All about history book of the tudors 126

Tudor life Shakespearean theories He didn’t really write the works The authorship of Shakespeare’s work has been the subject of debate for decades With no original manuscripts, no mention of him even being a writer in his will and a command of Latin, Greek and other languages that would belie his apparent poor education, many believe that Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford was the writer rather than the small-town boy from Stratford And if not him, then one of 80 other historical figures that have been mentioned over the years, such as Marlowe He didn’t even exist Some scholars believe that the Shakespeare revered today as a playwright was actually a fictional character They believe that the few documents relating to him were actually for a man called William Shaxper or Shakspere who was born in 1564, married and had children but became an actor and remained in such a role until his retirement Certainly, Shakespeare’s death appears to have been unmarked Had Shakespeare been such a prominent playwright, there would surely have been many documents mourning his passing, critics say He was an Italian Those who argue Shakespeare was not quite who he claims he was are called anti-Stratfordians One of their theories is that Shakespeare – or Michaelangelo Florio Crollalanza – had moved from Sicily to London, fearing the Holy Inquisition The family name of Crollalanza was translated and became Shakespeare Sicilian professor Martini Iuvara claims to have proof and mentions the Sicilian play Tanto Traffico Per Niente written by Crollalanza It can, he claims, be translated into Much Ado About Nothing Lord Chamberlain’s Men, Shakespeare’s famous troupe, performed for Queen Elizabeth I 126 “ Their plan was to blow the building sky high, taking parliamentarians and King James I with it” Catholics felt James I was guilty of “My own theory is that Shakespeare, though not an outright rebel, used his increasingly privileged position to address the court and the crown, both Elizabeth, and James, on the issue of religious toleration”, Asquith asserts “He protested against the persecution and injustice perpetrated in the name of the monarch, and pleaded for religious toleration.” Such an assessment revises the prevailing thinking that Shakespeare wrote universal plays and avoided any topicality Some literary scholars remain hostile to the idea that the playwright was involved in the volatile religious issues of the day, but could he really have ignored what was going on around him? It’s plausible that he wanted to more than merely shake the literary world; he wanted to influence politics and religion, to affect his society When he sat at his desk, overlooking the squalid, filthy conditions of London, William Shakespeare may have been looking out at a more enlightened nation than ever before, but is was still a city and a country where the screams of religious and political prisoners filled the corridors of cramped jail cells as torturers extracted their forced confessions This sobering reality was a stark reminder of the perils of religious divisions that continued throughout Shakespeare’s life Was it a society that he rebelled against in his own way, through his work? The final and definitive answer to that, like some of the great man’s work, is unfortunately lost to the ages The Gunpowder Plot was a politically and religiously charged conspiracy to blow up the Houses of Parliament