Share this information

Share this information

(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!

(586) The Oxfrauds and their inner dichotomy towards the Marlowe candidacy

Marlowe‘s could be a very strong case

Oxfraudians unfortunately handed over their common sense to the cloakroom of the authorship theater...
The Oxfraud community (with about 250 members) states on their Website that they launched the site, five years ago to a chorus of jeers from Oxfordians everywhere, many of whom wrote to them explaining their insignificance and pointing out that they would be swamped by the onslaught of the new ‘post-stratfordian' paradigm. 

With an inner joy they express that they „survived that onslaught, and every other one since including The Stritmatterian Big Fist, the Declaration of Reasonable Unreason, the Wavian Teflon Fortress“ and here they „are still doing business.“

... and „the business end of this argument would {now} be over and Oxfordians rarely would now emerge in public.“
You learn ...

A) about 102 reasons to dismiss Oxford's candidacy. You learn that since the group first launched the site, the big (authorship) questions have been getting smaller. They ask themselves („strangely!“) „why there is anyone left at all believing in alternative authorship, is the biggest question today .“..but stunningly they also state ....

B) that „there are better candidates ...and alternative candidates.... Most of them better than the Earl of Oxford. „. A heavily commented part of the site.

Christopher Marlowe

Strangely enough you find a chapter about Christopher Marlowe's candidacy …claiming that it „has a great deal going for it“.... You learn from Oxfrauds website:

There would be {only} one major hurdle to overcome. If De Vere was dead before a third of the {Shakespeare} plays were written, Marlowe was dead before almost any {? None!} of them were written. Marlowe died in a pub { ? was „a house“, owned by Eleanor Bull .....) in Deptford on 30 May 1593 There was a body, there were witnesses, there was an inquest, there were 16 jurors, there was a verdict and there was a funeral.{ everything discovered not even 100 years ago}„

„However, the historical sleight of hand required to turn the man from Canterbury into the man from Stratford {would be} only a fraction of what is needed to turn the 17th Earl into Shakespeare. And Marlovians are up to the task. They have an explanation for the witnesses, an alternative body and a host of reasons why Marlowe would want to play dead and could have pulled off a fake killing successfully. 

You read..“..If Marlowe didn't die in 1593 and became Shakespeare then there is no need for the preposterous Oxfordian redating scheme. The plays, say Marlovians, were written and performed in an order which follows the rules of history, scholarship and common sense....“

...the rules of Common Sense:    Formulated and written by Oxfraud !

Unlike Oxford, Marlowe was a 
gifted writer,
a pioneering playwright,
a superb poet and 
a consummate craftsman.
Stylometry even places his vocabulary nearest to the vocabulary used in the canon (Oxford's is out by from here to Venus).

Unlike Oxford, Marlowe was a commoner, a rare visitor to court with no rights or personal experience of courtoisie and matters of detailed hierarchy. His English history plays show shortcomings in knowledge of the court that are 

almost identical to the gaps in Shakespeare's knowledge.

Unlike Oxford, Marlowe was a graduate—an intellectual even. The so-called 'missing academic hinterland' 
need not be improvised from fable as the evidence is all solid.

Unlike Oxford, there are plausible reasons for the switch with 

no need for feeble pseudonymy or 
the invention of claptrap like 'the stigma of print'.

Unlike Oxford, the use of a pseudonym in the publication of —>Venus and Adonis 

supports the argument instead of blasting it to smithereens.

Unlike Oxford, the cover up as Marlowe assumed his new identity in a milieu which already knew him as Marlowe
does not require the incredible invention of a second Shakespeare 
to explain away topical references. 

Original Oxfraud text:

"If only Will had made zero impact before the publication of —>Venus and Adonis (a fantastic nonsense!) Marlowe's could be a very strong case."

(585) DOUBLE DUMMY : Oxfraud / Shakefraud! The Questionability of the Shakespeare Authorship issue.

From the worlds most gigantic „writer“ 
   naming  himself „SHAKE-SPEARE“
never a („hand“)written single sentence has ever been discovered.That‘s...

the most Incredible Grotesque:
The world's greatest literary and playwright genius of all time,
 who during his entire lifetime (... especially in his 25 years in London)  never communicated (by any note, sentence or letter) with any publicly known person....

