Shakespeare authorship question (English Wikipedia)

Edmondson & Wells 2011 Edmondson, Paul; Wells, Stanley (2011). Shakespeare Bites Back. The Shakespeare Birthplace Trust. Archived from the original on 22 December 2014. Retrieved 26 June 2013.

books.google.com

The UK and US editions of Shapiro 2010 differ significantly in pagination. The citations to the book used in this article list the UK page numbers first, followed by the page numbers of the US edition in parentheses. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 2–3 (3–4). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Kathman 2003, p. 621: "...antiStratfordism has remained a fringe belief system"; Schoenbaum 1991, p. 450; Paster 1999, p. 38: "To ask me about the authorship question ... is like asking a palaeontologist to debate a creationist's account of the fossil record."; Nelson 2004, pp. 149–51: "I do not know of a single professor of the 1,300-member Shakespeare Association of America who questions the identity of Shakespeare ... antagonism to the authorship debate from within the profession is so great that it would be as difficult for a professed Oxfordian to be hired in the first place, much less gain tenure..."; Carroll 2004, pp. 278–9: "I have never met anyone in an academic position like mine, in the Establishment, who entertained the slightest doubt as to Shakespeare's authorship of the general body of plays attributed to him."; Pendleton 1994, p. 21: "Shakespeareans sometimes take the position that to even engage the Oxfordian hypothesis is to give it a countenance it does not warrant."; Sutherland & Watts 2000, p. 7: "There is, it should be noted, no academic Shakespearian of any standing who goes along with the Oxfordian theory."; Gibson 2005, p. 30: "...most of the great Shakespearean scholars are to be found in the Stratfordian camp..." Kathman, David (2003). "The Question of Authorship". In Wells, Stanley; Orlin, Lena Cowen (eds.). Shakespeare: an Oxford Guide. Oxford Guides. Oxford University Press. pp. 620–32. ISBN 978-0-19-924522-2. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2. Paster, Gail Kern (April 1999). "The Sweet Swan" (subscription required). Harper's Magazine. pp. 38–41. Retrieved 2 March 2011. Nelson, Alan H. (2004). "Stratford Si! Essex No!". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 149–69. ISSN 0040-3288. Carroll, D. Allen (2004). "Reading the 1592 Groatsworth Attack on Shakespeare". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 277–94. ISSN 0040-3288. Pendleton, Thomas A. (1994). "Irvin Matus's Shakespeare, IN FACT". Shakespeare Newsletter. 44 (Summer). University of Illinois at Chicago: 21, 26–30. ISSN 0037-3214. Sutherland, John; Watts, Cedric T. (2000). Henry V, War Criminal?: and Other Shakespeare Puzzles. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-283879-7. Retrieved 16 February 2011. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Bate 1998, p. 73; Hastings 1959, p. 486; Wadsworth 1958, pp. 8–16; McCrea 2005, p. 13; Kathman 2003, p. 622. Bate, Jonathan (1998). The Genius of Shakespeare. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-512823-9. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Hastings, William T. (1959). "Shakspere Was Shakespeare". The American Scholar. 28. Phi Beta Kappa Society: 479–88. ISSN 0003-0937. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Kathman, David (2003). "The Question of Authorship". In Wells, Stanley; Orlin, Lena Cowen (eds.). Shakespeare: an Oxford Guide. Oxford Guides. Oxford University Press. pp. 620–32. ISBN 978-0-19-924522-2.
