�be �bake�peare

Volume 46: No.2 HDOlJC 10 den III by slam/e,'olls tongue / \"as tile hel'O IballJcrc lies." lHucIJ Ado About NotMug. August 2010

Why Is There No History of Henry VII?

Robin Fox

hnkcspeare wrote a play for Henry in the chronological sequence ofHenrys. and the Duke still rules in Illyria. S IV (two parts), Henry V (one part), We cannot get inside God's memory so The kings in particular are warriors Henry VI (three parts), and even Henry we can only conjecture the reasons for tile and power brokers, and it is their exploits VIII. Why did he not write one for Henry omission. The writer of the Shakespeare in these departments that are his subject VI I? The man who was to become Henry plays was a monarchical romantic with matter. Henry V seems to have exhausted, VII appears at the end of Richard 1/1 as a decidedly fe udal view of the divine for him, the possibilities of a hero king Henry Tudor, Duke of Richmond, the right of kings, and of the rightfulness of in England. Henry VI was a pawn and Luncastrian candidate for the throne, who the fe udal order of society. His history went mad. His play is about the Wars of beat the evil Yorkist Richard at the battle plays areabout kings and nobles and their the Roses, with its cast of power hungry of Bosworth in 1 485. This ended the Wars ladies Francis Bacon, in 1622 published the they are nevereven remotely in command Henry recognized that the boy was first great biography of an English king, or ever shown to be capable of anything simply a tool, and having defeated the his History oj the Reign oj King Henry but supporting roles and slapstick. In the rebellion he pardoned him and put him to the Sellelllh. The material was there, the comedies, those below stairs can outwit work as a spit turnerin the royal kitchen. public demand for history plays was the upstairs characters, as with Maria in He clevcrly managed Parliament and there, the general urge to write pro-Tudor Twelfth Night for example, but this does taxation, and filled the chronically empty dramatic propaganda was there, but for not touch on the ordering of society; royal coffers, which left his surviving some reason the bard skipped this king Malvolio is nothing more than a steward, (col/I'd 01/ p. 2) page 2 Augusl2010 Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter

SOil, Henry VIII, a very rich boy indeed. eldest son, Arthur, and his wife) hc is said Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter He expanded Ihe syslem of Justices of to have slept with three hundred women, Published quarterly by the (he Peace which persists (0 this day, and getting two hundred seventy-three of Shakespeare Oxford Society which put the administration ofjustice into them pregnant. There is also a tale that P.O. Box 808 Yorktown Heights, NY 10598 the hands of volunteer gcntry responsible during his exile he worked for five years 10 Ihe Crown. He reorganized the royal as a male prostitute. These may have ISSN 1525-6863 household as the basis of administration, been Yorkist slanders, but slander never EDITOR: and some of their titles are still used for stopped ShakespeHre in the other cases. Michael Egan ministers of the crown. He preferred However, it was not good material for a PUBLICATIONS cm.'Ir-.IITIEE: royal marriages to royal wars and dealt pro-T udor propagandist. Matthew Cossolotto, Chair brillianl diplomalic deals wilh Ihe Pope, Despile Ihe possibly scandalous Brian Bechtold the Emperor and the continental powers, tidbits, Hemy was a sober, private king, James Boyd which broughl peace and prosperily concernedwith the details of government. Kalherine Chiljan to England after years of failure and Hekept in fact a quite cultivated and lively Frank Davis devastation. As the common verdict has comt as befitted a Renaissance prince, but Jolm Hamill, ex officio it, hc may not have been a greatking, but he was not given to public appearances and Michael Egan, ex officio he was an astonishingly sllccessful one. pandering 10 Ihe people. There were no Ramon Jimenez I would even like to claim him as thc royal "progressions" around the c u t y Richard Joyrich o n r James Shenvood first truly modern r------� as wilh Elizabelh. Richard Sm.iley, WeblllITster king: a realist and a And in this he pushed pragmalist He had 10 further Ihan did any Tel: (914) 962-1717 change acollntry rlln of his predecessors Fax: (914) 245-9713 by rival mafia fami­ the useof"new men" Email: [email protected] lies (after Ihe Wars who werc, unlike the www.shakespeare-oxford.com shakespeareoxfordsociety.wordpress.com of Ihe Roses and Ihe old aristocrats, loyal directly to him and All conten Is copyright © 2010 failure of feudalism /' Shakespeare Oxford Society. had brulalized Ihem) owed their liveli­ /"/' ' into a country of citi­ hoods and advance­ LAYOUT & DESIGN zens responsible to a ment to him. Such Michael Egan Associates central bureaucracy men included Rich­ PRINTING SI. Martin de Porres Lay under the king and ard Fox (no known Domi nicans, his appointed min­ relative) the son of a New Hope, Kentucky iSlers. I-Ie prefelTed humble yeoman who BOARD OF TRUSTEES that these ministers rose 10 be Bishop John Hamill, President not be nobles, or of Winchester, Lord Richard Joyrich, 1st VP only nobles Ihal he King Henry VII as a Young Man Privy Seal, founder Matthew Cossolotto, 2nd VP created, and drew (From the Receull d'Arras) of Corpus Chrisli Virginia Hyde, Secretary from Ihe ranks of College, Oxford, and Susan Grimes Width, Treasurer burghers and lawyers, and churchmen that godfalher 10 Ihe fulure Henry VIII. I n Brian Bechtold he favored. The old formula we learned 1497 he had been maSier al lhe school of James Boyd in school was accurate: "King and Town Ihe Guild of Ihe Holy Cross in Siratford Joan Leon versus Castle." Tudor towns and their on Avon. Michael Pisapia James Sherwood tradesmen expanded round churches and This I lhink is Ihe crux of lhe negieci Richard Smiley cathedrals with their attached Grammar by Shakespeare. Henry made il his goal Schools. Caslles fell inlo disuse alld were 10 curb and reslricI Ihe power of Ihe old LIFETIME HONOHARY TRUSTEE domesticated into residences or were lIobility and did it supremely well. We Charles Boyle replaced by country houses. Efficiency, had to wait until Louis XIV in France Tlte SOS Nell'sleller welcollles research ar­ lic/es) booK rc",'cwcrs, lel/ers oJ/rillewsi/e llls. and direct dependence on the monarch, to see such another successful attempt. COII/ribll/iollssholllri be reasollabl,y cOllcise became more important than nobility in He pushed laws through Parliament to all� wheJ/ appropria/c, I'fllirla/erl b)'peer re­ the governanceof England. restrict the usc of liveried retainers - in ssi lllllen /0/ eop) 'riglt/is reqllli'erifor '!;CIJ'.A g Bmcallcratic efficiency is not, how­ effect abolishing the private armies the publicalioJl . The ",'ell'Sof eOJllribJllorsdo1101 ever, lhe sluff of which greal alld especially lIobles had roulinely kepI in Ihe past. He Jlcccssa";(y reflcell/lOsc o/llle Sltakespeare Ot/ord Socic�,! as a lilerary aJldedllcaliollal tragic drama is made. Henry had a colorful lel lhemkeep Iheirlilles and high-sounding orgallllalioll. AllCOli/ellIs COp)'rigltl ©20JO sex life, and while being a good husband offices ("Lord Greal Chamberlain" elc) Sllfikespeare o.l/ol'dSociel),. and fa lher (feeling deeply the loss of his but he hemmed them in with taxes and Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter August 20 I 0 page 3

effect, an efficient, central, meritocratic in a trap here because he was himself an This I think is the bureaucracy, and in doing so reduced the almost prototypical part of that new world. crux of the neglect by powers ofthe aristocracy, which continued If he was indeed the Grammar to "shine at court" but was less likely to School boy from Stratford·on-Avoll that Shakespeare. Hem), try to usurp royal power. is claimed, then he was an end-product l1lade if his goal to The newly authenticated play of of the process that was geared to the curb and restrict Richard Il, Pari Olle, formerly known production of the new men he seemed as Th ol/1as o/Woodstock, (Egan, 2006) is to despise. He was not an aristocrat but the power of the old overtly concernedwith exactly this issue: a meritocrat; he was one of the new mcn nobility and did it the use by the king of the new men of the who made his own way to success. He was supremely well. We had educated middle class, and the usurpation a son of the trading classes aspiring to a by them of the power of the old nobility. coat of arms and the ranks of the gentry. to wait until Louis XIV There is not a shadow ofa question where He should have reveled in the memory in France to see such the author's sympathies lie. Again his of Henry VII. another successful portrait of the new men is a caricature Above all, he would have been a of greed and villainy, and is contrasted product of the Grammar School system attempt. with the sense of duty and obligation that was itself a conscious product of the of the old nobility. This theme carries required of them bonds that ruthlessly policy of educating these new men. Th is over into Richard II proper with Bagol, conscious state policy was a confluence penalized disloyalty. A measure of his Bushy and Green � the "caterpillars of sllccess is that his son succeeded him of the twin influence of the Renaissance the commonwealth," Cunningham cites without challenge, something unheard of revival of classical learning, and the an interesting play promoted by Cardinal Protestant Reformation that brought the in the past. But in all this he represented John Mortoll. Morton was Henry VII's the wave of the future, of the dominance of bible to all believers and the Calvinist Wolsey, and among other things raised the rule of law and the centrality of trade work ethic to life in general. Thomas More whose His/ory of King These two powerful forces were that spelled the beginning of the end of RichalYllII (1557) was a deep influence feudal society with its rigid hierarchies crossed with rising nationalism and the and its familial loyalties. on the Shakespeare play. The play here desire to have a literate middle class to in question was Henry Medwall's Fulg/Is The old order lingered, but a new alld Lucrece "performed before courtiers" order was taking over that meant the , If Shakespeare was emergence of a new class eager for its in 1497. Medwall (another new man) was indeed the Grammar Morton's chaplain, and his plot turns on share of governance. Scan Cunningham the struggle between a nobleman and a School boy from (2007) in his excellent history of Henry commoner for the hand of an heiress. VII, shows in detail how this worked. Stratford-an-Avon that ]n the end, says Cunningham, it is the Henry had been isolated from the English is claimed, then he hard-working commoner rather than the aristocracy during his years in exile, and he shallow and arrogant nobleman who gets was an end-product tended therefore to rely less on the noble the girl. This deserves further study, and I courtiers, many of whom were of suspect of the process that can think of no such conflict or outcome loyalty, and more and more on the new was gea red to the in any Shakespeare play. men. He ruled through the royal council and Lawrence Stone (1965) has shown production of the new around it gathered "managing committees" the aristocracy to have been "in crisis" that constituted "a core of executives and men he seemed to common lawyers gathered permanently at during the Tudor period. Its power was being eroded; its lands were being sold despise. He was not Westminster." He created very few new to the tradesmen. (In the end Oxford's an aristocrat but a titles of nobilty, but knighted many com· Grammar School at Earl's Colne passed moners like, Empson Poynings and Bray, meritocrat; he was one to a grocer.) Shakespeare looked eternally who became his closest advisers. These of the new men who backwards to the feudal society that was new men foreshadowed Wolsey, Cecil, his ideal of governance;but he saw what made his own way to Cromwell and Walsingham, and Henry made their fortunes entirely dependent on was coming. So hejust kept silent about success. He was a son the man who more than anyone helped to himself in what Cunningham describes of the trading classes usher in the new world order: thc order as "a purely professional relationship of pragmatism, efficiency, bureaucracy, as piring to a coat of created to streamline policy, and one that meritocracy and contract: the modern made Henry's new men more accountable arms and the ranks of world as we know it. He did not write and easier to supervise." He created, in the gentl)'. He"ry VII. Yet Shakespeare was caught page 4 August 2010 Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter

