News and Scholarship on the Shakespeare Authorship Question

Category The Lost and Found Books of Edward de Vere

1604 and the Shakespeare Fact Pattern

Apparently in responses to Ms. Winkler’s Guardian story about the Francis Meres analysis I published in Critical Survey a chorus of followers has taken it upon themselves to lecture the internet. A leading argument of this internet flashmob concerns de… Continue Reading →

Mistaken Identity: Discovering The Two Cinnas in the Audley End Notes

Shows that one of the most potent passages relevant to the authorship question — namely the murderous confusion of “Cinna the Poet” for “Cinna the Conspirator — by the mob roused to a fury by Mark Antony’s Funeral Oration — is inscribed as an annotation in the Audley End copy of Cassius Dio.

Audley End Annotations Revealed at the Blue Boar Tavern

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 →

Audley End Annotations Show Handwriting of Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford

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 →

The Audley End Annotations are Not in Sir Henry Neville’s Handwriting

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 →

Forthcoming Article on Audley End Annotations to help Revolutionize Shakespeare Studies

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 →

Fact Patterns in the Shakespeare Authorship Question: Missing Books

Fact patterns are more important than facts. In this first of a series, we consider the fact pattern of Shakespeare’s missing books.

De Vere Bible Psalms in Shakespeare: Surprise in Notes and Queries

The Blog reports on Richard Waugaman’s influential 2009 and 2010 Notes and Queries articles on the influence of the Sternhold and Hopkins edition of the Psalms in Shakespeare. Visual evidence from the de Vere Geneva Bible shows eight of the Psalms whose influence Waugaman discusses are marked with manicules in the de Vere copy of Sternhold and Hopkins.

Whose Handwriting is in the de Vere Geneva Bible?

Sticky post

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.

Shakespeare’s Bible: St. Paul and the De Vere Geneva 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.

« Older posts

© 2024 Shake-speares-bible.com — Powered by WordPress

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