Shakespeare Beyond Doubt?: Exposing an Industry in Denial

by John M. Shahan, Alexander Waugh (Editor)

The Book the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust Doesn’t Want You to Read: Shakespeare Beyond Doubt? Never has the case against the Stratford man been made so clear and compelling. Unsettled by the growing success of the Shakespeare Authorship Coalition and its online Declaration of Reasonable Doubt About the Identity of William Shakespeare, the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust in Stratford-upon-Avon has published a book insisting that the identity of the author William Shakespeare is “beyond doubt.” In this withering reply a dozen scholars expose the bankruptcy of this claim and challenge the Birthplace Trust to stand and defend its position under cross-examination in a televised mock trial. “Authorities tell us there is no doubt that Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare. Should we trust them? This book comes at a critical time, with defenders of orthodoxy deceiving the public about how weak their case really is. It is time for a serious re-examination of the evidence. This book does just that.” – Richard Waugaman, M.D., Clinical Professor of Psychiatry; Faculty Expert on Shakespeare for Media Contacts, Georgetown University, Washington, D. C.

Genres: History, Shakespeare

527 pages, Kindle Edition

First published June 11, 2013

Reviews

[Marilyn · Rating 5 out of 5]

I liked this book because:

1) It did not stress alternative candidates for the position of "Who was really the dramatist, William Shakespeare?" It showed why William Shakspere [the spelling of the last name in the Stratford church's baptismal record for William and his siblings] could not be that dramatist "beyond doubt", and that the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust would lose a lot tourist revenue and academics who believe Will of Stratford was Shakespeare a lot of credibility if doubt took hold. [It's possible that Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford and the current front-runner in the "I'm the Real Bard" controversy, is the real bard; but I think the Oxfordians who say that Oxford was Queen Elizabeth's son or lover (and the father of the Earl of Southampton) or both son and lover and that he and/or the Earl of Southampton was "Prince Tudor", the "rightful heir to the Crown" [and so his / their current successors are too] are ga-ga about thrones, not about the authorship of the plays. Any child of Good Queen Bess would have been illegitimate because she was unmarried, and she could not marry an already married man. Mary I did not "make herself legitimate" as one contributor wrote. She was made illegitimate by Act of Parliament in her father's reign. When she became Queen, she had the act repealed. Besides, the Pope upheld her parents marriage and so all Catholics believed she was the legitimate heir to the Crown since her birth. The Protestants believed Elizabeth's parents had the valid marriage, so she, to them, was the legitimate heir after her brother Edward. Elizabeth was already seated on the throne and neither Mary of Scots nor Catherine Grey could get close to pull her off it. It wasn't a case of "I made myself legitimate heir"; but "I was born legitimate heir" according to the Catholic or according to the Anglican church). Neither church would have accepted Oxford or Southampton or any child the unmarried Queen had borne as legitimate heir.]

2) Each essay in this book has a bibliography of both "Stratfordian" and "Doubter" authors' books.

Read both "Shakespeare Beyond Doubt" by Paul Edmondson [the Birthplace Trust's book] and "Shakespeare Beyond Doubt?"

[Rik Walter · Rating 5 out of 5]

Essential reading for anyone interested in the authorship issue.

[Montse · Rating 5 out of 5]

A thorough account of the authorship question. Not trying to backup any possible candidate, but simply stating why there are grounds for research and room for doubt due to lack of actual evidence on essential details. A must read for anyone interested in the topic. Very detailed (though a bit repetitive at times) and informative. Highly recommended

[Dave J · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you have read much on this it is repetitive... lots of info that does prove a case.

[Edmund]

Essential entry book to Authorship question.

[Robin Anderson · Rating 5 out of 5]

The evidence against the man from Stratford, William Shaksper, having written the Shakespeare plays and sonnets is overwhelming. So, it's not just a 21st Century habit to ignore and overrule fact in favor of personal gain, or to refuse to study the case further once that gain is entrenched in tradition.

[Robynne Lozier · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is for those anti-stratfordians who accept that shakespeare could not have written those plays. It presents ALL the evidence including those arguments that the stratfordians use as proof that the man from stratford DID write the plays.

Lots of images of signatures and other evidence.

It is actually nice to have all the evidence in one neat tidy book.

A little dry in some places, but very informative.