Taylor 1989, p. 167: By 1840, admiration for Shakespeare throughout Europe had become such that Thomas Carlyle "could say without hyperbole" that "'Shakspeare is the chief of all Poets hitherto; the greatest intellect who, in our recorded world, has left record of himself in the way of literature.'" Taylor, Gary (1989). Reinventing Shakespeare: A Cultural History, from the Restoration to the Present. New York: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. ISBN 978-1-55584-078-5. Retrieved 12 November 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 87–8 (77–8). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Bate 2002, p. 106. Bate, Jonathan (2002). "Scenes from the Birth of a Myth". In Nolen, Stephanie (ed.). Shakespeare's Face: Unraveling the Legend and History of Shakespeare's Mysterious Portrait. Free Press. pp. 103–25. ISBN 978-0-7432-4932-4. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Shapiro 2010, p. 317 (281). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 2–3 (4); McCrea 2005, p. 13. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Bate 1998, p. 90: "Their [Oxfordians'] favorite code is the hidden personal allusion ... But this method is in essence no different from the cryptogram, since Shakespeare's range of characters and plots, both familial and political, is so vast that it would be possible to find in the plays 'self-portraits' of, once more, anybody one cares to think of."; Love 2002, pp. 87, 200: "It has more than once been claimed that the combination of 'biographical-fit' and cryptographical arguments could be used to establish a case for almost any individual ... The very fact that their application has produced so many rival claimants demonstrates their unreliability." Shapiro 2010, pp. 304–13 (268–77); Schoone-Jongen 2008, p. 5: "in voicing dissatisfaction over the apparent lack of continuity between the certain facts of Shakespeare's life and the spirit of his literary output, anti-Stratfordians adopt the very Modernist assumption that an author's work must reflect his or her life. Neither Shakespeare nor his fellow Elizabethan writers operated under this assumption."; Smith 2008, p. 629: "...deriving an idea of an author from his or her works is always problematic, particularly in a multi-vocal genre like drama, since it crucially underestimates the heterogeneous influences and imaginative reaches of creative writing." Bate, Jonathan (1998). The Genius of Shakespeare. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-512823-9. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Love, Harold (2002). Attributing Authorship: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-78948-6. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Schoone-Jongen, Terence G. (2008). Shakespeare's Companies: William Shakespeare's Early Career and the Acting Companies, 1577–1594. Studies in Performance and Early Modern Drama. Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7546-6434-5. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Smith, Emma (2008). "The Shakespeare Authorship Debate Revisited". Literature Compass. 5 (April). Blackwell Publishing: 618–32. doi:10.1111/j.1741-4113.2008.00549.x.
Wadsworth 1958, pp. 163–4: "The reasons we have for believing that William Shakespeare of Stratford-on-Avon wrote the plays and poems are the same as the reasons we have for believing any other historical event ... the historical evidence says that William Shakespeare wrote the plays and poems."; McCrea 2005, pp. xii–xiii, 10; Nelson 2004, p. 162: "Apart from the First Folio, the documentary evidence for William Shakespeare is the same as we get for other writers of the period..." Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Nelson, Alan H. (2004). "Stratford Si! Essex No!". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 149–69. ISSN 0040-3288.
Love 2002, pp. 198–202, 303–7: "The problem that confronts all such attempts is that they have to dispose of the many testimonies from Will the player's own time that he was regarded as the author of the plays and the absence of any clear contravening public claims of the same nature for any of the other favoured candidates."; Bate 1998, pp. 68–73. Love, Harold (2002). Attributing Authorship: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-78948-6. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Bate, Jonathan (1998). The Genius of Shakespeare. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-512823-9. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Nicholl 2010, p. 3; Shapiro 2010, p. 2 (4). Nicholl, Charles (21 April 2010). "Yes, Shakespeare Wrote Shakespeare". The Times Literary Supplement. No. 5586. pp. 3–4. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 246–9 (216–9); Niederkorn 2005. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Niederkorn, William S. (30 August 2005). "The Shakespeare Code, and Other Fanciful Ideas from the Traditional Camp". The New York Times. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Prescott 2010, p. 273; Baldick 2008, pp. 17–18; Bate 1998, pp. 68–70; Wadsworth 1958, pp. 2, 6–7. Prescott, Paul (2010). "Shakespeare in Popular Culture". In De Grazia, Margreta; Wells, Stanley (eds.). The New Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare. Cambridge University Press. pp. 269–84. ISBN 978-0-521-71393-1. Baldick, Chris (2008). The Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-920827-2. Retrieved 10 January 2011. Bate, Jonathan (1998). The Genius of Shakespeare. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-512823-9. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
Matus 1994, p. 15 note. Matus, Irvin L. (1994). Shakespeare, IN FACT. Continuum Publishing. ISBN 978-0-8264-0624-8.
