Share this information

Share this information

(612) Shakespere's Collaborators?


The video argues 

that J.F.  belongs to the Pseudo-Initials of MARLOWE, only then it becomes understandable and logical, that he did not collaborate, but - alone - was the true poet-genius SHAKESPEARE who  wrote 

                                               the' King  HENRY VIII play'. 

It is more plausible that a single dramatist genius was the author of the King HENRY VIII play!

.a hidden author revealing himself in the play as Ambassador Capucius...  

MARLOWE was writing under PSEUDO-NAMEs such as 

                                             SHAKE-SPEARE  & FLETCHERs (John. - Giles,-  Phineas...) 

                                         or PSEUDO-INITIALS such as J.F.(John Fletcher /  or John  Ford)?



(611) Shakespeare: A Freemason ?? -- Did A.Waugh deliberately overlook MARLOWE ?



From      Alexander Waugh's last Youtube

I learned that 

 a) "....Hermeticisms survived as the philosophical and theological Epicenter of Freemasonry.- ..." in England

 b) "....that one of the Key messages of Hermes (Trismegistos) is that he writes: "The greatest evil in mankind is then a guide to take you by the hand and lead you to the portals of knowledge that(?) te the light cleansed of all darkness...

 c) " who better to that than William Shakespeare who stands in Leicester Square carved in marble pointing to his own words : ä0pTHERE IS NO DARKNESS BUT IGNORANCE"

                           Shakespeare carved in Marble  at Leicester Square (London)

d) Waugh: " Shakespeare thus very close to the Hermetic philosophers and to Hermes..(Trismegistos)

 e) NOTE: it is more appropriate  to associate this Marble" phrase to Marlowe's famous sentence  in "The Jew of Malta"   :  I count religion but a childish toy, and hold there is no sin but ignorance. or Doktor Faustus and the Ignorance in knowledge 

 one can  take this as another logical and plausible   evidence that Marlowe 

 a) is identical with Shakespeare (his pseudonym)
b) that he is a predecessor of the Freemasons?

(610) Shake-speare: The first of Marlowe's TOP 10 Pseudonyms

The name Shake-speare is dealt with a list of the top 10 most significant Pseudonyms of a singular Poet and dramatist Genius 

Christopher Marlowe.

That Marlowe (aka Shake-speare) survived can only become conceivable when his incredibly great spirit was incredibly productive, writing under many pseudonyms, over a long period of life!


(609) Rodney Bolt - only recently became aware of his Marlowe reflection in 2005

Why did I become aware of such a fascinating 
personality so late?

Rodney Bolt

A great creative and imaginative book

A triumphant resurrection of the poet genius and dramatist Marlowe


(608) the incredible Shakespeare Bodenham Deception


The argument presented in this VIDEO favor the Idea that John BODENHAM must have been a PSEUDONYM, an ALIAS or PEN-NAME similar to SHAKE-SPEARE

and to many
other 'alleged' coworkers! of the contemporary poet-genius Christopher Marlowe

(607)Marlowe alias Shake-speare. The acceptance and need of contextual biographical proof

Literally, with all  Marlowian  I miss some fundamental reflections and research.


A Marlowian Theory cannot exist, i.e. doesn’t make any sense, as long as one does not assume that Marlowe survived.


If Marlowe (alias Shakespeare) survived, however, he must have had a specific biography for his surviving time. (up to 1655?)  And these life data & experiences must have been reflected in some (many?)  ways in texts of himself as of concealed pseudonymous poets, and by no means only in play texts of Shakespeare.


Can anybody even remotely accept that there is no need for any contextual autobiographical (poetical) evidence and (re)search?


These contextual massive autobiographical evidence in fact are and must be the cornerstones of the evidence, of circumstantial evidence and reasoning.


And Marlowian Daryl Pinksen (mirabile dictu!) doesn’t either have heard or ever listened to any line of all Youtube presentations or ever asked the crucial question what Marlowe might have done & written in all his surviving time? What a depressing confession of failure!

(606) Pal Faklen's (Budapest, Hungary) enlarged article "Marlowe's delayed resurrection.

As a longtime Marlowian, I recently discovered a  more detailed article of the hungarian publisher and editor Pal Faklen (Budapest) on the Marlowe Shakespeare  authorship issue (entitled "The Delayed Resurrection of Marlowe) which I naturally liked very much.

I very much hope that Pal Faklens essential and amazing arguments will receive (slowly, but at least) a gradual recognition world wide.


 Publication in




Please  forward the article to interested parties…

(604) The impressive hope of self-fulfilling prophecy of the OXFRAUDIANS


The Game is over !!! It's quiet !!  Really?

