Anti-Stratfordians, hold this L:https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/sep/13/william-shakespeare-father-legal-skirmishes-john-shakespeare-national-archives-glyn-parry …
I'm not an anti-stratfordian, but I'm not sure how this is a loss for them. We already know that John Shakespeare had legal troubles and this recent unearthing doesn't say anything about the authorship of the plays
-
-
I am an anti-Stratfordian. What scholars want to do is display that the family name was officially recognized as "Shakespere" in documents before William ever picked up a pen (which was rare). This is also immaterial as I've rather conclusively demonstrated Will was a front.
-
Go on
-
You can read about it here: http://www.davidpublisher.org/Public/uploads/Contribute/57c922498ee87.pdf …
-
But the key is the recognition that what Stratfordians believe is utter nonsense. That the understanding of Shakespeare that has existed for centuries was based on some very bad initial guesses and the stupid conviction that there couldn't possibly be a "conspiracy".
-
You can read a summary of that here: https://www.commdiginews.com/entertainment/alan-tarica-explores-the-sonnets-of-william-shakespeare-20531/ … and on my site here:https://sites.google.com/view/eternity-promised/ …
-
But it defies imagination that I've provided a comprehensive theory explaining the motivation and mechanism for how and why and Oxfordian conspiracy took place & done it all within the confines of Shakespeare's own words and everyone refuses to reconsider this obvious stupidity.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.