(171) True Shakespeare's (Marlowe”s) full parodic Epitaph on himself as the deadly wounded (and healed) hart...

 FULL PARODIC EPITAPH

Shakespeare’s metaphors of Holofernes and the wounded Hart 

1] Emblems out of Henry Peacham's Minerva Britannia (1612)  and George   Withers "A collection of Emblems (1634)

In Shakespeare's early play "→Love's Labour's Lost [LLL]" (Act IV/2-1594/95?) )  "Holofernes" asks the curate Nathaniel, whether he will  listen to "an extemporal Epitaph on the death of a deer, to humour the ignorant(...) called  the deer, the princess killed, a pricket",

 
The metaphorical epitaph is about the hunt for a deer*1] by means of wordplays with double meanings of "pricket" and "sore", and verbal tricks of changing word meanings by adding single letters ... sore -> soreL. 

After the deer was shot, a letter "L" was quickly added to the Sore, and out of the thicket sprang a Sorel, ...  it exemplifies the principle how the princess [the Queen as Judith] and the author [beheaded Marlowe/Shakespeare as Holofernes] solved her serious [Identity] problem  [by adding an "E" to Shak[e]speare —>  the Stratford-man became the Poet-Genius]

There can be little doubt that the Epitaph in LLL  reveals a hidden autobiographical background of the author.

—-

Why did Shake-speare experts never feel the need to try to decipher the Metapher of the Epitaph?

`

—————————

VIDEOS – Complete Video Archive:

CLICK. —> https://www.youtube.com/@bastianconrad2550

OPEN  —>   Heading-->  Home -->Videos -- Shorts  -- Posts

                                                                   ->Popular

(170) Ignoring the Shakespeare Authorship Problem is against all principles and purposes of Academia - 3000 signatures soon

> 5700  SIGNATURES  of educated people 

who openly and firmly stand in their doubts. 

The issue of who was William Shakespeare is widely viewed as settled in Academia and is treated as a religious taboo subject. 

The Web Site  →Shakespeare Authorship Coalition (SAC)  has reached more than 5ooo  signatures of educated people  who openly and firmly stand in their doubts that the Stratford man William Shakspere ("Will of the records") cannot possibly  have been identical with William Shakespeare ("Will of the works")

-------------------------------

It is against all principles and purposes of Academia (as the community of students and scholars engaged in higher Education and Research) to deny or resist the existence and exploration of a very real Shakespeare Authorship Problem!

(169) The discourtesy of 3 Presidents (Academics)..following Frank Günther's strategy: "Do not even ignore them"...

DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS

 [ ...the Non- or Anti-Stratfordians] Do not even ignore them,

----------------------------------------------------

The →Deutsche Shakespeare-Gesellschaft (DSG, German Shakespeare Society), founded April 23 1864 on the occasion of Shakespeare's 300th birthday, is one of the world's oldest literary associations.  The Society holds annual conferences and edits →the Shakespeare-Yearbook, with an annual section of Book Reviews related to Shakespeare.

In 2009, 2011 and 2014, I allowed myself to write a letter to the actual Presidents of the DSG, sending the thesis or the book "→The True Shakespeare: Christopher Marlowe" and asking for a  critical review of the book in the corresponding Review section of the Yearbook book.

In his recent book "Our Shakespeare (2014)" Frank Günther (currently best known German Shakespeare translator) gave 

general advice against Non-Stratfordians: Do not even ignore them!- 

(s.→Blog 116). He wrote

Translation: Do not feed the trolls. Do not even ignore them, when the Anti-Shakespeareans knock loudly at the door, seeing themselves as heroic Davids against Goliath and when they call "on an equal footing" for a debate about "Nonsense".(Don't feed the troll !" 


This seems to correspond  perfectly to the strategy of all 3 past presidents:  None of them ever replied to  the  letters  (asking for a critical Review of the book).

