Category Literary forensics
This Blue Boar Tavern kindly sponsored a discussion on the Audley End Annotations in this video recorded two weeks ago. Blue Boar hosts Bonner Miller Cutting, Dorothea Dickerman, Alex McNeil, and Jonathan Dixon — all experienced authorship skeptics — posed… Continue Reading →
A detailed forensic study, forthcoming in the Journal of Forensic Document Examination, of the annotations of six books at Audley End in Essex shows that that they are not made, as sometimes supposed, by Sir Henry Neville, but by Edward… Continue Reading →
Here’s the first of what will be many videos on the Audley End Annotations, sponsored by the Shakespeare Authorship Trust and the and posted to Youtube in April 2022. The video shows with detailed analysis why the annotations are not,… Continue Reading →
Nearly a year ago the De Vere Society Newsletter published several brief first impressions of the content of the Audley End Annotations, following my April 2022 discussion of the handwriting question for the Shakespeare Authorship Trust. The Authorship Trust lecture… Continue Reading →
Roger Stritmatter In a Winter 2022 Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship Newsletter article, “Who Wrote George Peele’s “Only Extant Letter,” Robert Prechter conducts an analysis claiming to establish that a 1595 letter sent to William Cecil, describing a literary work written by… Continue Reading →
One emphasis of this developing blog and website is on forensic method, a topic I’ve long studied and recently written about in the Journal of Forensic Document Examination (Vol. 27, 2017). One way I’ve developed an understanding of forensic methods… Continue Reading →
Guest Post by William S. Niederkorn. After the recent post on Hypnerotomachia, I downloaded the first edition of that book (1499) from archive.org courtesy of the Boston Public Library and upon opening it, saw that the text block pattern of… Continue Reading →
In April I delivered an invited lecture to a members-only meeting of the Shakespeare Authorship Trust, a British organization dedicated to exploring the authorship question, about some annotated books at the Essex Estate of Audley End. John Casson and Bill… Continue Reading →
The blog entry contests the facile and mistaken argument that Edward de Vere is not the annotator of his own Bible, using photographic evidence of handwriting and underlining in two of the three major ink types in the Bible.
The post considers the significance of one of the most striking of the de Vere Bible annotations, the annotator’s supplemental correction of the missing pronoun at Romans 7:20.