Exploring the evidence that the works of Shakespeare were written by Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford 

February 27, 2006

“Publish We This Peace…”

Roger Stritmatter illustrates the explanatory power of Peter Dickson’s theory about the political context of the First Folio publication with this telling look at why –possibly– Cymbeline appears as the last play in the First Folio, a circumstance that has puzzled scholars for decades and for which no good answer has ever been provided.

Read More »

“Bestow how, and when you list…”

Roger Stritmatter reports on a discovery he first made in 1990 about a connection between the Jaggard firm and the de Vere family, but which –up to now– has never been published. As with Dickson’s First Folio-Marriage Crisis theory, this discovery may also provide a crucial link in finally getting at the true circumstances behind the First Folio publication.

Read More »

The Queen’s Worm

The most frequently-asked question in the authorship debate is, “What difference does it [i.e. knowing who the true author is] make anyway?” A perfect example of the difference that knowing the truth can make is illustrated in this article by Richard Whalen — adapted from his presentation at the 1998 Edward de Vere Studies Conference. Whalen takes a small scene from Antony and Cleopatra and brings it to new life with the simple observation that in French the word for worm is “ver.”

Read More »

Oxford as “The Knight of the Tree of the Sunne”

Prof. Daniel L. Wright gives us a glimpse of the “theatricality” of Edward de Vere in comparison to those around him. This description of how de Vere responded to a challenge to participate in a jousting tournament before Queen Elizabeth in 1581 is clear proof that he was indeed “a man apart” among his peers.

Read More »

The Art of The Art of Shakespeare’s Sonnets

Shakespeaere Oxford Newsletter columnist Mark Anderson took a look at Helen Vendler’s celebrated book on the sonnets in 1998, de-constructing the artful dodges that make up any Stratfordian attempt to understand them while ignoring the author.

Read More »

Shake-speare’s Sonnets – Book Reviews

Richard Whalen reviewed three recent sonnet books in the Spring 1998 Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter (Helen Vendler’s, Katherine Duncan-Jones’, and G.Blakemore Evans’.), and finds they have in common what we already knew: without knowing the true author, the sonnets can mean anything and nothing.

Read More »

Review of Shake-speare’s Sonnets and the Court of Navarre by David Honneyman

Long-time Oxfordian Ramon L. Jimenez reviews a little known book by David Honneyman (1997) that again illustrates the Stratfordian dilemma with the Sonnets. Honneyman’s solution is quite startling, though. In his book he invents the “Ur-Sonnets,” originally written in France in the 1570s, and has our Stratford hero merely translating them into English later. We kid you not. Check it out.

Read More »

Shake-speare’s Sonnets are Stratfordians’ Achilles’ Heel

Joseph Sobran based his 1997 book Alias Shakespeare on his Oxfordian reading of the Sonnets, and he re-states here what he said in his book: the Sonnets are indeed an “Achilles’ heel” for Stratfordians, since any acceptance of their reality virtually blows the Stratford actor out of the water as their author.

Read More »

Subscribe

Subscribe to our FREE email list for news, event links & updates!

We respect your privacy. Your information is safe and will never be shared. Read our privacy policy.