Å Is Edward de Vere the True, and
Only, Author of Shakespeare’s Work?

\

The works of Edward de Vere, 17^th Earl of Oxford, have been under intense scrutiny in the past century.  Why has he received so much attention?  Some people believe he is the true author of the works attributed to William Shakespeare.  Rival societies have been formed with the Oxfordians going to great lengths to disprove the claims by the Stratfordians that their man was the one and only genius playwright.  In this, the age of computers, websites are full of “facts” unearthed by the champions of each cause.  Who can we believe and is it really necessary for those of us who appreciate great literature to know who actually penned the words?

The major problem for academics who seek to find the rightful author of works from the 16^th century is that they were rarely signed.  This applies equally to the works of De Vere and Shakespeare.  Oxfordians claim that Edward was unable to put his name on his works because he was a noble and by doing so he would have violated an Elizabethan social code.  Between sixteen and twenty-two poems are attributed to him, mainly written when he was a young man, but none of his plays have survived.  The works of William Shakespeare are greater in volume, with over 150 poems being claimed as his by his supporters.  There are also 37 plays that are reputed to have been written by the man from Stratford and these are considered to be his greatest legacy to the world of literature.

In Elizabethan times, plays were not considered to be great literature.  They were created as entertainment for the masses and ranked along with bear baiting as a suitable diversion for all ranks.  Some plays were presented at court and were of a more genteel nature but the plays attributed to William Shakespeare were much broader in their range.  We are fortunate that they have survived as they give us a glimpse into life at that time.  They vary from comedies to tragedies, from social commentary to magical fantasies.  But were they all the work of one man?  This question has stymied scholars for years as they find it hard to believe that a glover’s son from the provinces could have the necessary background to write such diverse material.  Oxfordians say that Shakespeare did not have the formal education or access to books that are the sources for these plays.  They doubt that he travelled abroad or that he knew Court life well enough to write about it so well. (http://www.deveresociety.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/authorship_subpage.html).

            Many of the plays survived because they were published in the First Folio in 1623, seven years after the Stratford citizen’s death.(http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/guide.htm).  The editors, Heminge and Condell, have not included any piece of work that is in Shakespeare’s handwriting but have put together a collection of stage copies.  As fellow actors in Shakespeare’s theatrical company, The King’s Men, they were proud of the plays they had performed in and wished to preserve them.  It is possible that the actors of the company had a hand in creating them.  Much as director Mike Leigh today gathers an ensemble cast to work on a film without a definite script but only an outline of what he wants to happen, it is entirely possible that theatre in Shakepeare’s time functioned in the same way.  The actors were together all the time and always performed the same type of role.  Thus Richard Burbage would know what his heroic character would say or William Kempe could act the clown to perfection.  The words did not necessarily come directly from the playwright but might have had a multitude of sources.

If this is the case then perhaps we should not be trying to compare apples and oranges (the surviving poems of De Vere with the plays of Shakespeare).  To discover who was the greatest writer in Elizabethan times we should look into the poetry that has survived.  This is where the debate gets interesting as we seem to have two halves of a riddle.   (http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/guide.htm)  De Vere has a few poems attributed to him that were written in his early life while Shakespeare seems to have emerged as a mature poet in later life.  Is it possible they were one and the same person? Many scholars have examined these writings carefully looking for similarities in form, words or phrasing.  Just as art historians examine paintings for evidence of forgery, so academia is looking for stylistic clues to the authorship of the wonderful Shakespearean sonnets and his other poems.

Elizabethan poetry is concerned with a number of common themes but the most usual theme is love.  Joseph Sobran, in his article “‘Shakespeare’ Revealed in Oxford’s Poetry”, finds it significant that both writers refer frequently to Cupid.  This statement incurred the wrath of David Kathman who, in his rebuttal for the Stratfordians, lets us know that as both authors were writing love poems then of course they would each include Cupid in their imagery.(http://shakespeareauthorship.com/)  Similar discussion erupted when Sobran claims that the classical myths used by both poets seemed unusually similar.  Kathman refutes this by saying that any educated Elizabethan would be intimately familiar with the conventions and cliches of these myths.

Sobran waved a red flag when he wrote “I challenge anyone to find so many close parallels of phrase, image, rhythm and thought between two poets in all literature”.  The Shakespeare Clinic at Claremont College responded by deciding to use computers to see which of the many "true authors" of Shakespeare would best match Shakespeare’s style. (http://shakespeareauthorship.com/elval.html).   The tests they used measured the way an author uses words together and the patterns of deviation from a writer’s normal rates of word frequency.  They checked for hyphenated compound words, relative clauses per thousand and the percentage of open and feminine ended lines.  They gave a grade level to the writing of each author based on word and sentence length.  

The results showed Shakespeare’s patterns to be very consistent and often at great variance with those of the other Elizabethan poets.  Even taking into account that texts may vary and some spelling and punctuation came from different editors and not the authors, this study is a blow to the Oxfordian movement.  Overall, the tests showed Shakespeare wrote at a Grade 11 level while Oxford wrote at a Grade 8 level.  Supporters of Edward de Vere suggest these differences may be developmental so more tests were run to compare early Shakespeare works with later ones.  The conclusion of the Clinic was that Shakespeare had a fairly narrow distinctive profile that was consistent over the years.  If the works of “Shakespeare” were actually written by the Earl of Oxford then he must have undergone several major stylistic changes, a feat they considered to be almost impossible.