Wells 2003, p. 388; Dobson 2001, p. 31: "Most observers, however, have been more impressed by the anti-Stratfordians' dogged immunity to documentary evidence"; Shipley 1943, p. 38: "the challenger would still need to produce evidence in favour of another author. There is no such evidence."; Love 2002, p. 198: "...those who believe that other authors were responsible for the canon as a whole ... have been forced to invoke elaborate conspiracy theories."; Wadsworth 1958, p. 6: "Paradoxically, the skeptics invariably substitute for the easily explained lack of evidence concerning William Shakespeare, the more troublesome picture of a vast conspiracy of silence about the 'real author', with a total lack of historical evidence for the existence of this 'real author' explained on the grounds of a secret pact"; Shapiro 2010, p. 255 (225): "Some suppose that only Shakespeare and the real author were in the know. At the other extreme are those who believe that it was an open secret". Wells, Stanley (2003). Shakespeare: For All Time. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-516093-2. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Dobson, Michael (2001). "Authorship Controversy". In Dobson, Michael; Wells, Stanley (eds.). Oxford Companion to Shakespeare. Oxford Companions to Literature. Oxford University Press. pp. 30–31. ISBN 978-0-19-811735-3. Shipley, Joseph T., ed. (1943). "Anti-Shakespeare Theories". Dictionary of World Literature (1st ed.). New York: Philosophical Library. pp. 37–38. OCLC 607784195. Retrieved 2 March 2011. Love, Harold (2002). Attributing Authorship: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-78948-6. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Bate 2002, pp. 104–5; Schoenbaum 1991, pp. 390, 392. Bate, Jonathan (2002). "Scenes from the Birth of a Myth". In Nolen, Stephanie (ed.). Shakespeare's Face: Unraveling the Legend and History of Shakespeare's Mysterious Portrait. Free Press. pp. 103–25. ISBN 978-0-7432-4932-4. Retrieved 2 March 2011. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2.
Shipley 1943, pp. 37–8; Bethell 1991, pp. 48, 50; Schoone-Jongen 2008, p. 5; Smith 2008, p. 622: "Fuelled by scepticism that the plays could have been written by a working man from a provincial town with no record of university education, foreign travel, legal studies or court preferment, the controversialists proposed instead a sequence of mainly aristocratic alternative authors whose philosophically or politically occult meanings, along with their own true identity, had to be hidden in codes, cryptograms and runic obscurity." Shipley, Joseph T., ed. (1943). "Anti-Shakespeare Theories". Dictionary of World Literature (1st ed.). New York: Philosophical Library. pp. 37–38. OCLC 607784195. Retrieved 2 March 2011. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010. Schoone-Jongen, Terence G. (2008). Shakespeare's Companies: William Shakespeare's Early Career and the Acting Companies, 1577–1594. Studies in Performance and Early Modern Drama. Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7546-6434-5. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Smith, Emma (2008). "The Shakespeare Authorship Debate Revisited". Literature Compass. 5 (April). Blackwell Publishing: 618–32. doi:10.1111/j.1741-4113.2008.00549.x.
