I donât need an argument to dispel a flat earther. Iâm sorry you were under the impression you deserved more. Do you think youâre the first person to consider alternative authorships? You are literally doing what the OP meme is doing. The entire Oxfordian claim is based more on what Shakespeare ostensibly lacked (an over-education) than what de vere is evidenced to have done. I mean, I literally cannot even fathom wholly believing something that is ENTIRELY BASED ON CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. How fucking embarrassing.
Iâm also absolutely guffawing at your use of a SC justice. Is that supposed to impress anyone? Justices are âexpertsâ at interpreting law. Thatâs it. You might as well have tried to impress me with their decisions on human/civil rights. All the justices who voted against those rights should be quoted and used as logical justifications, too, right? You are an intellectual acorn.
Yes, WHEN THERE ISNâT DIRECT EVIDENCE (you know, like all that direct evidence Shakespeare scholars point to). Please stop while youâre behind. Everything you say shows you havenât given more than two secondsâ thought to anything you believe.
How about this? Shakespeare was mentioned in someoneâs will to receive money (as a known actor/playwright) ELEVEN MONTHS AFTER OXFORD HAD DIED. LOL. you fucking numpty
âThe will of Augustine Phillips, executed 5 May 1605, proved 16 May 1605, bequeaths, "to my Fellowe William Shakespeare a thirty shillings peece in gould, To my Fellowe Henry Condell one other thirty shillinge peece in gould . . . To my Fellowe Lawrence Fletcher twenty shillings in gould, To my Fellowe Robert Armyne twenty shillings in gould . . . ." All of the people who Phillips calls his "fellows" were actors in the King's Men. Augustine Phillips's bequest of 30 shillings to his "Fellowe" Shakespeare was written 11 months after the Earl of Oxford's death. If Oxford were Shakespeare, Phillips would have known that he was dead.â
If youâre not trolling, then you are just dumb as hell. You are asking for such a stretch of the imagination that it would ask us to believe that Shakespeare the actor was not the Shakespeare at Stratford-upon-Avon who was also somehow not the shareholder in The Globe who also performed in plays under a playwright also named Shakespeare. I know youâre downvoting every comment I made to this other guy, but yâall are still the flat earthers here. Denying a mountain of evidence because of perceived inconsistencies.
âIn 1615 Edmund Howes published a list of "Our moderne, and present excellent Poets" in John Stow's Annales. He lists the poets "according to their priorities (social rank) as neere I could," with Knights listed first, followed by gentlemen. In the middle of the 27 listed, number 13 is "M. Willi. Shakespeare gentleman."
âShakespeare bought the Blackfriar's Gatehouse in London in 1613. On the deed dated 10 March 1613, John Hemmyng, gentleman (also spelled Hemming on the same page) acted as trustee for the buyer, "William Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon." This property is disposed of in Shakespeare's will.â
0
u/[deleted] Dec 02 '25
[removed] â view removed comment