Login

Mudhammam · April 6, 2016 at 6:04 am

**Alex K** · April 6, 2016 at 6:08 am

It's a little known fact that all those works were not written by Shakespeare himself, but by another man by the same name.

Mudhammam · April 6, 2016 at 6:27 am

So, in other words, the body of work attributed to "Shakespeare" perhaps represents a number of unknown individuals? As it turns out, "Shakespeare" was a common name in Warwickshire during that period.

**Alex K** · (This post was last modified: April 6, 2016 at 6:33 am by Alex K.)

(April 6, 2016 at 6:27 am)Mudhammam Wrote: So, in other words, the body of work attributed to "Shakespeare" perhaps represents a number of unknown individuals? As it turns out, "Shakespeare" was a common name in Warwickshire during that period.

It was a joke, but actually I think it is not so likely. There was a mathematical analysis of his writings done, looking for subtle clues, and they claimed to statistically exclude several famous men as candidates for impersonating Shakespeare via their respective styles. I guess they would have noticed if "Shakespeare"'s works were by different individuals. This is speculation, but I don't find it so absurd that the historical Shakespeare collaborated closely with friends and colleagues, and that some of his works were partly a team effort. One of the reasons some people doubt that the historical Shakespeare from Stratford really wrote all that stuff by himself is his lack of formal education. To me it at least suggests that he was probably strongly influenced by others and absorbed a lot of ideas about literature and society from the writers around him.

**Minimalist** · April 6, 2016 at 12:24 pm

downbeatplumb · April 6, 2016 at 12:33 pm

I've been to his house and been made to learn his unfunny comedies at school. Men dressing as girls is not funny.

**Minimalist** · April 6, 2016 at 12:36 pm

Pervert priests think it is a riot.

**Aegon** · April 6, 2016 at 1:19 pm

Oh look, another historical figure with little evidence of their existence that everyone just accepts as existing. But just replace the name with "Jesus"...

ApeNotKillApe · (This post was last modified: April 6, 2016 at 1:24 pm by ApeNotKillApe.)

No one has been tortured and killed over the existence of Shakespeare. No one is attempting to impose authoritarian rule in the name of Shakespeare or traumatize children with the threat of eternal torture for not believing Shakespeare existed.

**Aegon** · April 6, 2016 at 1:27 pm

(April 6, 2016 at 1:21 pm)ApeNotKillApe Wrote: No one has been tortured and killed over the existence of Shakespeare. No one is attempting to impose authoritarian rule in the name of Shakespeare or traumatize children with the threat of eternal torture for not believing Shakespeare existed.

All of that would have happened whether Jesus existed or not. It's irrelevant to his historicity.

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me

Poll: Did William Shakespeare of Stratford upon Avon exist as an historical person? You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Yes, absolutely; like Julius Caesar.	73.33%	11	73.33%
Probably.	26.67%	4	26.67%
Unknown.	0%	0	0%
Not probably.	0%	0	0%
Definitively not.	0%	0	0%
Total		15 vote(s)	100%

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread		Author	Replies	Views	Last Post
	Did Muhammad exist?	Fake Messiah	34	9330	February 14, 2018 at 2:56 pm Last Post: Pat Mustard