Wilting at Tin Mines
Jim KQKnave
Oxford's life make a case for his authorship, when the parallels to literature
that was available to Shakespeare are much more numerous and more
convincing in their details. But why so FEW parallels to Oxenforde?
Surely, if they claim that a parallel means something in Hamlet, that
they must mean something in Shakespeare's other plays. If we can
find parallels to Oxenforde in Hamlet, then we *must* find parallels
to Oxenforde in every play, otherwise the claim has no validity.
Where is Oxenforde in "As You Like It"? Rosalind is the heart and
soul of this play, one of Shakespeare's greatest creations. Is
Oxenforde Rosalind? Hard to imagine the man accused of
petty murders as Rosalind. And what is the analogy to the
three sons of Rowland de Boys?
Where is Oxenforde in "Midsummer Night's Dream"? The most loveable
and endearing and memorable characters in this play are Peter Quince
and his player fellows. Is Oxenforde Puck? After all, Puck says at one point
"Then slip I from her bum".
Where is Oxenforde in "King Lear"? Most Shakespeare lovers
are in agreement that this play is one of his greatest plays, at least the
equal of "Hamlet". Did Oxenforde have three daughters
or even three children who competed for his wealth? Did his son
try to take command of his estate? Is there anything remotely
resembling Oxenforde's life in this play?
Where is Oxenforde in "Twelfth Night"? Where are the fraternal twins in
Oxenforde's life? This unforgettable story, one of Shakespeare's greatest
plays, features fraternal twins as the principal characters around which
the story revolves, and William Shakespeare had fraternal twins
himself, a boy and a girl.
Where is Oxenforde in "The Merchant of Venice"? The most memorable
character is Shylock. Was Oxenforde a jew? Was he a professional usurer?
And don't give me this nonsense about how he borrowed money from
a Jew once. Oxfordians go on and on about how only a nobleman
could portray the nobles in the play so convincingly. That is
the primary reason why Hamlet, according to them, is such a memorable
character, because Oxenforde *was* Hamlet. So was Oxenforde
a Jew and a usurer too?
In Hamlet, the ghost has one of the most interesting and unforgettable
parts, and likewise in Macbeth, the witches. But where in the voluminous
record of Oxenforde's life (especially his letters) is there a mention
of his having experienced ghosts or witches? Those times were not
like ours; belief in such things was a matter of course, even for educated
men.
Where are the parallels in "The Taming of a Shrew"? Was Oxenforde
a drunk, like Sly? During the time that Oxfordians claim Oxenforde
was writing the plays, he was one of the wealthiest men in England,
so he could hardly be the poor gentleman Petruchio, who is trying
to marry a rich girl for her dowry, and whose friends have to pay for
his courtship.
Where is Oxenforde in "Love's Labour's Lost"? The most colorful
characters are Holofernes the pedant and Costard the clown. Did Oxenforde
create an academy such as the one in LLL? Or was he Berowne,
who vowed to abstain from women for 3 years and do nothing
but study? If so, where is the record of it? Is he Don Armado,
who said "...I do love that country girl that I took in the park...."
Surely there must have been some real-life country-girl in Oxenforde's
life? Or was Oxenforde considered to be a clown like Costard?
Where is Oxenforde in "Henry the Fifth"? One of the most memorable
characters is H5, with a glorious military record, yet Oxenforde's
military record is one of cowardice. How could Oxenforde have
created the memorable Crispin's day speech if he had never lead men
in battle?
One of the most memorable scenes in Cymbeline occurs when Jachimo
pops out of a trunk to steal Innogen's bracelet. Where is that
in Oxenforde's life? Surely he would have revealed that event
in one of his letters! Instead all we get is his interminable
whining for a tin-mine concession from the Queen. Why is there
not a single mention of tin-mining in the plays?