Nelson 2004, p. 149: "The Shakespeare authorship debate is a classic instance of a controversy that draws its very breath from a fundamental disagreement over the nature of admissible evidence."; McCrea 2005, pp. 165, 217–8; Shapiro 2010, pp. 8, 48, 112–3, 235, 298 (8, 44, 100, 207, 264). Nelson, Alan H. (2004). "Stratford Si! Essex No!". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 149–69. ISSN 0040-3288. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Schoone-Jongen 2008, pp. 6, 117. Schoone-Jongen, Terence G. (2008). Shakespeare's Companies: William Shakespeare's Early Career and the Acting Companies, 1577–1594. Studies in Performance and Early Modern Drama. Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7546-6434-5. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Schoenbaum 1991, pp. 405, 411, 437; Love 2002, pp. 203–7. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2. Love, Harold (2002). Attributing Authorship: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-78948-6. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Callaghan 2013, p. 11: "It is a 'fact' that the survival rate for early modern documents is low and that Shakespeare lived in a world prior to the systematic, all-inclusive collection of data that provides the foundation of modern bureaucracy." Callaghan, Dympna (2013). Who Was William Shakespeare?: An Introduction to the Life and Works. Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 978-0-470-65846-8. Retrieved 7 April 2013.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 253–95 (223–59); Love 2002, p. 198. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Love, Harold (2002). Attributing Authorship: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-78948-6. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Wadsworth 1958, pp. 163–4; McCrea 2005, pp. xii–xiii, 10; Nelson 2004, p. 149. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Nelson, Alan H. (2004). "Stratford Si! Essex No!". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 149–69. ISSN 0040-3288.
Matus 1994, p. 47: "...on the mysterious disappearance of the accounts of the highest immediate authority over theatre in Shakespeare's age, the Lord Chamberlains of the Household. Ogburn imagines that these records, like those of the Stratford grammar school, might have been deliberately eradicated 'because they would have showed how little consequential a figure Shakspere cut in the company.'" Matus, Irvin L. (1994). Shakespeare, IN FACT. Continuum Publishing. ISBN 978-0-8264-0624-8.
Matus 1994, p. 32: "Ogburn gives voice to his suspicion that the school records disappeared because they would have revealed William's name did not appear among those who attended it." Matus, Irvin L. (1994). Shakespeare, IN FACT. Continuum Publishing. ISBN 978-0-8264-0624-8.
Schoenbaum 1991, p. 6; Wells 2003, p. 28; Kathman 2003, p. 625; Shapiro 2010, pp. 116–7 (103); Bevington 2005, p. 9. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2. Wells, Stanley (2003). Shakespeare: For All Time. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-516093-2. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Kathman, David (2003). "The Question of Authorship". In Wells, Stanley; Orlin, Lena Cowen (eds.). Shakespeare: an Oxford Guide. Oxford Guides. Oxford University Press. pp. 620–32. ISBN 978-0-19-924522-2. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Bevington, David Martin (2005). Shakespeare: The Seven Ages of Human Experience. Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 978-1-4051-2753-0.
Wells 2001, p. 122. Wells, Stanley (2001). "Education". In Dobson, Michael; Wells, Stanley (eds.). Oxford Companion to Shakespeare. Oxford Companions to Literature. Oxford University Press. pp. 122–24. ISBN 978-0-19-811735-3.
Schoenbaum 1987, p. 295. Schoenbaum, S. (1987). William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life (Revised ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-505161-2.
Daybell 2016, p. 494 Daybell, James (2016). "Gender, Writing, Technologies, and Early Modern Epistolary". In Smuts, R. Malcolm (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of the Age of Shakespeare. Oxford University Press. pp. 493–511. ISBN 978-0-199-66084-1.
Ellis 2012, p. 41 Ellis, David (2012). The Truth about William Shakespeare: Fact, Fiction and Modern Biographies. Edinburgh University Press. ISBN 978-0-7486-4666-1.
Honan 2000, pp. 49–51; Halliday 1962, pp. 41–9; Rowse 1963, pp. 36–44. Honan, Park (2000). Shakespeare: A Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-282527-8. Halliday, Frank E. (1962). The Life of Shakespeare. Penguin Books. OCLC 353820. Rowse, A. L. (1963). William Shakespeare: A Biography. New York: Harper & Row. OCLC 352856.
