#1
Posted: 5/27/12 at 2:47pm
Sir Derek Jacobi, Michael York, Mark Rylance, Orson Wells and other thespians have doubted or rejected the idea of the man from Stratford-on-Avon as the author known as "William Shakespeare." Most recently, Roland Emmerich asserted in his movie, Anonymous, that Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford was Shakespeare, the son of Queen Elizabeth and her lover, who produced a child, Henry Wriothesley, 3rd Earl of Southampon.
The historical assertions in the movie are based on my book, Oxford: Son of Queen Elizabeth I, which can be found on Amazon.com, or for more information on the whole debate, and why the above is true, please visit my website, www.shakespeareidentified.com.
Please don't post any wild assertions of the established facts you learned in college: the established truth that has been wrong for generations. (I have heard them all before. Visit the website, I answer most of them there.) There are good reasons why the above men support the Earl of Oxford as the author. Mainly, they are drawn to Oxford to help them understand the works and the characters that Shakespeare/Oxford presents.
Paul Streitz
Shakespeare Identified.
The historical assertions in the movie are based on my book, Oxford: Son of Queen Elizabeth I, which can be found on Amazon.com, or for more information on the whole debate, and why the above is true, please visit my website, www.shakespeareidentified.com.
Please don't post any wild assertions of the established facts you learned in college: the established truth that has been wrong for generations. (I have heard them all before. Visit the website, I answer most of them there.) There are good reasons why the above men support the Earl of Oxford as the author. Mainly, they are drawn to Oxford to help them understand the works and the characters that Shakespeare/Oxford presents.
Paul Streitz
Shakespeare Identified.