Their names [similar to Shakespeare] were alias names of the unversal genius Marlowe forced to distribute his biographical and poetical cosmos amongst a multiplicity of (pseudo) authors or authornames.
No true poets named Chapman and Petowe do have existed.
Their names [similar to Shakespeare] were alias names of the unversal genius Marlowe forced to distribute his biographical and poetical cosmos amongst a multiplicity of (pseudo) authors or authornames.
Giving up his name and identity, as Marlowe has in all likelihood
done, does not occur as seldom, as is usually assumed, but for
very different reasons. An example.
There are serious reasons to argue that in 1599 the "Passionate Pilgrime" has been written by a single author, the true poet and dramatist genius Christopher Marlowe who signed under one of his various pseudonyms: W.Shakespeare.
There was no need for Marlowe to reveal the contributions of others of his pennames used previously. Some brief reflections on those poems of allegedly other poets (Griffin, Barnfield, Deloney, Heywood) disclose a common contextual autobiographical background of the poems as well as the reason why “Shakespeare Academe” for lack of acceptance of a historical authorship problem is not yet ready even to begin to resolve the excess of Shakespeare inconsistencies.
For Details s.Video!
The Shakespeare authorship controversy
The Shakespeare-Stratford-Dogma (SSD) is not allowed being questioned or doubted and it cannot be changed or discarded without affecting the very system's paradigm.
....challenging the dogma is academic death and the most elegant way for a scholar to commit career suicide”
Any scholar would lose his job, his position or reputation in the academic world of
"Shakespeare orthodoxy" if he would would engage in the least to the authorship debate
One wonders how such a infinite unique global confusion could occur ?
There are significant reasons for this confusion, which - in my estimation -
can only ever be resolved with the gradual acceptance of the complex
Marlowe Shakespeare authorship thesis.(Marlowes Survival and his multiple
Short you-tube video exposé (15 min.) about the second edition of Shakespeares Sonnets (1640) trying to approach the question why Shakspeare (Stratford) was the false and Marlowe the true poet genius and dramatist.
It is neither a possible, nor a plausible, nor a probable or a certain option, that within a few years 4 "King Edward" historical plays were composed in London in a similar diction by 4 outstanding dramatists (Peele, Marlowe, Shakespeare, Heywood) with no established evidence of a personal connection.
Lets start by ending the devastating academic long-term failure and by putting the Shakespeare Marlowe authorship thesis
to the test.
Hallo Alexander Thom
I am an old retired Professor for Neuroscience from Munich and wrote a german book (after 10 years of reading and studies) on the Marlowe/Shakespeare Authorship thesis . Unfortunately I couldn’t find an english Publisher, since I was regarded (up to now) as a conspiracy ideologist. At least, I lately fabricated a short english Summary of the book.(Video youtube)
With great interest I read your contribution on „banishment as a romance“ on the website „Before Shakespeare“ . I suppose it‘s a base of your upcoming PhD „Bodies of Law: Banishment, Marriage, and Sovereign Power in Shakespeare’s Plays“.
The reason of my letter is a question:
What may be the reason, that in your essay on "Banishment in Shakespeares time" you totally neglegt (or deny?) the Marlowe / Shakespeare thesis, even though banishment, exile, disgrace , loss of identity etc. is a crucial element not only in Marlowe/Shakespeare‘s work but also in other poets or playwrights works ( best explainable as contemporary pseudonyms) such as, Drayton(1), Griffin (2) Ford (3) Shake-speare(4) and many more
Is the Marlowe/Shakespeare authorship thesis (also to you, belonging to a younger generation) total nonsense?
…so that it is advisable for you, not to answer a mentally confused one (as 99 % of all british intellectuals do)
Bastian Conrad (Prof.emeritus)
Michael Drayton (1) Bartholomew Griffin (2) John Ford (3) William Shakespeare. (4)
B.Griffin's Fidessa by Marlowe alias Shakespeare - Duration: 10 minutes.
Short Rationale why B.Griffins Sonnet Sequence "Fidessa" 1596 must have been written by Christopher Marlowe alias Shake-speare alias Barnfield alias Heywood etc. As absurd as it may sound!!
Published on 4 Jan 2018
Some 30 Arguments (a compilation of 6 videos) why Michael Drayton should belong - analogous to Shake-speare, Chapman, Davies(twice) and others - to the multiple pseudonyms of the true poet genius Christopher Marlowe.
Be warned: A complex literary-historical authorship affair!
This video contribution was consciously decelerated by the music.
