ago
Comment removed
commonberus1 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@edboswell Malcolm X may have been a great man but he was clearly speaking outside his area of expertise.
commonberus1 8 months ago
@CarricThura RE: Twain, I think he brought a few valid points into the argument. Namely, that he also came from a small town. No one in Stratford knew of WS as a poet or dramatist. Damn near every person from Hannibal had a story to tell about Twain. Shaksper had a son-in-law, an Oxford graduate , Dr. John Hall, who had a journal. He mentions tending to a poet, Michael Drayton. Even though he lived in New Place, NO MENTION OF FATHER in LAW as poet or dramatist. How strange?
edboswell 1 year ago
@CarricThura I invite you to search WALT WHITMAN SHAKESPEARE where you can read how the poet of the common man declares the Historical plays of WS to be created out of the fullest heat and passion of feudalism. As Whitman died before the ID of Edward de Vere as the man behind the pen-name "shake-speare", I have to give profound credit to Walt Whitman's astuteness. He theorized that only "one of the wolfish earls so plentious in the plays themselves" was the true author. SPOT ON, Walt!!!
edboswell 1 year ago
DeVere seems the likely candidate. The plays said to have been written after his death were actually only published after DeVere's demise, but written sometime before. Lots of other corroborating evidence.
Capt777harris 1 year ago
@Capt777harris I agree. 17 of the plays were not published until 1623. Using Stratfordian logic, that excludes the man from Stratford as well. Have you ever seen the "PROOF" which excludes de Vere? It's the use of the word bermoothes in a Tempest shipwreck description, which leads one to deduce it was a description of a famous shipwreck in the bermudas in 1611. Not mentioned is the fact that in the 1590's another famous shipwreck occurred, which was written about in London at the time.
edboswell 1 year ago
@edboswell No, but I'm pretty sure De Vere authored or headed up the writer's group responsible for the body of work noted as Shakespeare.
Capt777harris 1 year ago
@Capt777harris There are too many unique facts that tie in de Vere with WS not to take serious notice. After digesting hundreds of tie-ins, its like the OJ trial. It's one person's voice, and its de Vere. He blew money on projects, and could have had Lyly, Munday, Marlowe and others help with certain parts. Also, the editing in 1623, with a possible assist from Bacon (he had Jonson as Personal.secretary) is possible. What's not possible is a Warwickshire lad making it all up sans experience
edboswell 1 year ago
There is far too much that implies it was the hand of Sir Francis Bacon.
Look into it and you'll most likely be convinced.
yowza69 1 year ago
Here is the website to check: shakespeareauthorshipDOTcom
zahir13 1 year ago
this is all a bunch of bullshit if you ask you me. no one wrote Shakespeare's plays other than the man himself. I think history has down whatever it can to try and de-glorify him.
andrika1990 1 year ago
@andrika1990 Any explanation for Shaksper not owning a single book? Ever wonder how he knew Venice so well? Ever wonder how he knew the French spoken only by royals? Ever wonder why De Vere's family is depicted in Hamlet? Ever wonder how he had access to rare books before public libraries existed? Ever wonder why WS rails against money lenders, when the man from Stratford was a money lender? Ever wonder why Walt Whitman predicted it was really an Earl close to the Queen? Curious? maybe not
edboswell 1 year ago
@edboswell Well conspiracy theories in history will always try to bring up something that MAY seem to fit. But however nothing can be proven without solid evidence. Now you tell me where the evidence is? I have heard this story vaguely before about Shakespeare not being the real author of all his stories because he borrowed them from various mythologies of the ancient world. BUT if you claim he was not a real author then how the hell did he go down in history after all these centuries as one.
andrika1990 1 year ago
@andrika1990 Kindly note that de Vere married into the Cecil family, who were official "keepers of the records". As he died in disgrace, having squandered a fortune, and because Cecils viewed actors and drama as "lewd", they kept the good part, being elevated to the peerage thru Oxford, and ditched the disgraceful part of him ditching his wife to hang out with transients and drunk poets. De Vere's Geneva bible is closest to "smoking gun". Shaksper was a money lender who died without a book
edboswell 1 year ago
rdward de Vere, Earl of Oxford, obviously wrote Shakespeare. he was a well-known ghost in Jacobean times and even came back during the nineteenth century in order to write all of Dickens' work. some people think that salman rushdie is the earl of oxford. I, for one, am disinclined to believe that.
morphybum 1 year ago
@morphybum I wonder if you know anything at all about Edward de Vere? How his in laws are the accepted models for Polonius, Laertes and Ophelia If you go back and read WS's work, it is OBVIOUSLY written by a highly educated person, with access to rare texts when NO public libraries existed. Men such as Walt Whitman, Malcolm X, Sigmund Freud and Mark Twain. smelled BS in the case of a rustic "genius" who made it all up. de Vere's life meshes perfectly with WS, so read about it, then talk.
edboswell 1 year ago
@edboswell
Thanks, but I'd rather read Shakespeare
morphybum 1 year ago
@morphybum Why read the work of Sam Clemens? I'm sure you'd prefer simply reading mark twain instead.
edboswell 1 year ago
@edboswell
Mark Twain also thought Elizabeth Ist was a man. In disguise.
