Share this information

Share this information

(550) Autobiographical of the "true" Shakespeare (exemplified on "The Winters Tale")

No rational man can doubt, that in the vast cosmos of Shakespeare's plays compiled for the
first time in the First Folio in 1623 there are  hidden autobiographical contents and
details of the "true" Shakespeare's personal life.

The reason, why virtually no clear autobiografical connections have been found, is related to the fact, that the "true" dramatist of the First Folio plays is not identical to William Shakspere from Stratford, it was: Christopher Marlowe, the only true poet-genius of his time, hiding behind a multiplicity of pseudonyms such as Shakespeare...(...Barnfield, Chapman, Davies and others.

For some Details click this Little Video!
 Autobiographical aspects in Shakesperare's Plays can never be found, unless we are dealing with the life of the "real or true" poet genius and dramatist (C.Marlowe) and not with the false W.Shaksper (from Stratford).

(549) The Shakespear Gate: A gigantic Collusion

A quarterly Contribution to Shakespeare‘s Collusion. 

Thomas Beard:           The key witness of the "true" Shakespeare's early demise

(548) A convincing Sherlock Holmes for the Shakeskespeare problem ?

Michael Dunns Speech related to the Shakespeare Authorship Problem.

What a shame!- When it comes to Marlowe, Michael Dunn loses his righteous reserve and ridicules the „highly educated“ poet with his „brilliant mind“: stating : it leaves us in „Elvis-lives-Category“ with a need of greater proofs. –

He speaks of an „interesting [Marlowe] theory not so far-fetched as it might seem“ but „Marlowe was killed at the age of 29 when many of the Shakespeare plays were not yet written.“ Didn’t he know that no Shakespeare play was written when Marlowe disappeared in 1593?

Dunn  loses himself in the weaknesses of the Oxford Theory (its good parts are in common with that of Marlowe) , since from the beginning he seems to have overlooked the superiority of the Marlowe theory.                          
                                          Is Michael Dunn really a convincing   Sherlock Holmes?

Dunn  loses himself in the weaknesses of the Oxford theory, since from the beginning he seems to have overlooked the superiority of the Marlowe theory. Is Michael Dunn really a convincing   Sherlock Holmes?

(547) Willobie his Avisa - An allegory of the Shakespeare authorship issue

Ostensibly the "lovesickness" of  H.W.   left by Avisa is sketched, but subtly  and blatantly 
 the "true" Shakespeare's   [Marlowe's] tragic secrecy and downfall.

"AVISA" de facto stands allegorically for the Shakespeare Authorship question, i.e. for the permanent historical concealment and invisibility of the "true poet - Genius" Shakespeare

(545) Shakespeare, the Oxfrauds and their mental bankruptcy

The Oxfrauds,  a very special British „Task Force“
It' s not enough anymore today (and a sign of mental bankruptcy) to attack the Oxfordians and the Oxford  Shakespeare authorship hypothesis  and declare solemnly,  repetetively and pretty naked  „that the man whose name is all over the work and to whom it is attributed by his contemporaries, is the man who wrote it,“  by hiding ,neglecting or denying  the vast amount of irrefutable evidence concerning the Marlowe/Shakespeare Authorship Thesis.

(543) The great Shakespeare authorship deception: John Davies twice!

The  clues  in this video  present some thoughts that behind the poems of a bizarre "double falsehood" of two poets both named John Davies... Christopher Marlowe  (the "real and true" poet genius aka Shakespeare) is hiding.

(542) A weird "Shakespeare "conspiracy theory" : Shakespeare's Apocrypha ?

The Shakespeare Apocrypha:  a ghostly literary-historical Hoax!

The "Shakespeare Apocrypha" is a group of plays and poems printed during Shakespeare's lifetime

- Believe it or not!-

with his name [or initials] on the works... ...but not accepted today as his works (...generally deemed to be the work of other uncertain writers.)

Are we really to believe  that during Shakespeare's lifetime a faked author-name "Shakespeare" was printed on plays, not identical with the author of "Hamlet" and "Romeo and                                                                                       Juliet?