(523)Why Marlowe would choose to use so many aliases, why not just stick with 'William Shakespeare' ?
:An attempt to give a short answer to a significant question, most often asked:
There are compelling reasons to assume that long before Marlowe's alleged death in 1593, from probably the very early beginnings of his writings, he must have been accustomed and was thus early prepared to write under false names, i.e. anonymously, pseudonymously, or with unidentifiable initials under a state of disguised identity. He must have wished (and was forced) to remain and write anonymously for various reason, not the least because of his (too) liberal or radical or progressive thoughts in matters of religion, social issues, ethics as well as because of his critics on public figures, opinions, books etc. - He was light years ahead of his time. -
To Marlowes early pseudo- or pennames, prior to his official death, one can safely count George Wither (e.g. "An ABC for Laymen" 1585/1588), Nicholas Breton ,William Gager ("Meleager"), William Basse , George Puttenham ..("The Arte of Poesie" and others. - Otherwise, it is literally impossible to explain why not a single literary work of Marlowe/Shakespeare was printed prior to his demise / or Shakespeare's rise in 1593, in Marlowes 30th year of life (exception: anonymous Tamburlaine 1590).
It is unthinkable and can literally be ruled out, that Marlowe/Shakespeare (of the same age!) between 1573 and 1593 have not spoken literally in many ways in their early most creative phase of life. - Consider that average life expectancy was not even 50 at that time! ......it is virtually impossible that the literary prolific creativity of the "true" Shakespeare genius within his first 30 years of life was Zero and consisted of no diversity of printed "literary Genres" at all (See: The Shakespeare Authorship : An Unsolicited Question - ref. )
Probably most people have no ideas of the dimensions, the earliness and immensity of Marlowes/ Shakespeares knowledge, of his power of comprehension, of his memory capacities, of his unimaginable speed of writing and thinking productivity, his dialogic language abilities or his elocutionary language skills, etc., i.e. his overwhelming creativity....
.....similar to a musical genius like Mozart, who wrote his first Piano Concert at the Age of 12. - KV37 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xFmod_Aazf0 and composed the Great symphony 36 (kv425) on transit within a prolonged weekend 1783 in the austrian City of Linz, when he and his wife had to interrupt their traveling between Salzburg and Vienna because of bad wether... https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=t7dWkI9H9fw
At the Elisabethan age crimes that threatened the social order were considered extremely dangerous offenses. They included not only heresy, but also treason, ( "Marlowes Dutch Libels.) which challenged the legitimate government and crown. Those convicted of these crimes (or threatened, such as Marlowe...he was advised and supported by Cecil to disappear by feigning his death) since by the law they had to expect the harshest punishment. Execution methods for the most serious crimes were designed to be as gruesome as possible....
Anonymity was necessary in those times, but not easy to achieve and often fraught with. It required "unlinkability", such that an attacker's examination of the pseudonym holder's message provided no information about the holder's true name or location.
It was by no means primarily the literary anonymity of Marlowe as a poet, under which he suffered from, (he very early on was accustomed to it!) but from his total banishment from society, from court and nobility ( since June 1593) and from his permanent and complete loss of reputation and identity, from his social isolation, his living in obscurity. - His formal extinction meant that he could never hope for a pardon under an earlier identity. He felt bound by his oath to William Cecil (See Hamlet Ghost Scene) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cWWyZaUKPmw
His "crime" (treason, rebellion, sedition) was atoned for by his formal death .... It was rather his reputation murder.....the absolute necessity to exist and remain incognito in seclusion....never to be recognized under any circumstances,
There is virtually no evidence that anyone during his lifetime knew of a poet Shakspere (Stratford), or of the fact that the Stratford person was the poet of Hamlet, Romeo & Julia, or King Lear. The idea of a fusion ( conflation?) of Shakspere and Shakespeare was explicitly invented or created for posterity, a construction of (for) his poetic aftermath ...
The ingenious trick of hiding behind the name of a single living (paid) person (such as Shakspere/Stratford) or deceased persons or invented names (e.g. John Overbury, Robert Southwell, Michael Drayton, George Chapman etc.) would have had the consequence, (as soon as somebody started looking for a singular person) of detecting the deceit sooner or later. ....this could only or best be prevented by a multiplicity of pseudonyms, but also by various other (also ingenious) tricks of multi-pseudonymities, e.g. by double names ( Sir John Davies/John Davies of Hereford --- or John Fletcher/Phineas Fletcher), by double authors Beaumont/Fletcher...and so on....