VIDEOS – Complete Video Archive:

CLICK. —> https://www.youtube.com/@bastianconrad2550

OPEN  —>   Heading-->  Home -->Videos -- Shorts  -- Posts

                                                                   ->Popular

(168) Ultimately the Earl of Oxford will not be the final solution to the "authorship problem"

Shakespeare- Authorship: 

There must be something truer than the true Edward de Vere! 

Independent filmmaker →Cheryl Eagan-Donovan Boston, MA produced  a →documentary entitled 

"NOTHING IS TRUER THAN TRUTH,"

based on Mark Andersons  book

                  

  →SHAKESPEARE BY ANOTHER NAME. ↓↓

The documentary film is about the presently best known Shakespeare candidate Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford. It deals on locations in Venice and other places in Italy and France, De Vere visited. 

The film includes interviews with renowned Shakespeare scholars and actors including Sir Derek Jacobi and Mark Rylance, See the Trailer below: „NOTHING IS TRUER THAN TRUTH“

In a decade of own reflection and search for the true author of the works attributed to William Shakespeare, there was 

never any doubt that the Stratford man cannot possibly have been 

the poet genius of "Hamlet" or "Romeo and Juliet". 

But due to the growing wealth of arguments, I gradually had to change my convictions: there is something truer than Edward de Vere…and - taken all facts, arguments and considerations together - that 

the Earl of Oxford will never be the final solution to the "authorship problem".

It must have been somebody else: Christopher Marlowe: for lifesaving, his death had to be feigned 1593, and he was forced to change identity and name permanently writing subsequently under many alias names or pseudonyms including Shake-speare. He spent his life up to 5-6 times in Italy.

Nothing is Truer than Truth    (Trailer).

————————-

VIDEOS – Complete Video Archive:

CLICK. —> https://www.youtube.com/@bastianconrad2550

OPEN  —>   Heading-->  Home -->Videos -- Shorts  -- Posts

                                                                   ->Popular

---

(167) Dennis Rawlins: Before you enter the Shakespeare Authorship Theater leave your brain at the cloakroom. (2)

D E N N I S    R A W L I N S  (5)

Rawlins inescapable conclusion  

 "Park-Your-Brains-at-the-door Dullard ")

__________________________

In a landmark scientific article in DIO "The 

International Journal of Scientific History Vol.18, March 7, 2014"
                                      in →DIO    "click Bard-Beard  Who wrote Shakespeare?"

——>= http://www.dioi.org/ji00.pdf. 

  Dennis Rawlins (U.S. astronomer, historian and author)  dealt with the centuries-old literary-historical problems of Shakespeare's authorship. He comes to the

 → inescapable conclusion  

that Marlowe (as the author of the works) is clearly

 superior to all other candidates. He writes:

 "   Among the serious candidates, he alone Has the Crucial attributes and distinctive features of Shakespeare's, Which We now list:(D10) He is the only one for which there are compelling reasons for hiding forever in anonymity

(D11) The track record of his writing plays is very much like  William Shakespeare's

(D12) There are no "timeline" problems - a neat Marlowe-Shakespeare bridge let instead-   in contrast to the chronology difficulties of Stratfordians and Oxfordians.

(D13) Marlowe was as lowborn as Shakespeare among the major parties to the controversy,  Marlovians alone cannot sanely be deemed elitist

(D14) The  "Star Chamber" was pushing Marlowe towards a swift and desperate singular choice  between torture-death or escape back into an alias-anonymity that was not entirely new to one who was already part of the spy ring

(D15)the preferability of a simple, plausible, predictive and unifying theory which solves the Shakespeare case's many outstanding mysteries 
(D16) Marlowe possessed all the connections and definitely the motifs, to escape the imminent torture-death. In escaping he became Shakespeare just as maturely as his former self.

