------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------

Steven: You've shown it was a variant used, and I've never disputed this. What grew tiresome was the use of "Shaxper" to refer to Will of Stratford - a spelling that, as far as I'm aware, he never used himself - with the insinuation that this name got confused with "William Shakespeare", the supposed pseudonym of the real author of the plays. 

------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------

Steven: That's a mighty black pot.

------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------- -

JB: And this discussion moves closer and closer to pointless as you steadfastly refuse to accept that the Stratford Man was not known as "Shakespeare". 

------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------- ---

The royal patent that created The King's Men in 1603 refers to "William Shakespeare", spelled exactly that way. 

The line-up of The King's Men included Burbage, Heminges and Condell.

Burbage, Heminges and Condell were named in the will of William Shakspeare (as it was spelt) of Stratford-Upon-Avon.

Heminges and Condell remember William Shakespeare (which is how it was spelt again) in the First Folio.

It's the same man. Or you have to jump through some mighty big hoops to think otherwise.

I'm happy to be corrected on this point, but it isn't "helpful" to refer to Will of Stratford as "Shaxper" and the author as "Shakespeare". It's done to suggest that they are two different people, and that the former was mistaken for the latter.

But it seems to be your insistence that Will of Stratford was "Shaxper" and this was muddled with William Shakespeare, the pseudonym of the true author of the plays.

As I've pointed out, and as you've agreed, there don't appear to be any records of Will of Stratford using "Shaxper" when referring to himself, so I don't see why you feel the need to, or the point you think you're making when you do?

The royal patent creating the King's Men refers to a William Shakespeare, spelled that way. It also refers to Heminges and Condell.

William Shakspeare (as it was spelt) named Heminges and Condell in his will.

Heminges and Condell then introduce the First Folio, which again refers to William Shakespeare.

The spelling is very, very slightly different. A missing "e". But it's obviously the same man. Unless you're arguing that the Heminges and Condell in the will aren't the same ones in the royal patent, and it's another instance of people with similar names being confused as being the same person? Or are you arguing that the names of Heminges and Condell (and Burbage too) were interjected into Shakspeare's will to maintain the illusion that Will of Stratford and William Shakespeare in the royal patent were the same?

If you still retain any vestigial interest, let me know and I'll see if I can suggest any books or websites for you.

After reading her book about ten years ago, I had several conversations with Ms. Price. I'm not an anti-Stratfordian, but even as somebody who studied under David Kastan, one of the leading Shakespearean scholars in the world and a General Editor of the Arden series, I can still plainly state that she knows her stuff. We discussed not just a few broader issues but even some fascinating minutiae. One could doubt her doubting but, in my opinion, not her erudition -- and that's ironic in as much as she entirely self-learned, which arguably might be the case for Stratford Will.