Consider, that half of Shakespeares plays (18) were printed only after his death, and not known before... of the other half 50% were printed anonymously thus only a quarter known under Shakepeare / Shake-speare....
This fact alone indicates the necessity that the recognizability of his person was prevented and had to be prevented by all circumstances!
If all 36 pieces of the First Folio and many more ( attributed to other fictious poets) had been printed under the name of William Shakespeare, there could or would soon have been a growing interest in getting a hunt for this person .... Under no circumstances could that happen ....It would have revealed the plot, the real conspiracy,....( Consider: its no conspiratory theory...)
Marlowe was considered to be dead, to be extinguished, and precisely at the time of his death (1593) a dramatist mockup Shakspere was created as a new poetical implemention....
There are several impressive literary sources, that later on Marlowe/Shakespeare, after his "Invention" to create a "living pseudonym Shake-speare", was very dissatisfied with that invention ( e.g.Typographie s.argument 24, Drayton https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3nZFlC4Gy2Q )
And there is another quite different chain of (backward) reasoning or argumentation to answer the variations of the basic question....
1 Why Marlowe would choose to use so many aliases?
2 Why not just stick with 'William Shakespeare' ?
(The sheer number of alleged aliases is unlikely -)
3 Why this huge quantity of pseudonyms ?
4 Was that really necessary for Marlowe?
We only get in the situation to answer the sheer scale of unresolved questions, uninterpretable literary Texts and inconsistencies (See John Ford as an example. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zYRdNU6GJc4) of so many contemporary authors ( such as Shakespeare, Basse, Wither, Drayton Chapman, Heywood, Barnfield, Taylor etc.) regarding the true poetical genius, if we presuppose the assumption of a multiple pseudonymity, which alone can resolve the Shakespeare authorship controversy.
This assumption is in strong contrast to the bizarre fact that more and more Shakespeare experts are now absurdly assuming that Shakespeare wrote in a team with co-authors.https://www.nosweatshakespeare.com/shakespeares-plays/shakespeares-collaborations/
Otherwise, we drown into a swamp of „unscientificness", or myth and stagnation....why a global collective intelligence up to now (>400 years) was not able to reach some progress to resolve a clearly existent authorship problem?
This YouTube contribution continues to argue (part 5 Arguments 21 to 25 ) why Michael Drayton must belong to the early "poetical pseudonyms" of the "true" Shakespeare (alias Marlowe).
Argument 21 RA Robert Allot Robert Armin
Argument 22 Frederick Fleay
Argument 23 Thomas Vicars
Argument 24 George Wither
Argument 25 Peter Heylin
This YouTube contribution continues to argue (part 4 Arguments 16 to 20 ) why Michael Drayton must belong to the early "poetical pseudonyms" of the "true" Shakespeare (alias Marlowe).
Argument 16 The Owle
Argument 17 Matilda
Argument 18 Henry Chettle
Argument 19 Wits recreations
Argument 20 John Weever
This YouTube contribution continues to argue (part 3 Arguments 11 to 15) why Michael Drayton must belong to the early "poetical pseudonyms" of the "true" Shakespeare (alias Marlowe).
Argument 11 Sweet Swan of Avon
Argument 12 Drayton is Outing himself
Argument 13 Draytons Marigold
Argument 14 The obscure Francis Meres
Argument 15 Paymemts only to Drayton
This YouTube contribution continues to argue (part 2 Arguments 6 to10 ) why Michael Drayton must belong to the early "poetical pseudonyms" of the "true" Shakespeare (alias Marlowe).
Argument 6 Endimion the perpetual sleeper
Argument 7 Drayton meets Shaksper
Argument 8 The scribe of Shakspers will
Argument 9 Shakspers Son in Law
Argument 10 Marginal poets pseudonyms.
Dishonest Frank Günther meets most criteria to discredit Non-Stratfordians and their arguments that someone other than William Shakspere of Stratford wrote the works attributed to him.
On August 12, 2017, the German cultural journalist and freelance author Bernd Noack interviewed the German Shakespeare translator Frank Günther in the Neue Züricher Zeitung (NZZ) on the occasion of the completion of his last translation "Perikles", entitled "The Happiness of the Conquest of the Texts" of his complete translations of all Shakespeare's Plays.I am referring to 2 questions only
Noack:[Translation] There is little information about Shakespeare's life, and there is still a doubt that he wrote the huge work of his own. Have you approached him, and perhaps see through Shakespeares game?
