Who Wrote "Shakespeare?"

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Hermit777


The circumstances surrounding his death are interesting. He was "killed," not in a tavern, but in a private residence used by the Northwest Passage group: a safehouse. Poley's description of the fight is not plausible physically. There are other detailsI will go into later.

If you read "The Dark Lady of the Sonnets" and then all the Sonnets and contrast and compare, this is where you will see the hand of an Aristocrat, a Lady. It is my belief that that Lady was the Queen.

Interesting.... I can't wait for the next installment.

There are installments i forgot to answer this, well pose my suggestion anyway.
The circumstances surrounding Kit's Death are at best curious, especially due to the players from our little drama.
I will just say this, there are very few ways a SPY can retire. And due to his excesses his body must have taken a toll.

I like to believe that he was retired to oh say Venice, with a Queens modest endowment. Maybe he wrote one or 2 things, under the name of "Kyp" or "Kyd" perhaps. Lived in the warm sunshine, Then quietly passed on from his excesses, learning the truth of the debates of G-d and heaven/hell First hand, before the others.

Or perhaps the new world, via his friend Sir Walter R. one never knows. Maybe he was healthier then i think.

Just a random thought.

G

a reply to: Droogie

Curious how his name was spelled in that entry.

I don't know if Penn Leary addressed that entry or not, to be honest. Here is his website although he is dead now: BaconCipher by Penn Leary

a reply to: Hermit777

The circumstances surrounding Kit's Death are at best curious, especially due to the players from our little drama.

Curious indeed. If Burleigh or Walsingham wanted Marlowe dead, they would have had one of their henchmen "yerk him i' th' ribs," relieve him of his purse, and tip him in the Thames. That sort of of end would have aroused no suspicions. Instead, he disappears from London, is alleged murdered by people who knew him, the inquest at the Crowner's Court is presided over by someone who relied on the earnest Edmund "The B--------d" Poley* to identify the body, and that body was never returned to London for a proper burial. It is almost as though the circumstance were designed to bait someone into looking for him. More of that on a dedicated thread.

Thank you for bringing up the raven garbed School of Night. They will feature prominently in the future. They bridge the Greeks, the theaters "protected" by noblemen and... the Reformation of the Whole Wide World. Stay tuned.

* I believe that it is not a coincidence that one of the most gloriously cunning and evil characters in the canon is named "Edmund."

a reply to: DJW001

I do hope you read the second part of my missive. You responded to part 3 about Marlowe's death?

Part 2 is on page 2. I should have numbered them.

A very difficult one this because when what was every day knowledge plus a good dose of occult knowledge is not known to most of us Brits today, let alone people from other cultures who study him. So much of the oblique references haven't carried forward in time which is why he's so hard for most to enjoy.

It will only ever be speculation because after his death no one came forward and claimed to have written the material or claim the rights to the royalties etc - which were it their writing one would have thought they would.

a reply to: DJW001

Oh what a contentious subject, there have been many whom have claimed that Shakespear could not have written the plays and yet other's whom have claimed he was an illegitimate member of the aristocracy for the same reason.

The most common answer is often Francis Bacon but of course this guy would have needed even more energy than Davinci to be responsible since he was off performing other works and this for me excludes him (though jokingly maybe it was a ghost Chicken writer www.haunted-london.com... he legendarily killed a chicken, buried it in snow and came back a week later to see if it was still fresh).

I actually believe it was non other than William Shakespear whom wrote these work's, why - self taught people are often among the most intelligent and litterate also remember the stupidity of the aristocratic class, there blacksmith's and housemaid's were mostly in some way related to them, the previous generation had a randy old grandfather whom liked his maid's while the bored lady of the house had the blacksmith or gardening boy perform some plaughing for her to take her mind off of her husbands lack of fidelity so he was the father of the next generation of servant's and whom indeed was the father of the heir to the estate, now of course in some cases they were so inbred the painting prove they kept it in the family but oddly not only the descendant's look like that old lord but so too do the local villagers.


William Shakespear without a doubt.

