Did Marlowe Die at Deptford in 1593? Part 1

[ibilly99]

Sparky was right you are wrong you need to check your facts instead of propagating mistruths into the public domain -

1. Coroner's report was 1926 not 1925

2. Coroners report is the summarised findings it is not indicative of who gave evidence.

3. Drew Wycliff was conned after this event not before it.

4. Skeres was connected to Frizer not Walsingham.

5. Ingram Frizer not involved in the Babington plot.

6. Not the only occasion that records specify Poley was in service for protracted period.

[MarloweAsShakespeare]

@ibilly99

1. Leslie Hotson's finding of the coroner's report was made public in his book "The Death of Christopher Marlowe" - publication date 1925, as you can confirm on Amazon and elsewhere. Good idea to check your own facts are correct before accusing others of mistakes.

2. No-one is suggesting it is anything else. But if there were other eye-witnesses to the account they are not named. Hence Dr Barber describes Poley, Skeres and Frizer as "the only named witnesses" to the event.

[MarloweAsShakespeare]

@ibilly99 3. You mean Drew Woodleff and again you are incorrect. See Nicholl (2002) p.26.  who says "it looks like [Frizer] and Skeres were at work on Woodleff in about April or May [1593]." Not that the date of this event is strictly relevant when we are establishing they were professional liars.

4. Again see Nicholl (2002) p.142: "Walsingham's connections with Poley and Skeres point back to the mid 1580s. They were professional connections within the intelligence world."

[MarloweAsShakespeare]

@ibilly99 5. She never says he was!

6. It is the only occasion to our knowledge that records specify Poley was, during a protracted period, "in the Queen's service all the aforesaid time" or any similar wording. If you have evidence to the contrary, please post it, along with appropriate citation so the reference can be checked.

It seems it is you that needs to "check your facts instead of propagating mistruths into the public domain."

[hortonhcci]

Nicely presented, Ros-the graphics are simple but effective.

What I don't understand is the resistance to the theory. I think the evidence is quite convincing, but even if it weren't--why do the vast majority of people want to see their hero as an uneducated boor, rather than a brilliant scholar and dashing, daredevil spy? Defense of the underdog? Marlowe is infinitely more interesting as a man than this nondescript guy Shakespeare. It's much more fun to think that he's the one behind it all.

[fitzjamie1]

If Marlowe faked his death, what did he do in the meanwhile? A playwrite, flamboyant, and vocal--where did he go? Retire? Be a voiceless ghost? Such a distinctive voice (as witnessed by his plays) could not be quiet.

[MarloweAsShakespeare]

@fitzjamie1 Indeed. See the interview on this channel.

[axelfalk1]

Shakespeare wrote Marlowe, giving a cover story as playwright to a Govt. official

[daver8521]

There are no factual errors in this presentation. All the facts that Ms. Barber gives can be verified easily by anyone who takes the trouble to do so.

[xtophermarley]

Sparky, your misuse of "your" has given you away. As an unintentional calling card of the uneducated, this is nearly as definitive as the equally galling "alot." It would appear you're (not your) found out. You have no list of factual errors, or else you'd have posted them.

[sparkythetortoise]

Hello

I started typing up the factual errors you have included in this video, but ran out of space! You seem to be a nice enough person but there is so much misinformation here that it undermines any valid work you night do on this.

I can only assume you are focusing on the published works on this topic rather than going back to primary sources - these are common enough errors. Will happily give you more detail if your interested