increase the national wealth and power. according to the story, started the decline the plays seemed to feel personally and How did a child of this surge ofmode rniza­ in the fortunes of the Oxford earldom. disliked at some profound level. It could tion come to have the obvious reactionary Someohservers, like Charlton Ogburn well have been the basis for the Earl of political and cultural biases we see in (1984), think this is a very good reason Oxford's reluctance to grant the first the plays? The matter is complicated, why Ihere is no play of Hellry VII. The Tudor 1ll00iarch his own play. or perhaps, as is the case with so many omission was Oxford's revenge for the Note:This is a re-working ofmaterial that was for authorship puzzles, simplified, by the attack on the finances of his lineage! This length reasonscllt from my al1iclc "Shakespeare, "mysteriolls nobleman" theory, which whole story originated with Francis Bacon, Oxford and the Grammar School Question" ill would have Shakespeare as a front man and Cunningham finds no other reference The OXfOl,liclll, Vol. II, pp. 111-136.2009 (g.v.) for Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford. to it and thinks there is no basis for it. Works Cited There is no need to spell out the evidence Henry needed these loyal noblemen Cunningham, Scan,2007. Hem), \11/. NewYork: for Oxford to this audience. One relevant as Illllchas he needed the new men, but the Routledge. matter for ollr immediate purposes is that promotion of the laller, and their central Egan, Michael, 2006. The Tragedy oj Richard his ancestor, the 13th Earl, was Henry part in all future forms of government, /I ParI Olle: A Newly Allfhelllicated Play Tudor's main supporter and appears as certainly dug into the privileges of the by William Shakespeare. 4 Vols. Lewiston, Queenstoll, Lampeter: The Edwin Mellen such at the end of Ric//{nd 111. In his former. As Cunningham puts it: "Some­ Press. campaign against the power of the nobles, thing deeply important to the long-term Ogburn,Charlton, 1984. The Mysleriolls \viffialll Henry VII is said to have turned all his development of England's ruling structures Shakespeare. New York: Dodd Mead. supporter, the 13th Earl, and levied a huge occurred during Henry VII's reign." SlOlIe. Laurence, 1965. The Crisis oj Ihe A ris­ This disruption of the feudal order was fine against him for having more liveried tocracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. retainers than the king himself. This, obviously something that thc author of

From the President of the Shakespeare Oxford Society

John Hamill

, ,

T.lese are exciting times for those inter­ focus grcatly increased public attention raise $20,000 to finance eSled in the Shakespeare Authorship on the Shakespeare Authorship Qucs­ the Society's educational and publish­ Question. There is a growing interest in the tion. The Society will need to respond ing activities, as well as the upcoming subject in academia and elsewhere, as we not just to attacks from academia, but to research proposals. We still have a way can tell frolll the books that keep coming the public at large, about the numerous to go to reach this goal. Please join me in out. And we will soon have a new movie, questions surrounding the authorship supporting this effor t, and please contact Anonymolls, that addresses the issue face issue. I am hoping that we can make me on ideas about how the Society can on. The movie will 110t only be controversial the most of this opportunity. In order best direct its energies and resources: within academia, since it presents Oxford to make a strong and active response to [email protected]. I look forward to as the author of Shakespeare's works, it the controversy, we will need additional hearing from you. will be controversial among Oxfordians. funding from our supporters. This will In addition, I hope that most of you Why? Because Oxford is presented as be a critical opportunity-onc that we willjoin us at the upcoming Joint SOS/SF the illegitimate son of Queen Elizabeth, cannot afford to miss. Ashland Authorship Conference, from Sept and later her lover. Henry Wriothesley, Thanks again to thoscofyou who have 16'h tol9'h, in Ashland, Oregon. It should third Earl of Southampton, is presented renewed your membership recently or who be an cxciting and educational experience. as their illegitimate child. According to have made an additional contribution to the We will have many exceptional papers the movie, this is the reason why Oxford SOS. We are trying to add to our resources and speakers, including live renaissance used an alias, and why it was maintained to covcr basic cxpenses and to create a musical entertainment. Ofcourse, we will after his death. The movie ignores the rival new grant program for researchers who also have the opportunity to see several theory- that Oxford and Southampton are investigating theAuthorship Question. plays performed by the acclaimed Oregon were lovers, not father and SOIL This 1 know these are difficult economic times Shakespeare Festival-The Merchall! of sexual liaison would also be a strong for many of us, but even a small contribu­ \lellice, Hamiel, and Hellry lY, Parll. reason for the families to maintain the tion will add to our ability to advance Hope to see you there! alias after Oxford's death. The movie will the argument that Edward de Vere is the certainly create mllch controversy and true Shakespeare. Our goal this year is to Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter August 2010 page 5

ReillY V by Oliviel' and Branagh: Enhancing Artistic Vision Through Technology

Johanna Krout Tabin

aurence Olivier and Kenneth Branagh of rule. An insulting gesture by Lpresent different visions of Shake­ the French galvanizes Henry speare's Hellry V. My topic here is the into believing it was his right different cinematic techniques with which and duty to dethrone France's each gained artistic success. So that it will present king. Counterpoint to be possible to follow how film enabled the enthusiasm of the nobles them to carry out their visions, a brief for Stich an adventure, we meet sumllHlry of Shakespeare's Henry might fanner l'Ousting companions of be helpful. Henry V is a link in his history Prince Hal for a view of how series about the crowned heads of England. the humbler folk feel, thinking It is preceded by Hellry IV ParIs I and of the spoils of war there might II. The young Prince Hal appears in the be for them, too. It is also a latter plays. He consorts with Falstaff and chance to bring in the death generally exemplifies the flaming youth of the heartbroken Falstaff. of the 15th Century. By the end of Part Another glimpse of Hen­ Olivier's Henry V: a hero for a country at war II, however, he denollnces Falstaff to ry's character in dealing with separate himself from his playboy days an assassination plot is set on By contrast, Henry uses the night and prepares himself to become a king. shipboard and precedes his landing in to make his sccret walk among his men, Shakespeare sketches in this background France. In the meantime. Henry refuses building up their morale, identifying with in Hellry V, but for modernaudiences, less a French compromise that offered the the humblest of them, but grappling with informed about English history, Olivier hand of the king's daughter, Katharine, his right as king to bring this battle IVhile and Branagh at times returnto the material plus a couple of meaningless dukedoms. trying to still his conflicts over being his of the Henry I V plays. A short siege at Harfleur starts with father's son. To make the action easier to follow, Henry's"Once more into the breach, dear An excursion on the way to Agincourt even for Elizabethan audiences closer to friends" ending with the famous "For reveals once again Henris character. An Henry V's time than are we, Shakespeare God, Hany, England and St. George!" old playmate, Bardolph, is apprehended borrows the Greek device of a Chorus who He threatens the mayor of Harfleur with for stealing from a church and Henry provides a running commentary. He uses the most terrible destruction if he does only one voice, however. This narrator not yield. The mayor yields because the In 1943, the English opens the play and reappears at pivotal French forces are not ready to support were almost alone moments to help the audience make con­ him. Henry then instructs his Illen to be nections. Shakespeare's usual richness of kind to their captives. The French attempt infightingthe character and ideas give wide range for once more to stave off Henry's actions Nazis. Hellry V was possible emphases and interpretations. and ask for the amount he would expect a pelject vehicle Henry V is straining for greatness, but for his ransom. Once more showing his his youthful inner struggles with his right character, Henry spurnsthe idea. He also for strengthening to be king, his wishes to be as any man, lets Mountjoy, the French spokesman, morale. Olivier was the harsh decisions a king might feel he know that he recognizes theman's quality. able to assemble a must make and yet his recognition of Hard fighting along the way results the horrors of war and war's aftermath, in an exhausted English force that mllst magnificentcast, with even the relationship between holding prepare for a showdown battle the next art alld music direction the throne and the complexities of his day at Agincolll't. Shakespeare switches to match, but no father's example-all of this and more the audience to the French. Katharine is in the text. charmingly beginning to learn English. appropriate director Before we meet Henry, we see the The French leaders in the next scene arc was available. He took Archbishop of Canterbury and a bishop preoccupied with displays of confidence. all the task of starring plotting how to get back lands belonging to They will lead a force Illuch greater than the Church in France and the fortune they Henry's. (Shakespeare makes it 3 to I; in alld directing the tire losing bectluse the French rule there. Branagh 5 to I; the French at the time picture, in itself a They plot to convince the new young king 10 to I). The dauphin dwells on the challenging feat. that an old document gives him priority magnificence of his horse. page 6 August 201 0 Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter

sees his hanging as necessary. He uses morale. Olivier was able to assemble visual atmosphere of Henry's time. The the occasion ollce morc to state that when a magnificent cast, with art and music blocking of the actors showed sensitivity "lenity and cruelty play for the same land, direction to match, but no appropriate honed by stagecraft, especially when many lenity is the winner." The battle for the director was available. He took on the task actors were in a scene. Stills of the shots land has not yet been won, however. of starring in and directing the picture, resembled the groupings of people in the The stage does not allow for the in itself a challenging feat. Book of Hours, but Olivier maintained enactment of the great battle when dawn The opening frame presents the play a fluidity of action that prevented any breaks. so the Chorus must again ask for as if one were looking at an announcement stiltedness. our imaginations and tell of the action. from Elizabethan times. The camera then Another production challenge was Henry is not sure at the end of the day shows a model of London of the time as to find metal armor for the battle scenes. who has won. Mountjoy returns to ask seen by aerial view, swooping over the Much of the old armor had been melted for permission to bury the French dead. Thames, finding the old GlobeTheaterand dowll for the new war effort. The appear­ Learning that the English have lost only its flapping flag to indicate a performance, ance of metal was accomplished through 529 men to the French loss often thollsand, and then zooming down into the middle painted wood, bright colors juxtaposed to Henry wearily gives credit to God. History of the roofless enclosure where 1110st of keep the eye away frOl11close inspection. records that the two main factors which the eager audience gathered. Te chnicolor wasjust newly available and enabled this amazing result were that the Olivier said that he wanted to bring Olivier took full advantage of it. ground was soaked from October rain, the modernaudience into the story first by To maintain the effects he wanted, making the movements ofthe horses of the confining thcm to thc old Globe theater. however, was tricky because the rushes French labored; and tile heavily weighted This setting let them get acquainted slowly came through only in fuzzy black and armored French were eas- f'T------:;�-----__::;��\IT-_="�:._\;:_;;i':i�l&;m1 white. This alone makes ily toppled. The English one appreciate the editing. longbow-men effectively Even a transition back to the pierced the French armor Old Globe at the very end with their arrows from a seems smooth and fitting distance. It is an interesting from that standpoint. aside that almost all of the Olivier's Henry strides French were knights and into the story, every inch a nobles, who sellt possibly king. Shakespeare gives him supportivecommollcrs away heroic words to declaim. because they felt no need for Olivier backs the cameras them. Henry's former low­ away from himself at these life companions, however, moments, making his inten­ feature prominently in his sity and volumeappropriate. figilting force. From over 3000 lines in The Battle ofAgincourt Branagh's Henry V: War is Hell the original script, Olivier was the last in which knights used only about half. The dominated the action. Hcnry movie is still over two hours V proved that ordinary men inexpensively with Shakespeare's language. Broad comic long. The cuts mostly eliminated maHer armed could defeat them. touches were added to put them in the that would appeal solely to the Elizabethan The final act of this play is worthy mood of boisterous 17th-century viewers audience or reflect Shakespeare's use of of tile old Hollywood movies, a happy and thereby to take away any feeling of intermittent scenes to give comic relief ending for all. Henry successfully woos Shakespeare being a musty and archaic or broaden the scope of the characters or Katharine and becomes heir to the French relic-to be revered but not enjoyed. Then vary the pacc of the action. The interest­ throne while the French king remains fading a staged shipboard scene into a ing cuts are those that eliminated signs on his throne for the rest of his life. The realistic countryside, he accomplished of harshncss in Henry. Olivier does not narrator is a spoilsport, however, because the contrast to give the modernaudience include the scene where Henry assents in the last lines foretell of the early death of a sense of release and participation. magisteriai manner to Bardolph's hanging. Henry V. His infant son's inept guardians Themusical score by William Walton In another instance, when Henry threatens lose France once again and put England atmospherically incorporated songs the mayor of Harfleur, Shakespeare details into turmoil. But that is for another play. from the 15th Century which helped to the kinds of destructiveness and villainy Laurence Olivier produced his version develop the action. The Book of Hours, an troops were well known to display in in 1943, a time when the English were illustrated calendar, was the only medieval victory. Olivier uses onlyHenry's speech almost alone in fighting the Nazis. Hellry artwork he could find during the war, but after the collapse of Harfleur, in which "was a perfect vehicle for strengthening it was enough to inspire creation of the he directs his men to be kind to the Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter August 20 I 0 page 7

vanquished. A hero for the 20th century nervous but steadfast, stood poised until This is a great role for a talented young must not display the cruelty of England's Henry finally gave the hand signal for the actor. In bringing this play to the screen 20th-Century foes, the Nazis. Although arrows to fly. Olivier shows the arrows sevcn years later, he obviously profited bright color suffuses the film, the screen fl ying into the air and then hitting their from a study of Olivier'S masterpiece. His is darkened for Henry's nighttime visit targets. The scene is interrupted when Chorus/Narrator walks through an empty to his men beforc the battle at Agincourl. Henry is told of the French bringing their soundstage rather than an Elizabethan His face is hooded and one can barely see fr ustration to the Eng) ish camp. ripping the theater, much the same as Olivier's the weary and troubled men who fear they tents and killing the boys waiting there. responding to the Narrator/Chorus' ap­ will surely die the next day. This scene is Henry says he was not angry in France pealing to the imagination of the viewer what 1 remembered from my first viewing until then. Olivier takes him to the field for creating the illusion of the story. of the picture in 1944. Here the camera where he furiously engages in single This similarity is not so important, is close to each speaker, adding to the combat with the Constable of France, however, as Branagh's original dramatic sense of intimacy that Henry achieves unhorsing and killing him. opening. The credits are played against with his soldiers. Henry's giving God due for the vic­ a black background. Suddenly, a match Morninglight bursts brightly on the tory fades into the promised long march is struck. Its glow illuminates the face of field before Agincourl. Olivier chose to toward Calais and home, singing hymns. the Narrrator/Chorlis. Reminiscent for emphasize the overwhelming odds against Chicagoans of the old Goodman Theater, the English. A wide shot fills the eye with Olivier uses only which proclaimed above the proscenium magnificent French armor glinting in the He11l)"s speech arch: "We can but bring the faggots. sun, horses pawing for action. Thecamera YOLI must set the flame," Shakespeare's focuses on the horses-one memorable aft er the col/apse of Chorus reminds us of the limitations of moment reflects their passage through a HarjfeU/; in which he even modern film theater. Wishing for a clear pool. The English bowmen can be directs his men. to be mllse of fire, Chorus calls on us to meet secn, but there is also a quality of guer­ the players with our imaginations. A fat rilla tactics, Englishmen leaping upon kind to the vanq uished. candle continues the glow from firc, now the French from tree branches. A hero for the 20th showing three-quarter faces of the con­ The soggy terrain traps the French celltul)' must lIot spiratorial Archbishop of Canterbury and as much as the English defeat them. the Bishop ofEly. They plot their scheme Olivier had no help fr om Shakespeare display the cruelty of in hushed voices. Branagh lIsesquick cuts for depieting the battle. He studied Sergei Eng/and's 20th-cen.tury to move the play along, mostly following Eisenstein's Alexal1der Nel'sky, produced foes, the Nazis. Shakespeare's ordering of scenes, which six years earlier for an interestingly similar allows great scope, however, for the set­ purpose. The Sovict Union was afraid of tings of them. The next cut takes us to attack by Germany. In the 13th Century, Olivier cuts back to a French assembly the nobles waiting for the king. The same a Russian leader threw back Teutonic where he hands negotiations over to palette of dim amber tones from candle knights who tried to overrun Russia. The his counselors and takes on the wooing light gives us what feels like a realistic film was to rcmind the Russian people that of Katharine. The final shot is of thcir senseofthe atmosphereofa 15th-Century Nevsky, representing them, had defeated wedding pose. This is the only false note council room of a king. Doors open at the heavily armed Germans once before. (A for me in the whole film. The close-up far end and backlight enables us to see sidelight is that the propaganda aspect of the bride shows a boy in makeup and the form of the king moving ponderously was modified. Eisenstein had placed Nazi wig, and sure enough we arc back at the toward the throne. symbols on the knights-but by the time Globe for the finale. At the beginning, The camera provides a close-up ofhis of the picture's release, the possibility there was backstage footage at the Globe face, which we finally see as he begins to of a German-Soviet pact was paramount during which boys were donning women's speak. He is looking for the Archbishop and the swastikas hnd to be removed.) costumes and wigs. of Canterbury, who quickly enters. Olivier was taken with how Eisenstein Afterthe wedding tableau, the camera The Archbishop goes tediously dramatized the powcroftheenemy horde. follows the removal of the performance over the laws of succession to justify He added his own remarkable technique, flag, moving into the sky for another shot Henry's invasion of France. Olivier gets however, to the long shots intermingled of old London. Olivier once told Anthony us through this by adding some slapstick with close-ups. Hecollstructeda half-mile Hopkins to be sure to go to the end of which the viewers in the Globe theatcr track on which the camera dollies could the line, but I wish he had not chosen to enjoy uproariollsly. Branagh uses close­ follow the movement of Illen and horses take us back to the Globe with that bit ups of the attending nobles' faces as the as they rode toward the English. Walton's of symmetry. Archbishop strides up and down trying music thundered in accompaniment. The From his first days as a professional to engage their help with the king. Henry effect was intimidating. The English line, actor, Branagh sought to play Henry V. speaks quietly, almost menacingly, as he page 8 August 2010 Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter warns the Archbishop of the seriollsness than Eisenstein. He does not declaim the pool of water is colored red. The camera of the decision. St Crispin's Day speech as Olivier does. must film through thickets at places, the Henry's inner spirit is Branagh's The camera stays close to him speaking men visible in the twilight furtherobscured focus. Communicating through action is just above conversational level. by smoke that still lingers. This innova­ not adequate. 8ranagh makes sure he is Branagh follows Shakespeare's lan­ tion is part of why Branagh's version is readily understood by the modcrnaudi­ guage when someone asks for Henry and considered to be anti- war. The whole ence by having mastered what he calls is told that the king is taking his place film is true, however, to nil the emotions the "consonant bite." Each consonant is with his soldiers. The French gallop close Shakespeare gives to Henry, including uttered crisply. Without exaggerntinghis to the English who stand behind pointed moments of fury, cruelty in the name of sOllnds, his enunciation slows the words stakes slanted forward as a defense against duty, tenderness and compassion. The just enough for the unaccustomed car 10 cavalry. The music raises excitement as we breadth of expression in a war film mllst understand what is being said. He trained watch. A voice-over gives the command force the cost of war upon a viewer. The his cast to do the same, which makes for the bowmen to release their arrows. battlefield scene concludes with a close­ listening to Shakespeare seem to be a Olivier indicates that this happens up of Henry's face, at first stunned but natural experience. marc than once but Branagh sends flight gradually, as the realization of victory Branagh's interest in character extends after night to rain down on the French. dawns, a slight smile is discernible. to the minor roles. This becomes clear in Now the mllsic shifts to a minor key, an Thecameracllts quickly to the French his use of flashbacks three times, all of amazing note of sadness that underscores council room with both sides entering them involving Henry's history as Prince the rest of the battle. Henry is in the it. In the final frame, Henry gracefully Hal and the denizens of lower life who vanguard of the English who attack the joins hands with Katharine, both facing wefe his friends. Like Olivier, he borrows bewildered French. the camera. from Hew)' IV, but to a greater extent. Derek Jacobi's Chorus closes the Scenes from the Falstaff days come to the The brilliant us e door upon them and quotes the epilogue old companions as they heal' that Falstaff of close- ups is Olivier left out. is dying of a broken heart. They also hear It is easy to understand why Olivier again Prince Hal's disavowal of Falstaff Branagh's style for did so. His purpose in bringing Henry from the conclusion of 2 Henry IV Like much of the film. It V's story to the screen was similar to Olivier, Branagh includes Falstaff's plead­ lI1akes for subtlety- Shakespeare's writing it, as the Chorus ing with the new king not to reject him. reminds the audience of Elizabeth's new The third flashback occurs as Branagh's and humanity-in adventure in Ireland. The Elizabethan Henry remembers his fond amusement at portrayals even of audience likely knew the rest of the story, Bardolph's antics, ending with his friend's minor characters . but there was no reason to inform the ironically prescient request that Hal not English of 1943 abollt it. to hang him ancr he becomes king. Olivier gives LIS a heroic and ac­ Hal responds ambiguously that it Even in the midst of the battle, the complished Henry V. Branagh provides will be Bardolph who will cause his own camera finds the faccs of the combatants. a king ill the making, a psychological hanging. The close-up of King Henry's Mcn can be recognized who have spoken at study of how the king comes into his face when Bardolph does hang shows his variolls times during the action, heighten­ own as a mall as well as a ruler. These effort to be true to his responsibility and ing the sense of the tragedy of war. The contrasting masterpieces could not have not give in to emotion. fighting is vigorous and unlike Olivier's. been achieved but for the miracles that The brilliant use of close-ups is At the end of it, this Henry is covered are possible with the tools of the cinema. Branagh's style fol' much of the film. It with blood and mud. His exhaustion and makcs for subtlety-and humanity-in confusion are apparent when Mountjoy portrayals even of minor characters. tells him the English have won the day. There are also only threc dissolves in Olivier follows Shakespeare in showing the the film, the first on Judi Deneh's face as march to Calais, the men singing prayers. Mistress Quickly is thinking about hefmen Branagh inserts a long wordless scene, going off to war, the camera staying with the camera moving ovcr the survivors as hel' as the editing shifts to the soldiers. they make their way through the field, The other two dissolves are for stretching picking up bodies, tenderly laying them maps across the screen to show the path down when sorted for burial. One mall the English arc taking, and then back to starts theNoll llobis and soon a background the men as they trudge along. chorus takes lip the prayer as the men Branagh's handling of the Battle of perform their sad duty. Agincollft reminds one lllore ofKurlisawa Music amplifies the scene of grief. A Shakespeare Ox ford Newsletter August 20 10 page 9