D16" Argument alone indicates (in addition to countless similar arguments ... just think of Shakespeare's will) that Shakespeare academic experts were forced early to leave their mind at the cloakroom of the Shakespeare authorship problem or largely to dispense with him. (Rawlins: "Park-Your-Brains-at-the-door Dullard ")

VIDEOS – Complete Video Archive:

CLICK. —> https://www.youtube.com/@bastianconrad2550

OPEN  —>   Heading-->  Home -->Videos -- Shorts  -- Posts

                                                                   ->Popular

(166) Dennis Rawlins: before you enter the Shakespeare Authorship Theater leave your brain at the cloakroom. (1)

DENNIS  R A W L I N S  (4)

Groundbreaking article 

 "Bard Beard, Who wrote Shakespeare's Plays.

__________________

In a groundbraking article  "Bard Beard, Who wrote Shakespeare's Plays?" (The  International Journal of Scientific History Vol.18, 7. März 2014 ), 
                                                in →DIO (click Bard Beard! Who wrote Shakespeare?) 

                                                —->      http://www.dioi.org/ji00.pdf.  <~~

Dennis Rawlins (U.S. astronomer, historian and author) dealt with the literary-historical problem of Shakespeare's authorship, seemingly unsolvable.  In Section-D, he summarized the reasons why  - in the public eye- academic science has distorted the real problem beyond recognition by raising it to religion in an "a priori" mentality. 

Some of Dennis Rawlins thoughts in Section D (from D1-D16):


1) (D2) Essential Marlowe documents appeared only long after a religious cult status for Shakespeare had been "cemented" ... 
2) (D3) Subsequent departure from Will of the records (Shakspere from Stratford), a "money-cow" brand name,  would have been too costly and led to chaos.
3) (D4) English  Academic profs have not wished Marlowe's suspected lifestyle (eg atheism, homosexuality, informants, etc.) to attach  to  Will of the works, (the author of Hamlet.  )
4) (D5) English literary Academic profs would never admit that they had been taken in by a centuries-old deception (that Marlowe's person is embedded in Shakespeare's works), 

?5) (D7) Almost 100% of the academic Shakespeare experts neither heard of it, would never write about or conduct research nor a centrist book or a newspaper would even take one line of type to tell its readers about the "absolute" impossibility that a Shakespeare in his 30. year of life exactly appeared   "on" the literary Scene, when   Marlowe in his 30. year of  "life literary "disappeared, and that both  never met or did  overlap  a single day  with their  literary output!"

6) D7" Argument alone indicates (in addition to countless similar arguments ... just think of Shakespeare's will) that Shakespeare academic experts were forced early to leave their mind at the cloakroom of the Shakespeare authorship problem or largely to dispense with him.

 (Rawlins: "Park-Your-Brains-at-the-door Dullard ")

The unifying  →Marlowe theory solves the Shakespeare case's outstanding mysteries 

Shakespeare academics haven't ever solved.

(165) Alexander Waugh got furious with Stratfordian Eng-Lit Academics and their absolute "Anti-truth Panorama"....

ALEXANDER   W A U G H (2)

(1963 - 2024)

got furious with Stratfordian Eng-Lit Academics 

Waugh: All [children] go to school and they are not taught that there is serious doubt  about the authorship of Shakespeare. We pay taxpayers money for those people who want to put it down to real grubby taunt (?)-...

On April 30th, 2014 there was a debate: "→Does the Authorship Question Matter?" at Ye Olde Cock Tavern, Fleet Street, London, organised by the →Central London Debating Society,  [Chair: Alain English. Speakers: Professor William Leahy, Dr. Rosalind Barber, Alexander Waugh, Professor Emeritus Alan Nelson, Dr. Duncan Salkeld.]

Alexander Waugh 

→Alexander Waugh  (at 26min: 22 sec) got infuriated and exploded in anger about the "absolutely Anti-truth Panorama" of Engl-lit Academics....