Can anybody understand why this weird "Shakespeare "conspiracy theory" has been separated from the debate on Shakespearean Authorship? if that could be handled without reference to one another , i.e. as if it were unrelated!

For details click this Video!

(541) Michael Wood disqualifies himself shockingly on the issue of Shakespeare's authorship!

Documentary Shakespeare Filmmaker  Michael Wood's  in an interview in Paul Bradshaws "Virals History' " dealt with the authorship of Shakespeare....

..formulating  his opinion on this century old question :

Wood must be seen as the most impressive prototypical Ignorant  discrediting "a real existing Shakespeare Autorship problem", using almost all of the bad dishonest tricks put together in this video!                                                                                                                                                             

WOOD:  (2:13 min) " I am fairly  brusque with the Shakespeare deniers, its  a load of rubbish - to be honest- . There is a couple of things, it raises interesting questions;  The key thing is - you know- that it is about  what historians do and this debate like all other debates in history is something historians decide and its about sources, and historians construct their images of the past by sources and you start with the primary sources that first hand that eywitnesses the documents that close up, you move out to the others depending on what you have got ,  and if you are going to deny that Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare, you deny the primary sources like the Will, 
so it is rubbish ...and nobody of the time thought that and for long after thought that anybody else but Shakespeare wrote Shakspeare,  (Thats devious! " see B-Wildenthals claim - video below!)    
 it 's 19th century fantasy, and unfortunately it's a conspiracy theory  - you know- you have got to look to  the recent American election  there is still a lot of people to think the moon landing didn't happen,  but it is as bonkers as that,  behind it lies a kind of ignorance, and the ignorance is about Tudors Society ....So it is nonsense on a total level,..." 

Michael Wood's  blatant ignorance  
on the issue of the Shakespeare authorship!
                                                                                   Bryan Wildenthal: Early Shakespeare Doubts

(540) Thr great deception, Shakekespeares true identity..

Christopher Marlowe ("The true Shakespeare") deadly threatened because of high treason and heresy had to fake his death  and change identity and name with the help of the crown. 

The video deals with a contemporary  poet and translator "Josuah Sylvester", and why his name  belongs to  the multiple pseudonyms of the "true" Shakespeare".  (Christopher Marlowe)

Josuah Sylvester

(539) Ros Barbers logical fallacies on Shakespeare Authorship Mystery Day.

Is she aware of the problem of "negative circular reasoning"? 

Bild könnte enthalten: eine oder mehrere Personen und Text

On Nov, 8th 2018  the Second Annual Shakespeare Authorship Mystery Day celebration took place with  a live stream introduction by former Marlowian Ros Barber.

Click here

I suspect that Barber has not even noticed which  logical error of thinking she accomplished.  Let me explain this with a single example:

Barber: (at min 29:50)"..... shortly after 1594....the name, either the initials W.S. or name Shakespeare started appearing on plays that actually are not his, that we know aren't his. So there were 7 plays that are part of the Shakespeare Apocrypha which means that they were at one point attributed to Shakespeare, we now know for sure they were not written by Shakespeare and its very interesting to me that these plays some of which are performed by that company end up beeing published with name or initials of William backs up the broker theory

How - on earth - can Ros Barber assert that the "London Prodigal" or "The Yorkshire Tragedy" was not written by Shakespeare... Barber has not even defined if she mean William from Stratford or the concealed "true Shakespeare" who must have used the name "Shakespeare" as a pseudonym or pen-name,  her own live stream   is arguing for. This is classical "negative circular reasoning". What a pity.

                                                   See 1.)Video on Apocrypha

and 2.)  Video on Logical Fallacies ( Circular Reasoning)

(538) It is not enough today to tackle only half of the Shakespeare authorship question.

Why Keir Cutler never dared to tackle the second part of a dual authorship  problem or question?

part 1.) Why William Shaksper from Stratford was not William Shakespeare, the author of Hamlet ?
part 2.) Who really was behind the pseudonym William Shakespeare?

                                             Keir Cutlers new Video

A plausible Proposal

(537) The fantastic monstrous imaginations of Alexander Waugh

Very  impressive castles in the air ! 