The Big Six Candidates

Stephanie Hopkins Hughes

them. It's been my view for somc time now that all of them (minus Derby and pillS Philip Sidney) belong in the pantheon of heroes when it comes to the cultural phenomenon known as thc English Literary Renaissance, but not as contributors to the Shakespeare canon. All (but Derby) wrote their own stuff in their own par­ ticular styles. What's caused so much confusion and misunderstanding is that three of them, Oxford, Bacon, and Mary Sidney, published some or most of what Peele wrote some of nUtS Aut/mlliells, they wrote under other names. though where Vickers posits collaboration As for the group theory, i.e., that between Strat-ford Hnd Peele, I see Titlls all of these gifted writers had a hand as one of Oxford's earliest plays, written in some or all of Shake-spcare's plays, in his teens as an exercise in Senecan Stephanie Hopkins Hughes tragedy, the kind that was popular at the ver the years, the Shakespeare au­ time, then revised during the Fisher's O thorship argument has moved from Folly period by Peele for the Queen's aile candidate to another, starting with Men or some other company. Of all the Bacon in the late 19th century, then to plays it shows the least connection with Marlowe (1895), then to Oxford (1920). Oxford's personal life. Perhaps due to a gradual weakening of the Vickers's use of the term "co-author" Stratford scenario, today almost anyone suggests the kind of collaboration shared in the 16th century who left evidence of by Gilbert and Sullivan or Rogers and travels to France or Italy, or published Hammer-stein. Although respect his Sir Francis Bacon 1 something, or was ever mentioned in CHr and his conclusion that there are some connection with the London Stage two hands at work on these lesser plays, what genius level creator would, or even has a book, or at least a website, where he since he refuses to acknowledge the could, share the agonies and ecstasies of or she is tallted as the real Shakespeare. anti-Stratfordian thesis that stand-ins creation, particularly at the subliminal Hopefully this is simply a phase in the were used, he doesn't deal with the pos­ level at which these masterpieces operate? long slow turn away from the Stratford sibility that Wilkins, who is firmly in the Elizabethans were fo nd of the metaphor myth, first conjured lip by Ben Jonson camp of those Elizabethans who lack a that compnred the creation of a work of for the King's Men in 1623. writer's biography, was a name used by an literature to a mother bearing a child. As it stands at the moment, there upmarket Jacobean who felt it necessary Like all mothers, literary mothers need are six candidates who have inspired at to hide his (or her) identity. (I am equally support (editors, publishers, and agents least one book, some several (William suspicious ofJohn Fletcher.) And because today; in Shakespeare's time: secretaries, hundreds, Bacon dozens), and whose Vickers refuses to consider the Oxfordian printers, and patrons), but as with the credentials are currently being furiollsly thesis, with its corollary of weak early mothers of human offspring, the creation hashed over online and in print. Just and polishing of a great writer's mental going by what I get from Google alerts, offspring always was and always will be blogs and comments, book reviews, etc., a solitary experience, inseminated by a I'd SHY that Oxford remains in the lead muse perhaps, but developed in secret with Bacon second, Marlowe third, and collaboration with no aile but the writer's trailing but still with some interest, Mary own soul. Nevertheless, it's true that other Sidney, Countess of Pembroke, Emilia hands are evident in someofShakespcare's Bassano Lanier, and William Stanley, plays, particularly the weaker ones. I sixth earl of Derby. Of all the advocates tend to accept Brian Vickers's argument for these six candidates, I know of none in his Shakespeare CO-(fllthorthat George but myself who is advocating for all of Mary Sidney, Countess of Pembroke page IO August 2010 Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter

versions rewritten during Oxford's mature too early (and toopublicly) to be included. poil'eill) and their fans, linked not only "Shakespeare" period, he can't deal with There is a seventh, Sir Walter Raleigh, by the styles they adopted, but also by the likelihood that the "other hand," the who's got to be considered for his great their relationships with each other. Art­ one that doesn't"sound like" Shakespcmc, literary gins, but the fog that surrounds ists, scientists, engineers and cooks-all was in fact Shakespeare's own juvenile so many of the works of this period is creators-make the best critics and most effort, later turnedover to Peele, Oxford still too thick around him to see clearly stimulating rivals for each other. They having lost interest in it. Finally, once enough where he fits in. Pulling the pieces not only make the most discriminating Oxford was dead, the acting companies, together, what I see is a group of artists, audiences for each olher, they are good eager to capitalize as much as possible on much like the onc in the 19th century at reevaluating their predecessors, as anything he ever wrote, had some of his that created the first important style in Alexander Pope in his time and Coleridge earliest plays revised by Jacobeans. The painting that can be considered modern in his, did for Shakespeare. King's Men had The Two Noble Kinsmell art, the French Impressionists, a group of The leader of this particular group painters of very differing styles, more or of makers, and the oldest, was the Earl less forced to band together to show their of Oxford. Arranged around him were work when they were rejected by the Royal the three who had the most influence on Academy. Much like our ELR crew, the him during his pre-Shakespeare years, basic group consisted of rive men and one and he on them: Philip Sidney, his woman (Monet, Renoir, Pissaro, Sisley, junior by four years; Francis Bacon, his Degas and BertheMorisot). No revolution, junior by eleven years; and Christopher whether cultural or political, can succeed Marlowe, his junior by fourteen years. without a handful of energetic (reckless?) He was influenced by the women, Mary individuals in positions to make things and Emilia, but not until his final period, happen, and it seems that six is often the the one we call Shakespeare. magic number. Sometimes they work together, sometimes they just arrive at Reprinted with kind permission from Am elia Bassano Lanier 1569-1645 the same place at the same time. Think http://politicworm.com/ of the six original members of the Austin revised, possibly by Fletcher (as claimed), High gang in the twenties, the early six in while Philip Hcns!owc had The Sp anish the Bebop of the forties (Charlie Parker, Tragedy revised by Ben Jonson. And, Dizzy Gillespie, Ray Brown, Milt Jackson, as trained scholars have shown, editors Kenn), Clarke, John Lewis), thc Beatles in did make changes of various sorts to the the sixties (four plus the ghosts of Brian plays before the First Folio was publishcd Epstein and Pete Best), the six members of in 1623. But while those who were most Monty Python in the seventies. At other likcly to have had hand in editing Oxford's times they arrive one after the other, with plays were themselves members of this periods of overlap, like the big three of group of artists (l propose Mary Sidney the Italian Literary Renaissance: Dante, and Francis Bacon), the sum total of their Petrarch, and Boccaccio, or the big three editing could never have approached a level of 17th-century French drama: Corneille, that could be considered co-allthoring. Moliere, and Racine. What ] am advocating is a group theory, There are other sllch groups, usually not for the creation of Shakespeare, but with a large fringe of lesser doers (II/akers, for the creation of the English Fourlh as they were known then, from the Greek Estate, including the London Stage and the English periodical press, and the start .. to the long tradition of English literature, the outpouring of poetry and novcls for �... � '. which the English have been lauded ever ' t. ,··. �. .. since. Each of these six writers created their own canons, some under their own names, some under the names of proxies. ' • _ r ; Ofthese six, five are now the leading can­ , . : �.. , \ didates for authorship ofthc Shakespeare i ..�. ,"- canon. The sixth, Philip Sidney, would Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford certainly be on that list had he not died Shakespeare Oxford NewsleLler August 2010 page I I