Transcript section (26'22'')
The authorship...It’s important, we all have children, we all have grandchildren, and it's absolute nonsense, they all go to school and they are not taught that there is serious doubt about the authorship of Shakespeare. We pay taxpayer’s money for those people who want to put it down to real grubby taunt(?), we pay taxpayer's money to educate our children, we pay taxpayer’s money to the universities in order that little close circles of mainly eng-lit academics to consider round in an absolutely Anti-Truth panorama which is known as Peer Review bill mark each other’s essays   ...they actually bother to read anything else, they don’t really know how the evidence is, these guys here, I have never seen in all the Shakespeare arguments, I have never seen a Stratfordian explain to me why ..... When it’s referred to a writer it means not proceeding from the origins reputed origin......what they do, they sweep it under the carpet and….pay money actually to concentrate on this matter to think about   in   …what..they are doing is blocking any possibility of proper debate...

---

-------------------------------------------

VIDEOS – Complete Video Archive:

CLICK. —> https://www.youtube.com/@bastianconrad2550

OPEN  —>   Heading-->  Home -->Videos -- Shorts  -- Posts

                                                                   ->Popular

(164) "Agnostic Shakespearean": Will Self finds the Marlovian totally unconvincing

R O S   B A R B E R  (3)

T they invited Will Self, who  confessed his complete ignorance on Marlowe?

May 29th 2012, on the occasion of an official launch event of her new  novel in verse "The Marlowe Papers, author Ros Barber Ph.D. spoke  along with Shakespearean scholar Prof. Bill Leahy  and writer Will Self in the British Library  (listen to the  Video below) 

In Barbers fiction  book, playwright Christopher Marlowe is revealed as the true author of Shakespeare's plays. 

In a general discussion about the Marlowe /Shakespeare Theory  Prof.Bill Leahy pointed out:
"The academic class have – if you like-  owned Shakespeare, let’s say, for the last 60 years or whatever, and may be that the Shakespeare authorship question that people are interested in , are a marker of the change that is  happening  (- that is to say-) a lot of independent scholars, non academics are (in a way –if you like-) challenging academic knowledge and in many ways are typicall for what’s going on in our society and that the traditional figures of authority are much more readily challenged whether that’s a doctor, wether that’s a policeman, wether that’s an academic, and perhaps the part of reason for academics getting so worked up about the Shakespeare authorship question is that they feel challenged – if you like – they loosing ownership of something they regard as theirs…"

Will Self
(who wanted to know how many in  the audience  were doubters of the Shakespeare's autorship) took an inofficial vote by handlifting. At least half of the audience were  doubters! Self early declared, that  he finds the "Marlovian totally unconvincing", 

Self's judgment sounds  preposterous since he replied to Leahy's first Question: Is this  a different Marlowe [Ros Barber's] to the Marlowe, you thought you know? .....
I didn't know Marlowe at all , I don't think anybody does, i think he is a late 16th century writer, i mean in what sense  can you know him...

   

               Ros Barber                                             Bill Leahy                                            Will Self

                                The Marlowe Papers - Shakespeare, Authorship & Identity

(162)Video Debate: Does the Shakespeare authorship matter?(part 2) Alexander Waugh ...a wishful thinking Gentleman??

ALEXANDER  W A U G H (1)

The REMARKABLE    L O O P H O L E 

 of  "one per cent uncertainty"

 of Edward de Vere being the true Shakespeare. Who is mister 1%?

On April 30th, 2014 there was a debate: "→Does the Authorship Question Matter?" at Ye Olde Cock Tavern, Fleet Street, London, organised by the →Central London Debating Society,  [
Chair:                                 Alain English. 
Speakers: Professor           William Leahy,
                                           Dr Rosalind Barber, 
                                            Alexander Waugh, 
                                            Alan Nelson, 
                                            Dr Duncan Salkeld.] 