Alexander Waugh is a leading advocate of the Oxfordian theory, the belief that Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford wrote the works of William Shakespeare. He is a life member of the De Vere Society, [4] and serves as the Honorary President of the Shakespeare Authorship Coalition.[5]
For quite some time he has been running a YouTube channel where he claims to have found surreptitious allusions embedded in 16th- and 17th-century works revealing that the name "William Shakespeare" was a pseudonym ("I think, this is correct!) , used by Edward de Vere to write the Shakespeare oeuvre.("I think this is incorrect!"!)
Unfortunately he does not allow comments on his Youtube channel  since he doesn't intend ( as he wrote) to spend the rest of his  life replying and arguing with impudent trolls.  Difficult to understand. It wouldn't  be difficult to erase the trolls (within seconds)  and keep the reasonable  letters and arguments.That's managable. Perhaps there are other reasons:  all his articles  ask for  contradiction. Lately he made again an interesting contribution about  the hidden secrets in Francis Meres "Palladis Tamia"1598) a key witness for the Shakespeare authorship debate.

Definition  of Chimera (1621) by the "true" Shake-speare
alias Josuah Sylvester
Is Waugh even remotely  sure who Francis Meres really was.  I wonder what kind of idea he has  of how the brain works.-
Does he  really believe that a single  dubious  but congenial Francis M. put such an obscure highly complex inner construction (a fantasic chimera) on paper  whose strange logic 400 years later a single similar congenial Alexander W. is (accidentally?) able to decipher? Does he really believe that Meres brain  had a mechanism or a deep need to conceal an unidentifiable truth in such a weird way? 

I assume that "Alexander Waugh" would be able to convince us that it is not accidental that in his 15 letter  name  unrecognized hidden meanings are concealed (to name a few -to be found in any anagram generator )

Lately  I reflected on Francis Meres (Blog 505).-A youtube contribution about Drayton. Argument 14 ( at 1h 03 min 20 sec) deals with Francis Meres ! Perhaps it is of some interest for some curious Non-Stratfordian!

                                      Alexander Waughs recent Youtube Contribution
                                                           "Francis Meres knew..."

(536) John Davies : A double falsehood ? [false identities and name - identical to Shak(e)speare?]

Consider that we learn that at Shakespeares times there existed two high level contemporaneous poets who published with...

the same name "John Davies!", in
the same year "1602"  , in
the same City in "London about 
the same literary subjectmatter"(the soul) ,
 2 masterpieces of philosophical literature


at Shakespeares times there existed two high level contemporaneous poets who publieshed with    the same name "John Davies!", in  the same year "1602"  , in  the same City in "London about   the same literary subjectmatter"(the soul) ,  "   2 masterpieces of philosophical literature    "NOSCE TE IPSUM" and "MIRUM IN MODUM"
Consider that in the "Scourge of Follies" (Date of print not secured , >1610) the one John Davies wrote a dedication to the other! How do you interprete this poem?

 in the "Scourge of Follies" (Date of print not secured  >1610)  one John Davies wrote a dedication to the other! How do you interprete this poem?

Also note that from Essay 34 in John Davies "Wittes Pilgrimage"(1605) you get  (specific biograhical) ideas about his poignant life situation

 from Essay 34 in John Davies "Wittes Pilgrimage"(1605) you get  specific biograhical ideas about his poignant life situation
Essai 34 in Wittes Pilgrimage (1605)
                                ("Marlowes life situation")



Doesn't this situation in 1605 fits better to someone else [e.g. Marlowe  who was alive but simultaneously dead] than to an unknown destiny of  a certain John Davies?

Doesn't "John Davies" thus represent a Double Falsehood" , identical to William Shakespeare?

(535) The absolutely amazing "Hero and Leander Triple" in 1598!

No true poets named George Chapman and Henry Petowe  have existed.

The "Hero & Leander Triple" in 1598
Their names [similar to Shakespeare] were alias names of the unversal genius Marlowe forced to distribute his biographical and poetical cosmos amongst a multiplicity of (pseudo) authors or author-names.

(For more details see this video!)

(534) When and Why to abandon Name and Identity?

The true Shakespeare : Christopher Marlowe

Abandoning name and identity, as Marlowe has in all likelihood done, and writing under pseudonyms of identifiable persons does not occur as seldom, as is usually assumed, but for very different reasons.... 