Lately, I became aware of the wonderful Self-Fulfilling Prophecy of the OXFRAUDSTheir belief or expectation about the Shakespeare Authorship is,  that the game is over.

At no time the OXFRAUDS had any real interest in finding out what about the centuries-old doubt is justified and what is not. The Marlowe Theory, despite Peter Farey, had no chance with them. They haven't even started, to reflect the Marlowe issue.

At no time the Oxfraud community had any real interest in finding out what about the centuries-old doubt is justified and what is not. And how to explain the unimaginable amount of inconsistencies. The Marlowe Theory, despite Peter Farey, did not have the slightest chance in their group. Wherever they could they made a fool of him and Marlowians like me , and even declared me as deceased(!). : a rather pitiable, ridiculous bunch when compared to the great minds of the Non-Stratfordians.

They do not even realize that they have very bad cards in the long run :

Their greatest strength (by far) : the personal insult,

their greatest weakness: the lack of a stringent argument

(to resolve any inconsistency)


(603) Shakespeare a mask, a dummy , a mockup

Can it be that the 'Universal'-Genius and  'Poet Dramatist'-Genius ( today is known and called as SHAKE(-)SPEARE ) never lived and existed? 

That it was no real person, but an artificial M A S K!
The Engraver clearly-marked  the Chin-Neck line
 to indicate  a M A S K 

A   M A S K behind which 'the only existing 'true' Poet Genius of his age 
Christopher  MARLOWE**   was hiding :



(602) There never existed a poet-genius called 'SHAKESPEARE'

 A brief highlight for the bored Stratfordians

Since I have long noticed that Shakespeare Admirers are not particularly interested in the real person of the poet and they consider the authorship problem as troublesome and as solved at the same time and do not estimate long discourses on the problem at all, I fabricated for a change a short highlight to alert and entertain most of the bored Stratfordians.

More than 80% of Stratfordians have no precise knowledge of Marlowe.


(601) Believe it or not !There never existed a poet-genius named SHAKE-SPEARE.


The name SHAKE-SPEARE  was a Penname for the 'true',  prolific 'absolute' polymath and  poet-genius called Christopher Marlowe, whose death was feigned with the help of the crown, he survived, but a long-life long  lived incognito and was forced to write  under a barely imaginable number of pseudonyms and initials (of invented  and/or really existing) persons (such as William S. from Stratford, a merchant, and shareholder)

One of these multiple Pennames:

Gervase Markham 

is dealt with in this video.


Believe it or not!

There is no other or better solution to the

Century old bizarre

Shakespeare Authorship Enigma.







Short Summary of a long Story!

taken from the German Monography
Der wahre Shakespeare: Christopher Marlowe

 also as e-book

(600) Why Shakespeare's alleged Play 'Pericles' was written by Marlowe?

   This Youtube  VIDEO tries to offer a solution about


▷ the only 'reasonable' and logical author of the Shakespeare play

    'Pericles Prince of Tyre - (CM)  

▷ the reason, why that play did not appear in the 'First Folio',1623

▷ the text parallels between the play 'Pericles', the Pericles Novella

    (1608) by G. Wilkins and 'The Painful Adventures' by  L. & T. 

    Twyne"(1594 /1607) (Pen-names of a unique, single author (CM)

▷ the autobiographical contextual background for Act I of 'the play ' 

     (Banishment and Exile)

▷  the Significance  of George Wilkins'  other Works (1606-1608)

(599 )Marlowe and the famous bard are one and the same person.


award winning journalist, author and lecturer Martin Sieff

introduces a series of often overlooked questions, paradoxes and facts that indicate a secret world of political intelligence that point towards the possibility that

Christopher Marlowe and the famous bard

are one and the same person.

(598) The true author of the play "King Lear" was Christopher Marlowe.....

......writing under one of his many pseudonyms:
   Such as Shake-speare

Observations and reflections of Shakespeare's famous Tragedy of "King Lear" make it seem plausible  and 


1)... that the 4 King LEIR / LEAR editions between 1594 and 1623 must have sprung from a single brain 
2)... that this brain cannot have been identical with that of William Shakspere from Stratford
3)... that it belonged to the poet and dramatist-genius Christopher Marlowe, who tried to link 
his complex, tragic life situation in 1605/06 with the ancient historic King Lear as  well as with his loss of identity (Edgar / Kent), his exile, the death of his parents, a general depressive melancholy and senselessness...

(597) The true Shakespeare as the Author of "Titus Andronicus".

The true Shakespeare  (and not the false! Shakspere ) as  the Author of "Titus Andronicus".