Nevalainen 1999, p. 336. Nevalainen, Terttu (1999). "Early Modern English Lexis and Semantics". In Lass, Roger (ed.). The Cambridge History of the English Language: 1476–1776. Vol. 3. Cambridge University Press. pp. 332–458. ISBN 978-0-521-26476-1. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Ioppolo 2010, pp. 177–183 Ioppolo, Grace (2010). "Early modern handwriting". In Hattaway, Michael (ed.). A New Companion to English Renaissance Literature and Culture. Vol. 1. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 177–89. ISBN 978-1-444-31902-6.
Matus 1994, p. 28. Matus, Irvin L. (1994). Shakespeare, IN FACT. Continuum Publishing. ISBN 978-0-8264-0624-8.
Shapiro 2010, p. 255 (225). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Schoenbaum 1991, pp. 393, 446. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2.
Matus 1994, p. 26. Matus, Irvin L. (1994). Shakespeare, IN FACT. Continuum Publishing. ISBN 978-0-8264-0624-8.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 116–7 (103–4). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
McCrea 2005, pp. 21, 170–1, 217. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Matus 1994, pp. 166, 266–7, cites James Lardner, "Onward and Upward with the Arts: the Authorship Question", The New Yorker, 11 April 1988, p. 103: "No obituaries marked his death in 1616, no public mourning. No note whatsoever was taken of the passing of the man who, if the attribution is correct, would have been the greatest playwright and poet in the history of the English language."; Shapiro 2010, p. 243. Matus, Irvin L. (1994). Shakespeare, IN FACT. Continuum Publishing. ISBN 978-0-8264-0624-8. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Matus 1994, pp. 265–6; Lang 1912, pp. 28–30. Matus, Irvin L. (1994). Shakespeare, IN FACT. Continuum Publishing. ISBN 978-0-8264-0624-8. Lang, Andrew (1912). Shakespeare, Bacon, and the Great Unknown. Longmans, Green, and Co. Retrieved 28 December 2019.
Wadsworth 1958, pp. 163–4; Murphy 1964, p. 4: "For the evidence that William Shakespeare of Stratford-on-Avon (1564–1616) wrote the works attributed to him is not only abundant but conclusive. It is of the kind, as Sir Edmund Chambers puts it, 'which is ordinarily accepted as determining the authorship of early literature.'"; Nelson 2004, p. 149: "Even the most partisan anti-Stratfordian or Oxfordian agrees that documentary evidence taken on its face value supports the case for William Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon ... as author of the poems and plays"; McCrea 2005, pp. xii–xiii, 10, Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) Murphy, William M. (1964). "Thirty-six Plays in Search of an Author". Union College Symposium. 3 (3): 4–11. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Nelson, Alan H. (2004). "Stratford Si! Essex No!". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 149–69. ISSN 0040-3288. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Shipley 1943, pp. 37–8, Shipley, Joseph T., ed. (1943). "Anti-Shakespeare Theories". Dictionary of World Literature (1st ed.). New York: Philosophical Library. pp. 37–38. OCLC 607784195. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Dawson 1953, p. 165: "...in my opinion it is the basic unsoundness of method in this and other works of similar subject matter that explains how sincere and intelligent men arrive at such wild conclusions"; Love 2002, p. 200; McCrea 2005, p. 14; Gibson 2005, p. 10. Dawson, Giles E. (1953). "Review: This Star of England. by Dorothy Ogburn; Charlton Ogburn". Shakespeare Quarterly. 4 (2). Folger Shakespeare Library: 165–70. doi:10.2307/2866177. ISSN 1538-3555. JSTOR 2866177. Love, Harold (2002). Attributing Authorship: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-78948-6. Retrieved 20 December 2010. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Shapiro 2010, p. 305 (270); Bate 1998, pp. 36–7; Wadsworth 1958, pp. 2–3; Schoone-Jongen 2008, p. 5. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Bate, Jonathan (1998). The Genius of Shakespeare. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-512823-9. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) Schoone-Jongen, Terence G. (2008). Shakespeare's Companies: William Shakespeare's Early Career and the Acting Companies, 1577–1594. Studies in Performance and Early Modern Drama. Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7546-6434-5. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
McCrea 2005, pp. 3–7. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Montague 1963, pp. 93–4; Loomis 2002, p. 83. Montague, William Kelly (1963). The Man of Stratford – The Real Shakespeare. Vantage Press. OCLC 681431. Loomis, Catherine, ed. (2002). William Shakespeare: A Documentary Volume. Dictionary of Literary Biography. Vol. 263. Detroit: Gale Group. ISBN 978-0-7876-6007-9. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Loomis 2002, p. 85; Montague 1963, pp. 93–4. Loomis, Catherine, ed. (2002). William Shakespeare: A Documentary Volume. Dictionary of Literary Biography. Vol. 263. Detroit: Gale Group. ISBN 978-0-7876-6007-9. Retrieved 2 March 2011. Montague, William Kelly (1963). The Man of Stratford – The Real Shakespeare. Vantage Press. OCLC 681431.