...shown here using the example of russian Vladimir Vavilow  and italian Guilio Caccini. 

Another example (not shown) could have been taken from Fritz Kreisler and Gaetano Pugnani.

Vladimir Vavilow


(533) Shakefrauds should compete with Oxfrauds

Shakefrauds ! An abyss of academic inability  of reasoning in humanities


Without accepting a historical Marlowe/Shakespeare authorship fraud there will be no way to explain and interprete the weird situation of plays explicitly printed as written by Shakespeare during his lifetime, but not included in the "First Folio! 1623
                                            What a bizarre and grotesque Situation!!
                   Ultra-orthodox  Stratfordian Shakespeare scolars ( e.g. Oxfrauds) 
                       should start to be more interested in good conspiracy theories!

The London Prodigal (1605)",  "A Yorkshire Tragedy (1608)" and Pericles (1609)"

Stunningly these plays were omitted in the First Folio , and amazingly "Pericles" alone      later was accepted to be included in the Shakespeare  Canon!                         

     For more details click this VIDEO!  


(532) The "true" Shakespeare alone wrote the "Passionate Pilgrime"! But who was he?

 The "Passionate Pilgrime" has been written by a single author, the true poet and dramatist genius Marlowe alias William Shake-speare,   alias  Griffin, alias Barnfield,  alias Deloney,  alias Heywood)

                                                 .... as inconceivable it may sound !

There are serious  reasons to argue that in 1599  the "Passionate Pilgrime" has been written by a single author, the true poet and dramatist genius Christopher Marlowe who signed under one of his various  pseudonyms: W.Shakespeare.

There was no need for Marlowe to reveal the contributions of others of his pennames used previously. Some brief reflections on  those poems of allegedly other  poets (Griffin, Barnfield, Deloney, Heywood)  disclose a common contextual autobiographical background of the poems as well as the reason why “Shakespeare Academe”  for lack of acceptance of a historical authorship problem is not yet ready even to begin  to resolve the excess of Shakespeare inconsistencies.

(531) William Shakspeare (Stratford) equals obscure James Shirley

James Shirley belongs to the late pennames of the true literary english genius .


Act V (a subplot) within the stage play "The wittie faire one" by James Shirley discloses in a round about way the Shakespeare / Marlowe authorship issue, indicating that Shirley belongs to the later pennames of the true genius.

                                                        (for details click video!)

(530) Stratfordians about the Non-Stratfordians: They are just crazy

The Shakespeare-Stratford-Dogma (SSD) is not allowed being questioned or doubted and it cannot be changed or discarded without affecting the very system's paradigm.


...challenging the dogma is academic death and the most elegant way for a scholar to commit career suicide” !
Almost any scholar would lose his job, his position or reputation in the academic world of "Shakespeare orthodoxy" if he would would engage in the least to the authorship debate and doubt.!
One wonders how such a infinite unique global confusion could occur ?

There are significant reasons for this confusion, which can only ever be resolved
with the gradual acceptance of the complex Marlowe Shakespeare authorship thesis.

(Marlowes Survival and his multiple Penname-ship)

(529) Were there really 2 high level poets named John Davies ?

What do you think about the probability that  2 high level poets  with the same name (John Davies), in the same year (1602)  with the same literary subjectmatter ( the soul) , in the same city (London) printed these 2 masterpieces of philosophical literature?

John Davies (of Hereford)
Sir John Davies


(528) The "false" Shakespeare and the Second Edition (1640) of the Sonnets

          The mirrored editors (Ben Jonson and John Benson)  and figure

Short you-tube Video exposé about the second edition of Shakespeares Sonnets (1640) trying to answer  the question why Shakspeare (Stratford) was the false and Marlowe the true poet genius and dramatist.


(527)The Shakespeare authorship is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge!

 4 "King Edward" historical plays in London by 4 outstanding dramatists within a few years


It is neither a possible, nor a plausible, nor a probable or a certain option, that within a few years 4 "King Edward" historical plays were composed in London in a similar diction by 4 outstanding dramatists (Peele, Marlowe, Shakespeare, Heywood) with no established evidence of a personal connection.