(see http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~ahnelson for Oxenforde's
brilliantly erudite letters begging for a tin-mine concession,
letters that were so affecting in their emotional and artistic
content that they failed utterly to convince the Queen to
give him what he wanted most - a tin mine.)
see also
The Droeshout portrait isn't unusual at all!
http://shakesandbacon.yolasite.com
art
<<Hans Christian Andersen was a compulsive autobiographer: At school,
he says, ‘I told the boys curious stories in which I was always the
chief person, but was sometimes ridiculed for that.’ His best known
self-portraits, inventive, harsh spiritually true, are in his fairy
tales. He is the triumphant Ugly Duckling and the loyal Little
Mermaid, the steadfast Tin Soldier and the king-loving Nightingale,
the demonic Shadow, the depressive Fir Tree, the forlorn Little Match-
girl. These are the characters and stories which made Andersen a
household name, and give him a place in literary history as one of the
greatest and most original of European writers.>>
- Jackie Wullschlager: ‘Hans Christian Andersen – the Storyteller’
---------------------------------------------
Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> It always amazes me that Oxfordians claim that parallels in Hamlet
> to Oxford's life make a case for his authorship, when the parallels
> to literature that was available to Shakespeare are much more
> numerous and more convincing in their details.
Especially in all those in languages he couldn't
possibly read or in private letters to a noble woman.
Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> But why so FEW parallels to Oxenforde?
Whole books have been written about the parallels.
Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Surely, if they claim that a parallel means something in Hamlet, that
> they must mean something in Shakespeare's other plays. If we can
> find parallels to Oxenforde in Hamlet, then we *must* find parallels
> to Oxenforde in every play, otherwise the claim has no validity.
For a play by play account I recommend William Farina's:
_De Vere As Shakespeare: An Oxfordian Reading of the Canon_
Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Where is Oxenforde in "As You Like It"? Rosalind is the heart
> and soul of this play, one of Shakespeare's greatest creations.
> Is Oxenforde Rosalind?
Absolutely!
Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Hard to imagine the man accused of petty murders as Rosalind.
Easy to imagine Shakspere as the country bumpkin William.
Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Where is Oxenforde in "Midsummer Night's Dream"? The most loveable
> and endearing and memorable characters in this play are Peter Quince
> and his player fellows. Is Oxenforde Puck?
"Robin Goodfellow" = "Robert Dudley" + "Robert Devereaux"
Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Where is Oxenforde in "King Lear"? Most Shakespeare lovers
> are in agreement that this play is one of his greatest plays, at
> least the equal of "Hamlet". Did Oxenforde have three daughters
> or even three children who competed for his wealth?
They both had three daughters because of whom
they were left without a castle over their heads.
----------------------------------------------------
Fool: I can tell why a snail has a house.
.
KING LEAR: Why?
.
Fool: Why, to put his *HEAD IN* ; not to give it away to
. his daughters, and *leave his horns* without a case.
----------------------------------------------------
. HE(a)DIN-gham Castle
http://www.castles-abbeys.co.uk/Hedingham-Castle.html
.
<<The [Hedingham] keep is faced with *ASHLAR STONE*
which had to be transported all the way from the quarries of
Barnack, Northamptonshire. Very few Norman Castles were
faced with *STONE* like Hedingham, and normally only
the doors and windows were faced with cut *STONE* .>>
____ *vere ashlar stone*
____ {anagram}
____ *leave horns tares*
*tare* : deficiency in the weight or quantity of goods by reason of
the weight of the thing containing the commodity. When the tare is
deducted, the remainder is called the net or *NEAT* weight.
----------------------------------------------------
Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Where is Oxenforde in "Twelfth Night"?
> Where are the fraternal twins in Oxenforde's life?
> This unforgettable story, one of Shakespeare's greatest
> plays, features fraternal twins as the principal characters around which
> the story revolves, and William Shakespeare had fraternal twins
> himself, a boy and a girl.
There is some evidence (a letter) that
Mary Vere may have been Oxford's twin sister.
In any event, Oxford's main rivals are there:
Christopher Hatton = Malvolio
Sir Philip Sidney = Sir Andrew Aguecheek
Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Where is Oxenforde in "The Merchant of Venice"? The most memorable
> character is Shylock. Was Oxenforde a jew? Was he a professional usurer?
> And don't give me this nonsense about how he borrowed money from
> a Jew once.
Oxford borrowed £3,000 from financier Michael LOK
for backing Martin Frobisher's failed expedition.
(No one knows if Michael LOK was Jewish or not.)
SHYLOCK: 3,000 ducats; 'tis a good round sum.
Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> In Hamlet, the ghost has one of the most interesting and unforgettable
> parts, and likewise in Macbeth, the witches. But where in the voluminous
> record of Oxenforde's life (especially his letters) is there a mention
> of his having experienced ghosts or witches?
1) John Dee listed Oxford as a patron.
2) Arundel accused Oxford of having seen his dead stepfather.
