Selects: Did Shakespeare really write all that stuff?

Shakespeare Had Documented Records From 1564 To 1616, Though Personal Documentation Is Limited For Someone of His Fame

William Shakespeare is confirmed to be a real historical figure, with records spanning from his birth in 1564 to his death in 1616. Despite this, there is a surprising scarcity of personal papers, considering his iconic status in world literature.

Shakespeare Came From a Middle-Class Family; His Father John Was a Glove Maker and Mayor

Shakespeare was born into a middle-class family. His father, John Shakespeare, made fine gloves for well-to-do clients and eventually rose to the prominent local office equivalent to mayor in Stratford. The family was well regarded but not part of the nobility.

Education at Stratford Grammar School: Latin, History, Classical Literature Until Age 13

Owing to his family's status and resources, it is highly probable, though not certain, that William attended the Stratford grammar school until about the age of 13. There he would have studied Latin, history, and classical literature. This level of education was not unusual for the time, falling between the extremes of no education and attendance at university. The knowledge he likely gained helps explain the learned references found throughout his plays.

Shakespeare, 18, WeD Pregnant Anne Hathaway, 26; They Had Three Children, Including Twins, one Named Hamnet, Who Died At 11

At age 18, Shakespeare married Anne Hathaway, who was 26 and pregnant—a somewhat unusual circumstance for the era. They had a daughter, Susanna, followed by twins Hamnet and Judith. Hamnet's death at age 11 is noted as a significant event in Shakespeare's life.

A Seven-Year Gap in the Historical Record, Known As the "Lost Years," Leaves His Whereabouts and Activities During This Time Unknown, Allowing For Speculation About Life Experiences or Travels

From 1585 to 1592, a seven-year stretch known as Shakespeare's "lost years," the historical record goes virtually silent on his activities. This gap has fueled speculation about travels, possible new experiences, and how he may have further developed his knowledge and craft before reappearing in London theater records.

Evidence of Shakespeare's London Theater Involvement

1592 Pamphlet Reference: Greene's "Upstart Crow" as Criticism or Plagiarism Accusation

The earliest indisputable reference to Shakespeare as a London playwright appears in 1592, when the pamphlet "Greene’s Groatsworth of Wit" describes him as an "upstart crow." Some interpret this as an insult against an actor daring to become a playwright or as a subtle accusation of plagiarism, referencing the fable of crows stealing the feathers of others.

Shakespeare's 1616 Will Omits Manuscripts, Plays, Books, and Musical Instruments Despite Using 300 Musical Terms and 26 Instruments in His Plays

A point of curiosity is that, although Shakespeare frequently used musical terms and mentioned 26 different instruments across his plays, there is no record of him passing on any books, manuscripts, or musical instruments in his 1616 will. This absence, along with the lack of a personal library or written correspondence, invites suspicion but is not definite evidence against his authorship.

Curse Warns Against Disturbing Remains; 2016 Scan Shows Skull Missing, Authenticity Questioned

On his tombstone, a rhymed curse warns would-be grave robbers against moving his bones. Despite this, a 2016 scan for the 400th anniversary of his death revealed Shakespeare’s skull appears to be missing, raising questions about grave robbing even despite the threat. Curiously, the grave marker contains the curse but not Shakespeare’s name.

Shakespeare Documentation Summary

Scholars have ma ...

Earliest Alternate Theory: Francis Bacon Authored Shakespeare's Plays; Delia Bacon's 1800s Research Influenced Later Scholarship Despite Limited Evidence

Delia Bacon, an American writer in the 1800s, became one of the earliest prominent doubters of Shakespeare's authorship. She claimed that well-known figures like Francis Bacon, Walter Raleigh, and possibly others were the true authors of Shakespeare's plays. According to Delia Bacon, these were individuals of standing in philosophy, politics, and science who could not openly attach their names to the works, as the plays contained biting criticisms of government and society far too controversial for their positions.

Delia Bacon Claimed Francis Bacon, Walter Raleigh, and Others Secretly Wrote Plays Critiquing Government and Society

Delia Bacon's theory centered on the idea that these celebrated men authored the plays anonymously to avoid possible execution for treason because of their progressive ideas, such as advocating social reforms and criticizing the nobility. Another motive suggested for their anonymity was the "stigma of print": the notion, first cited in the 1870s, that nobles would not publish creative works as it would harm their social reputation. These arguments about hiding authorship for reputational or political safety became the foundation for many future authorship theories.

Bacon was extremely passionate about her claims, convincing even Ralph Waldo Emerson to support her research trips to England. Rather than searching archives or records, Delia Bacon believed that clues were hidden within the plays themselves and spent time at Shakespeare's tomb, believing the ultimate secret might reside there.

Bacon Embedded Codes and Ciphers in His Writings, So the Theory He Did the Same In Shakespeare's Plays Seems Plausible, Especially Claims the First Folio Contains Lines Spelling "Francisco Bacono."

