(s. Blogs - 254 - / - 333 -).
Malim points to interesting parallels of similar wordings and idioms between „The Arte“ and „Shakespeare‘s work“, which – I agree - by no means can have occured purely accidental. - But how to explain the contextual connections between both ? Malims bizarre conclusion is that the dating of Shakespeare’s works must have been prior to 1589, because Puttenham already quoted Shakespeare (1589) , and that this rules out the Stratfordman as the author of the plays.
Malims final conclusion: „These examples [of wordings] are a small fraction of those available whereby Puttenham’s quotations can be seen to be taken from works (…) written and in circulation before Puttenham’s publication date of 1589. Puttenham therefore provides vital pieces of evidence for the dating of works, and these rule out William Shakspere of Stratford-Upon-Avon as the author.“ [thus .... are in favor of the Earl of Oxford]
Is it conceivable that at the literary climax of Shakespeare/Marlowe [see--> Marlowe/ alias Shakespeare Thesis] both in his 25th year of life (1589), an unknown author Puttenham wrote nothing else [-->one exception] than this high profile essay on "The Arte of English Poesie?"
If the "The Arte", is exhibiting such powerful parallels with the language displayed in Shakespeare's plays, is'nt it much more likely, that its anonymous author must be identified as the greatest english poet Genius? Is there any reason that speaks against it?