Lets end the devastating academic long-term failure by putting the Shakespeare Marlowe authorship thesis to the test.

(526) An open letter to a guest post of "Before Shakespeare"

Hallo Alexander Thom,

I am an old retired Professor for Neuroscience from Munich and wrote a german book (after 10 years of reading and studies) on the Marlowe/Shakespeare Authorship thesis . Unfortunately I couldn’t find an english Publisher, since I was regarded (up to now) as a conspiracy ideologist. At least, I lately fabricated a short english Summary of the book. (Video youtube)

With great interest I read your contribution on „banishment as a romance“ on the website „Before Shakespeare“ . I suppose it‘s a base of your upcoming PhD „Bodies of Law: Banishment, Marriage, and Sovereign Power in Shakespeare’s Plays“.

The reason of my letter is a question: What may be the reason, that in your essay on "Banishment in Shakespeares time" you totally neglegt (or deny?) the Marlowe / Shakespeare thesis, even though banishment, exile, disgrace , loss of identity etc. is a crucial element not only in Marlowe / Shakespeare‘s work but also in other poets or playwrights works ( best explainable as contemporary pseudonyms) such as [s.Video] --> Drayton(1), Griffin (2) Ford (3) Shake-speare(4) and many more

Is the Marlowe/Shakespeare authorship thesis (also to the younger genration) a total nonsense?
…so that it is advisable for you, not to answer a mentally confused one (as 99 % of all british intellectuals did.

With regards
Bastian Conrad

Bastian Conrad (Prof.emeritus)

Techn.University Munich


(525) B.Griffins Fidessa . An artistic autobiographic Sonett sequence be Marlowe

Short Rationale why B.Griffins Sonnet Sequence "Fidessa" 1596 must have been written by Christopher Marlowe alias Shake-speare alias Barnfield alias Heywood etc

Video.  B.Griffin's Fidessa by Marlowe alias Shakespeare - Duration: 10 minutes.

To enlarge the figure,tip on it.

click video!

(524) Drayton, Shake-speare and the like: pseudonyms of the unique poetical genius Marlowe

Some 30 Arguments (a compilation of 6 videos) why Michael Drayton belongs - analogous to Shakespeare, Chapman, Davies and others - to the multiple pseudonyms of the true poet genius Christopher Marlowe.


Be warned: A demanding complex literary-historical authorship affair!
This video contribution was consciously decelerated by the music. !

...the Video contribution was consciously decelerated by the Music!

(523)Why Marlowe would choose to use so many aliases, why not just stick with 'William Shakespeare' ?

An attempt to give a short answer  to  a significant question, most often asked....

There are compelling reasons to assume that long before Marlowes alleged  death in 1593 , from probably the very early beginnings of his writings, he must have been accustomed and was thus early prepared  to write under false names, i.e. anonymously, pseudonymously, or with unidentifiable initials, under  a state of disguised identity-. He must have wished ( and was forced) to remain and write anonymously for various reason, not the least because of his (too) liberal or radical or progressive thoughts in matters of religion, social issues, ethics  as well as because of his critics on public figures , opinions , books etc. ... He was light years ahead of his time...

To Marlowes early pseudo- or pennames, prior to his official death,  one can safely  count George Wither  (e.g. An ABC for Laymen 1585/ 1588) , 
Nicholas Breton
William Gager (Meleager), 
William Basse ,  
George Puttenham ("The Arte of Poesie" ) and others. -  

 Otherwise, it is literally impossible  to explain why not  a single literary work of Marlowe/Shakespeare was printed prior to his  demise/or Shakespeare's rise  in 1593, in Marlowes/Shakespeares  30th year of life   (one exception:  anonymous Tamburlaine 1590). 

It is unthinkable and can literally be ruled out, that Marlowe/Shakespeare (of the same age!) between 1573 and 1593 have not spoken literally in many ways in their early most creative phase of life.  - 

Consider that average life expectancy was not even 50 at that time., seems virtually  impossible that the literary prolific creativity of the true Shakespeare genius within his first 30 years of life  was zero , and consisted of no diversity of printed  literary genres at all (.See   YouTube contribution - ref 

Probably most people have not the slightest ideas of the dimensions, the  earliness and immensity of Marlowes/ Shakespeares  knowledge, of his power of comprehension,  of his memory capacities, of his unimaginable speed of writing and thinking productivity, his dialogic language abilities or his elocutionary language skills, etc. , i.e. his  overwhelmig creativity....

