<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Letter from SOS President, Matthew Cossolotto	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://shakespeareoxfordfellowship.org/letter-from-sos-president-matthew-cossolotto/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://shakespeareoxfordfellowship.org/letter-from-sos-president-matthew-cossolotto/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=letter-from-sos-president-matthew-cossolotto</link>
	<description>Exploring the evidence that the works of Shakespeare were written by Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 18 May 2014 18:22:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Terence Matthews		</title>
		<link>https://shakespeareoxfordfellowship.org/letter-from-sos-president-matthew-cossolotto/#comment-1529</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Terence Matthews]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:59:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shakespeareoxfordsociety.wordpress.com/?p=204#comment-1529</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Sept. 25, 2009  Dear Matthew:  In response to your request for comments in the SOS newsletter here are my suggestions for the Sonnets: 1.  Instead of a paper or monograph, we should publish a book--a 400th anniversary edition of the Sonnets.  The tile page should be the same as the 1609 (with the decorative borders) except the name:  Shake-Speare&#039;s Posthumous Sonnets; instead of &quot;Never before imprinted&quot; insert &quot;Ever before imprinted;&quot; and the date at the bottom should be, of course, &quot;2009.&quot;  2.  I understand from May&#039;s book on the Sonnets that there are 13 surviving copies of Q, which should all be examined for evidence and photographed. 3. Establish a proper text for reading with extensive annotations, illustrations--make the sonnets accessible and readable to the public.  4.  The commentary and notes can make the case for Posthumous publication and Oxford as the author.  5.  Make the book beautiful and readable in design and printing.  6.  Note that there are three major players:  the author, the editor, and the publisher; was the publisher the editor? What can we deduce the manuscript looked like?   7.  TT&#039;s dedication is cryptic and apparently contains a hidden reference to Oxford, beside the &quot;ever-living&quot; theme.  8.  We need several Oxford scholars to put the edition together.  9.  New research needs to be done to put the 1609 publication in context, to collate the copies of the texts, to flesh out the historical background and subsequent history of the sonnets.  10.  The idea is that the entire edition makes the case and encourages non-Shakespeareans to read and understand the sonnets--that would be a major accomplishment.  T.M.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sept. 25, 2009  Dear Matthew:  In response to your request for comments in the SOS newsletter here are my suggestions for the Sonnets: 1.  Instead of a paper or monograph, we should publish a book&#8211;a 400th anniversary edition of the Sonnets.  The tile page should be the same as the 1609 (with the decorative borders) except the name:  Shake-Speare&#8217;s Posthumous Sonnets; instead of &#8220;Never before imprinted&#8221; insert &#8220;Ever before imprinted;&#8221; and the date at the bottom should be, of course, &#8220;2009.&#8221;  2.  I understand from May&#8217;s book on the Sonnets that there are 13 surviving copies of Q, which should all be examined for evidence and photographed. 3. Establish a proper text for reading with extensive annotations, illustrations&#8211;make the sonnets accessible and readable to the public.  4.  The commentary and notes can make the case for Posthumous publication and Oxford as the author.  5.  Make the book beautiful and readable in design and printing.  6.  Note that there are three major players:  the author, the editor, and the publisher; was the publisher the editor? What can we deduce the manuscript looked like?   7.  TT&#8217;s dedication is cryptic and apparently contains a hidden reference to Oxford, beside the &#8220;ever-living&#8221; theme.  8.  We need several Oxford scholars to put the edition together.  9.  New research needs to be done to put the 1609 publication in context, to collate the copies of the texts, to flesh out the historical background and subsequent history of the sonnets.  10.  The idea is that the entire edition makes the case and encourages non-Shakespeareans to read and understand the sonnets&#8211;that would be a major accomplishment.  T.M.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: shakespeareoxfordsociety		</title>
		<link>https://shakespeareoxfordfellowship.org/letter-from-sos-president-matthew-cossolotto/#comment-1528</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[shakespeareoxfordsociety]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 17:03:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shakespeareoxfordsociety.wordpress.com/?p=204#comment-1528</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I forwarded your information to Alan Navarre. L.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I forwarded your information to Alan Navarre. L.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