→Alexander Waugh  (at 27min: 39 sec) took the initiative to a question from the audience: When all this with Shakespeare did kick-off (during?) all the hundred years ... that he (wrote/didn't write?) the plays.
Waugh gave examples that it already kicked off in the lifetime of Shakspere and he reiterated his  →published opinion on an early literary mentioning of Shakespeare together with the Earl of Oxford. He literally said in the debate:

" We have in 1595 a man called William Covell who identifies Edward de Vere (…) as Shakespeare by using a footnote, Shakespeare next to the words „Our de Vere“ ...

In Waugh's Statement, just about everything seems to go fatally wrong!- 

Waugh refers to the writing →"Polimanteia"(1595-page 44/45 ) by an author identifying himself only with the initials W.C.

1) It is almost certain, that W.C. was a pseudonym, and more likely that the author (Pseudo)Name was William Clarke, specifically characterized in John Davies "The Scourge of Folly" in →Epigram 143.

2) It is by no means a footnote but a →Marginalia (see Faksimile above)  adding some important information to the content of the text, dealing with the works  1594 of →Daniel( Delia, Rosamond, Cleopatra - Matilda), highly likely to be a pseudonym. ( →Ref.)

3) The information of the Marginalia most likely is about the author of "Lucrece"(1594), sweet Shakespeare who has to be associated with "Eloquent Gaveston" (see Faksimile), and thus with Marlowe's "Edward II"(1594) and   →Drayton's "The legend of Piers Gaveston"(1594) of the same year.

4) There is no association whatsoever to Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford, but to the University of Oxford. (Oxfordian Hank →Whittemore copied this error -Blog.80) 

Polimanteia deals with the metaphor of the 3 daughters (the Universities Cambridge, Oxford and The London Lincoln Inn) written by mother England (!...take upon me Englands person and speak like a Commonwealth,   the hidden Author - Guess who!)

5) How was it possible, that Alexander Waugh reads as an anagram "Our de Vere" (see Faksimile). It must be seen as ludicrous wishful thinking.  

Waugh, Honorary President of →SAC ("Oxfordian"), declared at that debate: I am 100% certain that Shakespeare didn't write it and  I am 99% certain who did it.

...what about the remarkable loophole of  1%

Who was Mister One per cent??

(160) Bill Leahy's sad lack of imagination for Marlowe as the true Shakespeare

THE S H A K E S P E A R E  A U T H O R S H I P 

 Does   it  matter ?   (part 1) 

There is nothing in front of  Prof. Leahy, what's going to happen,  He got stuck in the mud of his multi-author idea ....No imagination for a possible multi-pseudonymity"...what a shame

On April 30th, 2014 there was a debate: "→Does the Authorship Question Matter?" at Ye Olde Cock Tavern, Fleet Street, London, organised by the Central London Debating Society,  [Chair: Alain English. Speakers: Professor William Leahy, Dr Rosalind Barber, Alexander Waugh, Professor Emeritus Alan Nelson, Dr Duncan Salkeld.]

Prof.William Leahy (Brunel University, London) when asked about the conclusive evidence ("Smoking gun") for the authorship, answered literally...

The "Smoking gun" is not going to happen as a new piece of evidence that convinces everybody that it was Marlowe, who wrote this. This is not going to happen! There is something very attractive about that and that draws us all to that idea and I think sometimes it gives rises to us wanting it to be another single author, but that's not going to happen.....we have to deal with what's in front of us...

What a shame that there is nothing in front of  Prof. Leahy, what's going to happen, except his total lack of imagination (or knowledge ? →  1,  →  2 ), it seems to entice him to such a  statement.  It leads nowhere!

Leahy did never even dare to favorize  an alternative author – neither Oxford, Bacon, Marlowe or whoever. 

LEAHY  got stuck in the mud of his multi-author

(or GROUP-) Theory...

---

.

___________________________.

VIDEOS – Complete Video Archive:

CLICK. —> https://www.youtube.com/@bastianconrad2550

OPEN  —>   Heading-->  Home -->Videos -- Shorts  -- Posts

                                                                   ->Popular