Gurr 2004, p. 60. Gurr, Andrew (2004). Playgoing in Shakespeare's London. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-54322-4. Retrieved 15 September 2020.
Stevenson 2002, p. 84. Stevenson, Laura Caroline (2002). Praise and Paradox: Merchants and Craftsmen in Elizabethan Popular Literature. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-52-152207-6.
Montague 1963, p. 71; Loomis 2002, p. 104. Montague, William Kelly (1963). The Man of Stratford – The Real Shakespeare. Vantage Press. OCLC 681431. Loomis, Catherine, ed. (2002). William Shakespeare: A Documentary Volume. Dictionary of Literary Biography. Vol. 263. Detroit: Gale Group. ISBN 978-0-7876-6007-9. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Montague 1963, p. 71; Loomis 2002, p. 174. Montague, William Kelly (1963). The Man of Stratford – The Real Shakespeare. Vantage Press. OCLC 681431. Loomis, Catherine, ed. (2002). William Shakespeare: A Documentary Volume. Dictionary of Literary Biography. Vol. 263. Detroit: Gale Group. ISBN 978-0-7876-6007-9. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Loomis 2002, p. 183. Loomis, Catherine, ed. (2002). William Shakespeare: A Documentary Volume. Dictionary of Literary Biography. Vol. 263. Detroit: Gale Group. ISBN 978-0-7876-6007-9. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Loomis 2002, p. 209. Loomis, Catherine, ed. (2002). William Shakespeare: A Documentary Volume. Dictionary of Literary Biography. Vol. 263. Detroit: Gale Group. ISBN 978-0-7876-6007-9. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Montague 1963, p. 98; Loomis 2002, p. 233. Montague, William Kelly (1963). The Man of Stratford – The Real Shakespeare. Vantage Press. OCLC 681431. Loomis, Catherine, ed. (2002). William Shakespeare: A Documentary Volume. Dictionary of Literary Biography. Vol. 263. Detroit: Gale Group. ISBN 978-0-7876-6007-9. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Loomis 2002, p. 238. Loomis, Catherine, ed. (2002). William Shakespeare: A Documentary Volume. Dictionary of Literary Biography. Vol. 263. Detroit: Gale Group. ISBN 978-0-7876-6007-9. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Taylor & Loughnane 2017, pp. 417–20. Taylor, Gary; Loughnane, Rory (2017). "The Canon and Chronology of Shakespeare's works". In Taylor, Gary; Egan, Gabriel (eds.). The New Oxford Shakespeare: Authorship Companion. Oxford Companions to Literature. Oxford University Press. pp. 417–601. ISBN 978-0-192-51760-9.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 254–5 (224–5); Nelson 1998, pp. 79–82. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Nelson, Alan H. (1998). "George Buc, William Shakespeare, and the Folger George a Greene". Shakespeare Quarterly. 49 (1). Folger Shakespeare Library: 74–83. doi:10.2307/2902208. ISSN 0037-3222. JSTOR 2902208.
