Originally Posted August 16, 2004
The true identity of Shakespeare...
From the New York Times Book Update:
Few subjects excite more passion in the books forums than the debate as to the true identity of Shakespeare, with Stratfordians accepting his traditional identification and Oxfordians arguing that the Bard's works were actually written by Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford. A proponent of the latter position writes, "All of the contemporary allusions to Shakespeare the writer are enigmatic and in no way refer to the man from Stratford. The only things that suggest that this Stratford man was the dramatist are the posthumous vague assertions in the First Folio introductions and the peculiar inscriptions on the Stratford Monument."
"That's just plain false; the allusions to Shakespeare as the author are numerous," says a Stratfordian. "It is only because Oxenfraudians posit some ghost Shakespeare - for whom there is not a single jot or tittle of evidence anywhere in the records of the time - and make Our Will ... battle against that ghost that this argument can be made with a straight face."
-----------------------------------------------------------
And not just Shakespeare, there is a genralized tendency for us to be interested in dientity.
So what say you? In which camp do you set your tent?
From the New York Times Book Update:
Few subjects excite more passion in the books forums than the debate as to the true identity of Shakespeare, with Stratfordians accepting his traditional identification and Oxfordians arguing that the Bard's works were actually written by Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford. A proponent of the latter position writes, "All of the contemporary allusions to Shakespeare the writer are enigmatic and in no way refer to the man from Stratford. The only things that suggest that this Stratford man was the dramatist are the posthumous vague assertions in the First Folio introductions and the peculiar inscriptions on the Stratford Monument."
"That's just plain false; the allusions to Shakespeare as the author are numerous," says a Stratfordian. "It is only because Oxenfraudians posit some ghost Shakespeare - for whom there is not a single jot or tittle of evidence anywhere in the records of the time - and make Our Will ... battle against that ghost that this argument can be made with a straight face."
-----------------------------------------------------------
And not just Shakespeare, there is a genralized tendency for us to be interested in dientity.
So what say you? In which camp do you set your tent?