... 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.„
click 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.-
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. Themethod 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!
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? No....it 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 [ unfortunately recently deceased!] 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 risking „Career 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 (unfortunately deceased in June 2023)
gave a speech on Michael Drayton ,
earlier she had published an interesting article entitled
For 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 ...
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.
Video
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 (TE) witness knew, that Shakespeare was a pseudonym being used by the poeticall 17th Earl of Oxford (Edward de Vere)".
As the decisive piece of evidence
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?"
"...my 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?