Theories of Authorship

Uicha ..d F. Whalen

The Shakespeare COlltroversy: An Anal)'sis actor's Shakespeare' at the expense of 'the from the first edition are valuable essays of t"e AlltllOrsliip Tileories. Secoud Edition scholar's Shakespeare.'" Alan Nelson's on important early figures in the author­ by Warren Hope and Kim Holston. Jef­ anti-Oxfordian, archival biography of ship controversy. They are the book's fe rson NC: McFarland & Company, 2009. the earl of Oxford, A1ollstrolis Adl'ersary opening chapter on Delia Bacon, the his second edition of Hope and (2003), gets four pages, mostly on Nel­ often unfairly maligned first Groupist, THolston's T"e S"akespeare COl/­ son's handling of three minor characters followed by a chapter on Mark Twain, trover,,,)' expands and brings up to date in Oxford's life, George Brown, Orazio quoted at length, and Walt Whitman with their selective survey and analysis of the Coquo and William Hunnis. "His book," his friend William O'Connor. literature on the authorship issue over say Hope and Holston, "is a piece of The flamboyant, Baconian cryptolo­ the past 280 years. Well-written and propaganda posing as scholarship." gist Ignatius DOllnelly gets a twelve-page well-researched, this book is not only an chapter. The skeptic Henry James shares entertaining, good read but also a valuable a chapter with Joseph Skipsey, the reference work. At the outset, the authors disillusioned custodian of the Stratford state that they are Oxfordians and " ...what Birthplace. Grouped together in the next we track in this book are the efforts of a HAMLET chapter are the respected anti-Stratford ian number of people which culminated in HIMS)i:LF George Greenwood and two writers they call "rebels:" Samuel Butler and that recognition of Shakespeare's identity, ... and the consequences, thus far, of that Frank Harris, who are not often heard recognition ....Our aim is to be critically from. Then comes one chapter entitled selective, not exhaustive." To cover the "Many Candidates: Marlowe, Rutland, years since their first edition, published Derby, and So On," and an excellent, full in 1992, the authors have added three chapter on J. Thomas Looney's life and chapters and extended thei r "Chronological ground-breaking ident i fication of Ox ford Annotated Bibliography" with selected as Shakespcare. books and articles published in the past The last of the original, pre- J 991 seventeen years. The third of the three new chapters re­ chapters covers works of numerous In the first of the new chapters, the ports on the work of various contemporary researchers and witnesses, illcludingJohn authors expand on works treated briefly in researchers of v a rio liS persuasions. They Galsworthy, B. n. Ward and his son B. M. their first edition. They devote five pages i nciude Peter Moore 011 the circumstances Ward, Gerald Rendall, Eva TurnerClark, to an admiring review of Hallllet Hilllself and votes for Oxford for membership Charles Wisner Barrell, S. Schoenbaul11, (1997), Bronson Fe ldman's booklet in the Knights of the Garter, The Lallie Percy Allen, Gerald W. Phillips, Dorothy published in 1977 that is out of print and Storyteller, POOl' and Despised; Daphne and Charlton Ogburn, and Ruth Loyd almost impossible to find. The first edi­ Pearson all Oxford 's inherited income, Miller. For whatever reason, Clark, the tion gave Feldman four paragraphs. They "Edward de Vere (/550-1604)"; Roger Ogburns and Miller-major, influential follow with reports on the 1987 debate Stritmatter's dissertation on Oxford 's Oxfordian authors-are not treated as fully before three justices of the Supreme Court Bible, Th e Margil/alia of Edward de as some of the more obscure writers. It of the United States and the Frontline Ve re 's Geneva Bible; Elliott Baker's is of course impossible to include every Public Broadcasting Systcm television shortened edition of Delia Bacon's book, book and article ordojustice to any of the program 011 the authorship controversy, Shakespeare s Philosophy Unfolded; Diana writers in a short survey of the immense "The Shakespeare Mystery," that was first Price's biography of Shakespeare, Shake­ literature all the authorshipconlroversy by broadeast in 1989. speare:" UnortllOdox Biograph)'; William Oxfordians, Stratfordians and others. In The second new chapter, "The Rubinstein and Brenda James's case for most cases, but not all, Hope and Holston Stratfordian Response," contains new, HenryNeville, Tile Truth Will Out; Robin select one or two aspects of the writer's post- 1991 material, including books by Williams case for Mary Sidney, Sweet work for discllssion, instead of providing Irvin Matus, an independent rcsearcher, Swall of AVOH; Mark Anderson's detailed a generalized summary of each. This and by Alan Nelson, an English profes­ and fully annotated biography of Oxford, makes it more interesting reading but at sor emeritus. The authors devote five Shakespeare by AHother Name; and Bill the expense of a more comprehensive, if pages to Matus's earnestly Stratfordian Bryson's informal, popular defense of brief, description of the work. Shakespeare /11 Fact (1994), a book the Stratford man, Shakespeare: The They do an admirablejob, however, of rarely cited by Oxfordians today. In the Wo rld as Stage. weaving together claims by Stratfordians end, they say, Matlls aims "to urge 'the Two of the chapters carried forward and Oxfordians, showing the back-and� poge 12 August 2010 Slmkcspcarc Oxford Newsletter fOrlh ofthedebateovertheceuturies. They and annotated bibliographic entries amount of reading and thoughtful inter­ have little patience ror Illost Stratfordian that sometimes rlill to several hundred pretation, is impressive. Warren Hopeand claims. The "Chronological Annotated words, so both should be consulted. Kim Holston have produced a worthy, if Bibliography"picks up in November 1991 Missing are lllallY of the morc significant quite selective, survey of an immense with "The Nose lob," anepisode from lhe Oxfordian research papers published in subject-280 years of literature on the TV program, Seinfeld. (A landlord con­ the Shakespeare Oxfo rd Newslelter, the Shakespeare authorship controversy in tends that "Shakespeare was an imposter,") De Ve re Society News/eller, Shakespeare 227 pages. The longest entries from 1991 to 2008 are Matlers, The O.\fortli1l11 annual journal, Suggested further reading: on books by Ian Wilsoll, Irving Matus, and the book Great O.lford, published in John Michell, Joseph Sobran, Jonathan 2004 by the De Vere Society. Shakespeare:, Philosophy UI(folded, by Bate, Diana Price, William Rubinstein, Thechrollological sequence is unusual Delio Bacon. Rodney Bolt (a conjectural Marlovian), for a bibliogmphy. Rarely will readers Shakespeare's Unort"odox Biography, have occasion to seek works published by Diana Price. The Tntlh lVill by Williolll Rubinstein The book's in a specific year. 0111, and Brenda James. idiosyncrasies ({nd Nor does the sequence of entrics convcy any particular insights. But thcsc Sweet Swan O/ AlIOIl, by Robin Williams. the sidelights that arc quibbles. The authors state at the outset Shakespeare by Another Name, by Mark caught the authors' that they do not aim to be exhaustive. The Anderson. Shakespeare: The lVorld as Slage, by Bill attention are a large book's idiosyncrasies and the sidelights that caught the authors' attention arc Bryson. Chaplcr9 including Bronson part of its appeal. The " large pari of its oppeal. The book's Feldman critique. book's ac hievel11 ent, achievement, the result of an incredible the result of an incredible amount of reading and thoughtful MALICE AFORETHOUGHT:

intel'l)J'etation, IS THE KILLING OF A UNIQUE GENIUS

ill1pressive. by Paul Altrocchi, :MD

MorkAnderson, Scoll McCrae, and Robin MALICE Shakespeare authorship Williams. The extended chronology also AFORETHOUGHT: mystery solved. Dastardly i neltldes entries on the Halper:" Magazine The Killing of (April 1999) collection "The Ghost of crime of authoricide­ A Unique Genius Shakespeare" that includes five articles by the premeditated Stratfordians and five by Oxfordians, and assassination of Edward The Te nnessee Law Review Vo l. 72, No. de Ve re's life story and I (Fall 2004) devoted to the authorship debate. (Full disclosure: This reviewer's literary creativity­ books ond orlicles arc included.) described with cerebral Readers new to the book and its sparkle and spine-tingling organization would do well to start with the chapters 011 Delia 8aco11, Whitman, suspense which only a Twain and Looney; then browse here and neurologist can properly there; nnd then keep the volume handy Paul Hemenway Altrocchl convey ! 395 pages. as a reference tool, consulting the index to find information on a specific author. To order from Xlibris Hope and Hoiston are especially good on easiest = by email: orders xlibris.com biographical backgronnd. @ Oxfordian readers will find anomalies. Refer to book #642 18. Some notable works receive scant attention Or telephone 1-888-795-4274. while some obscure works arc treated at Softcover: $19.99 Hardcover: $29.99 length. Some bibliographic entries seem Also available fr om Amazon. com less than consequential. Major authors arc covered in both chapter narratives Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter August 20 10 page 13

A Letter to the Editor of the Times Litermy Supplement

[email protected] May 5, 2010 As for Shapiro's book, it suffers from tell the difference, the easy way out (the Dear Sir, an embarrassing lack of scholarship. road taken by Shapiro in COI//es/ed Will) We suggest that your rcaders were Worse, it does not reflect the IllOSt recent is to say that it should not be attempted. ill-served by Charles Nicholl's review evidcnce provided by "anti-Stratfordians". Basically, COIi/ested Will is a fail­ of James Shapiro's COli tested Wi ll in Shapiro does not even attcmpt to addrcss ure. The authorship question remains your April 21 issuc. By conccntrating the myriad of issues that have been raised unresolved. We invite true scholars to on the lunatic fringe of those who doubt concerning the authorship question. He objectively revicw the data accumulated Shakespeare's authorship of the Collee/ed assumes from the start that Shakespeare sinceTJ. Looney's seminal " Shakespeare " lVorks, Nicholl gives the impression that wrote Shakespeare. which literally begs Idell/ified in 1920, and join in the discus­ questioning the customary ascription is the question he pretends to answer. By sion. They'll discover a series of thrill­ indeed to be psychologically unbalanced. focusing on why people think someone ing possibilities illuminating cOllntless Every field has its extremists. We are not else may have written the plays, Shapiro enigmas, large and small, in the work of among them. Thcre is a long, respectable again turns a very real question into a our greatest poet-playwright. To resolve and sobcrtradition concernedwith theevi­ pathology. In fact it's a deadly serious, the Shakespeare authorship mystery dent contradictions between the achieve­ highly important academic matter. Shapiro once and for all, the Sliakespeare Oxford ment of the Collee/ed IVorks and what is should call his book Ullcol//es/ed lVill. Society has called for the creation of an known about Shakespcare of Stratford. Shapiro 's main procedural objection independent, blue-ribbon commission None of it has to do with hidden ciphcrs rests upon the claim that it is illicit to composed of distinguished, internation­ and cryptograms. Anyone wishi ng to find read a writer, especially Shakespeare, ally recognized experts in relevant fields, out more about what "anti-Stratfordians" from his work. Yet thai's exactly what he including historians, biographers,jurists, really think is invited to review our an­ himself docs in his earlier book, 1599: A and other writers and scholars. nual publication, The O.\jo l'dinll, recently Ye ar ill the Life of Wi lliam Shakespeare. Sincerely. described by William Niederkorn as "the Of course a writer's life is reflected in Johl/ Hall/ill, best American academic journal cover­ his/her art. The question is, which parts President, and The Board of Trustees of ing thc authorship qucstion." Contact liS come directly from experience, which The Shakespeare Oxford Society online at the Shakespearc Oxford Society are imaginatively transformed and which website and we'll be happy to mail out a are pure invcnttion? Because it's hard to Note: The TLS declined to publish this letter. complimentary copy. page 14 August 20 10 Shnkcspcare Oxford NCWS!cllcr

Panel discusses Authorship Question with Classical Theatre Lab in West Hollywood

John Shahan

n Tuesday, July 13, the Classical of his death and connection to Shake­ OTheatre Lab hosted a panel discus­ speare's publishers; and Louis Fantasia, sion of the Authorship Question at the currently director of "Shakespearc at the West Hollywood COlllmunity Center in Hunti ngton," the teacher-training institute Pllllllmcr Park. Alexander Wells, an actor at the Huntington Library, who defended and current director of the Lab. asked William Shakspere of Stratford with his Carole Sue Lipman of the LA-based usual good hUlllor, insisting that one Ileed Shakespeare Authorship Roundtable to not be a Klingon to write SIal' Trek. organize the panel, reprising an event About forty people involved with held three years ago. the Classical Theatre Lab attended the Panelists included Carole Sue, who informal event. Following the opening gnvea brief overview oflhe morc prominent ten-minute presentations, pnnelists first John Shahan, Chairman of the authorship candidates (Bacon, Marlowe a�ked each other questions, and then took Shakespeare Authorship Coalition, and De Vere, plus newer candidate Sir questions from the floor. The audience has big doubts. Henry Neville and Amelia Bassano was clearly fascinated by the topic. Some Shahan said, "but they could see we were Lanier); John Shahan, chuirman of the were already aware of it , but many clearly excited about the topic, so some might Shakespeare Authorship Coalition, who were not. John Shahan brought copies of be motivated to look into it." Of course presented the case for reasonable doubt the Declaration of Reasonable Doubt, they will hear a lot about it when Roland about the Stratford man, as well as the case plus Ramon Jimenez' recent article in Emmerich's feature film Anonymous for Oxford; writer-producer Alex Ayers, Th. Oxfordian, "The Case for Oxford comes out next year, portraying Oxford who presented the case for Christopher Revisited," as handouts, "It's difficult to as Shakespeare, and as Queen Elizabeth's Marlowe, highl ighting the circLlmstances communicate much in such a short time," son and lover.

