Unraveling the Authorship Mystery: Could Someone Else Have Written Shakespeares Plays?
Unraveling the Authorship Mystery: Could Someone Else Have Written Shakespeare's Plays?
For centuries, the works of William Shakespeare have captivated audiences and scholars alike. His plays and sonnets have stood the test of time, but what if someone else wrote them? The idea of Shakespeare not being the author of his own plays is a theory that has gained considerable traction. This article explores the evidence and common sense arguments that support the theory of an alternative author for Shakespeare's works.
The Dangerous Political Climate for Writers in Shakespeare's Time
During the 16th century, the political climate for writers was anything but safe. A striking example of this danger is the story of John Stubbs, a man who wrote a pamphlet that caused such an uproar that Queen Elizabeth I ordered his hand chopped off with a mallet. The incident provided a stark reminder of the risks associated with political satire and social commentary.
Considering this context, it is highly improbable that Shakespeare would have authored 37 plays, 154 sonnets, and four long poems without risking severe repercussions. The sheer volume of works and the potential for political and social controversy raises significant questions about the authenticity of the authorship.
Insider Details in Shakespeare’s Works
The plays themselves contain a wealth of insider details that defy common knowledge. For instance, in The Merchant of Venice, the line “Meet me at the Rialto” refers to a bridge over the largest canal in Venice. Maps of the city do not include bridges, so how would Shylock know this detail unless he was an insider?
Another example is from Romeo and Juliet, where the author describes a grove of sycamore trees west of the city. This description can only be accurate if someone from Italy wrote it, as the trees are not native to England.
In The Taming of the Shrew, there is a reference to a graveyard near Lucentio’s conversation in the city of Pisa, and in The Comedy of Errors, the character Solinus is named after a book translated by Edward de Vere's uncle, Arthur Golding. These details suggest that the author had intimate knowledge of Italian geography, culture, and literature.
Shakespearean Sources and Scholarly Discrepancies
One of the most compelling pieces of evidence against Shakespeare's authorship is the source material for his works. For instance, the poem The Rape of Lucrece includes sources in Latin not translated into English until after 1600. The real author would need to be proficient in Latin to compose the poem so quickly and accurately. Further complicating matters is the fact that Ben Jonson, a contemporary and friend of Shakespeare, claimed that William was "small" or "little" in Latin.
Fans of the traditional Shakespeare authorship theory may argue that he could have taught himself Latin, but the evidence points to the opposite. The Latin text used to teach students Latin is 250 pages long and entirely in Latin! This raises doubts about the authenticity of the Shakespearean authorship claim.
Circumstantial Evidence and Common Sense
The circumstantial evidence is not just about insider details and specific knowledge. It also includes the political risks, the complexity of the language and the sheer volume of work. When combined, these factors strongly suggest an alternative author for Shakespeare's plays.
Conclusion
While the case for Shakespeare's authorship remains the mainstream narrative, the evidence for an alternative author, such as Julius Practice, is both compelling and intriguing. As the debate continues, it is essential to approach the question with an open mind, considering the historical, cultural, and political context of the time.