3) Arundel accused Oxford of authoring an illustrated book of
prophesies which depicted a male child crowned as successor of a
queen.
---------------------------------------------------------------
<<On July 23, 1567, at Lochleven, Mary Queen of Scots had
to sign an act of withdrawal in favor of her one year old son,
who was crowned as James VI five days afterward at Scone.>>
...........................................................
<<On July 23, 1567, while practicing fencing with Edward Baynam,
. a TAILOR, in the backyard of CECIL's house in the Strand,
the 17-year-old Oxford killed an unarmed undercook
. named THOMAS BRINCKNELL with a thrust to the THIGH.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Where are the parallels in "The Taming of a Shrew"?
> Was Oxenforde a drunk, like Sly?
Oxenforde was the nobleman; Shakspere was Sly.
Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> During the time that Oxfordians claim Oxenforde
> was writing the plays, he was one of the wealthiest men in England,
> so he could hardly be the poor gentleman Petruchio, who is trying
> to marry a rich girl for her dowry, and whose friends have to pay for
> his courtship.
Sister Mary Vere was noted for being adept at handing out verbal
abuse.
After Perigrine Berties wedding to Mary Vere, Thomas Cecil wrote that
Mary
"will be beaten with that rod that heretofore she had prepared
forothers."
Oxford wrote a letter from Padua in 1575 claiming to have borrowed
money from *BAPTISTA* nigrone & pasquino *spINOLA* ;
Kate's father is *BAPTISTA (m)INOLA*
Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Where is Oxenforde in "Love's Labour's Lost"?
Where is Shakspere in "Love's Labour's Lost"?
(Bob Grumman is embarrassed to even mention LLL.)
Art Neuendorffer
ignoto
> ---------------------------------------------
> <<Hans Christian Andersen was a compulsive autobiographer: At school,
> chief person, but was sometimes ridiculed for that.� His best known
> self-portraits, inventive, harsh spiritually true, are in his fairy
> tales. He is the triumphant Ugly Duckling and the loyal Little
> Mermaid, the steadfast Tin Soldier and the king-loving Nightingale,
> the demonic Shadow, the depressive Fir Tree, the forlorn Little Match-
> girl. These are the characters and stories which made Andersen a
> household name, and give him a place in literary history as one of the
> greatest and most original of European writers.>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> It always amazes me that Oxfordians claim that parallels in Hamlet
>> to Oxford's life make a case for his authorship, when the parallels
>> to literature that was available to Shakespeare are much more
>> numerous and more convincing in their details.
>
> Especially in all those in languages he couldn't
> possibly read
Something you can't possibly know.
> or in private letters to a noble woman.
The sttrachey letter still remains the most probable source for the
tempest (although the arguments put forward against the strachey letter
are at least plausible they do not overcome the specific parallels
between the strachey letter and the tempest)
>
> Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> But why so FEW parallels to Oxenforde?
>
> Whole books have been written about the parallels.
whole books of circular arguments.
Ign.
[snip]
nordicskiv2
ignoto <ign...@tarpit.org> wrote:
[...]
> > Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >> It always amazes me that Oxfordians claim that parallels in Hamlet
> >> to Oxford's life make a case for his authorship, when the parallels
> >> to literature that was available to Shakespeare are much more
> >> numerous and more convincing in their details.
> > Especially in all those in languages he couldn't
> > possibly read
> Something you can't possibly know.
You'll have to pardon Art -- he judges the ability of others to
read foreign languages by his own ability (or rather, by the lack
thereof) to read them. Since even his ability to read English (which
for Art qualifies as a foreign tongue) is woefully deficient, it is
little wonder that he concludes that Shakespeare couldn't possibly
have read anything, a comic conclusion also reached by Stephanie
Caruana, for equally amusing but very different reasons.
> > or in private letters to a noble woman.
> The sttrachey letter still remains the most probable source for the
> tempest (although the arguments put forward against the strachey letter
> are at least plausible they do not overcome the specific parallels
> between the strachey letter and the tempest)
> > Jim KQKnave <kqkn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >> But why so FEW parallels to Oxenforde?
> > Whole books have been written about the parallels.
As Dave Kathman has pointed out, the parallels in _Hamlet_ with the
life of James I are at least as compelling as those with the life of
Oxford.
> whole books of circular arguments.
You'll have pardon Art -- he doesn't have the vaguest idea what a
circular argument is, so he wouldn't recognize one if it bit him;
indeed, judging by his posts, Art seems to lack even the vaguest idea
what an argument is.