Francis Bacon was known for embedding ciphers and codes into his own writings, making the idea that he could have hidden similar secrets within Shakespeare's works seem plausible to some. Mark Twain and others even claimed that certain lines in Shakespeare's First Folio spell out "Francisco Bacono," fueling this facet of the theory.

Bacon's Output Was Mainly Philosophical and Scientific, With No Evidence He Composed Plays, Weakening the Connection to Shakespeare

Despite the elaborate narrative, a major weakness in the Baconian theory is the lack of evidence that Francis Bacon ever wrote plays or fiction. Bacon's surviving works are primarily philosophical and scientific, and there is no record of him composing theatrical works, casting doubt on his candidacy as the hidden playwright.

Oxfordian Theory: Edward De Vere Authored Shakespeare's Plays; Followers Are "Oxfordians."

Another leading theory posits that Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford, authored Shakespeare's plays. Supporters of this belief are known as "Oxfordians."

De Vere's Poetry Shows Similarities to Shakespeare's, Suggesting a Potential Connection

Oxfordians note similarities between De Vere’s poetry and Shakespeare's works, suggesting a possible literary connection.

Dedication of Shakespeare's Narrative Poems Puzzles Scholars, While De Vere Knew Individual

A compelling point for Oxfordians is that Shakespeare’s two major narrative poems were dedicated to a nobleman whom De Vere knew well—the two were raised almost as brothers. There is no evidence that Shakespeare of Stratford would have known or had reason to dedicate poems to this individual.

Parallels Between De Vere's Life and Shakespeare's Plots Support the Playwright's Use of the Earl's Story

Oxfordians also point to biographical parallels: plots and themes in Shakespeare's works that mirror events and circumstances from De Vere’s own life. This has been used to strengthen the narrative that De Vere’s biography is intertwined with the content of the plays.

De Vere, Like Other Candidates, Was a Published Poet, Undermining the Argument That "Stigma of Print" Prevented Noblemen From Claiming Authorship

The case for De Vere complicates the "stigma of print" argument. De Vere and several other alternative authors were, in fact, already published poets, making it less likely that issues of reputation alone would have prevented them from claiming credit.

Alternative Theories Suggest Lesser-Known Figures as True Authors, Each With Limited Evidence

Beyond Bacon and De Vere, numerous other theories exist—but each has scant supporting proof.

Marlowe Faked Death, Wrote As Shakespeare Theory

One theory suggests playwright Christopher Marlowe faked his death to escape execution and continued to write under Shakespeare's name. Marlowe’s atheism, alleged secret-agent activity, and the suspicious circumstances of his supposed death feed this idea. However, as Marlowe was already successful and acclaimed, detractors question why he would not have continued writing under his own identity. Additionally, Marlowe’s darker, more atheistic tone does not match Shakespeare’s blend of humor and humanism, making this attribution less convincing.

Multiple Women Writers The ...

The debate over Shakespeare’s authorship features a complex mix of physical artifacts, contemporary documentation, linguistic patterns, and counterarguments that each side marshals for their case.

Shakespeare Authorship Artifacts Support Opposing Views

Marble Bust of Shakespeare in Holy Trinity Church Altered; Base Resembles Grain Sack, Suggesting Merchant Father; Pro-shakespeare Side Claims It Was Changed Into Pillow, Writing Remains

The marble bust of Shakespeare inside Holy Trinity Church in Stratford has long fueled controversy. This effigy, often cited as a reference for Shakespeare’s appearance, is debated not only for its likeness but its symbolism and authenticity. Evidence exists that the bust has been altered: an early etching shows the base as a puffy object at Shakespeare’s hands. Some argue this represents a sack of grain, referencing his father's occupation as a merchant—fuel for claims by anti-Stratfordians that the effigy depicts his father, or at the very least, associates Shakespeare more with trade than writing. Supporters of Shakespeare as the author counter that the object clearly became, and is now, a hand rest or pillow for writing, and that the presence of a quill and paper underscores the literary intention. Modifications to the bust, such as converting a grain sack to a pillow or the replacement and protection of the quill over the years, are cited by anti-Stratfordians as evidence of later cover-ups, but pro-Stratfordians find these arguments unconvincing.

First Folio of 1623: Jonson's Poem on Shakespeare Sparks Debate

Another major artifact is the First Folio, published in 1623 and including 18 plays previously unprinted. Its forward contains a poem by Ben Jonson, Shakespeare’s rival, calling him “the swan of Avon”—an explicit link to Stratford-upon-Avon. Pro-Stratfordians note Jonson’s critical nature and unwillingness to flatter the undeserving, arguing that his praise is strong evidence for Shakespeare’s authorship. Anti-Stratfordians suggest Jonson might have been acting as cover for a deeper conspiracy or had ulterior motives, a theory described as strained by supporters of Shakespeare’s authorship.

