Intro to Oxfordianism

An introduction to the Shakespeare Authorship Question, and to the Oxfordian theory that "Shakespeare" was the a pen name of Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford.

[annenelson]

I am an Oxfordian ...raised in Castle Hedingham and lived in the lodge to the Castle for a few years! No doubt in my mind that Edward de Vere was Shakespeare...a true master of his craft. :) Great to listen to your chat...thank you guys x

[thestevepbrady]

This is great. I have my students write a research paper backing Stratfordian/Oxfordian/Bacon etc. every year so I am familiar with a lot of this, but your presentation makes things so clear. Saving it to use next year.

[floatingholmes]

You 2 are outstanding speakers with a lovely command of the arguments. The humor and rapid dialogue made a fun and compelling video.

[taketheredpill]

this has now been settled by Alexander Waugh. I'm no pretender, I just learned about this recently. Waugh's work is beyond definitive. He visually clarifies the coding that De Vere used in his works. Waugh's work is staggering and leaves the lay viewer (like myself) both in awe and overwhelmingly convinced. One leaves as certain that Edward de Vere was Shakespeare as I am now certain that Billy Shears is still playing his "role" of Paul McCartney. #SageOfQuay #2Fer

[henrybegler]

I can’t say this made me an oxfordian but I enjoyed it a lot, you two have a fun dynamic and I’d love to hear more from you about de vere and the elizabethan era in general.

[JohnSmith-lkcy]

One thing is for sure. That kids from Stratford did not write them - unless he could shape shift to different realities and parts of the planet!

[n.lightnin]

Would like to see a part 2 with the pregnancy portrait and tutor Prince theory but good stuff nice 101

[DrWrapperband]

Just noticed, the 1st folio front piece says "Shake-spears Sonnets" not "Shake-speare's Sonnets"

[niles]

Excellent job. I look forward to your take on "Shakespeare's" early retirement and the fact that 18 of the plays weren't published until 7 yrs after his death in 1616. That is a favorite Stratfordian argument as to why Vere couldn't have been Shakespeare since Othello, King Lear, Macbeth, and Antony and Cleopatra were published after his death in 1604.

[EndoftheTownProductions]

Shakespeare refers to the Gunpowder Plot in Macbeth. He mentions "equivocation" and "equivocator" and this refers to the Catholic Priest Henry Garnet who was associated with the plot. There are also other allusions to the plot in the play. The date of the Gunpowder Plot was November 5, 1605. Therefore, the play Macbeth must have been completed after this date and most likely finished in mid to late 1606. Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford, died on June 24, 1604, which obviously makes it impossible for him to have written the play Macbeth which has been attributed to Shakespeare and later published in the 1623 First Folio. It is difficult to write a play after you have died and there is obviously no way for Edward to have known of the Gunpowder Plot and the trial of Henry Garnet before his death.

[EndoftheTownProductions]

John Heminges, Henry Condell, and Richard Burbage, three actors of The Lord Chamberlain's Men, a famous acting company that included William Shakespeare, were given money by William Shakespeare of Stratford in his Last Will and Testament in 1616. Two of these actors, John Heminges and Henry Condell, were responsible for having 36 of Shakespeare's plays published in the First Folio in 1623. Ben Jonson's eulogy in the First Folio clearly praises Shakespeare as a great writer. He states that "thy writings to be such, /As neither Man, nor Muse, can praise too much." Heminges and Condell also praise Shakespeare as a writer, stating that "he thought, he uttered with that easinesse, that wee have scarse received from him a blot in his papers. But it is not our province, who onely gather his works, and give them you, to praise him." These are "his works" and "his papers" that they are publishing. He is clearly presented as the writer of these works in the First Folio. The Last Will and Testament of William Shakespeare of Stratford clearly connects him with the 1623 First Folio through Heminges and Condell and it is clear that Shakespeare is presented as the author of the plays.

[johnbeattie]

Six Days Theatre – am I looking in the wrong places? I can't find where it says who you are and your location. Are you affiliated with Symphony Space?

[duncanmckeown]

I'm nearly convinced...especially with the sonnets...after confronting Alexander Waugh's work on the codes contained in the first printing; but I do think that there must have been other authors behind the curtain in the plays. Bacon for sure . The problem for me is Macbeth; unlike most of the plays this can be pinned down to a particular moment in time. Oxford died in 1604 shortly after James VI of Scotland became King James I of England. This play, supposedly premiered in 1606, apart from its Scottish subject matter, has undoubted references to the new king's' fixation with Scottish witchcraft. Hard to explain this as coming from Oxford's pen?

[rooruffneck]

How can I get in touch with ya'll?

[donaldwhittaker]

A woman living in stratford was interviewed and when asked about de vere said if de vere was shakespeare then it would ruin tourism in stratford. No doubt she's right.

[TheLenze]

What about John Florio who gave Shak-sper all his information and details and Italian and Latin about Italy and Sicily? Doesn’t that prove that the man from Stratford had access to all of this information even though he didn’t know how to read or even though he didn’t have access to any books? What he did is go down to the pub and talk to the world travelers, maybe buy them drinks and ply them for ideas, so he could write his plays and sonnets? And Florio may have even written some of those plays?

[HectorLopez-kmvh]

Saw another great presentation that intimates his annuity may have something to do with his association with Francis Walsingham and his Office of Propaganda as part of Elizabeth’s Secret Service?

[gregart]

This is not convincing at all. Lots of talking about why the man known as Shakespeare was not the real Shakespeare (Which I agree with) but no proof at all that Edward De Vere was Shakespeare. Only circumstantial links with family ties and travels etc... However if you look more carefully at Francis Bacon's and the fact that his brother Anthony Bacon had a printing shop and the fact that Francis Bacon travelled to France and Italy and had inside information and close relationship in France with the main character in Love's Labour's lost and the fact that all of the names in the play were on Anthony Bacon's passport (which is an impossibility to be a coincidence statistically considering some of the weird unusual names) and the fact that many of the words and unusual lines including the longest word in his play are found in Francis Bacon's notes .. one need not look elsewhere. It is obvious that the Shaker of the Speer, lord chancellor and Rosicrucian leader Francis Bacon was the real Shakespeare.

[evh]

Unfortunately his writing style doesn’t come close to Shakespeare.

[WJRay]

The breezy exchanges are so full of non sequiturs I feel like the older generation missing your point, puzzled, unable to follow the argument. And I am an experienced commentator on this topic. Try marshalling your view, present it, give a moment to how the traditional conformists glosses over the utter contradictions in the narrative, list your strong points and chronology, and sum up. Factually the assertions are spotty. For example you claim de Vere's 1000 pound annuity was from revels? It was from the Secret Service, making his playwrighting a national propagandistic priority. You have spunk, and it is heartening that an X generation (whatever that connotes) would tackle this neglected and suppressed inquiry. Did you know that an American graduate student questioning the Stratford Shakespeare catechism loses his standing and reputation? As well as any recommendations for advancement. I am well disposed to your attempts to grapple with the issue. It requires a great effort getting the context and reviewing the complex history, so that you understand the plight of a nobleman who broke the taboo against being an artist and a theater producer and defied the most implacable aristocrats in English history.