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.
(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.
The "Shakespeare Apocrypha" is a group of several plays and poems printed during Shakespeare's lifetime ....
- Believe it or not!- .....with his name (Shakespeare) printed on the title ...but not accepted today as his works (...generally deemed to be the work of other poets of uncertain origin…
a definite conspiratory situation !!!
2 examples of Plays by Shakespeare
The LONDON PRODIGAL
A YORHSHIRE TRAGREDY
Are we really to believe that a contemporary playwright with the printed name Shakespeare corresponded to a historical fake or conspiracy ?
Can anybody understand why this weird "Shakespeare [Apocrypha] Conspiracy theory" has been separated from the general "Shakespearean Authorship debate" ?
in an interview in Paul Bradshaws "Virals History' " dealt
with the authorship of Shakespeare....
..formulating his opinion on the century old question :
Wood must be seen asthe most impressive prototypical Ignorant
discrediting "a real existing Shakespeare Autorship problem",
using most of the dishonest tricks put together in this video!
MICHAEL WOOD: (2:13 min) " I am fairly brusque with the Shakespeare deniers,its a load of rubbish - to be honest- . There is a couple of things, it raises interesting questions; The key thing is - you know- that it is about what historians do and this debate like all other debates in history is something historians decide and its about sources, and historians construct their images of the past by sources and you [should] start with the primary [contextual] sources that first hand that eywitnesses the documents that close up, you move out to the others depending on what you have got ,
WOOD ...and if you are going to deny that Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare,you deny the primary sources like the Will, so it is rubbish...and nobody of the time thought that and for long after thought that anybody else butShakespeare wrote Shakspeare,
(be aware : thats devious! " see B-Wildenthals VIDEO- below!) it 's 19th century fantasy, and unfortunately it's a conspiracy theory - you know- you have got to look to the recent American election there is still a lot of people to think the moon landing didn't happen, but it is as bonkers as that, behind it lies a kind of ignorance, and the ignorance is about Tudors Society
....So it is Nonsense on a total level,..."
_________________________ Michael W O OD :
a likable but shocking Ignorant on a total Level! What a shame!
Barber: (at min 29:50) "..... shortly after 1594....the name, either the initials W.S. or name Shakespeare started appearing on plays that actually are not his,
that we know aren't his.
So there were 7 plays that are part of the Shakespeare Apocrypha which means that they were at one point attributed to Shakespeare,
we now know for sure (!?) they were not written by Shakespeare
and its very interesting to me that these plays some of which are performed by that company end up beeing published with name or initials of William Shakespeare...it backs up the broker theory "
How - on earth - can Ros Barber be that certain and assert that the plays "The LondonProdigal" or "The Yorkshire Tragedy" were NOT written by Shakespeare.?..
Barber has NOT EVEN defined if she means William from Stratford or the concealed poet genius, the"true Shakespeare" who must have used the name "Shakespeare" as a pseudonym or pen-name, ( her own live stream is arguing for.)
I suspect that Barber has not even noticed which logical error of thinking she accomplished. Let me explain this with a single example:
For quite some time he has been running a YouTube channel where he claims to have found surreptitious allusions embedded in 16th- and 17th-century works revealing that the name "William Shakespeare" was a pseudonym
("I think, this is correct!) , but used by Edward de Vere to write the Shakespeare oeuvre.("I think this is incorrect!"!)
Unfortunately he does not allow comments on his Youtube channel since he doesn't intend ( as he wrote) to spend the rest of his life replying and arguing with impudent trolls. Difficult to understand. It wouldn't be difficult to erase the trolls (within seconds) and keep the reasonable letters and arguments. That's managable! Perhaps there are other reasons: all his articles ask for contradiction. Lately he made again an interesting contribution about the hidden secrets in Francis Meres "Palladis Tamia"1598) a key witness for the Shakespeare authorship debate.
Definition of Chimera (1621) by the "true" Shake-speare
alias Josuah Sylvester
Is Waugh even remotely sure who Francis Meres really was. I wonder what kind of idea he has of how the brain works.-
Does he really believe that a single dubious but congenial
Francis M. put such an obscure highly complex inner construction (a fantasic chimera) on paper whose strange logic 400 years later a single similar congenial Alexander W. is (accidentally?) able to decipher?
Does he really
believe that Meres brain had a mechanism or a deep need to conceal an unidentifiable truth in
such a weird way?
I assume that "Alexander Waugh" would be able to convince us , that it is not accidental that in his own 15 letter name unrecognized hidden meanings are concealed (to name a few - to be found in any anagram generator )
A youtube contribution about
Drayton. Argument
14 ( at 1h 03 min 20 sec) deals with Francis Meres ! Perhaps it is of some
interest for some curious Non-Stratfordian!
Consider that we learn that at Shakespeares times there existed
Two high level
contemporaneous POETS
who published with...
the same name "John Davies!", in
the sameyear "1602" , in
the same City in "London about
the same literary subject matter" (the Soul) ,
"
2 masterpieces of philosophical literature
"NOSCE TE IPSUM". and . „ MIRUM IN MODUM"
________________
Consider that in the "Scourge of Follies" (Date of print not secured , >1610) t
the one John Davies wrote a dedication to the other!
How do you interprete this poem?
_________________
Also note that from Essay 34 in John Davies "Wittes Pilgrimage" (1605) you get (specific biograhical) ideas about his poignant life situation
Essai 34 in Wittes Pilgrimage (1605)
("Marlowes life situation")
Doesn't this situation in 1605 fits better to someone else [e.g. Marlowe who was alive but simultaneously dead] than to an unknown destiny of a certain John Davies?
as Marlowe has in all likelihood done, and writing under pseudonyms of identifiable persons does not occur as seldom, as is usually assumed, but for very different reasons....
...shown here using the example of russian Vladimir Vavilow
An abyss of academic inability of reasoning in humanities
___________________
Without accepting a historical Marlowe/Shakespeare authorship fraud there will be no way to explain and interprete the weird situation of plays explicitly printedas written by Shakespeare during his lifetime, but not included in the "First Folio! 1623
Abizarre and grotesque Situation!! Ultra-orthodox Stratfordian Shakespeare scolars ( e.g.
Oxfrauds) should start to be more interested in good
conspiracy theories!
The London Prodigal (1605)", "A Yorkshire Tragedy (1608)" and Pericles (1609)"
Stunningly these plays were omitted in the First Folio , and amazingly "Pericles" alone later was accepted to be included in the Shakespeare Canon!
The Passionate Pilgrim (1599) is a small anthology—a slim book of 20 short poems, published by William Jaggard and put out under the name “W. Shakespeare.”
————
In reality (click Video) It has been written by the true poet and dramatist genius Marlowe [alias William Shake-speare, ]
alias Griffin, alias Barnfield, alias Deloney, alias Heywood)
.... as inconceivable it may sound !
______________
0
There are serious reasons to argue that in 1599 the "Passionate Pilgrime" has been written by a single author, the true poet and dramatist genius Christopher Marlowe who signed under one of his pseudonyms: —> W.Shakespeare.
-----------------------------
There was no need for Marlowe to reveal the contributions of others of his pennames used in "The Pasionate Pilgrms".
Some brief reflections on those poems of allegedly other poets (Griffin, Barnfield, Deloney, Heywood) disclose a common contextual autobiographical background of the poems as well as the reason why “Shakespeare Academe” for lack of acceptance of a historical authorship problem is not yet ready even to begin
to understand the excess of Shakespeare inconsistencies.
1597