Schoenbaum 1987, p. 231. Schoenbaum, S. (1987). William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life (Revised ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-505161-2.
Schoenbaum 1987, pp. 227–8. Schoenbaum, S. (1987). William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life (Revised ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-505161-2.
Schoenbaum 1987, pp. 231–2; Matus 1994, p. 60. Schoenbaum, S. (1987). William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life (Revised ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-505161-2. Matus, Irvin L. (1994). Shakespeare, IN FACT. Continuum Publishing. ISBN 978-0-8264-0624-8.
Schoenbaum 1987, p. 232. Schoenbaum, S. (1987). William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life (Revised ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-505161-2.
McCrea 2005, pp. 17–9. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 272–3 (239–40). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
McCrea 2005, pp. 7, 8, 11, 32; Shapiro 2010, pp. 268–9 (236–7). McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
McCrea 2005, p. 191; Montague 1963, p. 97. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Montague, William Kelly (1963). The Man of Stratford – The Real Shakespeare. Vantage Press. OCLC 681431.
Shapiro 2010, p. 271 (238); Chambers 1930, pp. 218–9. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Chambers, E. K. (1930). William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems. Vol. II. Clarendon Press. ISBN 978-0-19-811774-2. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
Shapiro 2010, p. 270 (238). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, p. 271 (238–9); Chambers 1930, p. 224; Nicholl 2008, p. 80. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Chambers, E. K. (1930). William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems. Vol. II. Clarendon Press. ISBN 978-0-19-811774-2. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) Nicholl, Charles (2008). The Lodger: Shakespeare on Silver Street. Penguin Books. ISBN 978-0-14-102374-8.
Matus 1994, pp. 121, 220. Matus, Irvin L. (1994). Shakespeare, IN FACT. Continuum Publishing. ISBN 978-0-8264-0624-8.
Kathman 2013, p. 127 Kathman, David (2013). "Shakespeare and Warwickshire". In Wells, Stanley; Edmondson, Paul (eds.). Shakespeare Beyond Doubt: Evidence, Argument, Controversy. Cambridge University Press. pp. 121–32. ISBN 978-1-107-60328-8.
McCrea 2005, p. 9; Bate 2002, pp. 111–2. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Bate, Jonathan (2002). "Scenes from the Birth of a Myth". In Nolen, Stephanie (ed.). Shakespeare's Face: Unraveling the Legend and History of Shakespeare's Mysterious Portrait. Free Press. pp. 103–25. ISBN 978-0-7432-4932-4. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Eaglestone 2009, p. 63; Gelderen 2006, p. 178. Eaglestone, Robert (2009). Doing English. Doing... Series. London, New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-49673-5. Retrieved 10 January 2011. Gelderen, Elly van (2006). A History of the English Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ISBN 978-90-272-3236-6. Retrieved 10 January 2011.
McCrea 2005, pp. 105–6, 115, 119–24; Bate 2002, pp. 109–10. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Bate, Jonathan (2002). "Scenes from the Birth of a Myth". In Nolen, Stephanie (ed.). Shakespeare's Face: Unraveling the Legend and History of Shakespeare's Mysterious Portrait. Free Press. pp. 103–25. ISBN 978-0-7432-4932-4. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
McCrea 2005, pp. 64, 171; Bate 1998, p. 70. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Bate, Jonathan (1998). The Genius of Shakespeare. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-512823-9. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Lang 1912, pp. 43–4. Lang, Andrew (1912). Shakespeare, Bacon, and the Great Unknown. Longmans, Green, and Co. Retrieved 28 December 2019.
Velz 2000, p. 188. Velz, John W (2000). "Shakespeare's Ovid in the Twentieth Century: a Critical Survey". In Taylor, Albert Booth (ed.). Shakespeare's Ovid: the Metamorphoses in the Plays and Poems. Cambridge University Press. pp. 181–97. ISBN 978-0-521-77192-4. Retrieved 26 May 2011.