So the issue of authorship was still raging as recent as 2 years ago? Found this and this

To quote Mark Wahlberg's character Jim Bennett in The Gambler (2014) at around 17 minutes 30 seconds:

"What lies behind every controversy about Shakespeare is rage. Rage over the nature, an unequal distribution of talent. Rage that genius appears where it appears for no material reason at all. Desiring a thing, cannot make you have it."

Will Sir Derek Jacobi agree? Have any one questioned Mozart or Picasso's works as truly their own?

Who wrote Dostoyevski?

a reply to: MaxTamesSiva

Have any one questioned Mozart or Picasso's works as truly their own?

No, but Alexandre Dumas, Charles Dickens, Salvador Dali, and any number of prolific authors and artists have been known, accused, or suspected to have used others to produce their work.

a reply to: DJW001

Reprint of my 3 part full posting plus a few more comments: I agree with DJW001 and others that feel that W.S. lack of formal education has nothing to with his ability to write.

The major added comment here is just this, Schools and Universities does not make anyone a Genius or endow them with the ability to Write Plays or Poetry, study chemistry/Physics (Known then as Alchemy).

So the occupation(s) of Parents or lack of formal training has nothing at all to do with W.S. being able to write plays. If W.S. could not keep up he would never have been a Member of "The School of Night", I am not sure i could have kept up with those people.


Now the Reprint:

Ok here we go again ARGH! First let me say This is a good thread, I like threads that are fun and make you think. Very intelligently proposed.

As i wrote in a paper in 1970: ( Suffice it to say i will not rewrite a Thesis size paper here, Caution there may be Snidely Whiplash Comments below)

1) Sir Francis Bacon, NO, his prose do not match, he was a Lawyer, he was an aristocrat. Writing a play would have been beneath him, but taking credit would not, did i mention Lawyer?

2) Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford, NO, , headmaster of Oxford, aristocrat etc etc. Prose do not match, After the fact family trying to take credit or just Looney.

3) Christopher "Kit" Marlowe, Interesting choice and has been for a couple of hundred years. Did William cop some ideas from Kit? I think so. May they have at one point work on some plays together this is also possible. But, Kit Marlowe was well constantly in trouble for his Excesses and Frankly his big mouth. Kit was the James Dean of his time. His ah Habits, put him accidentally in the position of Aiding the Queen, Sir Francis set this up, for him. He was a playwright, scientist, atheist, genius, gay., and the list goes on. But his plays, which were very good, do not resemble in style, those of Shakespeare. Did the 2 Collaborate YES, and drink together etc.

If you read "The Dark Lady of the Sonnets" and then all the Sonnets and contrast and compare, this is where you will see the hand of an Aristocrat, a Lady. It is my belief that that Lady was the Queen.

Background: (Gawd this is more then i have written here in 5 years, oh well here goes) (( next post, i have to remember some facts, i hate getting old but it beats the alternative. ))


a reply to: DJW001

You Axed for it
First a note about Oxford, I gave the 17th Earl short shrift. He was what we would call today an Amateur Astronomer, and a good inventor of household necessities. So shhhhhh 16th century Aristocrats were not supposed to have anything more then Hobbies & to help the Queen Govern in the house of Lords and at Court. He was a very good politician BTW, even by today's standards and did not loose his head either Figuratively or Literally.

Now Background: "The School of Night"

This was a rather scandalous (for the time) Bohemian group, I would say fraternity but that would be Wrong, there were Ladies involved, I use the Term Lady in it's proper manner. It is Rumored Even the Queen herself. These were individuals that were not fond of the Status Quo, and in some cases Flaunted that fact. Writers, scientists, alchemists, etc. One "Lady" was a Chemist/alchemist of some note, because she was connected at "Court" any word getting to the Queen that she might be a witch was immediately squished, to the point of neck pain if it continued.

