Why Doubt the Authorship?

You might be thinking to yourself, why would anyone question that William Shakespeare wrote the works of William Shakespeare? Hasn’t this question been put to bed by now? My quick answer: NO, it has NOT.

Also, the Internet makes it easier for anyone to take a fresh look at the “smoking gun” evidence Shakespeare scholars have been talking about for years – so you will be able to see for yourself.

It does NOT exist. It’s all really sketchy.

For example, here is the actual baptism record of William Shakespeare. It can be found at the Folger Shakespeare Library in Washington D.C. He was born Gulielmas filius Johannes Shakespeare or Gulielmas son of Johannes.

So if he was baptized Guilelmas why do people call him William? Answer: Shakespeare scholars will tell you that Gulielmas means William in Latin. This sounds logical.

However, Gulielmas is a name that is still around today. You can Google it. It is an Irish name and is pronounced “Gilly-mas” What is interesting is that on the baptism record it shows the person who was baptized before Shakespeare and after him were both named William.

So if the argument is: Gulielmas filius Johannes – is Latin for William, son of John, then why do we find Johannes fillius William Brooks right above Shakespeare’s name in the baptismal record?

See for yourself. Here is the baptism record of William Shakespeare.

This link “Shakespeare documented” will take you to the Shakespeare library and you can see for yourself. Here’s another thing that you can find there: property records belonging to John Shakespeare – his father.

What is weird is that everyone always claims that Shakespeare’s father worked as a glover. Right? Well, this was true in 1556, ten years before William was born. John Shakespeare identified himself as a “glover” but in 1570, when William was 4 years old, John was “a tenant” of Ingon Meadows and in 1579, when William was 15 years old, John labeled himself a “yeoman” or gentleman farmer.

So, why do scholars nowadays call William Shakespeare a “glover’s” son? Would not it be more accurate to call him a “farmer’s” son? I say this because apparently, William was actually living on a farm about 3 miles away from Stratford-upon-Avon during most of his youth, not in the city of Stratford. He was NOT steps away from the King Edward VI grammar school as Shakespeare lovers would have you believe.

However, a “glover’s” son makes him sound more like an educated city boy, doesn’t it? Someone who lived close to a grammar school could stay for long hours pouring over Latin books because the house on Henley Street was only steps away. But a farm boy walking 3 miles to school and 3 miles back? No. In fact, he might have to left school early when he was 9 years old because he was needed at home to help with the farm chores.

Certainly, Will could have learned to read and write later in life. But what about learning Latin? It is a “dead” language. People do not speak it openly like French or Spanish. And Shakespeare would have needed to know how to read Latin to compose his two long poems and some of the plays (many of the plays were based on earlier Latin plays.)

Therefore, if the Folger Library is correct and John Shakespeare was proud to call himself a “yeoman” in 1579 when William was 15, then William must have been living on the farm at Ingon Meadows.

The Folger also claims that John Shakespeare was heavily involved in the wool business, so if that is true, wouldn’t John need his eldest son (William) to look after the younger ones and be the man at the house? (William came from a family of 8 kids – but two of them died very young.) Most likely, the two oldest sons of John Shakespeare, William and Gilbert would have been needed to tend and shear the sheep.

What do the documents in the Folger Library tell us? They show that in 1579, when William was 15 years old, his father John called himself a yeoman or a farmer. In 1570, William would have been six years old when documents show that John was a tenant of Ingon Meadows — also a farm.

Therefore, does it seems likely that William Shakespeare would be walking six miles each day to attend grammar school at the King Edward VI grammar school in the town of Stratford-upon-Avon as legend has it?

Here are the documents so you can see what I’m talking about.

Here is a link to a website about John Shakespeare and his wool business. According to this link, the house at Henley Street where tourists flock to see, and where scholars claim that WS grew up in, was actually used for sheering sheep.

Finally, we know that William Shakespeare married Anne Hathaway when he was 18 and she was 26 and pregnant.

So, where did they hook up to have sex? If Anne and William both lived on farms, there would be plenty of opportunities to “hook up” in barns or pastures. But it would have been difficult to have sex in either of their houses.

Anne Hathaway came from a household of six children and so did William Shakespeare.

Also, John Shakespeare knew her father, Richard Hathaway. John knew that Richard owned a nice farm too. Would John mind if William were to go over and help out the Hathaways with chores with an eye to marrying Anne in the future? No? You don’t believe me? Okay, it was only an idea. But, here is proof that shows a possible connection between William and Anne Hathaway. Back in 1566, John had acted as a “surety” for Richard when William was only two years old, so Richard owed John Shakespeare a favor. One year before William and Anne got married, Richard Hathaway passed away. So perhaps William WAS sent over to the Hathaways to help out.

from the Folger Shakespeare Library

Some people insist that only “kooky conspiracy theorists” would doubt the authorship of William Shakespeare.

Not true. Most of us have been content to just go along with what has been taught to us at school. We never bothered to see the evidence and/or assumed that scholars had already done this for us.

But the Internet changes things and now that we can see the evidence for ourselves, the SAME evidence that scholars have used in the past, does not add up. Or look as convincing.

In fact, you might come to a different conclusion if you look into things.

Starting with his baptism records, we can see that William Shakespeare might not have been named William. Also, he likely lived at a farm and not living in town so learning Latin at a nearby grammar school seems doubtful. His hasty marriage to Anne Hathaway had to happen because she was already a few months pregnant. And because William was under 21, he needed two witnesses who just happened to be local farmers. (They were NOT his Latin teacher or business-owners from the town of Stratford-upon-Avon.) Nope. These farmers lived close to Ingon Meadows too!

There is more to this authorship question if you are willing to continue!