Stunningly, that does not need an explanation for the impressive & bizarre „Battle Troop“ (...fighting for „William“ from Stratford) ...called the

With their admirable perseverance for the absolute 
„Unimaginable“ of a (double) Shakespeare
Authorship falsehood !
Believe it or not! There did exist a „William Shakspeare“  from Stratford. 
But he was no poet and playwright  genius!
He was taken as a protective „Dummy“, a pseudonym ! (for deadly threatened Christopher Marlowe
accused  of Treason & Heresy)

That‘s the even more remarkable

(584) The Shakespeare authorship issue.- Who can still believe that?

A highly interested  Marlowian Roland Lenz from near Fulda  (Hesse) wrote me a letter proposing, we should take a much more provocative (aggressive) attitude towards the Shakespeare/Marlowe authorship issue.....

William Shakespeare has been found! 

The greatest stage writer in the world was, of course, the most talented person of his time or maybe of all time? However, he is said to have taken the blank verse from Christopher Marlowe. Two geniuses born in the same year and one copying from the other, so to speak? 

Who can still believe that?

, one Poet genius (W.S.) appears on the literary stage when the other (C.M.) has just died! He died in a knife fight in 1593 because of a bill to pay for food and drinks among friends! 

Who can still believe that?

In 1599 Christopher Marlowe enrolled in the seminary in Valladolid and in 1602 the head of this seminar reported to the Crown Council in London that he had noticed a Christopher Marlor (aka Matthew) and that he was planning to go to London. 

Who can still believe that?

 In 1604, after his release from a London prison, Christopher Marlowe was issued an invoice for his 7-week prison sentence, which, however, was sent directly to the head of the Crown Council, Robert Cecil! 

Who can still believe that?

By the way, Christopher Marlowe studied in Cambridge at the same time as Robert Cecil - who eventually became the second most powerful man in England after Jakob I.

 Who can still believe that?

Aren't creative people always looking for stories like this? 
I believe in it! Doesn't that provide material for an incredible documentary that the “Shakespeare Authorship Question” cries out for ??? 

Best regards
Roland Lenz

(583) Everyone is tired of Fake (Shakespeare) News

In 2018, I sent an open letter to SOF as a test balloon, so to speak, without expecting an answer to follow....
Open letter 2018 to SOF
Open letter to the president of SOF