Günther:[ Translation] The Thesis "Shakespeare did not write Shakespeare" is an absurd conspiracy theory, one of the oldest, there is, and that does not interest me at all. Because it's nonsense.
But Shakespeare is as strange to me today and as far away and unrecognizable as it was. He withdraws completely behind his plays, and that is actually the ideal attitude for an author: He is not at all present. He lets his staff act and construct the conflicts between the characters so that one has the impression that the whole is generated by itself. As in the real world. It is never thought that someone takes an instruction and carries it out, but the characters tell the story itself by talking to each other. That is why the author, the Demiurg, completely disappears behind his texts and persons, and one never gets to know him. Unlike Brecht's: after the second piece, you think you already have a good understanding. Shakespeare, on the other hand, is a fog.
Noack: Is not that frustrating?
Günther: No, not at all. You do not have to worry about biographical nonsense: that's what he wrote for that reason, out of that mood. It is said that the author's life can be read in the plays, and that they can only be understood if one knows what he had in the year for a disease - all this plays no role.!
Why, for Gods sake , Günther hadn't the slightest idea of a need to question his own observations. What may be the reason, that the poet and human being "Shakespeare" is to him as strange and far away and unrecognizable as ever? Is Shakespeare really retreating behind his plays? Why is William not present ? Why does not Günther get to know Shakespeare? and so on and so on ....
Could not Günthers fatal attitude "without any scientific curiosity" be related to his total lack of imagination of an authorship problem?
Original German text
Noack: Über Shakespeares Leben gibt es wenig Informationen, und es bestehen nach wie vor Zweifel daran, dass er das riesige Werk selber geschrieben hat. Sind Sie ihm näher und vielleicht sogar auf die Schliche gekommen?
Günther: Die «Shakespeare schrieb nicht Shakespeare»-Behauptung ist eine absurde Verschwörungstheorie, eine der ältesten, die es gibt, und das interessiert mich überhaupt nicht. Weil's Quatsch ist.
Aber Shakespeare ist mir heute tatsächlich genauso fremd und fern und unerkennbar, wie er es war. Er zieht sich völlig hinter seine Stücke zurück, und das ist eigentlich die ideale Haltung für einen Autor: Er ist gar nicht vorhanden. Er lässt sein Personal agieren und konstruiert die Konflikte zwischen den Figuren so, dass man den Eindruck hat, das Ganze generiere sich aus sich selbst. Wie in der wirklichen Welt eigentlich. Nie meint man, dass einen da einer belehrend an die Hand nimmt und durchführt, sondern die Figuren erzählen die Geschichte selber, indem sie miteinander reden. Deswegen verschwindet der Autor, der Demiurg, gänzlich hinter seinen Texten und Personen, und man lernt ihn niemals kennen. Anders als etwa bei Brecht: Den meint man nach dem zweiten Stück doch schon gut begriffen zu haben. Shakespeare dagegen ist ein Nebel.
Noack: Ist das nicht frustrierend?
Günther: Nein, überhaupt nicht. Man muss sich nicht um biografischen Unsinn kümmern: Das hat er aus diesem Grund, aus jener Stimmung heraus geschrieben. Man meint ja, das Leben des Autors könne man in den Stücken lesen und diese verstehe man erst, wenn man wisse, was er in dem Jahr für eine Krankheit hatte – das fällt hier alles flach!
Early on, the poet Michael Drayton, has been considered a pioneer of the sonneteering obsession in Elisabethan England, with significant influences on Shake-speare’s(!) Sonnets.
This own YouTube contribution argues (first 5 Arguments - part 1/of 6) why Michael Drayton must belong to the early "poetical pseudonyms" of the "true" Shakespeare (alias Marlowe).
Argument 1 The missing Overlap
Argument 2 The Authors Sacrifice
Argument 3 His first Death
Argument 4 Marlowes Gaveston
Argument 5 Eloquent GHaveston
(516) Kastans refreshing, but unimaginative interests in the well-known grotesque facts about Shakespeare's will...
It does not need any age, it requires only
an inner arch-conservative (Stratfordian) unscientific attitude!
(515) Why the most renowned contempory writers didn't start their literary career in Shakespeare's first 3 decades of life (1563-1593) but only after Marlowes death?
The poets William Shakspeare, George Chapman, Michael Drayton, Thomas Heywood, Gervase Markham, Richard Barnfield and the "strange double" of John Davies started their literary career only after Londons greatest poet Genius and dramatist Marlowe had disappeared in 1593!
