Видео

👍 Thumbs up !

An amazing feat of memory, and brilliantly acted.

Probably one of the dumbest videos on this website. Thank god it basically had no views, and this channel no subs. Dreadful stuff.

Brilliant KC thank you! I also thank Charlton Ogburn who first enlightened me! And added to the list to whom I am grateful is ‘Anonymous’ a superb film that further explodes the mythology! As for the trogs, Shapiro most culpable with his unending prevarications and rationalisations! Once more KC Thank you! Clyde Gatell.

Ben Jonson thought Shakespeare existed, and was a playwright, if only you'd been around to advise him of his mistake.

This matters for far more serious reasons than satisfying the idle curiosity of a few wannabe intellectuals. It shows that great lies and deceptions can and have been carried out by the very top of society and been perpetuated for many hundreds of years. WE WERE LIED TO and we still are being lied to. This was a systematically organised conspiracy to deceive. This involved not only top members of the English aristocracy but Elizabeth and James 1st. The consequences and motivations may have been reasonably benign but what this reveals should make us wonder how many other matters that have formed the foundations of our historical record are also fraudulent? We already know of some of them, but how many more exist that we have have not yet discovered? The truth is that we live in a world of lies and deceptions some of which are far older then this one. In my opinion virtually everything that we believe is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth is not. This applies to virtually all subject matters, to a great or greater degree. Knowledge is power. This is why our Owners retain so much of the latter and we remain with so little of the former. It is perhaps ironic that the greatest proponent of the Enlightenment namely Sir Francis Bacon was one of the Worlds greatest liars and deceivers as well as one of the smartest and most influential persons ever to have lived. Bacon and his co-conspirators may have had the best intentions in mind when embarking on this great project to deceive the masses, but the motivation is relatively unimportant with regards to its clear implications. This also amply demonstrates that it is far easier to fool someone than convince them that they have been fooled.

Love this !!🫡

I believe that Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare. But who was Shakespeare?

Surely(so to speak!) the most open-minded and logical conclusion - until proven otherwise - is that a male and female group or 'Shakespeare Salon' of playwrights wrote but NOT co-wrote the plays, then submitted them to the group for read-throughs, finessing, minor or not-so-minor changes and suggestions - just as movie screen-writers do. And as always noone points out that (would-be) female playwrights had one other major reason to hide behind a male pseudonym in Elizabethan England because women were not permitted to write plays and have them publicly performed under their own names or using any female name for that matter! So I'll continue to broad-mindedly believe - until proven otherwise - that the likes of Mary Sidney, Amelia Bassano, Marlowe and Edward de Vere all contributed their own individual but "willfully"(!!) very 'Shakespearean' plays to a Shakespeare Salon or collective - and a Mr. Will 'Spellcheck' Shak'spear from Stratford, real actors, closet actresses and others in the theatre business would also frequently attend the Shakespeare Salon's meet-ups. And much (very productive) fun would have been had by all. I can't wait for a now long-overdue movie sequel to "Anonymous" that reflects and both entertainingly and intelligently dramatises all of the above and much much more besides.. Paul G

Very good monologue on Shakespeare. I watched an earlier one of yours, on this same topic, when you were dressed as a Lawyer and were handling the Shakespeare bust. Impressive grasp of your subject and immensely entertaining too.

Did this b**"" really just say "read my lips" with a close up on his masked face? 😑

One key but too-rarely mentioned reason to believe a woman or women wrote some/all of the plays is that women had to hide behind a (male) pseudonym given that women were not permitted to write plays and have them publicly performed except as "closet" playwrights. The only truly balanced non-chauvinist conclusion is that a male and female "Shakespeare Salon" including de Vere, Mary Sidney, Amelia Bassano had some great fun covertly writing but probably not co-writing all of the plays. Actors, theatre owners and play commissioners would have attended those semi-clandestine Shakespeare salon sessions for initial read-throughs and as with movie screenplays minor or major changes would inevitably have been proposed by all involved. Paul G

Cute … ✋🏼D

Also, if everyone knew this Stratford chap was actually Shakespeare, how could he write for example Richard II, where the King literally gives away his crown and not get arrested? It's honestly laughable.

Brilliantly done and very funny 😂

Didn't the pen name Shakespeare first turn up 13 days after the death of Marlowe? And now there is some documentary evidence that Marlowe died in Padua in 1627? This was a very funny , enjoyable performance. Thank you.

