Is it really only Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford whose life matches the historical and literary evidence in all repects ?
Not to be confused (but almost identical ) with the Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship, a non-profit educational foundation established in 2013 comprising two organizations formerly known as the Shakespeare Fellowship and the Shakespeare Oxford Society.
|
The first 2 of the last 3 paragraphs of „The Welcome Page“ of the Britsh De Vere Society (DVS) in 2014 concluded , correctly as far as I can see :
1) Academics have never found a single document which proves that Shakspere was an author - from the contemporary documents that have been discovered all we know about the man's interests is that he conducted a number of business transactions which included a small share in the Globe Theatre. Six ineptly penned signatures are the only examples we have of his [in]abilities as a writer - there are no letters home to his wife and there are certainly no original literary manuscripts.
2) As doubts about the apparent chasm between Shaksper's known life and the works of Shakespeare grew, people naturally asked the question,
"Well if Shakspere wasn't the author, then who was?"
And over the last hundred years or so many candidates - from Marlowe to Bacon and the Earl of Derby - have been proposed and championed by ardent followers.
But the last paragraph leaves us helpless....
3)Today, 400 years after his death, there is only one serious candidate left in the field, only one man whose life matches the historical and literary evidence in all repects - Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford.
How such a bizarre conclusion could be developed,