Is this pure coincidence or is there any plausible explanation?
Be aware that you cannot expect a reasonable answer from the "Stratfordian" Shakespeare Academe.
This Video contribution highlights some arguments why the first two alleged printed literary works of William Shakspeare (Stratford) "Venus & Adonis" (op.1 - 1593) and "Lucrece" (op.2 - 1594) have been written by Christopher Marlowe.
Conclusive Arguments of the Video:
There is no plausible motive for Shakspere (Stratford), to announce the beginning of his literary career (op.1)
"Venus&Adonis" with the last lines of´ Ovid's Elegy 15, dealing with the last things, the death, and the immortality
of the deceased Poet, - It fits, however, perfectly, with Christopher Marlowes literary restartafter his disappearance in 1593
Similar in "Lucrece", there is no identifiable motive for Shakspere (Stratford), to start his literary career with the parable of Tarquins misconduct against mythical "Lucrece" (op.2) matching however, with Christopher Marlowe's literary restart after his disappearance in 1593.
(513) Unnoticed handwriting / signature of Christopher Marlowe, 18 days prior to his alleged murder?
In the Collection items of the British Library you may read some interesting handwritten material related to the well known accusations against Christopher Marlowe by Richard Baines and others. (The Harley Manuscript 6484)
On a paper sheet between two pages numbered by pencil 189/190, you detect a short handwritten "2-part note" dated 12 May 1593, [ 18 days prior to Marlowe’s alleged murther]
The first part of this note (Black ink) dealing with the contents of Thomas Kyds heretical conceits………….
The second part (Brown ink, added later) deals with the possible origin of the conceits by Marlowe, the total notes ressembling Marlowes handwriting and his single existing signature.
No-one can seriously assume, that the Plays of Prince Hamlet and Dr. Faustus are pure literary fiction: They contain significant autobiographical connections to the "true" Shakespeare [alias Marlowe] which could never even partially be established between Hamlet and Shakspeare(Stratford)
"Doktor Faustus" (The play, by C.Marlowe ) ....was performed in London prior to 1593 and staged successfully 25 times between 1594 and 1597. A modified textual revival after 1602 was printed for the first time in 1604.
"Hamlet"(The play, by W.Shakespeare) . There are no references to early performances of Hamlet in London. Surviving texts suggest that the author added passages, after the play had been in performance for a while, prior to 1600.It was first printed in 1603(Q1) and a second time in 1604(Q2) after a considerable revision of the text.
The conclusion of the Video : Marlowe in 1616 "officially" dead for almost 25 years, was alive!
There are no reason or motives why the B-Text (Faustus) was kept under lock for a quarter of a century and who else but the author himself coulrd have added such late significant "biographical" information in view of the proximate death of his "literary dummy" "Shakspeare" from Stratford.
Denying the [virtually unimaginable] possibility of Shakespeare having been a [Pen]Name of Marlowe as taken from a "real" provincial Stratford frontman will for ever prevent a plausible solution of the century old unspeakable Shakespeareauthorship controversy.
Prof. Bate fulfills all criteria (s.Video1) for an orthodox academic Stratfordian Grandmaster
or horrendous ham actor to discredit a serious authorship problem.
He deals with authorship key questions (s.Video2) as if they were non-existent!
A paid stirrup holder of the SBT?
Jennifer Reid (introducing Prof.Jonathan Bate at the beginning of the Video by saying...)
Quote: "I am here today with Jonathan to talk about the authorship question. So we'd like to adress the question about the authorship in Person ....-
....and put it to bed once and for all "
Jonathan Bate concluded the Q&A game by saying:
Quote: "so in a way the authorship controversy emerged out of a kind of disappointment that the hard evidence of the documents didn't quite have the colour and the glamour to go with the idea that Shakespeare as the quintessential Genius
I think by the later 20th century the phenomenon, the controversy was dying away..- But then of course, with the advent of the Internet, it came back in a big way, because marvellous thing that the Internet is, the problem is, that there isn't a sort of a system of independent verification where you can discover which websites are actually based on evidence and which are based on conspiracy theory. So I am afraid it's not going to go away. But from our point of view, from the point we feel on the basis of the evidence we have laid out, other evidence thats available in a nummber of books [that we'll be listing on the Course site] the matter is settled.-
The english Blog (first 220 entries) available as kindle E-Book
Marlowe equals Shakespeare
Buchkritik im Internet
Peter von Becker
→Zeitzeichen WDR / NDR/ SR.
Zum Bearbeiten hier klicken.