Perhaps Art's most amusing recent example of a circular argument is
the following farce. Someone (Peter Farey?) pointed out Shakespeare's
conspicuous use of feminine endings and enjambments; Art hastened to
deploy this bit of data to "argue" for Oxford's authorship of the
Shakespeare canon:
"Oxford led the way in using more feminine endings & open lines
than anyone else."
I cannot imagine whom Art had in his mind (what's left of it, at any
rate) under the category of "anyone else," since as far as I can
recall, Oxford never used a single feminine line in any of his verse.
Art's response to my challenge exemplifies the classic circular
"reasoning" of the committed crank:
"All Oxford's feminine lines must be in Shake-speare then."
Where on earth did Art get the factoid about Oxford "leading the way"
in using "more feminine endings" than anyone else?! Priceless!
> Ign.
>
> [snip]
art
Peter Farey
David. L.Webb wrote:
>
> Perhaps Art's most amusing recent example of a circular
> argument is the following farce. Someone (Peter Farey?)
> pointed out Shakespeare's conspicuous use of feminine endings
> and enjambments; Art hastened to deploy this bit of data to
> "argue" for Oxford's authorship of the Shakespeare canon:
>
> "Oxford led the way in using more feminine endings & open
> lines than anyone else."
>
> I cannot imagine whom Art had in his mind (what's left of it,
> at any rate) under the category of "anyone else," since as far
> as I can recall, Oxford never used a single feminine line in
> any of his verse. Art's response to my challenge exemplifies
> the classic circular "reasoning" of the committed crank:
>
> "All Oxford's feminine lines must be in Shake-speare then."
>
> Where on earth did Art get the factoid about Oxford "leading
> the way" in using "more feminine endings" than anyone else?!
> Priceless!
According to figures produced by Elliott and Valenza, early
plays leading in the feminine endings and open lines stakes
were Marlowe's two *Tamburlaines*, Greene's *Alphonsus*,
Mary Herbert's *Antonius* and Daniel's *Cleopatra* - all of
them slightly ahead of Shakespeare if anything.
There was in fact a general increase in the use of these two
ways of breaking away from the constant repetition of the
regular end-stopped iambic pentameter throughout Shakespeare's
career, but Shakespeare later forged well ahead of all other
playwrights in his employment of them.
My reason for referring to Shakespeare's use of them was not,
however, to show how much he used them in comparison with others,
but to show how the trend by which his use of them increased is
such that the Earl of Oxford can be eliminated as the possible
author of a great many of them.
In particular, I believe that the existence of such a trend
raises two questions which Oxfordians have so far been compl-
etely unable to find adequate answers for. Please see details
posted today at <http://www.marlowe-shakespeare.blogspot.com/>
Peter F.
<pet...@rey.prestel.co.uk>
<http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rey/index.htm>
Dominic Hughes
> <http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rey/index.htm>
From the comments to your initial article:
Paul said:
Thirdly, Peter adopts another (exceedingly bad) Stratfordian
assumption that "Shake-speare" was a follower and not a leader.
Peter says:
Had you got around to reading what I said you would have seen "in the
first graph the contemporaries' trendline is only two points away from
his level in 1598. By 1604, however, he is ahead by some ten points on
average, and by 1613 that difference between them has grown to twenty
per hundred lines of verse." Does this sound like a follower to you?
Paul said:
Fourthly, he ignores the Oxfordian theory that the canonical plays
were written primarily for the royal court, and Oxford (as "Shake-
speare") would have been setting trends in works not usually available
to fellow-playwrights for a decade or more.
Peter says:
Not available! What sort of logic is that? Unfortunately, the Elliott
and Valenza data cover only four Marlowe plays. Using my own counts,
however - which I have shared with you in the past - we see that
Marlowe's translation of Lucan's Pharsalia experimented with a level
of open endings which "Shakespeare" would not typically reach until
half way through his career. Luckily Marlowe had no idea that such an
utterly irresponsible use of open lines wasn't "available" yet!
*****End of Quotation*****
Wouldn't the fact that Marlowe was at a point in his use of open lines
and feminine endings that Shakespeare did "not typically reach until
half way through his career" constitute evidence against Marlowe being
Shakespeare? If he had already discovered the magic of open lines and
feminine endings, why would he digress from that practice as
Shakespeare and then seem to learn that magic all over again.