There are even more differences between the verse forms of Oxford and those of Shakespeare.  Steven May (http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/may.htm) states that Oxford’s poems are “the output of a competent, fairly experimental poet working in the established modes of mid-century lyric verse”.  He used eleven different metrical and stanzaic forms – including one English sonnet.  This sonnet “Who taught thee first to sigh, alas, my heart” is in the same form as that which Shakespeare used.  This caused the father of the Oxfordian movement, J. Thomas Looney, to claim that “the actual founder of the Shakespearean sonnet was Edward de Vere” (Looney, page 386).  However, Terry Ross, in his article “The Verse Forms of Shakespeare and Oxford” (http://shakespeareauthorship.com/verform.html) provides many examples of “Shakespearean” sonnets that were written before De Vere’s time (and before Shakespeare’s time too, which is somewhat confusing!).  Because Shakespeare made the 14 line iambic pentameter sonnet with an “ababcdcdefefgg” rhyme scheme most memorable it has been given his name but he was not the first poet to use this format.  Ross gives that honour to Henry Howard, the Earl of Surrey (1517-47).  There are many other differences in the verse forms of the two authors.  Shakespeare preferred to write in iambic pentameter while only 42% of Oxford’s poems are like that.  Oxford seemed to enjoy writing 14 syllable lines either as fourteeners or in poulter’s measure.  This was a popular form in the 1570’s but didn’t appear in many works after that period.  Shakespeare didn’t use it in his poetry although it appears from time to time in his plays when he trying to be funny (e.g. in parts of Pyramis and Thisby in A Midsummer Night’s Dream).

With all this evidence against him, why has Edward de Vere captured the attention of so many people?  There have been other contenders for the position of “the real Shakespeare” – Francis Bacon, Christopher Marlowe and William Stanley among others have had their supporters since the 18^th century.  What has happened since J. Thomas Looney published his book in 1920 is that the authorship question has moved out of academia and has been integrated into popular culture. More and more people are exposed to the works of William Shakespeare through teaching in schools, visits to the theatre and movie adaptations.  People have become more curious about the “genius’ who provides them with quotations for every occasion.   They have not been satisfied with the information they have found on the life of the Stratford man.  Sensing a mystery that needs to be solved, they are looking for other explanations.  De Vere enthusiasts have been very successful about putting their position into the public eye and in ways that attract attention.  Books, both fictional and non-fictional, have been written, websites created, even serious television programs and debates have been produced to support the Oxfordian claims.  Various well-known figures have given their names to the cause.  From prominent British actor Sir Derek Jacobi to Hollywood heartthrob Keanu Reeves, many people are convinced that De Vere is “the man”.

Sigmund Freud felt that as all work is essentially autobiographical then elements of the author’s life should be contained in his works.  He drew parallels between Hamlet and the life of Oxford.  This in turn sent even more people scouring the texts for links between the Earl’s life and the poems and plays of Shakespeare.  Who was the “Dark Lady of the Sonnets”?  Perhaps it was Anne Vavasour, Oxford’s mistress who bore him a son and was locked up in the Tower.  Who was the young man whose beauty inspired so much poetry?  Even Stratfordians agree it was most likely Henry Wriothsley, the young Earl of Southampton who was engaged to De Vere’s daughter.  However, what most people are looking for is a definitive piece of evidence that would prove their point.

The discovery of Edward de Vere’s 1569 Geneva Bible was a significant boost for the Oxfordians.  More than a quarter of the 1000 underlined verses and marginal notes happen to be some of Shakespeare’s favourites. (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shakespeare/update/andersondoc.html) Scholars over the years have chronicled the biblical passages that Shakespeare used but this Bible is now rectifying some shortcomings in their work.  One interesting aspect in the study of this 425 year-old Bible is the frequent reference to “doing all things without murmuring”.  Is De Vere giving us a hint that eventually he will receive recognition for his secret words and deeds?  The truth is tantalizingly close but the supporters from each side are still grasping at straws.

Which brings us to the last point – is it really necessary to know who wrote these works to properly appreciate them?  We can examine the evidence found online, in articles and texts, or listen to interesting discussions giving opinions on who might have written the work.  Or we might prefer to disregard the hoopla and just enjoy the poems, plays and performances.  Just as some people will only wear designer jeans because they are the right brand, others will ignore the name as long as they are the right fit.  In the case of the body of work that is attributed to William Shakespeare, I think I will devote my energies to appreciating the talent of the poet and playwright no matter what his name might be.

References

A Beginner’s Guide to the Shakespeare Authorship Problem. http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/guide.htm Accessed March 21, 2005.

Anderson, Mark K. Oxfordian Argument: An Update. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shakespeare/update/andersondoc.html Accessed March 22, 2005.

Elliot, Ward & Valenza, Robert. Was the Earl of Oxford the True Shakespeare? A Computer Aided Analysis. http://shakespeareauthorship.com/elval.html Accessed March 23, 2005.

Looney, John Thomas. Shakespeare Identified Jennings, Louisiana: Kennikat Press, 1975. page 386

Kathman, David & Ross, Terry. The Shakespeare Authorship Page: Dedicated to the Proposition that Shakespeare Wrote Shakespeare. http://shakespeareauthorship.com/ Accessed March 23, 2005.

May, Steven. Edward de Vere, Seventeenth Earl of Oxford (1550-1604)

http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/may.htm Accessed March 23, 2005.

Ross, Terry. The Verse Forms of Shakespeare and Oxford http://shakespeareauthorship.com/verform.html Accessed March 22, 2005.

Sobran, Joseph. “‘Shakespeare’ Revealed in Oxford’s Poetry” http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/sobrpoet.htm Accessed March 22, 2005.

Some Awkward Questions. http://www.deveresociety.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/authorship_subpage.html Accessed March 21, 2005.

Site Maintained By Anna Galway
email: 061615g@acadiau.ca
Last Updated April 10, 2005