Like many things, another lie we have been told. Lets Reconsider everything history has told us.

Let's cut to the chase here cos life is too short - 1. John Heminges,Henry condell and William Shakespeare are all mentioned in the same list as 'players' who receive red cloth for James 1st coronation. 2. These three guys are again linked in shakespeare's will where he bequeaths money to them 'and to my fellows John Heminge, Richard Burbage, and Henry Condell 26s 8d a piece'. 3. And guess what - they are once again all linked up in the Shakespeare first folio - they name him in the dedication as the writer of these plays "onely to keepe the memory of so worthy a Friend, & Fellow alive, as was our Shakespeare, by humble offer of his playes." Thus we conclude - the Stratford man IS William Shakespeare the playwright. Link to the 'red cloth' shakespearedocumented.folger.edu/resource/document/account-master-great-wardrobe-recording-issue-red-cloth-shakespeare-and-his Link to the 'will' shakespearedocumented.folger.edu/resource/document/william-shakespeares-last-will-and-testament-original-copy-including-three Link to the 'dedication in the first folio' firstfolio.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/book.html (image 8)

In the months following Francis Bacon’s death his trusted Rosicrucian Brother Dr William Rawley gathered together and quietly issued a commemorative work in his honour entitled Memoriae honoratissimi Domini Francisci, Baronis de Verulamio, vice-comitis Sancti Albani sacrum. This rare and still virtually unknown work contains thirty-two Latin verses in praise of Bacon, which his orthodox editors and biographers have simply glossed over, ignored, or suppressed, that portray Bacon as a secret supreme poet and dramatist, the writer of comedies and tragedies, under the pseudonym of Shakespeare.ruclips.net/video/n3UL4MfyAZc/видео.html

Odd isn't it that the fact that women had one major additional reason to hide their identities often strangely goes unmentioned: women were still not permitted to write plays in ostensibly enlightened and liberal Elizabethan England. By contrast the fact that women were not permitted to *act* in plays in English theatres is widely known and freely discussed. Paul G

John Hudson has been making his exhaustively researched and highly persuasive case(link) for many years that the "Dark Lady" Amelia Bassano was the author of some or all of the plays attributed to the playwright or group of playwrights who wrote under the Shakespeare pseudonym. Who can possibly dare argue against Hudson's massive mountain of evidence and his forensically joined-up contextual historical knowledge and expertise: ruclips.net/video/tyn-3GNOd7w/видео.htmlsi=2IRSAv_IQhaRRY0V PS. the fact that women had one major additional reason to hide their identities often strangely goes unmentioned: women were still not permitted to write plays in ostensibly enlightened and liberal Elizabethan England. Paul G

Brilliant!

I'm also impressed by his bigger-picture mockery of the media's and so-called experts' conforming insistence on labelling and smearing even highly-informed dissenters on any issue as "conspiracy theorists".

The way I see it, both sides have evidence but neither side has proof. Is it asking too much to have the plays credited to “anonymous”?

Canadian Connection 😂😂😂

Loved it!

I would have ended with Nietszche " Convictions are dangerous enemies to truth then lies '.

francis bacon shake spear has occult connotations

A paradigm of cogent reasoning and incisive humor, the real author would be proud.

Thank you. You’ve helped reawaken my involvement with this issue. I gave it up when I had to move to Pittsburgh. Not a lot of interest here. I’m hoping to escape…and wake. Your presentations are an excellent review for me, I hope an intriguing introduction for others.

'Flatfordian' meaning - an exceptionally well paid academic, who dose virtually no work, in an Oxbridge / Ivy league university, yet gatekeeps and protects the most feeble, weak premise ever made - that an illiterate, unschooled Brummie oaf, debt collector and son of a Glovemaker, made the finest literature that Mankind has ever conceived.

I know, I know. How disconcerting it must be to those whose high and lofty perch lay threatened. Upon that molehill hill of university degrees it sits. A rage to those whom an affront is must so clearly be. That so little talent is bestowed compared to thee. A simple chap, a pleb of the most humble earth to whom so much light of providence has shone.