They were the rebels of their day, thinkers and dreamers. They were all welcome at Court, which meant "Be There" when the Queen asks. If you Receive an "Engraved Invitation" you have neglected Her Majesty, and this means, you best show up and bring a Pressie or else. ( Present she liked those )

So let me drop a few names, Germaine to this Thread: ( a few names of import )

William Shakespeare
Christopher "Kit" Marlowe
Oxford
Thomas Harriot
George Chapman
Sir Walter Raleigh
The mysterious Matthew Roydon (who owns the house and servants, "The Landlord" as it were.)
Northumberland
Sir Francis Bacon

Notable Drop-ins :

Queen Elizabeth Regina
Lady Pembroke (Chemist/Alchemist)
Henry Percy (Mathemetician, Astronomer )
John Dee (Chemist/Alchemist)
Edward Kelly ( Chemist/Alchemist sort of more like Note taker and assistant Alleged speaker to Angels )


So here are the characters to our play. You can see that over many a bottle of wine and sweat, there could be a great deal of Cross Pollination of ideas, thoughts and prose.

Games like everyone write a poem for tonight's entertainment, a short story, or a debate using proper prose and Logic, critical thinking on the existence of G-d as is directed toward the Monarchy. And other barn burners.

( No Movies or TV or PS3s. The electrics bill must have been unpaid i guess. )

So the free flow of ideas is evident amoung these thinkers. Also notable in our drama is that William Shakespeare
and Christopher "Kit" Marlowe were seen in each others company quite a bit. especially at Court. I think this was a ruse to some extent, Kit was William's Beard, so that W.S. could have some uninterrupted time with the Queen without raising eyebrows. Yes very different from today.

But to read the works of Christopher "Kit" Marlowe and then W.S. well they are very different, may have traded ideas, but each wrote in their own way. Neither needs to explain their writings or justify their works, knowing they were friends is good enough. ( I have always thought the Witch's were Kit's idea, he tended to that darker streak. )

To me the only Authourship in question are the "Dark Lady Sonnets", These beautiful pieces of Unrequited Love poetry were not between W.S. and Kit or vice versa, they were W.S. and ER. At least in my heart they were i can feel the Love and Pain so evident in them.



The circumstances surrounding Kit's Death are at best curious, especially due to the players from our little drama.
I will just say this, there are very few ways a SPY can retire. And due to his excesses his body must have taken a toll.

I like to believe that he was retired to oh say Venice, with a Queens modest endowment. Maybe he wrote one or 2 things, under the name of "Kyp" or "Kyd" perhaps. Lived in the warm sunshine, Then quietly passed on from his excesses, learning the truth of the debates of G-d and heaven/hell First hand, before the others.

Or perhaps the new world, via his friend Sir Walter R. one never knows. Maybe he was healthier then i think.

Just a random thought.

_______________________________________________________________

a reply to: Hermit777

There has been some speculation that Shakespeare was secretly a Roman Catholic, and received a University grade education in a crypto-Catholic aristocratic household. I am writing from a mobile device so I am not able to check my library for an exact reference, but there is a book called "Shadow Play" that deals with the theory at length. Curiously, Marlowe was known to boast about attending Catholic seminaries on the Continent. There has been speculation that his atheism was a cover for his genuine Catholic sympathies, and that he was really a "double agent!"

The School of Night is certainly of interest although it is not clear if it was a formally structured group, or just a clique.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Hermit777

There has been some speculation that Shakespeare was secretly a Roman Catholic, and receive a University grade education in a crypto-Catholic aristocratic household. I am writing from a mobile device so I am not able to check my library for an exact reference, but there is a book called "Shadow Play" that deals with the theory at length. Curiously, Marlowe was known to boast about attending Catholic seminaries on the Continent. There has been speculation that his atheism was a cover for his genuine Catholic sympathies, and that he was really a "double agent!"

The School of Night is certainly of interest although it is not clear if it was a formally structured group, or just a clique.

He may have in fact been raised as a Papist, and educated in the same way secretly, this is very possible. Even E.R. was raised and educated by closet Jesuits, Catholic due to her sister "Bloody Mary".

It was very confused and a dangerous time then, politics and religion one kept to ones self outside of trusted "family".

