Please forgive me for this slightly provocative title. My reason for it is that I want to make an important point – or rather two points. The first is that I think it’s highly unlikely – to put it mildly - that William Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon was the author of the works that we attribute to Shakespeare. The second is that one should separate this question - where the answer is to me pretty clear - from the other questions that follow (such as, obviously, who then was the author?) because these other questions are much trickier. We can deal with them later – and I’ve tried to deal with them separately. But, first, could it conceivably have been the man from Stratford?
There are two “killer” reasons for doubting it – that is to say, facts where no one has been able to explain, in any remotely convincing way, how they are consistent with the man from Stratford being the author.
First reason
The first is extremely surprising to anyone who hasn’t looked into the question. It is that no one – absolutely no one - during Mr Shakespeare’s lifetime claimed that he was the author. Or if they did, they left no record that has been found despite some 400 years of searching.
Before moving on, let’s look at an obvious objection to relying on this: how can one ever be sure about anything that happened or didn’t happen 400 years ago? Maybe all the records have simply got lost. Indeed. But various people have been identified who knew him and whose letters and other written records do survive. And none of them mention the great dramatist. One was his son-in-law, no less, Dr John Hall, who was married to his daughter Susanna. Dr Hall kept copious notes about his patients, which survive in the shape of notebooks. There is no mention in any of them of his famous father-in-law. How odd!
There was another writer, William Campden, who wrote a history called Britannia. In it he describes the country, county by county. When he gets to Warwickshire, he describes Stratford-upon-Avon, then a small market town. He refers to the important people who had lived there – a John de Stratford who became Archbishop of Canterbury; as well as Hugh Clopton, who financed the construction of the bridge at Stratford that still bears his name. But he makes no mention of the leading dramatist and poet of the day. Again, how odd!
A historian, Diana Price, has done some research to see if this lack of evidence is also reflected in other contemporary writers. She identified 24 (or 25 if we include Shakespeare). In the case of each of the 24, there is evidence (letters, manuscripts, receipts, etc.) that clearly connects them with writing the works attributed to them. The only exception is the greatest of them all, Shakespeare.
How could that have been? No one has given a convincing answer – or indeed any answer at all.
Second reason
The second reason is rather similar. Mr Shakespeare died in 1616. When he died there was no public mention of his death, either in London or Stratford – just a note of his burial in the parish records in Stratford a few days later. The custom at that time was for eminent men – other authors, for example – to publish eulogies, normally poems, honouring the deceased. Ben Jonson died in 1637 and many eulogies were published, of which 33 were collected in a book that survives. Similarly, Francis Beaumont, another dramatist, died a few weeks before Shakespeare. He was buried in Westminster Abbey. For Shakespeare – nothing. Again, how odd! Why could that have been, if he really was the famous poet and dramatist? No one has provided an answer.
Confusion
We ought to clear up some confusion. We’ve been referring to Mr Shakespeare of Stratford. In fact his name, as it appeared in almost all the official records, was “Shakspere” – not Shakespeare. Some have said that spelling at that time was less punctilious than it is today. Correct. But nevertheless, although indeed his name was spelt in various ways, sometimes Shaxpere, sometimes even Shagspere, when the name was associated with the plays and the poems, it was virtually always spelt as we do, although sometimes with a hyphen, as in “Shake-Speare”. Interestingly, hyphenated names were normally pseudonyms in those days. In order to avoid the potential confusion, people often say Shakspere or Will Shakspere to indicate the man from Stratford – and Shakespeare or William Shakespeare to indicate the author. I’ll do the same.
Pseudonym
It is sometimes argued that there is plenty of evidence of Shakspere’s authorship, including evidence during his lifetime. The argument is that both the long poems, Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece, were published in 1593-4 with a dedication signed by William Shakespeare; and starting in 1598 a few of the plays were printed during his lifetime under that name. This is correct, so far as it goes. The problem with it as an answer is that there is an alternative view, namely that the name was a pseudonym. Actually, it was used as a pseudonym, in that various plays were published under that name that no one thinks were by the author we know as Shakespeare – or indeed by Shakspere. But as it could have been a pseudonym, plainly it doesn’t prove that the works were written by a Mr Shakespeare, any more than the name John Le Carre proves that there was anyone of that name writing spy novels.
Knowledge
The two killer reasons explained above have never been satisfactorily answered. There are many other points that strongly indicate that Will Shakspere couldn’t have been the author, but they are not quite so conclusive, in that people have at least tried to explain them away. However, they are certainly reasonably persuasive.
They relate mainly to the amazing breadth of knowledge displayed in the plays and indeed in the poems: knowledge of the law, medicine, astronomy, history, classical literature, military and naval affairs – and particularly foreign countries such as Italy. How could Mr Shakspere have acquired it? The classic answer is that he was a genius. But it takes more than genius to acquire knowledge. Eminent lawyers have studied the many and various references to legal matters in the plays and have failed to catch him out.
Much emphasis is placed on his education at the Stratford Grammar School. But did he even attend it? No one knows as no records survive. Perhaps he did, though at the time his father was in serious financial trouble and probably needed his son’s help in his business. Shakspere certainly never went to university. University records do survive.
But perhaps the most telling example is knowledge of Italy, its geography and customs. Many of the plays have scenes set in Italy. Some have said that the references aren’t really to Italy: yes, the plays have Italian settings but they are really about England. Others have tried to point out errors. This whole topic has been comprehensively dealt with in a detailed and fascinating book The Shakespeare Guide to Italy by Richard Paul Roe. He explicitly avoids any discussion of the authorship question, but concludes that the playwright (as he calls him) could only have acquired such specific, and strikingly accurate, information about the country by travelling there. No one has realistically suggested that Shakspere ever went outside England.
Who was Shakspere?
If Mr Shakspere was not the author of the plays, who was he? Many records survive, even though, as indicated, none relate to any form of literary activity. He was a businessman. He traded in what we would term agricultural products – wheat, malt, cereals. In fact he got into trouble with the authorities for hording wheat during a time of famine. He was a great litigator, being quick to sue to collect his debts. He was also an investor in property and became a rich man. He bought one of the largest houses in Stratford - New Place. He was also an investor in the theatre, acquiring an eighth leasehold interest in the Globe Theatre, and becoming a member of the theatrical group, the Lord Chamberlain’s Men. Many legends have grown up from this that he was an actor. He may have been, although there is very little evidence. There is no evidence at all that he was an author.
Tony Herbert
21 February 2021