Mark Bradbeer

"This book presents original material which indicates that Aemilia Lanyer - female writer, feminist, and Shakespeare contemporary - is Shakespeare's hidden and arguably most significant co-author. Once dismissed as the mere paramour of Shakespeare's patron, Lord Hunsdon, she is demonstrated to be a most articulate forerunner of #MeToo fury. Building on previous research into the authorship of Shakespeare's works, Bradbeer offers evidence in the form of three case studies which signal Aemilia's collaboration with Shakespeare. The first case study matches the works of "George Wilkins" - who is currently credited as the co-author of the feminist Shakespeare play Pericles (1608) - with Aemilia Lanyer's writing style, education, feminism and knowledge of Lord Hunsdon's secret sexual life. The second case-study recognizes Titus Andronicus (1594), a play containing the characters Aemilius and Bassianus, to be a revision of the suppressed play Titus and Vespasian (1592), as authored by the unmarried pregnant Aemilia Bassano, as she then was. Lastly, it is argued that Shakespeare's clowns, Bottom, Launce, Malvolio, Dromio, Dogberry, Jaques and Moth, arise in her deeply personal war with the misogynist Thomas Nashe. Each case study reveals new aspects of Lanyer's feminist activism and involvement in Shakespeare's work, and allows for a deeper analysis and appreciation of the plays. This research will prove provocative to students and scholars of Shakespeare studies, English literature, literary history, and gender studies"--

Aemilia Lanyer As Shakespeare's Co-Author

John Casson

Shakspere's history plays are more than dramatized history lessons. They explore contemporary dangers inherent in royal succession at a time when Elizabeth I decreed that mere discussion of who would inherit the throne was treason. The plays were political and therefore dangerous. Yet William Shakspere from Stratford-upon-Avon was never arrested for his writing nor spent time in prison, unlike his fellow playwrights Marlowe, Kyd and Jonson. In 1601 Sir Henry Neville was imprisoned and "Shakespeare" stopped writing history plays. The identification of Neville as an authorship candidate, put forward by James and Rubinstein (2005), urges reinterpretation of the plays. Neville enjoyed privileged access to the Holinshed Chronicles (1587), a primary source for the plays. He was ambassador to France and spoke French (see Henry V), knew the descendants of Jack Cade (Henry VI Part 2), was familiar with Crosby Place (Richard III) and lived in Blackfriars (Henry VIII). This book reveals new evidence of Neville's authorship, with examples of annotation found in books from Neville's library suggesting they were source material for the plays. Numerous anomalies in the plays indicate Shakespeare's consistent bias in portraying the Nevilles in a positive light, revealing the hidden author's political viewpoint and true identity.

Authorship Evidence in the History Plays

Sir Henry Neville, Alias William Shakespeare

Shakspere’s history plays are more than dramatized history lessons. They explore contemporary dangers inherent in royal succession at a time when Elizabeth I decreed that mere discussion of who would inherit the throne was treason. The plays were political and therefore dangerous. Yet William Shakspere from Stratford-upon-Avon was never arrested for his writing nor spent time in prison, unlike his fellow playwrights Marlowe, Kyd and Jonson. In 1601 Sir Henry Neville was imprisoned and “Shakespeare” stopped writing history plays. The identification of Neville as an authorship candidate, put forward by James and Rubinstein (2005), urges reinterpretation of the plays. Neville enjoyed privileged access to the Holinshed Chronicles (1587), a primary source for the plays. He was ambassador to France and spoke French (see Henry V), knew the descendants of Jack Cade (Henry VI Part 2), was familiar with Crosby Place (Richard III) and lived in Blackfriars (Henry VIII). This book reveals new evidence of Neville’s authorship, with examples of annotation found in books from Neville’s library suggesting they were source material for the plays. Numerous anomalies in the plays indicate Shakespeare’s consistent bias in portraying the Nevilles in a positive light, revealing the hidden author’s political viewpoint and true identity.

Mark Bradbeer

About

Books

Join the club