Fulke Greville

Dcrl"llll Charlton

uring early February this year I the Consistory COlirt of the Diocese conncctions D notified Phaeton that a radar scan on of Coventry, granted permission for an with E.O. We the ornate monument to Fulke Greville endoscope to be used to examine the will have to wait which stands in the Chapter House of the mOllument. A stringent set of conditions and scc," Collegiate Church of SI. Mary, Warwick, have stipulated that the work mllst be It is now had revealed three "box-like" objects carried out within the next few months. almost mid-Au­ sealed within. However, those involved expect the work gust (six months Professor James Stevens Curl, Cam­ to begin, almost certainly, within the next since I quoted Fulke Grevil le bridge University, stated: "Until we look six weeks. That is by mid- Marcil. the above) and inside we cannot know for sure what it Fulkespent the equivalent of£300,000 I have not seen any updates from the is. What is absolutely certain is that the on his monument, but his body was placed authorities. size, cost and magnificence are intended in the crypt below the church - not in the Being more than fascinated I con­ to speak to liS. There are plenty of elues monument itself, Ben Jonson referred tacted the official website http://www. about what it might be, and they suggest to his friend William Shakespeare as "a masterofshakspeare, com/index.htm on this is an incredibly exciting find," monument without a tombe"; a precise two occasions. Sadly, without reply. I will The discovery has resulted in great description of Greville�s monument. try again shortly. Lovely DornaBewle y, excitement, with academics positing that According to a mid-17th century completillgher Masters in "Oxfordianisl11" the boxes may contain the holy-grail of biography Greville wished to be known has also twicc requested official updates, English dramatic history, possibly an to posterity under no other notions than without acknowledgement. original manusclipt ofaS hakespearcan play. of "Shakespeare" s master". Somcthing drastic appears to have In a major developmcnt during early I informed Phacton: "I do not think · happened to cause such silence. Surely the February, Chancellor Stephen Eyre of that non-Oxfordians are aware ofGreville" s investigations have now been completed! Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter August 20 10 page 15

Oxford and Evolution A Letter to the Editor Anew academic journal appeared in Dear Sir, on the right track-Mr WH is (not as late 2009 from the State University I WaS looking over your site on Oscar Wilde thought)-Walter Ralegh­ of New York Press (Albany NY): Tile Shakespeare and I am disappointed that see altar rail within. I have completed Eva/ulianar), Review; Ar/, Sciellce, you modernisethe spelling. My problem the cipher and yes, Edward de Vere is Cllltllre, edited by Alice Andrews and with your choice to do so is that it is not mentioned-the answer Shakespeare takes John Carroll. fair on anyone attempting to understand you to is in Sonnet XVII but you will Tn its first issue (Vol. I, 1'1', 135-7) it Shakespeare the way Shakespeare was never understand it until YOll have all the carried a review by Robin Fox of Marcus meant to be understood. I havejust finished facts as Shakespeare wanted you to have Nordlund's Shakespeare alld ,lie NO/lire a 600,000 word book on deciphering them-the clue is in the last two words of 0/ LOl'e; Literature, CU/lIlre, Evallllioll Shakespeare and there is nobody on this theSonnet-MyRhyme-myrrh-y-me. (NorthwesternU. P. 2007.) Nordlund uses planet who is anywhere Ilcar the truth of Don'tjulllp to conclusions-myrrh is the a biocultural, evolutionary approach to understanding what Shakespeare stood for . clue-a gift from one of the Thrce Wise understanding love in Tillis AlldroniclIs, It has taken me several years to come Men-and it comes from the Arabic word Corio/all liS, King Leal; OllieI/o, 1i'oilus to the bottom of Shakespeare and let meaning bitter. Who would have known al/{I Cressida and All's lVell Th at Ellds me tell YOll-there is no such persoll­ that? Why give a gift like that-there's We ll (with a glance at A lVillter's Ta le.) Shakespeare is a made-up name-it comes always a reason-remember, this is heresy. Towards the end of a highly favorable from the Greek god Ares - the answer Shakespeare would have been burned to review, Fox slips in this paragraph. to Shakespeare's riddle to be or /lot to death, only the last heretic was burnedin "The biographical approach is cur­ be. The work is full of riddles and you 1612-he made it through that... rently out in literary analysis, but I have to start with the Sonnets before the can't help noticing that there are zero plays. The present tense of to be is I, Kim Core correspondences between the life of am, arc-Shakespeare wanted unity so William Shakespeare of Stratford and the make it plural-Ares-the Greek god of characters in these plays (or any of the war-also known as the shaker ofspeal's. ANNOUNCING the first others.) There are, however. numerous and Spear is the old word for spirit. You start Oxfordian edition of often quite specific cOlTelations with the off with Mars, the Roman god of war but lifeofEdward de Vere, the most plausible all answers go back to Greek. The first William Shakespeare's alternativecandidate. rn his youth he was play to look at is The Te mpes/-thesong in Bertram, his dark jealousy was Othello's The Tempest is where the Bee Sucks, there Othello (and he had his own lago), in his old age Slick I - now see the small words within he was Lear (with the three daughters) and run the sounds - Here, the bee Slicks With nn introduction and line notes and in between he was most definitely - here the basics and here suck I-hair/ from an Oxfordian perspective Hamlet, even down to the pirates. A study uslI-heresy. The anSlVer to the riddle By Ren Draya of Blackburn College of these correspondences might throw as within this song is the Holy Book. The and Richard F. Whalen, much light on the plays as does Nordlund's great ornamentof the time was the King Co-General Editor biocultural analysis." James Vers ion-believe me-you have of the Oxfordian Shakespeare Series He concludes that Nordlund's book to read it-that's why Shakespeare look is " ...the best read on Shakespeare frol11 Raphael Holinshed-Chronicles, From Horatio Editions-Llumina (whoever he was) and also all the nature why we have Acts, Romans, Numbers Press. Available direct from Llumin

Obituaries: Robert Brazil and Verily Anderson

n July the Oxfordian cause tragically Den'an Charllon w/'iles: Charles Darwin was her great-great-great O IOSl lwO of its best researchers/writ­ uncle and Florence Nightingale was a it is with the deepest regret that I ers. Robert Brazil and Verily Anderson great-great-grcat aunt. One of her cOllsins, notify readers of the Newsleller of the will be sorely missed. now living in Castle Hedingham, owned the passing froll1 nature to eternityof Verily Elizabethan manor-house that originally Anderson Paget, aged 95. RobeI'I 8razil belonged to Horatio Vere, at Tilbury Ve rily died at home, in her own bed, Juxta-Clare. Her ancestors included the Robert was a dedicated researcher of a slispected heart-attack. Duchess of Derby, as portrayed in the film who self-published two fine books. 1 was speaking to her only the day Til e Dllclless. Ve rily's traceable family The first, five years ago, was about the before. Ve rily was as fit as a fiddle. She history dated from 932. Shakespeare publishers most closely explained that during her upcoming Ve rily, together with Sir DerekJacobi, linked to his works. The second, three medical her doctor would "probably were the joint-Patrons of the D. V.S. She years IHter, concerned Angel Day's The congratulate her on her excellent good was also a prolific writer, having written Ellg/isll Secretary (1586). Day of course health !" 53 published books and films, including was one of Oxrord's secretaries, and his Verily was extremely robust, always her Oxfordian endeavor Tlte de Ve res of book was dedicated repeatedly to him travelling abroad. She recently returned Castle Helling/Will. through half-a-dozen editions (including home frol11 singing with her local choir Only two days ago, she told me that a Part Two in the early 1590s). at the Hermitage, Russia. Prince Charles 'he had just completed her 53rd book A Robert was also an accomplished awarded her a cycling award for her History of Her�'llIIonceaux Caslle (where mllsician, as he d(flllonstrated at the 2005 charitable works, and Chariton Ogburn, she had lived following the war) for the White Plains joint conference, playing JnL, gave her the Charlton Ogburnaward University of Canada. an acollstic guitar and singing in a wcll­ for her many contributions to Oxfordian­ Verily leaves four daughters and trained voice. He maintained Elizaforum, ism. One of Ve rily's Illany enthusiasms a son, Edward, who was deliberately an email blog, and an excellent webpage in lire was to walk her guide-dog Alfie, named in honor of Edward de Ve re and featuring transcriptions ofkcy documents most days, half-a-mile down the drive to christened in the sallle 1563 church in and books by Barb Flues (hllp: /llI'ww. Templewood, and through her glorious Stoke Newington where Edward's son el izabethanauthors. com/sac 101. htm). ancient woodlands. Henry had been christened. Tn these contexts Robert was a tough Ve rily must have been the oldest Her sudden death has cOlne as a representative of his own opinions. Many surviving Oxfordian, having been intro­ tremendous shock to all who were truly Oxfordians are proud to have called him duced to the cause by her first husband blessed by hcr extraordinary life and their friend. over 70 years ago; in fact her beloved personality. husband, a playwright, poet, player, and A true Renaissance Lady has passed Verily Anderson play-producer had been a close friend and away. We are all deeply inspired and most Verily Anderson's book Til e De lleres ardent supporter of John Thomas Looney grateful for her life. of Co.

