Horror As 'Man Doused In Bleach' In Busy...
News1 min ago
No best answer has yet been selected by johntheplamf. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.im sure there are actually scholars who believe this to be true, theres books about it and stufff. people think this because apparently:
shakespeares parents and children couldnt read or write
his statue shows himself resting on a sack (the sign of a merchant) not a pen
the few remaining signatures of shakespeares are poorly written scrawls
no manuscripts were left in his will, and none were mentioned in his house
some professor studied his writing and thought it was similar to christopher marlowes.
so theres the conspiracy theory that marlowe wrote shakeys plays.
however marlowe was apparently murdered 6 months before shakespeares first publication was released.
however ya never know....
most of this is taken from horrible histories - the terrible tudors by terry deary.
Like most playwrights of his period, Shakespeare did not always write alone and a number of his plays were collaborative, although the exact number is open to debate. Collaboration between dramatists routinely occurred in the Elizabethan theatre, particularly for unknown playwrights wishing to make a name. Co-writers are thought to include John Fletcher, Thomas Middleton, George Wilkins and George Peele et al
There is considerable historical evidence of the existence of a William Shakespeare who lived in both Stratford-upon-Avon and London. The vast majority of academics identify this Shakespeare as the Shakespeare. Over the years however, such figures as Walt Whitman, Mark Twain, Henry James, and Sigmund Freud have expressed disbelief that the man from Stratford-upon-Avon, christened William Shaksper or Shakspere, actually produced the works attributed to him. This scepticism is due to: the lack of a single book to be found in his otherwise detailed will, the circumscribed social, education and travel opportunities available to the young author that could have served to prepare him, the language of the works itself. Mainstream scholars consider all these supposed mysteries to be explicable. But many attribute this debate to the the scarcity and ambiguity of many of the historical records of this period.
Usually (see Jack the Ripper case) suspects were always attributed to royal connections or aristocracy - in this instance Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford, an English nobleman and intimate of Queen Elizabeth, became the most prominent alternative candidate for authorship of the Shakespeare canon, after having been identified in the 1920s. Personally I believe this to be a load of beslubbering toad-spotted canker-blossom.
I doubt they'll find much. His bones would have sank in the mud below the church and possibly sailed merilly down the Avon to Tewksbury years ago.
The Marlowe people will continually bang on about his faked death but for God's sake they wrote in a completely different style. Similarities, what similarities? Marlowe was an influence, a big name in London when Shakespeare first arrived but they had their own way of writing. It didn't stop the Marlowe Society putting a question mark next to the date of his death (1593 "?") on the stained glass window in Westminster Abbey. Take a look next time you are there!!