C O N C L U S I O N S :

There are numerous plausible and logical reasons to agree that Shakespeare ("William from Stratford) was not the author of Titus Andronicus:

1.)   A no longer comprehensible number of  renowned literary Experts (although largely 
forgotten and negated today) early doubted Shakespeare's authorship of  "Titus Andronicus" such 
Lewis Theobald, Samuel Johnson, George Steevens, Edmond Malone, William Guthrie, John Upton, 
Benjamin Heath, Richard Farmer, John Pinkerton, and John Monck Mason, William Hazlitt and 
Samuel Taylor Coleridge a.o. 

2.) Q1 printed 1594 entered the Stationer's register late 1593 only month after Marlowe's fatal twist of 

3.) Specific text analogies between Shakespeare’s "Titus Andronicus", "History plays" and  the "Sonnets" suggest a common poet and author: 

Demetrius, Tamara's son, speaks in “Titus” about 
Lavinia (II/1)
        "She is a woman, therefore to be woo’d" 
        "She is a woman, therefore to be won"; 
        "She is Lavinia, therefore to be lov'd",

This sounds strikingly similar in Shakespeare's 
Sonnet 41: 
        "Gentle thou art, and therefore to be won", 
        "Beauteous thou art, therefore to be assailed" 

«The same applies to» Henry VI/ I « (V / 3): 
        "She's beautiful,  and therefore to be woo'd" 
         "She is a woman,  therefore to be won"

4.)  The late insertion and content of scene III/2 in Titus Andronicus of the First Folio reveal unnoticed 
allegoric (autobiographic) parallels to the true authors senseless death..

 "a deed of death done on the innocent";

 as well as allegoric legacies, to posterity, to his 
daughter (Lavinia):
"...go with me Lavinia, I'll to thy closet; and go 
read with you sad stories chanced in the times of old"

and to his nephew (boy)
" Go with me:  thy sight is young and thou shalt 
read, when mine begins to dazzle
                                                                         [--->  ! End of the newly inserted scene! ]

5. In Marlowe's play "The Jew of Malta"  the villain "Barabas" definitely  influenced the Villain 
("Aaron" )  in "Titus Andronicus".

6. There are logical and plausible arguments that not only the authors of the history plays  "Edward 
II" [Marlowe[ and anonymous "Edward I" [Peele ??]) were identical, but also the authors of the anony-mous plays "Edward III" [Shakespeare?] and "Edward IV" [Heywood?] belonged to pennames of 

                                                      for some more details see these  videos!

(596)When will SOF begin with necessary steps?

Where does "Oxfordianism" actually get the hope from, of ever gaining general acceptance of its theory? (a century after Looney!)

 I suppose

A dead end story!?

    An infinite way to an unavailing success!?


SOF should define the Criteria
for final success!

Is the probability of success for Edward de Vere really 
so much better than for the only poetic and dramatic genius of its time,
the singular former Superstar of the London Theater, Christopher Marlowe?

There are thousands of PRO- Arguments
but only a singular essential CONTRA-Argument for Marlowe
( His death because of his early assassination)

Shouldn't a Global Collective and Academe begin to reverse and correct a singular false fatal Conclusion  in favour of  thousands of logical and plausible Pro-Arguments for Christopher Marlowe's Survival as the "true" Shakespeare?

An open , honest and fair S O F community would at least have to invalidate all logical and plausible arguments in favour of Marlowe, which, given the facts, can hardly succeed...

When will SOF begin with the necessary steps?

Collected Video-Contributions (arguments) to support
the Marlowe/Shakespeare authorship thesis (oct. 2020)

(595) A key question, the Oxfraud ADEPTS should answer!


What is the main interest (main goal? main question?) of the Oxfraud adepts?

... to prove that ...

1. The Oxford theory is absolute nonsense!

2. The Stratfordman theory is and will remain the gold standard!

3. The world still needs a more coherent theory!


(594) Nicholas Breton : a Pseudonym of the "true" Shakespeare. (Not to be confused with the Stratfordman)

In this video a series of contextual 

arguments have been compiled that make it 

compelling, logical and plausible that the 

author "Nicholas  Breton", contemporary to 

Shakespeare and unidentifiable in his 

lifetime (beyond his works), must have been 

a Penname or literary  Pseudonym of 

Marlowe. [aka Shake-speare]


It remains utterly  inexplicable why generations of literary scholars have not even attempted to enlighten and understand 

a) what autobiographical and deeper meaningful contents lay behind the complex texts, the poetry and philosophy of the prolific  genius Nicholas Breton, 

b) who this productive, witty contemporary of Shakespeare actually was  and 

c) why Breton does not  even belong to the devious list of todays discussed Shakspeare authorship candidates?