.....similar to a Musical Genius like Mozart, who wrote his first Piano Concert at the Age of 12.  - KV37 and composed the Great symphony  36 (kv425) on transit within a prolonged weekend 1783  in the austrian City of  Linz, when he and his wife had to interrupt their traveling between Salzburg and Vienna because of  bad wether...

My own experience with such types of Genius is the pianist Kit Armstrong  whom I learnt to know, years ago who speaks 8 languages fluently, who wrote his mathematical  dissertation at the age of 14  who is a fine composer and  highranking world pianist .  I asked him in  a conversation if he was familiar with a fugue composed by Chopin..Since he was not, I showed him the score on an iPad , he memorized the page for a minute and went to the piano and played the piece by heart at Concert Level. ...unimaginable...
At the Elisabethan age crimes that threatened the social order were considered extremely dangerous offenses. They  included not only heresy, but also treason, ( "Marlowes Dutch Libels.) which challenged the legitimate government and crown.. Those convicted of these crimes (or threatened such as Marlowe...he was advised and supported by Cecil to disappear by feigning his death) since by the law they had to expect the harshest punishment.  Execution methods for the most serious crimes were designed to be as gruesome as possible....

Anonymity was necessary in those times, but not easy to achieve and often fraught with.  It required "unlinkability", such that an attacker's examination of the pseudonym holder's message provided no information about the holder's true name or location.

It was by no means primarily the literary anonymity of Marlowe as a poet,  under which  he suffered  from, (he very early on was accustomed to it) but from his  total banishment from society, from court and nobility ( since June 1593) and from his permanent and complete  loss of reputation and identity, from his social isolation, his living in obscurity ....His formal extinction meant that he could never hope for a pardon under an earlier identity.  He felt bound by his oath to William Cecil (See Hamlet Ghost Scene)

His "crime" (treason , rebellion , sedition ) was atoned for by his formal death .... It was rather his reputation murder.....the absolute necessity to exist and remain  incognito in seclusion....he was never to be recognized under any circumstances,

There is virtually no evidence that anyone during his lifetime knew of a poet Shakspere (Stratford), or of the fact that the Stratford person was the poet of Hamlet, Romeo & Julia, or King Lear ...The idea of a fusion ( conflation?) of Shakspere and Shakespeare was explicitly invented or  created  for posterity,a construction of (for) his poetic aftermath ...

The ingenious trick of hiding behind the name of a single living (paid) person (such as Shakspere/Stratford) or deceased persons or invented names (e.g. John Overbury...Michael Drayton George Chap,manetc.)   would have had the consequence,( as soon as somebody started looking for a singular person) of detecting the living person sooner or later....this could only or best be prevented  by a multiplicity of pseudonyms, but also by  various other  ( also ingenious) tricks of multi-pseudonymities, e.g. by double names ( Sir John Davies, or , John Davies of Hereford --- or  John Fletcher or Phineas Fletcher),  by double authors Beaumont&Fletcher...and so on....

Consider, that half of Shakespeares  plays (18) were printed only after his death,and not known before... of the other half 50% were printed anonymously  thus  only a quarter known under shakepeare / shake-speare....
This fact alone indicates the necessity that the recognizability of his person was prevented and had to be prevented by all circumstances!

If all 36 pieces of the First Folio and many more ( attributed to other fictious poets) had been printed under the name of William Shakespeare, there could or would soon have been a growing interest in getting a hunt for this person .... Under no circumstances could that happen ....It would have revealed the plot, the  real conspiracy,....( Stay aware: its not a conspiratory theory...)

Marlowe was considered to be dead, to be extinguished, and precisely at the time of his death (1593) a dramatist mockup Shakspere was created as a new poetical implemention....

