See the new shakespeare.com. This feature, while it still provides useful information, is no longer maintained.
Replies | Post Reply | Shakespeare Queries & Replies From Everyone Else 4.2.97: Top | Help
It seems to me that the authorship dispute can be reduced to
a simple equation.We have one set of plays and two candidates for authorship.
The plays were produced at a steady rate during Shakespeare's
lifetime, with anything up to three new plays a year, so there was
definately a demand. There is evidence that other acting companies
and publishers tried to pirate the plays. As the Globe Theatre was
run as a business (sorry, Bill, but that's how things were in those
days) we can safely assume that Shakespeare plays must have made money.
(Somewhere I've see a copy of the accounts of the Globe theatre. It
gives details of a typical day's takings. I'll see if I can find it.)Of the two candidates, one was born into a moneyed family, with property
and investments. Throughout his life, however, he gradually lost money in
various failed business schemes (see Oxford's letters for details).
Eventually his situation got so bad that he relied upon handouts from his
noble friends, and even received an unprecedented pension from the crown.
He died next to penniless.The other one started with nothing (his father was bankrupt).
Through working hard at his chosen career in the theatre (there
is no evidence of any other source of income) he started to earn
money at quite a comfortable rate, which he then invested in property
and in grain concessions. Occasionally he had recourse to litigation
in order to protect his investments. He died moderately wealthy,
the second richest man in his home town.So which of the two do you think is the more likely author of this
highly popular and profitable set of plays?Posted by Thersites on April 15, 1997 at 05:57:05
In Reply to "Oh?" posted by Bruce Spielbauer on April 14, 1997 at 18:41:30
Replies | Post Reply | Shakespeare Queries & Replies From Everyone Else 4.2.97: Top | Help