(593) A fundamental breakthrough and progress for the SHAKESPEARE authorship debate! -

A great event has happened.....a milestone

"As of August 1, 2020,

all texts produced under EEBO Phase I and Phase II

are freely available to the public."


(592) The Shakespeare authorship Issue: A new Marlowianism at the horizon?

 I became aware of "Langton lite", with 2 posts on the Authorship issue.- What a surprise,  new Marlowian efforts at the horizon ?

, …my key question to Dr.Christian Taylor. : what is his main reason to rehash (at this moment) a century old terribly stale taboo discussion on all the damn old topics (spelling, correspondence, biographical contents, the will, illiterate family etc. etc. etc.

 What does he  expect? Another hundred years of an obviously unfruitful unproductive "Oxfordianism" (they just now celebrate Looney’s centennial (!) anniversary)

Where is the solution supposed to come from, if not from a radical turnaround in traditional views?

            A complete new "Marlowianism"?

It seems not likely  that a more logic and more plausible „conspiracy authorship thesis“ (than the Multi-pseudonymity thesis of poet genius and former Superstar of the London Theater ) will arise.  It may even well be, that a global intelligence will never be able or ready to understand and resolve the complexity of the authorship problem, let alone  the singular virtually inconceivable mental capacity of the singular „true“ Shakespeare [Marlowe].


Multi-Pseudonymity thesis of Marlowe


Collected single Argument s


(590) Sturrocks „Combined Statistical Significance of the cryptograms“: False supposition, wrong Conclusion! A Hanky-Panky!

                                  Discussing Alexander Waughs YouTube contribution 

                ——->    „Edward de Vere 

            - Saint or Sinner ?

... decoding the dedicatory text of Shakespeare‘s Sonnets 


Alexander Waugh recommended to read the Journal of Scientific Exploration (SSE) vol.34 no.2.pp268-350 (15 June 2020) by answering : „ Decoding the dedication of Shakespeare‘s Sonnets.  by Prof. Peter Sturrocks , Stanford which demonstrates that the combined statistical significance of the cryptograms is overwhelming.„

See als Prof. Peter Sturrocks LECTURE


The opinion of the Marlowian Pal Faklen (Budapest) on  Sturrocks case,  is, „that even a sophisticated method (combined statistical significance etc.) can not prove a statement which is based on a wrong premise.- Faklen concised his view in a chart (s. below) 

                                                        Pal Faklen Budapest



Pal Faklen :
„As for the research article Behind The Mask: Decoding the Dedication of Shakespeare’s Sonnets (Peter A. Sturrock, Kathleen E. Erickson) 

                        — my opinion is that 
         it's a hanky-panky. 

Today's computer technology can conjure from almost any text some desirable hidden messages, can create anagrams, can search all kind of equidistant letter sequencing (ELS), can arrange patters from the letters etc. The method is neutral, the usage, the content, the message qualifies.

Otherwise, the name of Henry Wriothesley is much stronger connected to Marlowe than to de Vere. De Vere died 1604, the Sonnets were published in 1609, the Shakespeare monument was erected around 1620. Dear Oxfordians! Who wrote Shakespeare and who encrypted de Vere's name after his death ?“


(589) The intangibility of the Marlowe / Shakespeare authorship thesis.-

When will Marlowe ever get his chance?


The (MSA) Marlowe Society of America held its 8th International Conference from 10–13 July, 2018 in Wittenberg, Germany,  an important historic center of both religion and culture in sixteenth-century Germany….its university (now known as the "Leucorea") was made the alma mater of Shakespeare's Hamlet ("Let not thy mother lose her prayers, Hamlet: / I pray thee, stay with us; go not to Wittenberg."). The town also served as backdrop for the B-Text Doctor Faustus, the locale where Faustus first "surfeits upon cursed necromancy" and where his life ends "All torn asunder by the hand of death!"

Could MSA organize a conference with 70 lecturers without sponsorship? is obvious that sponsorship depended on the INTANGIBILITY Of THE STRATFORD DOGMA . Crossing this sacred frontier, (by dealing with the Marlowe / Shakespeare authorship)  the conference and MSA would have had no chance to get institutional financial support.

The International Marlowe Conference featured keynote presentations by all the ultra-dogmatic  Stratfordian scholars such as Lukas Erne (University of Geneva), Kristen Poole (University of Delaware), Holger Syme (University of Toronto) ,  and Meghan C. Andrews (s.below!) and many more.