Heading: Richard Field Printed "Venus and Adonis" During Shakespeare's Lifetime; Attended Stratford Grammar School With Him, Suggesting Documented Personal Connection to This Recognized Publication

The publication of "Venus and Adonis" by Richard Field, a contemporary and fellow student at Stratford Grammar School, demonstrates a direct personal and documentary link from Shakespeare to a recognizable, verified literary work. This relationship provides further grounding of Shakespeare’s active literary life and connections.

Shakespeare's Contemporaries Praised His Work, Indicating His Literary Reputation During His Lifetime

Contemporaneous accounts and published criticism of Shakespeare’s writing while he was alive indicate that he was recognized during his lifetime as a playwright and poet. He continued to be active within literary and entertainment circles and was known by both fellow writers and critics, supporting the mainstream authorship view.

Pursuit of Coat of Arms: Shakespeare's Achievements Defended by William Camden

Shakespeare’s later pursuit of a coat of arms is another episode used by both sides. Seeking to raise his family’s social standing, Shakespeare faced opposition from those who questioned his merit. The respected William Camden, a learned authority and Ben Jonson’s schoolmaster, defended Shakespeare’s petition, citing his achievements and listing him among the great writers of Avon. Camden’s literary knowledge and involvement in the process provide substantial support that Shakespeare was recognized and regarded as a literary figure by his most erudite contemporary.

Linguistic Patterns and Educational References Suggest Shakespeare Attended Stratford Grammar School

The Taming of the Shrew's Latin Phrases Suggest Knowledge of Stratford Grammar Curriculum

Shakespeare’s use of Latin phrases in "The Taming of the Shrew" aligns closely with the known curriculum of Stratford Grammar School, further suggesting he was educated there. These details signify an insider’s familiarity with specific texts and teaching practices of that institution.

Warwickshi ...

Debate Lacks Evidence, Devolving Into Subjective Interpretation of Ambiguous Artifacts and Speculation Over Objective Analysis

The Shakespeare authorship debate is marked by the absence of irrefutable proof for either side, leading discussions into subjective interpretation and speculation. Josh Clark and Chuck Bryant repeatedly stress that neither proponents of Shakespeare’s authorship (Stratfordians) nor doubters (anti-Stratfordians or Oxfordians) can produce a "golden bullet" piece of evidence. Instead, both camps must rely on ambiguous artifacts, such as textual analysis, biographical readings, and the interpretation of historical documents.

There is no conclusive documentation that definitively names Shakespeare as the author of the plays, nor is there a clear record of an alternative author. For example, the lack of any mention of manuscripts in Shakespeare’s will is seized on by skeptics as proof he did not write the plays, but others interpret it as an expected historical loss, given the extinction of Shakespeare's family line within seventy years of his death. The personal records that survive provide evidence of Shakespeare's involvement in theater as an actor, but do not directly prove his hand in authorship.

Discussions often spiral into speculation as researchers search for hints about the author's identity in the text itself or draw biographical parallels, moving the debate away from objectivity. What evidence exists is so ambiguous that each side marshals it in service of their preconceived beliefs; a single artifact, such as the absence of a name on his tombstone, can be interpreted as supporting or undermining Shakespeare’s authorship, depending on one’s stance.

Authorship Question Rooted In Elitism, Struggling to Accept Extraordinary Talent From Humble Rather Than Noble, Educated Backgrounds

A recurring theme in the authorship debate is elitism and skepticism that a provincial, middle-class man, educated only until age 13, could possess the intellectual breadth and creative genius displayed in Shakespeare’s works. Clark and Bryant point to the complexity, insight, wit, and range of Shakespeare’s writing—including understanding of military details and foreign settings like Italy, where there is no firm evidence Shakespeare ever traveled—as fueling doubt that he was the sole, unassisted author.

This skepticism is often rooted in the disbelief that someone with Shakespeare’s modest background could produce works of such enduring brilliance and universal relevance. Anti-Stratfordians sometimes propose that an elite cabal of noble individuals, more plausibly steeped in courtly knowledge and higher education, must have written the plays, using Shakespeare as a front. Yet, as Bryant points out, such doubts are ultimately a backhanded compliment, recognizing the plays as so remarkable as to seem beyond the reach of an ordinary man.

Despite plentiful historical cases of exceptional talent transcending educational or social confines, the possibility that Shakespeare, coming from humble origins, could write works that continue to move and inspire audiences worldwide four centuries later remains difficult for some scholars to accept.

1987 Supreme Court Mock Trial: Justices 2-To-1 Favor Shakespeare as Author; Verdict Not Conclusive

The endurance of the authorship controversy is further illustrated by the 1987 Supreme Court mock trial, where justices ruled 2-to-1 in favor of Shakespeare’s authorship. The justices approached the trial lightly, but Oxfordian advocate Charlton Ogburn took it very seriously, hoping to definitively set ...