Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum << Prev Page of 20
Topic: Famous Folk talk Shakespeare Authorship (Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Michael Penn
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 April 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 12587
Posted: 24 June 2024 at 6:40pm | IP Logged | 1  

"George Buck's attestation[?] in 1607 that King Lear was the work of William Shakespeare is generally accepted as evidence that it was by him" - do you disagree with it? If not, what wording would you consider to be fairer, or more accurate?

***

I don't understand why the verb "attest" needed to be used in your new statement. It could be taken the wrong way, as if to say this register entry is direct evidence that Buck attested that Stratford Will is William Shakespeare the author of "King Lear." That's not in the register entry. One could say he attested that this work names the author as William Shakespeare, but then "attest" (to affirm to be true, genuine, authenticate officially) seems needlessly excessive. There's no doubt that the named author is William Shakespeare. Buck "entered" the play in the register; he didn't "attest" to anything. 

The remainder shown in bold does appear in the register entry:


 QUOTE:
Na[thaniel] Butter / Io. [John] Busby. Entred for their copie vnder thandes [the hands] of Sr Geo[rge] Buck knight & Th[e] wardens. A booke called Mr William Shakespeare his historye of Kinge Lear as yt was played before the kinges maiestie at Whitehall vppon St Stephans night at christmas Last by his maities servantes playinge vsually at the globe on Banksyde.


This printer, Butter, with his colleague, had registered by Buck a copy of "King Lear" whose author is named as William Shakespeare. That's clear, for me. No problem. Does the register entry further "attest" that Stratford Will is Shakespeare? No. Does it attest that he's not? Also, no. In and of itself, it is neutral. (Taken with other evidence it could be a different matter, see below.)

What you then further added in your changed statement, shown in italics, raises a host of questions for me: you say that the register entry "is [on the basis of its own content? in connection with other evidence? what other?] generally accepted [by whom? generally? mostly? universally? or rejected by some?] as evidence [direct? circumstantial? and how?] that it [King Lear] was by him [Stratford Will]."

It's truly amazing that this one register entry has survived when so much else from that time has been lost. All the more reason to examine it as thoroughly as possible.


Back to Top profile | search
 
Mark Haslett
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 6315
Posted: 24 June 2024 at 8:20pm | IP Logged | 2  

Cory: I lean toward Shaksper being a play-broker who took credit for other peoples work. The Upstart Crow

**

Or the Poet-Ape

Ben Johnsonís poem of this name describes an actor who has come into undeserved credit as an author by brokering the works of others.

It closes with a couplet which advises that learned audiences can tell the difference between this false-author's work like they can tell a fleece and locks of wool, or shreds from the whole piece.

Do any would-be authors of the time have a debatable career as a playwright, but a verified career dealing in wool?

Edited by Mark Haslett on 24 June 2024 at 9:41pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Steven Brake
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 January 2016
Posts: 653
Posted: 24 June 2024 at 8:49pm | IP Logged | 3  

Michael Penn wrote: I don't understand why the verb "attest" needed to be used in your new statement.

SB replied: Fair enough. How about:

George Buck, Master Of The Revels, stated in 1607 that King Lear was the work of William Shakespeare.

Michael Penn wrote: What you then further added in your changed statement...

SB replied: It wasn't a changed statement, it was a new one. I posted the original, which you felt to be strong, and proposed a second one, which you're not content with either. 

Here's hoping that third time's the charm. :)

You go on to raise a series of questions, or requests for clarifications. With hope springing eternal...

In 1603, a royal patent is issued confirming the creation of The King's Men. Among the people named are William Shakespeare, Richard Burbage, Henry Condell and John Heminges.

In the same year, George Buck is appointed Master Of The Revels, making him responsible for supervising entertainments presented to the sovereign, and for censoring plays performed in public theatres. 

In 1606, Buck stated that William Shakespeare had confirmed the authorship of George-A-Greene, the Pinner of Wakefield.

In 1607, Buck stated that Shakespeare was the author of King Lear.

In 1616, William Shakespeare dies in Stratford-Upon-Avon. In his will, he leaves small bequests to Burbage, Heminges and Condell.

In 1619, Burbage dies.

In 1623, the First Folio is published, comprised of 36 plays, which Heminges and Condell state to have been the work of William Shakespeare, the man they had known for decades. King Lear is included among them.

Michael Penn wrote: It's truly amazing that this one register entry has survived when so much else from that time has been lost.

SB replied: Are you suggesting that the register entry is a forgery? If so, why, and by whom? 

If it were that case that Will of Stratford wasn't William Shakespeare, wouldn't the people who were trying to maintain the fiction that he was have forged something more substantial, like a letter or a diary entry?

Michael Penn wrote: Do any would be authorís of the time have a debatable career as a playwright, but a verified career dealing in wool?

Michael Penn earlier wrote: I'm not advocating for any alternative authors, or even doubt. As a Stratfordian...

SB replied: Michael, it's apparent that you are an Alternative Authorship theorist. Wouldn't it be better to just be open about it? I don't agree with the position, but I do enjoy the thrust and parry of debating it. :)


Edited by Steven Brake on 24 June 2024 at 8:50pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Michael Penn
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 April 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 12587
Posted: 24 June 2024 at 9:43pm | IP Logged | 4  


 QUOTE:
Michael Penn wrote: What you then further added in your changed statement...

SB replied: It wasn't a changed statement, it was a new one. I posted the original, which you felt to be strong, and proposed a second one, which you're not content with either.

Your own words: "If I amend this to say..." Anyway, you now have provided a good example of quibbling.

***


 QUOTE:
SB replied: Are you suggesting that the register entry is a forgery? If so, why, and by whom?

I don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about or how you drew this conclusion from anything I said.

***


 QUOTE:
SB replied: Michael, it's apparent that you are an Alternative Authorship theorist. Wouldn't it be better to just be open about it? I don't agree with the position, but I do enjoy the thrust and parry of debating it. :)

There's no point discussing this further since you think I'm a liar.






Edited by Michael Penn on 24 June 2024 at 9:43pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Mark Haslett
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 6315
Posted: 25 June 2024 at 12:54am | IP Logged | 5  

Dedicated Stratfordians really donít understand how much ďdoubtersĒ
would love it if proof that Stratford Will wrote the works came to light.

Because they donít adopt the scholarly distance that allows for any
evidence to support any candidate but the one they champion, they donít
believe anyone else can either.
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132764
Posted: 25 June 2024 at 10:33am | IP Logged | 6  

I think this thread is done.
Back to Top profile | search
 

Sorry, you can NOT post a reply.
This topic is closed.

<< Prev Page of 20
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login