I have penned a poem or two though most of them are dogs hounding paths to love that's new in mysts and rain and fogs Me thinks I did speak poorly though both time and time again if I did not speak sweet to you my long lost holy friend while Shakespeare waits in fashion's tomb and Marlow speaks behind Just beyond the curtain Le nome de Plume sublime I would stoop to ape the bard If it would bring her back That girl that was my Isabel In this twelfth Night of my lack

the way stratfordians behave, you'd think people questioning the narrative were saying shakespeare was an alien or something, rather than something completely mundane and prosaic. their rejection of contrarian opinions is out of all proportion to what is being proposed. it really is quite anti scientific and unscholarly to be so unobjective. it shouldn't matter to them in the slightest if shakespeare turns out to be de vere and /or marlowe. in fact a true scientist and person of intellectual integrity welcomes their long held beliefs being overthrown, if thats what new evidence suggests. in the case of shakespeare, the long held beliefs seem to have been utterly foundationless from the start.

The usual postulation that Shakespeare wasn’t the author, based on absolutely nothing. When a play is being produced for the first time, the author has to be present. Many, many people would have known who wrote the play. You don’t see numerous contemporaneous articles saying that Shakespeare didn’t write X,Y, etc. There is very little known about Shakespeare, and there is absolutely, 100%, no evidence either way about authorship, so all of these doubters have as much legitimacy as people who believe Shakespeare wrote the plays, and I have to fall on the latter side, for the reasons stated. He had to have been there when they did the plays for the first time. There are always questions, “what did you mean by this“? The whole doubt thing is ridiculous.

Oh! Keir! Where? When? Wheelchair accessible? I MUST see this play. Bravo!

delirious complacent sanctimonious conspiracy-theorists!!!!

Ha! Great talk, but let me challenge a bit of orthodoxy presented therein: a few years ago I came across a refutation of the carbon dating of the Shroud of Turin. Years after the original carbon dating of the 1970s it was discovered that the samples were taken from a side which had been repaired after a fire had damaged the silver box in which it was reputed to have been stored (and melted). The edge had been sewn on, but had bits of genetic material from Europe. New samples were taken from further into the piece of fabric and analyzed both via carbon dating and also for vegetation fragments(? maybe DNA?). The main body of the shroud is woven using a weave style only found in the Middle East, the linen itself is an ancient type and it has microscopic pollen which is genetically only seen local to present day Israel. Also non-Catholic scientists examined the image and cannot account for it because it isn’t pigments or a photographic process etc. So it is possibly what the Catholic church has claimed it is-a burial cloth from the area of Jerusalem from two thousand years ago with an “atomic” image on it. There are videos about this on RUclips. But Edward de Vere *was* the author of Shakespeare’s works. No way was the Stratford man educated enough to have written them.

bloody brilliant (excuse my language) - Twelth Night, Malvolio's words at the end bring new meaning: "Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon 'em'

And why are all these anti-Stratfordians always waving their arms as if trying to bat away the blindingly obvious? Always so "full of passionate intensity"! Fake moon landings anyone? With thanks to ethelburga: "Either one believes Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare or there were an unknown number of collaborators" that's the pivotal canard here. Shakespeare authorship study is revealing hitherto unsuspected contributions by other Bankside playwrights as more sophisticated stylometric analysis is able to tackle smaller and smaller fragments. But the identical process has completely deflated the claims of alternative authors of the entire canon which have now moved along the authorship spectrum from the familiar territory of "preposterous" to their new home in the realms of "impossibility". Yes there are parts of the early and late plays, and even Macbeth, which contain additions by other playwrights but it is both absurd and disingenuous to suggest that this has created new space for followers of The Earl of Oxford or Bacon to explore. The opposite has happened. Better stylometric analysis has reduced the probability of candidates to effective elimination. The Shakespeare Authorship Question, where that implies the existence of potential alternative candidates for the whole canon (minus a couple of percent in collaborative additions), no longer exists. It is a parlour game for contrarians.

So it took academics 400 yrs to figure out Shakspere was just another grand masonic hoax? Lol. The masses will never understand the power of masonry and it's impact on everything from Hollywood to geopolitics.

