Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum MOBILE
Byrne Robotics | The John Byrne Forum << Prev Page of 15 Next >>
Topic: The Stratford Man Post Reply | Post New Topic
Author
Message
Cory Vandernet
Byrne Robotics Member

Henchman

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 848
Posted: 23 January 2021 at 3:05pm | IP Logged | 1 post reply
Back to Top profile | search
 
Cory Vandernet
Byrne Robotics Member

Henchman

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 848
Posted: 23 January 2021 at 3:08pm | IP Logged | 2 post reply


Edited by Cory Vandernet on 23 January 2021 at 3:08pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Cory Vandernet
Byrne Robotics Member

Henchman

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 848
Posted: 23 January 2021 at 3:17pm | IP Logged | 3 post reply
A Yorkshire Tragedy is clearly attributed to Shakespeare but was probably written by Middleton.

Why was Shakespeare credited these plays when they not part of the official folio?

And there are others.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Steven Brake
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 01 January 2016
Posts: 562
Posted: 23 January 2021 at 5:00pm | IP Logged | 4 post reply
Yes, there are plays attributed to Shakespeare now lost, such as Cardenio and Love Labour's Won, and there are plays not in the First Folio, but later attributed to him, such as Pericles and Edward III.

I have to admit to not having read A Yorkshire Tragedy, but I do remember listening to a radio programme - I think it was an episode of In Our Time - in which one of the guests laughingly admitted that she was possibly the only person who thought Shakespeare had written it.

Why was Shakespeare credited? He may indeed have written them, or collaborated in writing them. Or maybe opportunistic booksellers just wanted to use a successful brand name.

Why aren't they in the Folio? Because Heminges and Condell couldn't track down manuscripts of them. Or perhaps they weren't aware of them. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Mark Haslett
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 6103
Posted: 23 January 2021 at 6:29pm | IP Logged | 5 post reply
The case can easily be made that Shaxper had little to no education by looking at the one work we unquestionably know was written by him -- his will.

It is the work of a money-obsessed, loveless, artless dimwit who opened it with a boiler-plate prayer and left not one item connecting him with the theater or the works or writing of any kind.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15797
Posted: 23 January 2021 at 7:19pm | IP Logged | 6 post reply
It is the work of a money-obsessed, loveless, artless dimwit who opened it with a boiler-plate prayer and left not one item connecting him with the theater or the works or writing of any kind.
---------------------
I'm curious why you say he left not one item connecting him with the theatre.

In the will, he left money to Richard Burbage and John Heminges -- both members of the King's Men. Rather than the zero connection to any theatre, here is a direct connection to the very theatre troupe that we know acted Shakespeare's plays. 


Edited by Peter Martin on 23 January 2021 at 7:20pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15797
Posted: 23 January 2021 at 7:54pm | IP Logged | 7 post reply
From page 1 of the thread:

What “first hand evidence” connects Stratford Will directly to the author known as William Shakespeare?
------------------------------------------------------
1. Shakespeare's will as mentioned above combined with a deed of trust of 1601 that describes the Globe as tenanted by Richard Burbage and William Shakspeare.

2. William Basse wrote an elegy in the early 17th century "On Mr William Shakespeare" in which he contrasts Shakespeare with Chaucer and Beaumont.

One line: "Sleep rare tragedian Shakespeare, sleep along, Thy unmolested peace, unshared cave"

The full title, from manuscripts of the day: "On Mr William Shakespeare, he died in April 1616." This is when the Stratford Shakespeare died. Clearly this refers to him. But he is also compared to Chaucer and called a rare tragedian...

3. The First Folio, the first known published appearance of half these plays, is attributed to Maister W. Shakespeare and talks about "thy Stratford Moniment."

4. In the same folio, Jonson calls Shakespeare the Swan of Avon.

5. Jonson in the same verse place Shakespeare in the court of King James. The King's Men were licensed under King James. There are numerous legal documents establishing that Burbage and Shakespeare were part of this troupe. There are legal documents that establish (as above) that this same Burbage was closely associated to Shakespeare of Stratford.





Regarding Oxford: In 1610, John Davies of Hereford published a poem addressed to Mr Will Shake-speare. "Thou hast no railing, but a raigning Wit: And honesty thou sow'st, which they do reape; So, to increase their Stocke which they do keepe." Oxford was 6 years dead in 1610. Why write this clearly addressed to someone in the present tense if Oxford was Shakespeare?

