Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth, and Hamlet, do they sound familiar? Most people have heard of these plays and know them to be part of the greatest body of literature in the English language. The name William Shakespeare graces these imaginative pieces of art yet there is still dispute over the authorship . According to CSI’s Joe Nickell, “anti stratfordians [are] mostly non-academics and…‘pseudo-scholars’”(Nickel 1). With passing trends and fads, it’s clear who the real shakespeare is. Although there have been claims over the past centuries, the true writer of the plays is Shakespeare because the rest of the candidates lack in certain areas and do not have any coherent theories with enough proof to support them either. William Shakespeare was born
…show more content…
Shakespeare was familiar with the roses of the time, eglantine, burnet rose, and dog rose, of which appear in his play A Midsummer night’s dream (Daily Mail 3). In King Lear, the king’s “crown of weeds” contained fumitory, burdocks, nettles, darnek, and thistles (Daily Mail 2). He had also planted a mulberry tree in his garden which also made an appearance in A Midsummer’s night dream. In Richard II, he compares the state of the nation to a neglected garden. Yet another botany reference. His daughter had also married a doctor, of which shakespeare was acquainted with and the subject of potions appeared in Macbeth, A Midsummer’s night dream, and Romeo and Juliet. Another piece of evidence pointing to the authorship of his plays is Ben Jonson and John Webster’s commentaries on him and his plays (Pruitt 2). In the commentaries, they directly refer to him and his company. Another undeniable fact is the use of slang in his works. Would an aristocrat have been able to reproduce the talks of the streets? (Wheeler 1). Unlikely. Could a commoner that lives in an era of performing for royalty mimic the …show more content…
The current earl also funds this movement and tries to give evidence to a weak and paltry case. De Vere is missing in multiple areas. The first of which is the fact that the earl was a flamboyant (Editors 3)and egotistical (Wheeler 2) figure. Somebody with that personality is unlikely to publish masterpieces and put them under the name of a “commoner”. Another false claim is that there was stigma towards writing poems and plays. There is no document describing this and De Vere, King James, and Queen Elizabeth all published their own poetry (Wheeler 2). This makes it unlikely that Edward would write poems with no style similarity to an underground venture. If he did, he would at least hint to it. Edward De Vere also leased Blackfriars Theater (Delahoyde ). Why would someone not only write plays for someone else to use, but also give away profit to another theater. This in conjunction with his personality creates an air of confusion. There’s also some trivial information that conspiracists have used. They say that de Vere’s crest was a lion shaking a spear. William Shakespeare’s crest was a rooster shaking a spear (Wheeler 2). They say there are biblical passages in Shakespeare’s plays that are underlined in De Vere’s bible (Wheeler 2). That’s a double edged sword as De Vere only has a few of the quotes used. Pointing to political commentary as a reason is grasping at straws
Shakespeare was familiar with the roses of the time, eglantine, burnet rose, and dog rose, of which appear in his play A Midsummer night’s dream (Daily Mail 3). In King Lear, the king’s “crown of weeds” contained fumitory, burdocks, nettles, darnek, and thistles (Daily Mail 2). He had also planted a mulberry tree in his garden which also made an appearance in A Midsummer’s night dream. In Richard II, he compares the state of the nation to a neglected garden. Yet another botany reference. His daughter had also married a doctor, of which shakespeare was acquainted with and the subject of potions appeared in Macbeth, A Midsummer’s night dream, and Romeo and Juliet. Another piece of evidence pointing to the authorship of his plays is Ben Jonson and John Webster’s commentaries on him and his plays (Pruitt 2). In the commentaries, they directly refer to him and his company. Another undeniable fact is the use of slang in his works. Would an aristocrat have been able to reproduce the talks of the streets? (Wheeler 1). Unlikely. Could a commoner that lives in an era of performing for royalty mimic the …show more content…
The current earl also funds this movement and tries to give evidence to a weak and paltry case. De Vere is missing in multiple areas. The first of which is the fact that the earl was a flamboyant (Editors 3)and egotistical (Wheeler 2) figure. Somebody with that personality is unlikely to publish masterpieces and put them under the name of a “commoner”. Another false claim is that there was stigma towards writing poems and plays. There is no document describing this and De Vere, King James, and Queen Elizabeth all published their own poetry (Wheeler 2). This makes it unlikely that Edward would write poems with no style similarity to an underground venture. If he did, he would at least hint to it. Edward De Vere also leased Blackfriars Theater (Delahoyde ). Why would someone not only write plays for someone else to use, but also give away profit to another theater. This in conjunction with his personality creates an air of confusion. There’s also some trivial information that conspiracists have used. They say that de Vere’s crest was a lion shaking a spear. William Shakespeare’s crest was a rooster shaking a spear (Wheeler 2). They say there are biblical passages in Shakespeare’s plays that are underlined in De Vere’s bible (Wheeler 2). That’s a double edged sword as De Vere only has a few of the quotes used. Pointing to political commentary as a reason is grasping at straws