Early on Robbie wrole up a thick my peculiar fate in life to be the pin that book proposal about "the royal story" of goes around bursting balloons, but this Shakespeare, filledwith PTscenarios. Of is too often the case." He also wfote, course he later dropped that and, much, "And let it not be said that I am simply much later than that, blasted my book n,e the person who says, 'NO,'" as he went MOl1ument all elizaforul11 (and probably on to demonstrate this by sharing some elsewhere :-). He knew that hiscriticisllls new information hehad gotten by long and might hun but could not disturb ollr diligent research before raising his hand. friendship and, in fact, we laughed a lot He worked like hell at this stufr. about our differences. At Ihe White Plains He was different than the mainstream conference a few years ago, he surprised (whatever that might be!) and he knew me with some unsolicited compliments, it and he was not about to change for for which I'll always be grateful. anything or anyone. The truth made I should explain that in my life him laugh and I recall, laughing with Robert was one of those friends who lell him, that Edward de Vere would have the truth about the way he thought about enjoyed his lack of b.s. and found him things and spoke it to your face. He did good company. I miss him. not care for polite avoidance of the truth of what he felt or knew. And for me this was a source ofmcrriment. One night J drove from Nyack to where he had moved, about an hour and a half north, and there was a terrible storm, but we got to a restraurant he knew, and I recall that much of our talk was not about Shakespeare but about writing and publishing and, in particular, some short stories he was writing or had Shakespeare Oxford wrilten. We also talked about acting on Society stage and, as I recall, more recently he appeared upstate in a community theatre and production of The Te mpest-which Marie Shakespeare Fello wship probably knows about. Joint Authors hip I am one of the many proud owners Conference of an inscribed copy ofT"e Tm e Story oJ September 16-19 2010 the Shakespeare Publicatiolls, Vo lume Olle: Ashland, Oregon Edward de Ve re & the Shakespeare Pri/II­ ers, by Robert Sean Brazil, copyright 1999. And of course we have the remarkable For conference information Elizabethan Authors site that he and Barb and registration, visit Flues created, not to mention elizaforuIll, the Shakespeare Oxford and his site with various images, as well Society website. as his many written contributions for the Oxfordian publications over the years. I'll always savor Gary Goldstein's Th e Merchant of Ve nice, remark: "He was this bearded wonder of Hamlet and Henry IV,Part energy, talk, and drama. He was ambitious One will be playing at to do things-to get not just the research the Oregon Shakespeare out into circulation but to provide everyone Festival with the literary context of the entire era so that redundancy of effort could be avoided for Oxfordian scholars." That gets it right. Back in April 1, 2010, addressing Roger Stritmatter 011 Elizaforul11. Robbie wrote in part: "1 have no idea why it is p"ge 18 Augusl 20 I 0 Shakespeare Ox rord News)cl(cr

Report of the 14th Annual Shakespeare Authorship Conference Richal'd Joyrich

he 141h Annual Sh"kespe"re Au­ Day 1\1'0 Tthorship Conference convened at Supposed willing career of Wilham of Concordia University in Pori land, Oregon The second day fealured Dr. Ren Stratford. De Vere of Course could have oraya on "The Three Queens of Ham­ Ihis lasl April. secn COl11llledia in Italy while he was lel,"-Gertrude, the Player Queen, and there. Good evidence "Inces him in the Day One Queen Hecuba. According 10 Dr oraya. audiencc at a specific performance. First lip was Mark Goggin 011 "The Thc Player Queen represenls Hamlel/ The afternoonbegan with a rousing Case for Bacon as the Author of Julius Oxford/s ideal MOlher figure and True romp by Dr. Daniel Wrighl and Bill Boyle Caesar", which foclIsed all the play's Loyal Wife. Gerlrude is also a mOlher/ ("A n AUlhorship iniliative of Unparalled underlying symbolism and allusions of wife figure but flawed since there remain Magnilude: Opening up Ihe SARC 10 Ihe play and how il is all aboul using questions about her complicity in the Ihe Whole ) Ihrough Ihe wonders of Ihe rhetoric for persuasion. OfCOurse Bacon, murder of Hamlet's father and even in Shakespeare Authorship Rcsearch Centre who wrote morc than any writer at the Ihe dealh of Ophelia. at Concordia. "Associnte Scholars" can lime aboul Ihe psychology of decision Next camc Dr. Michael Delahoyde, access the online databases of lit crary and Il1nking, was a mastc)' of rhetoric. on "Oxford Wrole Richard Ihe Second. othcrscholarly information that until now Second, we heard from lhc brother­ Know Ye Not That?" With his usual fl air only university libraries offered. and-sister team of Dr. Bruce Thompson for the dramatic and the humorous, Dr. Kevin Gilvary. of the de Verc Society and Claudia Thompson in a talk entitled oelahoydeexplained how "perspeclivcart" UK nexl spoke on "On Ihe Dale and "Shakespeare on Ihe Orienl Express." in thc Renaissance used artistic tricks to AUlhorship of The Conlenlion ..." As an It was delivered in tandelll, with each cause i Ilusiolls ofdepth and other "hidden" edilor of Ihe de Vere Sociely's "daling taking turnsto read. The significance of im"ges. He showed Ihal Oxford could project," Kevin was ablc to show that this became clear later. Taking their clie easil y have seen such painti ngs during his Ihe Henry VI plays (his specialty) almosl Agatha Christie's Murder 011 the Oriellt continental travels. Similarly, the plays certainly first appeared in their Quarto Express, in which nonc of the twelve of Shakespeare have many layers and versions, and were then reviscd for the suspects alone possesses Illative, means, perspectives. Richard I/contains parallels 1623 Folio. and opportunity, Hercule Poirot discov­ 10, and symbolically represenlalions of The nexl queslion is whelher Shake­ ers Ihal Ihey all did it. The Thompsons Oxford and Elizabelh. Delahoyde added spearc's main source was the Holinshed concludc Ihat the works of Shakespeare that there are several subtle allusions to edilion of 1 577 onhe 2nd edilion (slighlly were not all written by the same person. ChaliceI' in the play, and also elsewhere differenl) of I 587, an i mpOrtalll di fference Nexl, Dr. Peler Maeinlosh spoke in Shakespeare. if you're interested in the dating ques. Oil "Dating Shakespeare's 'Late Plays': After a break, Richard Whalen spoke tion. According to Kevin, Shakespeare

Coriolalllls." Macintosh showed that the on "The Tragi-Comedy of Olhello: A Link used Hall's Union of the Two HOlfses . .." lradilional daling of Corio/alll/slO 1608 (or to Oxford the Dramatist," an expanded (1548-I 550) as his main source. at leasl lo after 1605) cannol be suslained. version of a talk he gave al Ihe SOS/SF The afternoon ended with Dr. Earl Heconcluded Ihal lhe play could be daled Conference lasl Oelober. Showennan on "Shakespeare and the anYlime from 1 598 10 1609. Thus de Vere Whalen's theme was the paradoxical Queen's Farcical Dalliance with Alell­ cannot be ruled alit as its author. use of COlllmedia dell'arte techniqucs in can", an elaboration of his research on An 80-minule OVO fealure aboul Ol/lello, supposedly a lragedy. Com media Shakespeare's Greek sources. According Marlowe's death followed. II look Ihe dell'arte, a form of theater which was at to Earl, Bottom in A Midsummer Nights form ofa umock inquest" into whether his ils heyday in llaly during Ihe lale 1570s Dream is a Herculean anti-hero, while the dealh on May 30, 1593 was an accidenl, when Oxford was on his continental tOllr play ilself is a polilical allegory aboul �t murder to prevent him from testifying consists of spontaneous improvisatio,; Elizabeth I's marriage negotiations with In COurt the next day, or a scheme to fa ke using stock situations and characters, all of Alencoll. his death. Three real barristers presented which have ccrtain defined characteristics Day Three each case, cross·cxamining actors in the and ways of behavior. Whalcn pointed roles of Ihe people involved. A "j ury" of out their close resemblance to many The Ihird day of Ihe Conference aboul 70 then gave ils verdict. The murder characlers in Olhello. (Saturday) began with a presentation by for political reasons won, fo llowed by For Oxfordians, Ihe nOlable Ihing Charles Boyle on "The COUri of Queen . Elizabelh in Shakespeare". Originally Ihe fake-death slory. Only I I people on IS Ihat a form of Commedia dell'arte Ihejury believed Ihe "official" story Ihal had been performed in England during inlended for presenlalion al Ihe 1996 Marlowe was accidenlally killed. Ihe 1560s and 1570s, bUI nol (wilh one SOS Confercnce. il was poslponed aftcr excelJlion, al court in 1602) during Ihe Charles suffered a slroke righl in Ihe Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter August 20 10 page 19 hotel. Since then he has been continued A remarkable presentation by Alan part of the phrase "the forth", pointing out his interested ill the authorship question Green followed. Entitled "The Holy that Vere= Vier=FourfForth/Forty was a key and has contributed papers to multiple Trinity Solution: John Dec's Master Key Ilumerical concept, corroborated by the conferences, mostly been read by his Unites the Sonnet's Dedication with the second sonnet ("When fo rty winters,.,"), brother William. Stratrord Monument and Gravestone and the extraordinary high incidence of Now Charles fell well enough to Inscriptions," Alan described a complex FOllr in the Shakespeare canon. present it himself. He spoke eloquently master code involving the church's Jacob Hughes spoke ncxt on " Chaucer of the many Oxfordian allusions in dedications and inscriptions. Combined Lost and Found in Shakespeare's Histo­ several plays, including As You Like II, with lohn Dee's EIIOC/titlll Ta bles these ries," a follow-up on a presentation given MidslIlIllller 's Night 's Drealll, Tr oilus alld reveal a specific placc in Holy Trinity last year. It is known that Shakespeare Cressida, Ti llis Androlliclls, 7ivelft h Night, Church wherc something "very important" lIsed Chaucer as sourcc in at lcast two HelllY IV Part II, and HamIel. is hiddcn. It turnsout to be under one of plays (A MidsulI1mer Night 's Dream and Aflera break William Boyledescribed the four consecration crosses on the altar The Two Noble Kinsmen), and ChaliceI' his work "Building aShakespeareAuthor­ of the church. seems a rcference in the name SirTopas ship Database: What's In, What's Out and Ncxt was a panel discussion on "A in Twe lft h Night. Jacob focused moslly Who Decides?" A professional librarian, Declaration of Reasonable Theorizing". 011 allusions to Challcer in the History Bill has been working on an onlineresource Charles Beauclerk, William Boyle, Dan plays, particularly in the character Falstaff. he calls SOAR (Shakespeare Online Wright and Hank Whittemore urged us The final presentation was by Frank Authorship Resources) which is a part of all to "get along" and respect others' Davis on "Shakspere: A New Look at his New England ShakespeareAuthorship conclusions or theories without necessar­ the Claim for His Literacy," elaborating Li brary (www.shakespeareox ford library. ily agreeing with them. There was some his work on the signatures of actors and org). It currenlly contains 200 records. spirited discussion, but nothing really writers during Shakespearean times, All Some links are available only to SARC was resolved in my opinion. of the actors and writers in Henslowe's scholars (see above). diary could write their names well. These The Awards The next presentation was "Com­ signatures were compared to the six il­ manded by the Motion of Thine Eyes: Later that evening attendees enjoyed legible signallires by Shakspere. Shakespeare and the Dark Lady," by the Awards Banquet, held on the main Summing Up Hank Whittemore. The talk was divided floor of the George R. White Library and into four parls, each discussing one of Learning Center at Concordia. With that the Confcrence formally four "named persons" in the sonnets and Several awards were given. Theannual ended. Overall it was a very enjoyable its dedication. Hank's conclusions were SARCAward for Artistic Excellence went and informative. A good variety of topics that "On lie Begetter" refers to the person to Chris Coleman, the Artistic Director was presented, all increasing (to varying who inspired the Sonncts, the Earl of of the Portland Center Stage. Awards ex tents) the case for Ox ford 's authorship Southampton, not (as some scholars say) for Scholarly Excellence were givcn to and the further understanding of the the one who procured the sonnets for the Michael Delahoyde and (in absentia) to "Shakespearean Age", Even presentations publisher Thorpe; the "Beller Sprit" (or Stephanie Hopkins Hughes and a Span­ rocusing on other authorship candidates the Rival Pact in sonnets 77-86) is the ish Oxfordian scholar, Jose Carrillo de served to shore up the case for Oxford pseudonym Shakespeare, which Oxford Albornoz Fabregas.A SpccialAward was in my opinion, had to usc and which threatened to (and presented to Charles Boyle for his many did) eclipse him; "Suborned Informer" contributions (he got a standing ovation). (from Sonnet 125) is "Time" and not a The Final Day person at all; and finally "My Mistress" Sunday began with another pancl is of course Queen Elizabeth. discllssion, this time featuring Paul Nich­ After lunch Charles Beauclerk deliv­ olson and Chris Carter. The subject was ered his keynote address on "Shakespearc's "The ImportanceofKnowing Shakespeare Lost Kingdom,"The message was similarto for Dramatizing the Plays." Nicholson the one presented at the Wednesday launch is the Executive Dircctor of the Oregon Bcauclcrk's new book, that Oxford was Shakespeare Fcstival and Carter, as noted the son of Queen Elizabeth and also the carlier, is the Artistic DirectorofPortland father (with the Queen) of Southampton. Center Stage. Shakespeare plays were wrillen largely Following a short break, William J. to assuagc Oxford's personal trauma and Ray spoke on "Rollell in Reverse: Objec­ identity crises, and also to try to affect tive Evidence That Edward de Vere Wrote the way Elizabeth rnled and prepared fo r the Sonnets." Ray expanded on the last her successor. page 20 August 20 I 0 Shnkespeare Oxford Newsletter