Has any text (normally atrributed to Shakespeare) every turned up in any guise attributed to Oxford?




Edited by Peter Martin on 23 January 2021 at 7:55pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne

Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132282
Posted: 23 January 2021 at 8:13pm | IP Logged | 8 post reply
You take the standard Stratfordian tactic of using “Shakespeare” as if it was the name of the man from Stratford.

Incidentally, the river Avon does not confine itself to the town limits of Stratford. It flows near London, too, and on its banks Edward De Vere had property.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15797
Posted: 23 January 2021 at 9:13pm | IP Logged | 9 post reply
You use terms like 'Stratfordian' as if it is a tribal team game. I laid out some examples of firm historic evidence to answer the question you asked.

The spelling in the will is such:

William Shackspeare in Stratford leaves money to Richard Brubage and John Hemyges.

To me you have to go out of your way to conclude this cannot be William Shakespeare leaving money to Richard Burbage and John Heminges.

I do not follow the logic of the spelling of Stratford Shackspeare (or Shakspeare) is inconsistent to the spelling of Shakespeare in the folio, therefore De Vere is a better substitute.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15797
Posted: 23 January 2021 at 10:00pm | IP Logged | 10 post reply
Perhaps we can agree that when the Folio says Duke of Burguny on one page it is not a different character to the Duke of Burgundy three pages later. It is rock solid fact that in England in the16th/17th century, they were less consistent about their spelling of names than we are today. The difference in Burguny to Burgundy that appears within the span of three pages of a printed book is not greater in magnitude than the difference between Shakspeare and Shakespeare in two very different documents.

Thrown into the mix is that Anne Hathaway's gravestone, who died the same year as the first folio was printed, has "Wife of William Shakespeare" inscribed on her gravestone in Stratford. Was her engraver taking the standard Stratfordian tactic?
Back to Top profile | search
 
Mark Haslett
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 6103
Posted: 24 January 2021 at 1:58am | IP Logged | 11 post reply
Peter: I'm curious why you say he left not one item connecting him with the theatre.

In the will, he left money to Richard Burbage and John Heminges -- both members of the King's Men. Rather than the zero connection to any theatre, here is a direct connection to the very theatre troupe that we know acted Shakespeare's plays.
***
This connection is logical and interpreted rather than stated. These two rings are the only bequest outside of Shaxper's family and Stratford friends and it comes with no comment or instructions for inscriptions, which was customary.

It should also be noted that this line is so jammed between the original lines that the scrivener could barely fit it in.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Steven Brake
Byrne Robotics Member


Joined: 01 January 2016
Posts: 562
Posted: 24 January 2021 at 3:16am | IP Logged | 12 post reply
JB wrote: You take the standard Stratfordian tactic of using “Shakespeare” as if it was the name of the man from Stratford.

Incidentally, the river Avon does not confine itself to the town limits of Stratford. It flows near London, too, and on its banks Edward De Vere had property.

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

This brings me back to the point I asked earlier about whether Oxfordians (or other alternative authorship theorists) believe that Will's supposed authorship is down to accident or design.

Jonson's verse in the First Folio commends THE AUTHOR (as the printed verse has it in the Folio), Mr William Shakespeare, "the sweet Swan of Avon".

Is the Oxfordian argument that this is a reference to a pseudonym that he used, and property that the River Avon flowed past, and it's just an unfortunate coincidence that William Shakespeare (or Shaxper, or whatever minor variant of spelling) was born, lived, and died in Stratford-Upon-Avon? And that Jonson knew all along, and cleverly wrote a poem that seemed to suggest one author, while actually meaning another?

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

Mark wrote: It should also be noted that this line is so jammed between the original lines that the scrivener could barely fit it in.

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

And what's the argument here? That Burbage and Heminges, or their cohorts, altered Shakespeare's will to create the illusion that they knew him? And having determined to alter the will, they decided to award themselves a pretty small bequest rather than anything more substantial?
Back to Top profile | search
 

<< Prev Page of 15 Next >>
  Post Reply | Post New Topic |

Forum Jump

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login

You are currently viewing the MOBILE version of the site.
CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE FULL SITE