Both W.S. and C.M. were welcomed into the courts of the French, Belgians, Germans and Scotland (M.R.'s Court) as well as being favorites to E.R. They mingled easily with in these Courts both Catholic and Protestant rarely causing or drawing insult.

Moreover, if in fact not just a put-on William and Christopher were, what do the kids call it? Oh yes "Pan-Sexual" or as the english say "Poofs", then it is very clear if they had not thrown off being practicing Catholics, their attitudes in their writings show a more enlightened view of Structured Religion (not to be confused with faith or spirituality).
__________________________________________________________________________________

"School of Night"

They had a house, "Club House" if you like. A snug harbour where they could let their collective hair down amoungst "Family" of like minded Bohemian individuals. Very individual which may have been the hallmark of their
acquaintance, rugged individualist who delved into forbidden topics for investigation, both physically and as Mind Experiments. They were more then a clique but not so Organized as to insult their Bohemian ideals & sensibilities.

They were the Secret Privy Consul to the Queen, truly the friends of E.R.
They were writers and keepers of songs, prose and poetry and Dreams. They were the Dreamers and singers of their time, the Magicians the Magi, their Magics being sometimes Subtle or Blunt as needs be. Some had entree' into lodges names not even spoken today. Then attempted to infect more common lodges and societies to attempt to spread just a little light, here and there. Like planting seeds never knowing if they will sprout and grow.

That particular "School of Night" once was for a season, and like all things faded away over time. There are always new seasons and new Bohemians, Magi and new School's of Night.

G

a reply to: Hermit777

What little I know of the Schoo of Night comes from reading Dame Margaret Yates. It sounds like you have done some deeper research.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Hermit777

What little I know of the Schoo of Night comes from reading Dame Margaret Yates. It sounds like you have done some deeper research.

I have indeed Starting with Naval History to understand the thought processes. Then to Newton with particular interest into the Science & Magics of that time, the beautiful literature. These researches led to many a trivial root of the main equation or premise that leads down the rabbit hole.

originally posted by: DJW001
I can't believe no-one has started this thread yet! As probably everyone knows, since the 19th Century there has been a controversy over the authorship of the body of work attributed to William Shakespeare. Much of the criticism is based on the lack of documentation of the man's life, the assumption being that a literary figure of that stature would have generated more biographical interest on the part of his contemporaries. He allegedly lacked schooling: one of his friends joked that Shakespeare had "little Latin and less Greek." There is certainly no record of him attending university. He also seemed to be very familiar with courtly etiquette, law, current events, ancient history, military technology, and even contemporary scientific discoveries.

The contradictions between a figure who seemed scarcely literate (no library or books were mentioned in his will) and the literary genius whose understanding of human nature and erudition of the ways of the world led many to suspect a conspiracy. The author of the works attributed to Shakespeare must have attended university at the very least and had some experience of the Court. Here is the shortlist:

1) Sir Francis Bacon, aristocratic lawyer. First proposed by Delia Bacon in the mid-Nineteenth Century. Sir Francis was a philosopher and the author of "The New Atlantis," and his cause has been taken up by a series of Rosicrucians and Theosophists. Secret codes have allegedly been found in the works of "Shakespeare" that "prove" that Bacon was secretly married to Queen Elizabeth and the rightful heir to the throne.

2) Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford. First proposed by J. Thomas (wait for it...) Looney. The current Earl of Oxford is its strongest proponent for some reason.

One feature that both of the above candidates have in common is that they are aristocrats. One of the underlying themes among the "Anti-Stratfordians" as they are collectively called, is that they seem to reject Shakespeare as an author because he is a commoner. Certainly only a nobleman would be capable of such elevated literary achievement. That makes our final candidate a breath of fresh air:

3) Christopher "Kit" Marlowe, atheist and spy. Marlowe was first proposed by T.W. White and remains a favorite candidate among working actors, who sense a stylistic "flow" from the works known to have been written by Marlowe into the earliest plays attributed to "Shakespeare." The only obstacle to this theory is that Marlowe was killed in 1593, a year before Shakespeare began writing. Or was he?


