For centuries, the question of Shakespeare's authorship has puzzled readers, scholars, and researchers.
This blog presents a comprehensive solution:
The Multi-Pseudonymity Theory (MPT).
According to my research, Christopher Marlowe — officially declared dead in 1593 — survived and continued to write under multiple pseudonyms.
The „Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship" Website" (SOF)
( SOF - dedicated to investigating the Shakespeare authorship question and disseminating the evidence that Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford (1550 – 1604), is the true author of the plays and poems published under the pseudonym “William Shakespeare ” )
published a speech of Prof. Don Rubin, York University (Canada) presented at the S O F Conference in Hartford, CT on October 19, 2019, entitled
The new field of Shakespeare. - A Critical Look at the Work of Taylor, Leahy, Florio and de Vere
The talk declares that It will look at both this arguably under-appreciated sea-change in academic attitudes toward the whole authorship question and that John Florio- despite significant francophone support—cannot be discussed as a Shakespeare candidate
Rubins 1min sketch of his own position (concerning Marlowe, starting at 23min 05) was shockingly ignorant and contradictory in that,on the one hand, …."well argued by Marlovian Ros Barber, a „wonderful story“ …. „it has much to explain themes of exile and the appearance of Italy in so many plays“..." many of his students love to argue for Marlowe this way..".
...but, on the other hand, ..."trouble believing it, believing the government would go to such length to protect the life of a supposed political asset at that time, no less cooperate with that person in the secret transportation of a stage play back to England,
....that was literally all he had to say about the Marlowe theory.
The "Shakespeare Authorship Coalition" (—>SAC with "Oxfordian" CEO —> Shahan) and Keir Cutler continue their fight for a "selective" historical truth. For reasons of honesty and truthfulness the Shakespeare Authorship Coalition should rename itself from SAC to SOAC
i.e. from
S hakespeare- A authorship - C oalition
To
...Shakespeare - O xford-Authorship Coalition (SOAC)
with Keir CUTLER
Amazingly, Marlowe - without any justification - does not play a significant role in the authorship debate today.
The video argues in favor of the theory that Christopher Marlowe survived his reported death and continued to write under pseudonyms such as “Shake-Speare” and many more
It presents contextual evidence
supporting Multi-Pseudonymity Authorship —
the idea that the works (traditionally attributed to Shakespeare) were actually written by Marlowe, who continued to produce literary works after his feigned death by using a multiplicity of pen names.
One line may be inspired by George Chapman's translation of the Iliad (late 1608).[9] References to "the coal of fire upon the ice" (I.i) and to squabbles over ownership of channels of water (III.i) could be inspired by Thomas Dekker's description of the freezing of the Thames in 1607–08 and Hugh Myddleton's project to bring water to London by channels in 1608–09 respectively.[10]
THIS VIDEO answers the question: Why Richard B A R N F I E L D (as SHAKESPEARE)
must have been one of the multiple PSEUDONYMS of Christopher Marlowe?
click this VIDEO!
----------------
From a Marlovian perspective Barnfield’s sudden literary silence mirrors that of several “minor” poets around 1598–1600. His style appears derivative yet authoritative, as if he were: either unusually close to the author behind Shakespeare or a mask / outlet for that author
Several features are noteworthy: Barnfield writes like someone already fully trained, not a beginner, His poetry feels less like youthful experimentation than controlled variation,
He emerges exactly when Marlowe “dies” (1593) and vanishes when Shakespeare’s canon stabilizes
This makes Barnfield a prime candidate in the multi-pseudonym theory of MARLOWE
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 autobiographicalcontentsand 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 Heywood, and many others.
For Details click these Video's!
------------------------------------------------
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)
(as Sherlock Holmes') impressiveSpeech related to the Shakespeare Authorship Problem (s.VIDEO)
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 (unfortunately) in
the weaknesses of the (inferior) Oxford Theory compared to the (superior) Marlowe Theory
What a shame!
(Its good parts are in common with that of Marlowe) , but from the beginning he seems to have
overlooked the superiority of the Marlowe theory.