There are several impressive literary sources, that later on Marlowe/Shakespeare, after his "Invention" to create a "living pseudonym Shake-speare",  was very dissatisfied with that invention ( e.g.Typographie s.argument 24, Drayton


And there is another quite  different chain of (backward) reasoning or argumentation to answer the  variations of the basic question....

1 Why Marlowe would choose to use so many aliases? 
2 Why not just stick with 'William Shakespeare' ? 
(The sheer number of alleged aliases is unlikely -)
3 Why this huge quantity of pseudonyms ?
4 Was that really necessary for Marlowe?

We only get in the situation to answer the sheer scale of unresolved questions, uninterpretable literary texts (See John Ford as an example.

and inconsistencies of so many contemporary authors ( such as Shakespeare, Basse, Wither, Drayton  Chapman, Heywood, Barnfield, Taylor etc.) regarding the true poetical genius, if we presuppose the assumption of a multple pseudonymity, which alone can resolve the Shakespeare authorship controversy.

More and more Shakespeare experts are now absurdly assuming that Shakespeare wrote in a team with co-authors.

Otherwise, we drown into a swamp of „unscientificness", or myth and stagnation....why a global collective intelligence up to now (>400 years) was not able to reach some progress to resolve  a clearly existent authorship problem?

If somebody has better explanation or a more plausible solution to this nightmare of inconsistencies of a factual problem , we should be delighted to listen to it....

(522) Michael Drayton: A significant Penname of the "true" Shakespeare (Arguments 21-25 Part 5)

  (part 5 Arguments  21 to 25 ) This YouTube contribution continues to argue why Michael Drayton must belong  to the early "poetical pseudonyms" of the "true" Shakespeare (alias Marlowe).

Argument 21    (RA)   Robert Allot  -  Robert Armin
Argument 22    Frederick Fleay
Argument 23    Thomas Vicars
Argument 24    George Wither
Argument 25    Peter Heylin


(521) Michael Drayton: A significant penname of the True Shakespeare (part 4 - Arguments 16-20)

 (part 4 Arguments  16 to 20 ) This YouTube contribution continues to argue why Michael Drayton must belong  to the early "poetical pseudonyms" of the "true" Shakespeare (alias Marlowe).

Argument 16  The Owle
Argument 17  Matilda
Argument 18  Henry Chettle
Argument 19  Wits recreations
Argument 20  John Weever

(520) Michael Drayton: A significant Pen-name of the true Shakespeare! (part 3 / of 6)

(part 3 Arguments  11 to 15) This YouTube contribution continues to argue  why Michael Drayton must belong  to the early "poetical pseudonyms" of the "true" Shakespeare (alias Marlowe).

Argument 11    Sweet Swan of Avon
Argument 12    Drayton is coming out himself
Argument 13    Draytons Marigold
Argument 14    The "obscure" Francis Meres
Argument 15    Payments only to Drayton.

(519) Michael Drayton: A significant Pen-name of the true Shakespeare! (part 2 / of 6)

Part 2 : Arguments 6 to 10.-  This YouTube contribution continues to argue (  why Michael Drayton must belong  to the early "poetical pseudonyms" of the "true" Shakespeare (alias Marlowe).

This YouTube contribution continues to argue (part 2 : Arguments 6 to 10)   why Michael Drayton must belong  to the early "poetical pseudonyms" of the "true" Shakespeare (alias Marlo

Argument 6      Endimion the perpetual sleeper
Argument 7      Drayton meets Shaksper
Argument 8     The scribe of Shakspers will
Argument 9     Shakspers Son in Law
Argument 10   Marginal poets  pseudonyms.

(518) Frank Günther: The Shakespeare Autorship Debate an absurd conspiracy theory! Total Nonsense !

Frank Günther meets most criteria to discredit Non-Stratfordians and their arguments that someone other than William Shakspere of Stratford wrote the works attributed to him.


Frank Günther
On August 12, 2017, the German cultural journalist and freelance author Bernd Noack interviewed the German Shakespeare translator Frank Günther in the Neue Züricher Zeitung (NZZ) on the occasion of the completion of his last translation "Perikles", entitled "The Happiness of the Conquest of the Texts" of his complete translations of all Shakespeare's Plays.I am referring  to 2 questions only

Noack:[Translation]  There is little information about Shakespeare's life, and there is still a doubt that he wrote the huge work of his own. Have you approached him, and perhaps see through Shakespeares game?