Dom
art
>
>> Someone (Peter Farey?)
>> pointed out Shakespeare's conspicuous use of feminine endings
>> and enjambments; Art hastened to deploy this bit of data to
>> "argue" for Oxford's authorship of the Shakespeare canon:
>
>> "Oxford led the way in using more feminine endings
>> & open lines than anyone else."
"Peter Farey" <pete...@rey.prestel.co.uk> wrote:
>
> According to figures produced by Elliott and Valenza, early
> plays leading in the feminine endings and open lines stakes
> were Marlowe's two *Tamburlaines*, Greene's *Alphonsus*,
> Mary Herbert's *Antonius* and Daniel's *Cleopatra* - all of
> them slightly ahead of Shakespeare if anything.
It depends upon how one dates Shakespeare.
In any event I believe the author of Shakespeare
was also the author of Marlowe & Greene.
> There was in fact a general increase in the use of these two
> ways of breaking away from the constant repetition of the
> regular end-stopped iambic pentameter throughout Shakespeare's
> career, but Shakespeare later forged well ahead of all other
> playwrights in his employment of them.
Indeed!
> My reason for referring to Shakespeare's use of them was not,
> however, to show how much he used them in comparison with others,
> but to show how the trend by which his use of them increased is
> such that the Earl of Oxford can be eliminated as the possible
> author of a great many of them.
1) Not if the traditional dating is off
2) Not if Oxford had a faked 1604 death
3) Not if they were extensively editted after Oxford
Art Neuendorffer
nordicskiv2
<ef902121-304d-4e0d...@31g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
art <acne...@gmail.com>
(aka Cuixot) wrote:
> > David. L.Webb wrote:
> >
> >> Someone (Peter Farey?)
> >> pointed out Shakespeare's conspicuous use of feminine endings
> >> and enjambments; Art hastened to deploy this bit of data to
> >> "argue" for Oxford's authorship of the Shakespeare canon:
> >> "Oxford led the way in using more feminine endings
> >> & open lines than anyone else."
> "Peter Farey" <pete...@rey.prestel.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > According to figures produced by Elliott and Valenza, early
> > plays leading in the feminine endings and open lines stakes
> > were Marlowe's two *Tamburlaines*, Greene's *Alphonsus*,
> > Mary Herbert's *Antonius* and Daniel's *Cleopatra* - all of
> > them slightly ahead of Shakespeare if anything.
> It depends upon how one dates Shakespeare.
And no doubt you date his works VERy creatively, Art, wantonly
disregarding entries in the Stationers Register and elsewhere that
constitute actual evidence and replacing them by your own demented
fantasies.
> In any event I believe the author of Shakespeare
> was also the author of Marlowe & Greene.
You thereby prove my point _ipso facto_ that you possess a tin ear,
Art. You also believe (or profess to believe, at any rate -- even you
could not really be *that* far out on the lunatic fringe) that the
author of the Shakespeare canon also wrote the works of Cervantes,
despite the rather inconvenient fact that the latter are in Spanish!
Need one say more about your literary attributions, Art? But what
about Mallory, Chaucer, and Homer? Surely you aren't going to omit
them from Oxford's eVER longer list of pseudonyms, are you, Art?
> > There was in fact a general increase in the use of these two
> > ways of breaking away from the constant repetition of the
> > regular end-stopped iambic pentameter throughout Shakespeare's
> > career, but Shakespeare later forged well ahead of all other
> > playwrights in his employment of them.
> Indeed!
> > My reason for referring to Shakespeare's use of them was not,
> > however, to show how much he used them in comparison with others,
> > but to show how the trend by which his use of them increased is
> > such that the Earl of Oxford can be eliminated as the possible
> > author of a great many of them.
Indeed, it eliminates Oxford pretty decisively. Of course, Art's
defenses of Oxford's putative authorship of the Shakespeare canon can
also be fairly characterized as acts of elimination.
> 1) Not if the traditional dating is off
If frogs had wings, they could fly.
> 2) Not if Oxford had a faked 1604 death
If pigs had wings, they could fly too.
> 3) Not if they were extensively editted [sic]
Is English your native tongue, Art?
> after Oxford
How many epicycles are you willing to add, Art?! (No, Art, an
epicycle is not one of those one-wheeled contraptions that circus
clowns ride, although your pratfalls are superior to anything that I
have seen in the circus.)
> Art Neuendorffer