CarricThura 1 year ago
@morphybum I think it would be Elizabethan. She died in 1603. De Vere's lifetime was from 1550 to 1604. So he only lived one year during the reign of James I. Your humor is only surpassed by your lack of intellect and curiousity. You obviously have invested little or no time on the Shakespeare Authorship Question. Good guess on my part?
edboswell 1 year ago
@edboswell
There isn't a Shakespeare Authorship Question, as you so grandly put it, so why spend time on it?And anyway I'm too busy researching Area 51.
morphybum 1 year ago
FRANCIS BACON :D
BLACKCONVERSE97 2 years ago
i think it makes the playwrites and writers who have lived since shakespeare feel less inadequate that somebody else was so far ahead of them on so many creative levels if all work attributted to the man is seen as written by many persons. if just by 1 man it will force subsequent writers to strive harder and in return we will be left with a greater amount of genius and superior literature. writers who pursue the many hands theory are just insecure and egotistical of their writing talents IMAO
bryngOneOn 2 years ago
shakespeare must have written some of it or had the initial concepts for the plots, if he did or didnt get others to assist it's no biggeey. as the great artists got their apprentices to do the backgrounds and boring bits, clothes and furniture etc of their masterpieces and no ones saying they've been part of a conspiracy.
bryngOneOn 2 years ago
@bryngOneOn Kindly note that the Earl of Oxford employed two major personages of the Elizabethan stage, John Lyly and Anthony Munday, as personal secretaries. I doubt if he wrote the plays in a vacuum. The later plays that are often attributed to Fletcher are an example of the mystery. We are left in the dark about a number of things, including to what point others assisted the Earl of Oxford. I've spent 1500 hours on this, and I'm content that it was Edward de Vere who wrote as WS.
edboswell 1 year ago
THIS IS FOR A SCHOOL PROJECT. NOT A PhD/THESIS!
googoodollspt 2 years ago
I like the background music; where did you get it from?
legacies17 3 years ago
i made it on garageband, we were not allowed to use other music
WatUpSammy666 3 years ago
The Marlowe-Shakespeare Connection book by Samuel L. Blumenfeld answers the question. Check out a Cable TV interview "Blumenfeld on Shakespeare" on YouTube with part 3 on Google.
RemnantMan 3 years ago
Incorrect "information" about the Earl of Oxford. He did not attend either Oxford or Cambridge. He received, as did many other young nobles, honorary degrees from both universities. He was educated at home (tutored). His early poetry does not resemble the great sonnets in the Shakespeare canon at all.
chilecontest 3 years ago
In fact, de Vere did attend Oxford. Degrees were honorary with royals, granted. He also attended Gray's Inn, explaining the legal expertise of the Bard. He wrote in the Sonnet format as a teen, and wrote a poem on the fickleness of women, making him evocative of "shake-speare" in both format and subject matter. His uncle, the Earl of Surrey, was the first man to write in the English Sonnet format, along with Thomas Wyatt. You stand corrected.
edboswell 3 years ago
You forgot the most likely candidate, the one who has the most qualifications that are documented and serious -- Mary Sidney Herbert, the Countess of Pembroke. Check out the book, Sweet Swan of Avon: Did a Woman Write Shakespeare?
TheRosetta 3 years ago
The most likely candidate is probably a man under whose name these works were actually published. Could it be a man named William Shakespeare who wrote the works of a man named William Shakespeare? Or are you Brits stuck in your caste-system so bad you can't afford to believe anyone not born into social standing could be a genius?
metyuewb 3 years ago
so true
koobl0 2 years ago
The most likely is definitely not Mary Sidney, considering that her defense was based on current day sources from her kin. Obviously, the most likely candidate is Sir Francis Bacon, but we all know that Shakespeare is the author of Shakespeare.
devinj64 3 years ago
According to the 1975 edition of E.B. the primary candidate is Edward de Vere. Her two sons were tied in with de Vere, one was his son-in-law, the other was tentatively engaged to another of his 3 daughters. Without doubt, the real story, if it ever came out, would have her very close to the center of the mystery. But it's de Vere, without doubt in my small mind.
edboswell 3 years ago
@edboswell I think you're in good company. Mark Anderson's book, exhaustingly researched, really brings things full circle to shed the light on the inspiration for the canon we call Shakespeare.
Capt777harris 1 year ago