“If Bacon wrote Shakespeare, who wrote Bacon?” George Kittredge

• Shakespeare was not born on 23.4.1564 on the one hand, as is generally assumed today, but on 19.4.1564, after which he was baptised on 26.4.1564 and died on 23.4.1616. • At his time, pure Catholicism was forbidden in England, which is why William Shakespeare officially confessed to Protestantism, which, however, was tantamount to a fraud, because in truth he was very strict and almost fanatically addicted to Catholicism and thus a strict and fundamentalist believer of this religion. • However, he knew how to hide this so well that only his wife Anne, née Hathaway, who was eight years older and married to him in 1582, knew about it. • The wife had fallen for him, which is why she remained silent in spite of many marital quarrels and in spite of his jealousy, even when she learned through dream mumbling on his part that he was treacherous and spying for the Holy Pope in Rome with regard to the Anglican Church - Church of England, State Church. • 'Hamlet' and 'Romeo and Juliet' were not written by William Shakespeare but by Christopher Marlowe, as were various other works, although the 17th Earl of Oxford, Edward of Vere, also wrote various works for Shakespeare, who himself was not so good at writing in the manner attributed to him that he could have written the works attributed to him today. • From his own writing came only very trivial and insignificant things, which he also did not bring to the public, and so all the 38 known dramas, comedies, poems and histories attributed to him came from the pen of Edward of Vere and Christopher Marlowe. • Both used Shakespeare during 1589 to 1613 only as a makeshift to publish their works. • Edward de Vere was not so good, but Christopher Marlowe was a very good poet and playwright. • Both of them, however, had profound reasons to use Shakespeare as a makeshift, especially Marlowe. • Edward of Vere was, not a particularly good poet and playwright, used Shakespeare, so that he would not have to appear himself, because he feared bad criticism. • Christopher Marlowe, on the other hand, had to flee because he put his life in danger with regard to his faith. • So, in the spring of 1593, he arranged a well-considered brawl with friends in which he was allegedly stabbed to death, which allowed him to escape unrecognised. • The truth is that he fled and went to Italy, where he could live under a different name and without the danger of persecution. • It was there that he wrote most of the works he had sent to Shakespeare until 1613, who then used them under his name. • However, he was not allowed to do so under his own name, nor was he allowed to do so under his false name, because otherwise he would have been recognised, persecuted and handed over to the courts. • Christopher Marlowe himself died at the age of fifty on 28 May 1614, so that Shakespeare naturally did not receive any more works from him during the last two years of his life and nothing else became known under his name.

Of course, it is much more convenient to suggest that many plays were not by Shakespeare in order to sanitise the glaring question of authorship, i.e that they were not written by the Stratford man in the first place, because that nulls the centuries of works written about Stratford man. When I did my undergrad at Cambridge, there was one thing that we were never to say out loud, and that is: "I don't know", the shaming would follow on a most embarrassing scale. So, fabrication was more acceptable, but not knowing was not. So, imagine that suddenly Cambridge University has to concede that the whole institution was "in not knowing" for centuries, by promoting Stratford man as Shakespeare? I think orthodox academia will have to transform radically or die, and become a museum, and it is their choice. I hope they read this comment.

The lack of a literary paper trail combined with the six scrawled signatures combined with the Droeshout engraving having two left arms, combined with the Stratford Moniment [sic] combined with the original bust not being a writer combined with "look not on his picture, but his book" combined with "Avon" being Hampton Court combined with "Stay passenger..." combined with Vere's Geneva Bible combined with "our English Terence" combined with ""our ever-living poet" combined with Golding's unlikely translation of Metamorphoses combined with hundreds of other items of evidence indicating that the Stratford businessman is not the author and pointing to Vere, I am inclined to believe that Da Vinci did not learn about painting Mona Lisa nor Michelangelo learn how to sculpt David by sitting around in a pub yucking it up with the guys as Stratfordian entrepreneurs would have us believe.

Sonnet 76: "Every word doth almost tell my name." ------Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford

Thanks for your work on furthering the authorship question in such an entertaining way. Please note an Oxfordian smoking gun that has not been sufficiently publicized: Five texts concerning Shakespeare that were encrypted by John Dee and state multiple times that the author of Shakespeare's works was Edward de Vere and the grace of God within him. I demonstrate that Dee encoded his signature three times in each text and that his signatures are not random but are positioned to serve as keys in all five encryptions: ruclips.net/video/7_b6p66N_Ss/видео.html

There was a team of writers

Thanks Keir, from a fellow Canadian. I got interested in the whole authorship debate from watching your You Tube performances...and I must admit, it has greatly changed my view of historical truth and accepted literary "conventional wisdom". Delving into the authorship question is also the most mind-expanding activity I can imagine...without dropping psychedelic substances!

Here we are and Shakespeare is still entertaining us only now through his authorship question which by now should have been put to bed if not put to a second best bed. Great presentation, simply great.