I am a Marlowian – 
I’m asking for your assistance in new, concentrated efforts. While we have the facts about Marlowe being the most plausible author behind the alias Shakespeare, as we know from current times, facts are not enough! Facts can be ignored or simply dismissed if they present a threat to current belief. There is much money at stake and reputations are threatened when we challenge the traditional myth that the author was William Shakspere of Stratford-upon-Avon. The best evidence indicates that the real author was Christopher Marlowe .  This claim impacts the validity of doctorates and biographies of so many Shakespearean “experts.”
Shakespeare plays are presented every day in every country in the world. Many plays, movies, symphonies, and operas are based on his writings. His writings impact our daily speech. Yet, the majority of the world doesn’t know his real biography. That by itself should lead to a renewal of interpretation of his works. There are many allusions that were topical to personalities of his time. To investigate these allusions would create a new Shakespeare Renaissance. People should be interested in the truth.
Yet, Marlowians are ignored by almost all of Academia, the press and the population at large. Nobody seems to care. Marlowians are treated like an irrelevant fringe cult! They are even more untouchable than Oxfordians Untouchable! Very few in academia will admit to even reading evidence about Marlowe:
• They ignored the seminal discovery by Leslie Hotson in 1925 or Calvin Hofmann 1955 etc etc-
• They ignore the 2007 Shakespeare Authorship Coalition’s “Declaration of Reasonable Doubt about the Identity of William Shakespeare,”which has been signed by over four thousand people now, including many Marlowians.
• They ignore Richard Roe’s 2010 book, The Shakespeare Guide to Italy, which demonstrates that the author traveled to Venice, Padua, Verona, Florence, and other places where the Shakespeare plays take place. We can deduce that Marlowe visited at least 8 times Italy ,( as early as 1574 as page boy for 10 months) but there is no evidence that Shakspere of Stratford ever left England.
• They ignore Samuel Blumenfelds and Daryl Pinksen biographies of Marlowe ( and several others) 2008, , in which (auto) biographical aspects of Marlowe are heavily represented.
And the list of Marlowian books goes on and on. All ignored!
Stratfordians claim that Shakespeare was a GENIUS who had an outstanding imagination and therefore the plays do not reflect his life. Absurd! Everyone’s work—in literature, painting, music, science—reflects one’s experience, education and travel.
Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon is not known to have had ANY education, and his parents, wife and children were illiterate. His will shows that he did not own any books at all, not even a family bible, or copies of Shakespeare’s plays or poems that had been printed at that time. Neither he nor his family ever claimed that he was a writer (there is no evidence that he ever even wrote a letter!), never mind the author of some spectacular poems and plays. Many of the sources of the plays were available only in foreign languages—like Italian, French, Greek, and Latin. How could he read them? Marlowe, we know, was fluent in at least 8 languages and had access to these sources. Marlowe was praised by many of his contemporaries as the best writers of his time, but one whose “identity and name ” had to be concealed throughout his long life. ,” as stated in a book published in 2016 (5th edition) ! Was it an open secret? Remarkably, 7 plays (printed with his name only after his presumed death) have survived but many others have been printed also under a series pseudonyms (Such as Drayton, Wither, Breton Barnfield, Basse and many more)
When anyone with an inquiring mind wishes to investigate the authorship question, they will turn to what the “experts” have to say. The “experts” are the professors of the leading universities, Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Stanford, etc. Yet these “experts” refuse to discuss the matter. The famous Shakespearean actors, Sir Derek Jacobi and Sir Mark Rylance, have been ignored and ridiculed in England by Academic professors for questioning the Shakespeare Authorship. An astrophysics professor at Stanford, Peter Sturrock, who wrote AKA Shakespeare: a Scientific Approach to the Authorship Question, has great difficulty in getting English professors to respond to his inquiries. One of his rare responses was, “You will never get me to believe that the works of Shakespeare were not written by the man from Stratford.” This is a Catch-22. It reminds me of the story that Galileo, having been the first to see the moons of Jupiter through his telescope, invited a math professor to take a look through the telescope; the professor declined because, he said, he knew there was nothing to see. “Experts” like these quash all inquiry and discussion, the opposite of what a University is supposed to foster.
A new documentary by Michael Rubbo , Much ado about something , is long out and discusses FACTS about Marlowe. Marlowians need contacts in the media that will interview them. We are initiating Podcasts on the SAQ.
This is what Marlowians need you to do:
1. Forward this to all your friends, family, colleagues, or anyone who you think might be interested in this dramatic cover-up.
2. . Ask your friends and family to join the Marlowe authorship thesis, and if possible, spread the strongest arguments.
3. If you know anyone in the media (TV, radio, cable, local paper, local access channel) contact them, send them a personal note and a copy of this email. Have them interview you. We will join you if possible, and if not, send you marketing material.
4. If you don’t know how to do it, have your kid or grandkid post this on all social media: Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. Have them create a hashtag such as #TheRealShakespeare or #400YearOldHoax.
5. Spread the word through your personal network: friends, civic clubs, community centers, etc. You’d be surprised how people that don’t know much about Shakespeare become riveted by this story.
6. Link the Marlowe website and youtube to your online posts.
7. Let us know if you can get the mikr Rubbo documentary screened anywhere.
Please share the Marlowe/Shakespeare video on you tube with your friends. They are suited in spreading the complex facts ! They are educational and fun.
Marlowians have been too nice and respectful, trying not to offend the Oxfordians . And the Strats continue to get away with their malarkey! It’s time for our voices to be heard!
Marlowian by far have the best cards.. It had to be Christopher Marlowe! — get used to it!
No more “fake news”! We need to educate the world about the complex truth of a fascinating real literary historical conspiracy story 
I look forward to your support
Bastian Conrad
Munich Bavaria