The real Shakespeare
(media.scored.co)
Comments (18)
sorted by:
Some more info on this theory here:
https://sirbacon.org/baconian-evidence-for-shakespeare-authorship/
I lean towards this being true. Also very interesting is the potential role he played in the KJV Bible as the head of the “Divines” who translated it.
Why would someone like Sir Francis Bacon not want credit for authoring all these works? Whoever actually authored them obviously put an insane amount of work and passion into them.
The profession of writing wasn't looked on well through a large part of history. It wasn't something gentlemen of means did professionally. Many people of means wrote, but published under a pseudonym.
My guess is that Shakespeare was the town dummy and Bacon (maybe others with him) threw Shakespeare's name on them as a joke. People at the time knew who really wrote them, but nobody thought (or cared) to make a note about the reference for the readers in the future.
Bacon was the head of the Rosicrucian order.
Was he illiterate? Possibly.
Just a few years ago most businesses men couldn't type. That doesn't mean they couldn't do their jobs, they just hired out the work.
Same goes for studio musicians who do all the playing for "pop artists". At the end of the day it's Taylor Swift's name in the liner notes as the composer.
No illiterate could have such deep and intricate knowledge of court politics, or history, or the classics that came before, or any of the other subjects so brilliantly touched upon by “Shake-Speare”.
Comforting notion though.
Because you decreed it.
Comforting indeed.
How the fuck could an illiterate make grand and majestic insights into classical literature - much less ones that would stand for a thousand years and continue to reverberate every time some schmuck like you says “we’re in a pickle”
https://www.rsc.org.uk/shakespeare/language/biblical-and-classical-references
The Shakespeare code couldn't have been made by an illiterate either.
That’s another ultra-interesting rabbit hole:
https://youtu.be/xHiad18ZwcY
(Same guy) https://communities.win/c/Conspiracies/p/15IrKsMZoT/whoever-built-the-great-pyramid-/c
A cogent response to the crap the being peddled by the "Stratford denier" OP is found here: https://fcarroll.substack.com/p/counter-oxfordianism-part-ii
The reason this argument doesn't work for me, is that both of Shakespeares SSI gutters were illiterate.
I will be honest, I don't know what you mean by SSI gutters.
It was a typo I didn't catch! I'm sorry.
It should have said : his daughters were illiterate.
Shakespeare basically abandoned his wife to work in London, leaving his family behind. And letting your daughters be illiterate in that era was no big deal. That's not conclusive is what I'm saying.
At that time, it was a sign of wealth to, " waste money" teaching daughters. That's how it became trendy. It then became a requirement for marriage, so the trend stayed. With a different reason.
Despite Shakespeare eventually getting a noble title by purchasing it, he was still a working man. So essentially, a man who abandons his family (but still financially supports them at some level) wouldn't necessarily educate his daughters unless they were going to marry up. And at the time they would be educated, when they were young, Shakespeare had not made his fortune yet. We have an idea that things were tight, with this troupe at least, because of lawsuit records.