Doubt of Shakespeare's Authorship of His Plays Over the years, various persons have expressed doubt as to the authorship of William Shakespeare. These doubts are as old as his plays. American author, Henry James once said, "I am haunted by the conviction that the divine William is the biggest and the most successful fraud ever practiced on a patient world.
However, many Oxfordians believe that the monument originally depicted Shakespeare holding a sack, and that it was subsequently altered to depict him as a writer.
However, the evidence is overwhelmingly against the Oxfordian scenario. InLillian Schwartz tried to put a scientific gloss on such speculations when she wrote an article for Scientific American which used computer modelling to suggest that the Droeshout portrait is actually of Queen Elizabeth.
However, as Steven May points out in his essay"the alleged code, handy and time-honored as it has become, does not square with the evidence. May does concede that there was for a time a "stigma of verse" among the early Tudor aristocrats, "but even this inhibition dissolved during the reign of Elizabeth until anyone, of whatever exalted standing in society, might issue a sonnet or play without fear of losing status.
They darkly hint that this is evidence of a coverup, and have even gone so far as to x-ray the Shakespeare monument in Stratford because of a suspicion that the manuscripts may have been hidden inside. This evidence, which cuts across handwriting, spelling, vocabulary, imagery, and more, has persuaded many Shakespeare scholars, but is generally ignored or ridiculed by antistratfordians because accepting it would be a crippling blow for their theories.
Oxford the Poet The Seventeenth Earl of Oxford was a recognized poet in his own day, and Oxfordians make the most of this fact in their attempts to prove that he actually wrote the works of Shakespeare.
However, most Oxfordian work in this area involves highly selective use of evidence, and often reveals a distressing lack of knowledge about Elizabethan poetry in general. Puttenham on Oxford If Oxford did indeed write the works of Shakespeare, why did he never acknowledge them?
Oxfordians claim that the works contain dangerous political allegories, and that Oxford could not safely allow them to appear under his own name. Hence, he used the name "Shakespeare. This case study of the Oxfordian misuse of evidence was written by Terry Ross; it appeared on the humanities.
We have made available the texts of the Response from Frontline -- and a Reply. Joseph Sobran has recently gone further, claiming that the verbal parallels he has found constitute proof that the poetry of Oxford and Shakespeare were written by the same person. Was the Earl of Oxford the True Shakespeare?
Thomas Looney onward have noted that some of the verse forms used by Oxford were also used by Shakespeare, and they have seized upon this coincidence as support for their theories.
Some of these myths have been repeated and handed down from Oxfordian to Oxfordian for decades, without any attempt being made to verify them. Here are three essays, each exposing an Oxfordian myth and demonstrating that the Oxfordian faith in them has been misplaced.
From this, Oxfordians have decided that Benson must not have thought that Shakespeare was really Shakespeare. Moreover, Benson nowhere expresses any doubt that the author of the poems was the William Shakespeare whose plays were collected in the First Folio and who died in April of He also outlines a fifty year history of Oxfordians parroting and even embellishing the myth without their ever checking to see whether it was true.
The Oxfordian film Anonymous On October 28,the movie Anonymous opened; it flopped at the box office, but there was considerable discussion of the film at the time. William Shakespeare is a character in the movie, but the central character is Edward de Vere, the 17th earl of Oxford, who is, among other things, the son of Queen Elizabeth, the lover of the same Queen Elizabeth some years laterand the real author of the works commonly attributed to William Shakespeare.
The film is NOT meant to be a comedy. There is, of course, no reason to credit the earl with even one line of any work that has traditionally been attributed to William Shakespeare for more information about this matter, please see the essays on this sitebut many entertaining movies have been based on historically dubious material.
Here are a few links related to the film: Roland Emmerich is among those wrote letters in response to Shapiro. In addition to previews, trailers, commercials, press kits, blogs, and interviews, the film is also being promoted for its educational value.
We are not making this up. An outfit called "Youth Marketing International" has prepared study guides for the movie that the producers hope will be used for high school and college courses. There is also a file explaining how seeing the movie and performing some classroom exercises can meet some educational standards.
For a blogospherical discussion of the study guides, see Attention Educators: Have We All Been Played? There will be more reviews when the movie goes into general release, but a showing at the Toronto Film Festicval prompted this blog post by Holger Syme to which the screenwriter John Orloff responded.
Simon Shama discussed the film for Newsweek: However, Ogburn has a distressing tendency to brush aside facts which he finds inconvenient, and to invent or distort other "facts" to suit his purpose; he employs a blatant double standard in evaluating evidence which makes his thesis unfalsifiable.
Michell thinks that just about everybody ever proposed as a candidate for authorship had his oar in the Avon. Matus points out the weaknesses of the Oxfordian case, and also argues that the Oxfordian approach to the play seeks to diminish its power as a work of art, reducing a profound exploration of the deepest issues that concern us as people to a petty expression of pique.
The Code That Failed: Testing a Bacon-Shakespeare Cipher Until the s, Francis Bacon was the favorite candidate of those who doubted that Shakespeare wrote the plays and poems that have been attributed to him.How We Know That Shakespeare Wrote Shakespeare: The Historical Facts by Tom Reedy and David Kathman Contents.
Introduction; The name "William Shakespeare" appears on the plays and poems. metin2sell.com: The Two Noble Kinsmen (Folger Shakespeare Library) (): William Shakespeare, John Fletcher, Dr. Barbara A.
Mowat, Paul Werstine Ph.D.: Books. Plot summaries of all the plays, including those of doubtful or joint authorship, such as Edward III, The Two Noble Kinsmen, Sir Thomas More (partly written by Shakespeare), and Cardenio (probably partly written by Shakespeare). Essay on Shakespeare Authorship Controversy Words | 7 Pages Shakespeare, the man who wrote 37 plays and more than a hundred sonnets, is known throughout the world.
About the Shakespeare Authorship High School Essay Contest The purpose of the Shakespeare Authorship High School Essay Contest is to involve secondary school students in the creative and analytic synthesis of knowledge about Shakespeare, the Shakespearean Canon, and the Shakespeare Authorship question, by offering prizes for the best essays.
Five of the essays were by Oxfordians, arguing that the Earl of Oxford wrote the works of Shakespeare, while five were by Shakespeare scholars arguing that William Shakespeare was the author.