I have my own theories, but first I'd like to hear from the partisans of the above candidates. This is a conspiracy site, I know you're out there.

If not Shakespeare then first choice would be the one who had the most free time.

Francis Bacon was probably distracted by his situations most of the time. Possibly not.

Marlowe looks good, but it could be anybody born into the top 1% of natural talent, if not the conventional Shakespeare.

100s to 1000s of Englishmen, Scotsmen, Welshmen, or Irishmen were born with the genes.

a reply to: Hermit777

To jump ahead a bit, I have no doubt that good Doctor Dee was an inspiration for the ludus, which in turn sparked a sort of fever among English philosopher and poets. I'm not sure whether or not they formed a formal "brotherhood," but certainly many of the names of those associated with the School of Night show influences of the Continental writings in their later works. I suppose it is possible that the School was, in effect, a seed crystal.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Hermit777

To jump ahead a bit, I have no doubt that good Doctor Dee was an inspiration for the ludus, which in turn sparked a sort of fever among English philosopher and poets. I'm not sure whether or not they formed a formal "brotherhood," but certainly many of the names of those associated with the School of Night show influences of the Continental writings in their later works. I suppose it is possible that the School was, in effect, a seed crystal.

I wonder was it Dee or Newton who was the inspiration for that, or both? Yes for many reasons there were carry overs to the new world.

Yes a seed, a beginning of certain forms of thought. Newton's physics was instrumental in showing that Rational science and magic were one in the same. This idea was grasped in those times by a few Including E.R. who charged both Newton and Later Dee as Masters of the Treasury, at different times due to her Fear of counterfeiting or corrupting the Coinage, Knowing full well what both of those men were capable of. I do however believe that E.R. was more concerned with Alchemy as it affected human nature and the evolution of that idea. The conversations with Angels and Daemons must have captured her imagination. I do not believe She [The Queen] was interested in turning lead into Gold or even fake Gold (using Antimony instead of Gold as the SUN/Male term of the formula), nor was She interested in living any longer then a normal lifetime, she felt trapped as it was and it would be a Hell to prolong it. She was however always interested in occult [means Hidden] writings and the knowledge they could impart.

Odd how this discussion leads into so many other things.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Hermit777

To jump ahead a bit, I have no doubt that good Doctor Dee was an inspiration for the ludus, which in turn sparked a sort of fever among English philosopher and poets. I'm not sure whether or not they formed a formal "brotherhood," but certainly many of the names of those associated with the School of Night show influences of the Continental writings in their later works. I suppose it is possible that the School was, in effect, a seed crystal.

Does your mention of a brotherhood allude to the possibility of a team collaborating to write Shakespeare?

There was a study about IQ in which a group of professionals were given an exam to answer as if the group were a single person. The group IQ was always higher than any of the individuals. I don't remember how much higher. At least one statistical category I think. Maybe not that much. Maybe more -- twice as smart as any single person.

originally posted by: Hermit777

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Hermit777

What little I know of the Schoo of Night comes from reading Dame Margaret Yates. It sounds like you have done some deeper research.

I have indeed

Starting with Naval History to understand the thought processes. Then to Newton with particular interest into the Science & Magics of that time, the beautiful literature. These researches led to many a trivial root of the main equation or premise that leads down the rabbit hole.

In economic history some reference is made to English smuggling. If smuggling was for centuries a normal option for an Englishman, a lot of cloak and dagger conspiracy stuff seems more likely. Does naval history have much to say about that?

The "ton" was a unit of taxation applied to wine. I would have thought it to be something more to do with convenient sizes fro shipping.

i have always leaned towards Bacon myself.

While the notion of a person who collected writings and published under his name has been something that interests me, it seems that the style of writing just doesn't lend itself to that many solo writers. It would have had to be a team affair from the beginning. That is something I could believe. Especially when you get down to the sheer artistic nature of how the words were used and the literary devices employed.