Stratford, Cooperstown and Myth

Richard F. Whalen

What do Stratford-on-Avon and records say he invented baseball, and he of the merchants, property owners and Cooperstown. NcwYork. have in common? never claimed to have done so. civic leaders of the town, the major league Famolls towns in rllral settings, yes. William Shakspere is the hero for baseball teams and the endorsement But more than that, both of them owe the Stratford myth. No records, however, of Congress and President Franklin D. their fame and prosperity to appealing show that Shakspere of Stratford wrote Roosevell. The Stratford myth had its and enduring myths. anything at all, much less the works of civic boosters and the support of eminent The Stratford myth is well-known Shakespeare. professors in the Shakespeare establish­ to Oxfordians. but the Cooperstown Nordid he ever claim to have written ment, sllch as Stanley We lls, chairman of myth that baseball was invented in that them. the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust bucolic, upstate New York town by Abner Myths also need historic artifacts. Myths need historic sites: In Coo­ Doubleday is almost as far-reaching. And Cooperstown's Baseball Hall of Fame perstowu it's Doubleday Field, origi­ the parallels between the Iwo myths afC boasts a soft, misshapen, small ball found nally Phinney's field; in Stratford it's striking. in a farmer's trunk in the 1930s, a ball that the Birthplace, a building which is Both towns are far from any metro­ the townsfolk soon came to believe was "preserved intact," originally the home politan center, but thanks to appealing and Doubleday's baseball. Stratford-on-Avon of the Shakspere family. enduring myths both have become major claims to have "the original cradle of the Myths need statues. Cooperstown tourist attractions and vacalion destina­ Bardiccanon itself-his birthroom," which has a wax museum in the Baseball Hall tions, both renowned for their supposed has been "re-displayed," according to the of Fame. Stratford has the monument in celebrities-William Shakespeare and Stratford web site. Trinity Church with the effigy of a writer, Abner Doubleday. Myths need celebrations. Thc Cooper­ "Shakspeare," allhough the original effigy To endure and prosper, myths need stown myth was ratified by the Centennial depicted a wool merchant before it was historic artifacts, celebrations, historic of Baseball celebration at Cooperstown allercd to fit the Stratford myth. sites, statues, institutions, continuing in 1939, a week-long event with parades, Myths !Ieed institutions (and entertain­ activities, and underlying and captivating speeches, an Old-Timers game, an NBC ments). Cooperstown has the National stories. radio broadcast from Cooperstown, and Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, And heroes. appearances by thirty-six major league featuring plaques for members, the wax Abner Doubleday is the hero of the players, including Babe Ruth. Thousands museum and a "Virtual Reality Batting Cooperstown myth. He is supposed to of baseball fans arrived on a special Cage." Stratford has the Birthplace, Anile have laid out the first baseball field in a train, but rain forced postponement of Hathaway's house, the schoolroom, and pasture in 1839 when he was in his teens. the opening day events. (The doubts of a "The Falstaff Experience," a "ghost A centennial plaque mounted there in 1939 few sports columnists in New York City haunted ....sini ster," scary experience, says: "Doubleday Field, Binhplaee of went unheeded.) apparently a veritable funhouse ofhorrors. Baseball." Doubleday had been nominated The defining celebration for the Myths need continuing activities. by a boyhood friend in Cooperstown, a Stratford myth was the rain-drenched Cooperstown has the Baseball Writers mining engineer out West who wrote in a Stratford Jubilee in 1769, with banquets, of America elect new members to the lellerdecades later that he saw Doubleday choral works, a costumed ball, a horse Hall of Fame annually. Stratford has lay out a diamond in Cooperstown and race, a display of variolls items presum­ all annual season of plays at the Royal write out rules for the game. ably owned by the presumed Bard, a Shakespeare Theatre. But Doubleday was not from Coo­ bardolatrous oration by David Garrick, Myths need an underlying and perstown. He was born in Ballston Spa, but no rainchecks and no performances appealing theme for the general public. New Yo rk, and schooled in Auburn N.Y. of any Shakespeare plays. The continu­ Cooperstown bills itself as the birthplace and then in Cooperstown but only for a ing celebrations for the Stratford myth of the All-American game invented by a few years. He went to West Point and are performances of Shakespeare plays schoolboy for schoolboys in a vacant field became a decorated Civil War general and in the Royal Shakespeare Theater and in rural, upstate New Yo rk. Stratford bills career military officer. He was at West the "international occasion" for laying itself as the rural birthplace of the com­ Point in 1839 when he was supposed to birthday flmvers at the no-name gravestone moner who supposedly went to grammar be ill Cooperstown inventing baseball. in Trinity Church. school there, became a universal genius He never returnedto Cooperstown, and Myths ueed dedicated supporters and wrote the works of Shakespeare. although he left copious memoirs and and the endorsement of notable figures. And, inevitably, myths have their diaries, they never mention baseball. No The Cooperstown myth had the support skeptics and debunkers. Hoboken, New Shokespeore Oxford Newsleuer August 20 10 poge 21

Jersey, argues that Alexander Cartwright "!t's all part of American mythology the Str:uford myth. founded the Knickerbocker Base Ball ond folklore, like Paul Bunyon ond John Post, Paul. Article in n,e Saratogiall of 3 April Club and invented the first orgonized Henry, but folklore is an important part 2005. Accessed in the entry for Gcncral Abncr Doubleday on theAri ington Cemetery baseball game with a diamond and rules of the American story." Stanley Wells, web site. in 1845 in Hoboken, New Jersey, ocross chairman of the Shakespeare Birthplace Schoenbaum, S. Shakespeare 's Lil'!!S: Nell' the Hudson River from Manhattan. The Trust, has not (yet) suggested that the Edilioll. Oxford, 1991. For the Shakespeare fourteen players all came from New story of the Stratford man ns Shakespeare Jubilee, see pp. 104- 10; for 'Relics and As­ York. The challenges to the Stratford may be part of British mythology and soei,uiolls," pp. 46-9. myth began in earnest in the mid- 1 800s folklore, but there are significant signs Stratford-Upoll-Avon web sitcforthe Birthplace and have continued into the 21'1 ccntmy. of some erosion to the well-entrenched and other information all statues, theaters, Myths can be vulnerable, and the Stratford myth. Clllcrl

Become Part of the Oxfordian Movement

Join the Shakespeare Oxford Society, fo unded in 1957, and receive the quarterly Shakespeare Oxford Newslettel·.

Membership Categories:

__ Basic and Student Memberships ($50.00 U.S./Canada; $65.00 foreign) include a subscription to the quar­ terly Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter and eligibility to vote at the Annual General Meeting.

__ Regular Membership ($65.00 U.S./Canada; $80.00 foreign) also includes a subscription to the annual re­ search journal The Oxfordian.

__ Family Membership ($1 00.00 U.S./Canada; $115.00 foreign) is a Regular Membership for two individu­ als at the same address, both of whom are eligible to vote at the Annual General Meeting.

______Name of Additional Fanlily Member: ______

__ Sponsor ($ 1 25.00 U.S./Canada; $140.00 foreign)

__ Contributor ($250 U.S./Canada/foreign)

__ Benefactor ($1000+ U.S./Canada/foreign)

_ Name and Address of Library: ______

NOTE: Sponsor, Contributor, Patron, and Benefactor Memberships are contributory memberships that can include an ad­ ditional Family member residing at the same address and a one-year subscription as a gift to a library of your choice. All members in good standing of the Society are eligible to run for election and to serve as members of the Board of Trustees.

Please check below the type of payment (U.S. Dollars only): t:I Check t:I Money Order

Credit Card: t:I American Express t:I MasterCard t:I Visa

_ _ Name (as il appears on card): ______

__ _ Card number: ______

___ _ Exp. date: ____

__ Signatl1l'e: ______

Please direct questions about membership, or about an application already sent to us, to the attention of Richard Joyrich using the SOS email or mailing address (or, on the on-line membership page, click on the link, Richard Joyrich , Membership Officer).

Shakespeare Oxford Society P. O. Box 808 Yo rktown Heights, NY 10598-0808 Phone: 914-962-1717 Fax: 914-245-9713 Email: sosoffice @optonline.net