Günther:[Translation] The Thesis "Shakespeare did not write Shakespeare" is an absurd conspiracy theory, one of the oldest, there is, and that does not interest me at all. Because it's nonsense.

But Shakespeare is as strange to me today and as far away and unrecognizable as it was. He withdraws completely behind his plays, and that is actually the ideal attitude for an author: He is not at all present. He lets his staff act and construct the conflicts between the characters so that one has the impression that the whole is generated by itself. As in the real world. It is never thought that someone takes an instruction and carries it out, but the characters tell the story itself by talking to each other. That is why the author, the Demiurg, completely disappears behind his texts and persons, and one never gets to know him. Unlike Brecht's: after the second piece, you think you already have a good understanding. Shakespeare, on the other hand, is a fog.

Noack: Is not that frustrating?

Günther: No, not at all. You do not have to worry about biographical nonsense: that's what he wrote for that reason, out of that mood. It is said that the author's life can be read in the plays, and that they can only be understood if one knows what he had in the year for a disease - all this plays no role.!

Why, for Gods sake , Günther hadn't the slightest idea of a need to question his own observations. What may be the reason, that the poet and human being "Shakespeare" is to him as strange and far away and unrecognizable as ever?  Is Shakespeare really retreating behind his plays? Why is William not present ? Why does not Günther get to know Shakespeare? and so on and so on ....

Could not Günthers fatal attitude "without any scientific curiosity"  be related to his total lack of imagination  of an authorship problem?

Original German text
Noack: Über Shakespeares Leben gibt es wenig Informationen, und es bestehen nach wie vor Zweifel daran, dass er das riesige Werk selber geschrieben hat. Sind Sie ihm näher und vielleicht sogar auf die Schliche gekommen?
Günther: Die «Shakespeare schrieb nicht Shakespeare»-Behauptung ist eine absurde Verschwörungstheorie, eine der ältesten, die es gibt, und das interessiert mich überhaupt nicht. Weil's Quatsch ist.
Aber Shakespeare ist mir heute tatsächlich genauso fremd und fern und unerkennbar, wie er es war.
Er zieht sich völlig hinter seine Stücke zurück, und das ist eigentlich die ideale Haltung für einen Autor: Er ist gar nicht vorhanden. Er lässt sein Personal agieren und konstruiert die Konflikte zwischen den Figuren so, dass man den Eindruck hat, das Ganze generiere sich aus sich selbst. Wie in der wirklichen Welt eigentlich. Nie meint man, dass einen da einer belehrend an die Hand nimmt und durchführt, sondern die Figuren erzählen die Geschichte selber, indem sie miteinander reden. Deswegen verschwindet der Autor, der Demiurg, gänzlich hinter seinen Texten und Personen, und man lernt ihn niemals kennen. Anders als etwa bei Brecht: Den meint man nach dem zweiten Stück doch schon gut begriffen zu haben. Shakespeare dagegen ist ein Nebel.

Noack: Ist das nicht frustrierend?
Günther: Nein, überhaupt nicht. Man muss sich nicht um biografischen Unsinn kümmern: Das hat er aus diesem Grund, aus jener Stimmung heraus geschrieben. Man meint ja, das Leben des Autors könne man in den Stücken lesen und diese verstehe man erst, wenn man wisse, was er in dem Jahr für eine Krankheit hatte – das fällt hier alles flach!

(517) Michael Drayton: A significant Pen-name of the true Shakespeare! (Arguments part 1 / of 6)

Early on, the poet Michael Drayton, has  been considered  a pioneer of the  sonneteering  obsession in Elisabethan England, with significant influences  on Shake-speare’s(!) Sonnets.

This YouTube contribution argues  (first 5 Arguments - part 1/of 6) why Michael Drayton must belong  to the early "poetical pseudonyms" of the "true" Shakespeare (alias Marlowe).

Argument 1     The missing Overlap
Argument 2     The Authors Sacrifice
Argument 3     His first Death
Argument 4     Marlowes Gaveston
Argument 5     Eloquent Gaveston