Search Results
6/28/2025, 12:04:56 PM
>>24502945
>A smoking gun would be someone at the time actually saying ‘oh yeah, Shakespeare is a pen name for this other guy’, not circumstantial conjecture.
The McCarthy thesis is that Shakespeare is not a pen name. William was a jack of all trades in the theatre and was buying plays left right and centre for his company as ALL other companies did.
North was disinherited from his family and broke (i.e. like Lear and Prospero and Orlando) and sold his old courtly plays to William. We have records that North was paid for playwrighting for Leicester's men - it's on McCarthy's website and the North wiki page.
There is no conspiracy or pen name required. Groatsworth of Wit and Ben Jonson comment that Shakespeare is using old plays. Some of the comments on this are on McCarthy's website (although there's a lot more, particularly in Jonson's satirical protraits of North and Shakespeare in his plays): https://sirthomasnorth.com/2021/01/04/wouldnt-some-have-noticed-that-shakespeare-was-using-norths-old-plays
Forensic linguistics is not circumstantial evidence, it is direct evidence of a relationship between one text and another. North's linguistic DNA is all over the canon, including from his unpublished manuscripts.
>The first folio says it’s written by William Shakespeare, not North
Even the orthodoxy doesn't believe the First Folio. Macbeth, Timon of Athens, Henry VI, Titus Andronicus etc are all accepted as having more than one author in the texts we have.
Also, the orthodox does not accept the so-called Apocryphal plays even though Shakespeare's name is on them and they were published during his lifetime.
>A smoking gun would be someone at the time actually saying ‘oh yeah, Shakespeare is a pen name for this other guy’, not circumstantial conjecture.
The McCarthy thesis is that Shakespeare is not a pen name. William was a jack of all trades in the theatre and was buying plays left right and centre for his company as ALL other companies did.
North was disinherited from his family and broke (i.e. like Lear and Prospero and Orlando) and sold his old courtly plays to William. We have records that North was paid for playwrighting for Leicester's men - it's on McCarthy's website and the North wiki page.
There is no conspiracy or pen name required. Groatsworth of Wit and Ben Jonson comment that Shakespeare is using old plays. Some of the comments on this are on McCarthy's website (although there's a lot more, particularly in Jonson's satirical protraits of North and Shakespeare in his plays): https://sirthomasnorth.com/2021/01/04/wouldnt-some-have-noticed-that-shakespeare-was-using-norths-old-plays
Forensic linguistics is not circumstantial evidence, it is direct evidence of a relationship between one text and another. North's linguistic DNA is all over the canon, including from his unpublished manuscripts.
>The first folio says it’s written by William Shakespeare, not North
Even the orthodoxy doesn't believe the First Folio. Macbeth, Timon of Athens, Henry VI, Titus Andronicus etc are all accepted as having more than one author in the texts we have.
Also, the orthodox does not accept the so-called Apocryphal plays even though Shakespeare's name is on them and they were published during his lifetime.
Page 1