Be aware, Marlowe ( if he is not Shakespeare) is licensed for research (only)  but not for  the prohibited zone of plausible theories ,  the entrance  is advisable only for those who are really independent and free, who have nothing to lose , who are no longer hurt when the official exorcist supervisors of literature signify that "doubting is mental illness " (J. D. Dixon) and these who disobey the blind „Stratfordian or Oxfordian“ faith " are just crazy" (Stanley Wells). And they call themselves scholars?!

Look at the long Marlowe resources bibliography on the MSA home page. And look at the much longer  Shakespeare bibliographies anywhere in the world.  An army of researchers will have to face that their work (sometimes life work) is a pile of scientific garbage. As long as this consacrated legend reigns, it's a better choice for them to accept benefits, job, professional advancement, prestige, reputation instead of riskingCareer Suicide“.- Their price is to accept also the rules of silence (omerta), and put the common sense in the wardrobe — or even better in the safe.


In Wittenberg Megan C.Andrews gave a speech on Michael Drayton ,

 earlier she had published an interesting  article entitled

For the reasons mentioned above (“Career suicide“), in her article (and at the conference) she didn‘t even dare to discuss a plausible possible  Marlowe / Shakspere connection, which assumes, that (surviving) Marlowe wrote under a multiplicity of pennames including Michael Drayton ...

                                                                   What a shame. -  



                                                                           See video


(588) Shakespeare‘s identity : Encrypted beyond any recognition

   Encrypted beyond any Recognition?

Alexander Waugh 


I am  always fascinated by the imaginative power of the human brain in general and  of Alexander Waugh in particular, what a fantastic obsession in a neve-never land, encrypted beyond recognition, decrypted after 400 years, by an unleashed brain.

Alexander Waugh‘s message (3.8.2020):  Thomas Edwards in 1595 knew that Shakespeare was the pseudonym of Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford! ....
Can that be true at all?

This time Alexander Waugh in his Video series used Thomas Edwards (TE) a contemporary of William Shakspere „trying to prove that his witness (TE) knew, that Shakespeare was a pseudonym being used by the poeticall 17th Earl of Oxford (Edward de Vere)".  As the decisive piece of evidence
                                                   Waugh selected TE's" Narcissus".

It remains difficult to understand why Waugh didn‘t give the  full (significant!) title and picture! of TE’s book „Cephalus and Procris“ (1595) and  why in 1595 in the dedication entitled „To the Honorable Gentlemen & true favorites of  Poetrie" the author openly confesses :
           " O what is honor without the complement of Fame?"
            " soul darkened with the terror of oblivion"

Who other than Marlowe in 1595 could have had a motif to explicitly write and reflect such  perspective of life.- . I see no motif for Edward de Vere.

How can we  understand, that  a completely unknown Thomas Edwards was the first author to mention Shakespeare’s op.1  "Venus and Adonis (1593)  in his "Cephalus and Procris" which entered  the Stationers' Register , October  22 1593 -  

How can it be that at that early time (1595), TE  in Narcissus is already quoting Marlowes "Hero & Leander ",!??    How  could  he have known from this poem that early, which appeared in print only years later  (1598)?

 Isn't the authorship thesis ...
A.)  that the only existing poet and playwright genius of his time,
surviving  Christopher Marlowe  was the author of  "Venus & Adonis" (1593 Shakespeare's op.1)  and "Lucrece" (1594 Shakespeare's op.2)  far more logic and plausible  ...than
B )  that Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford, with no documented capabilities of a playwright genius whatsoever, was the "true" Shakespeare?


Venus and Adonis

Hero & Leander 

(587) Oxfordian Richard Waugaman does not even once dare to mention Marlowe

Marlowe's Inconceivable Multiplicity 
of Pen Names

 Richard Waugaman's Speech
                                          Internal and External Meanings of Pen Names
                                                    Did Shakspere write Shakespeare?


What a shame that not even once ( unforgivable failure!) Richard Waugaman mentioned in "his Reflections on Pen names and Shakespeare

Shakespeare Marlowe

.—. see the video: English Summary (50 min) of the German Book: (700pages) „The only true Shakespeare: Christopher Marlowe“.-
Several highly plausible and logic proposals (Pen Names) are given in various videos that 
Marlowe (alias Shake-speare) used a stunning 
multiplicity of Pennames (pseudonyms) such
(as absurd as it may sound!!) Richard Barnfield.
William Basse.

Thomas Beard.                    
                            Nicholas Breton. . ..............
William Cle(a)rke
John Davies.
Thomas Drayton.
George Chapman. .
Bartholomew Griffin

John Ford.
Henry Petowe. ..... .
William Shakespeare
James Shirley. .....
Joshua Sylvester. ..
Henry Willobie (Willoghby).
George Wither. And many more!