Love 2002, p. 81: "As has often been pointed out, if Shakespeare had read all the books claimed to have influenced him, he would never have had time to write a word of his own. He probably picked up many of his ideas from conversation. If he needed legal knowledge it was easier to extract this from Inns-of-Court drinkers in the Devil Tavern than to search volumes of precedents." Love, Harold (2002). Attributing Authorship: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-78948-6. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
McCrea 2005, pp. 62–72. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Shapiro 2010, p. 288 (253). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 283–6 (249–51). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 293–4 (258–9). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, p. 30 (29). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 30–3 (29–32). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Schoenbaum 1991, pp. 99–110. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2.
Wells 2003, p. 329. Wells, Stanley (2003). Shakespeare: For All Time. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-516093-2. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Taylor 1989, p. 167. Taylor, Gary (1989). Reinventing Shakespeare: A Cultural History, from the Restoration to the Present. New York: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. ISBN 978-1-55584-078-5. Retrieved 12 November 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 83–9 (73–9). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Gross 2010, p. 40; Shapiro 2010, pp. 86–9 (76–9). Gross, John (March 2010). "Denying Shakespeare" (subscription required). Commentary. 129 (3). Commentary: 38–44. ISSN 0010-2601. Retrieved 2 March 2011. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 97–8, 106–9 (87, 95–7). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 119–20 (105–6). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
McCrea 2005, p. 13. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Schoenbaum 1991, p. 404. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2.
Hackett 2009, p. 164. Hackett, Helen (2009). Shakespeare and Elizabeth: The Meeting of Two Myths. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-12806-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Schoenbaum 1991, p. 403. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 113–4 (100–1); Wadsworth 1958, pp. 34–5. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
Schoenbaum 1991, pp. 391–2. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2.
Wadsworth 1958, p. 57; Schoenbaum 1991, p. 412; Hackett 2009, pp. 154–5. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2. Hackett, Helen (2009). Shakespeare and Elizabeth: The Meeting of Two Myths. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-12806-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 144–5 (127); Wadsworth 1958, pp. 63–4. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
Shapiro 2010, p. 144 (127); Wadsworth 1958, p. 64. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
Shapiro 2010, pp. 149–58 (130–9). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Schoenbaum 1991, pp. 422–5 Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2.
Wadsworth 1958, pp. 88–9; Garber 1997, p. 8. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) Garber, Marjorie (1997). Shakespeare's Ghost Writers: Literature as Uncanny Causality. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-91869-5. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Schoenbaum 1991, p. 446; Zeigler 1895, pp. v–xi. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2. Zeigler, Wilbur Gleason (1895). It Was Marlowe: A Story of the Secret of Three Centuries. Donohue & Henneberry. OCLC 228707660. Retrieved 13 December 2010.
Shapiro 2010, p. 218 (192). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 11–4, 319–20 (11–3, 284). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 228–9 (200–1). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 220–1 (194). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Hackett 2009, p. 167. Hackett, Helen (2009). Shakespeare and Elizabeth: The Meeting of Two Myths. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-12806-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Shapiro 2010, p. 228 (201). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Schoenbaum 1991, p. 445. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2.
Shapiro 2010, p. 229 (202). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Quoted in Shapiro 2010, pp. 228–9 (201). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, p. 230 (202). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 230–3 (202–5). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 232–3 (204–5). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Bethell 1991, p. 47; Gibson 2005, pp. 48, 72, 124; Kathman 2003, p. 620; Schoenbaum 1991, pp. 430–40; Shapiro 2010, pp. 229–49 (202–19). Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Kathman, David (2003). "The Question of Authorship". In Wells, Stanley; Orlin, Lena Cowen (eds.). Shakespeare: an Oxford Guide. Oxford Guides. Oxford University Press. pp. 620–32. ISBN 978-0-19-924522-2. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 242–3 (212–3). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 234–6 (206–8). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 236–7 (208–9). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, p. 238 (209). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, p. 238 (209–10). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 246–8 (216–8). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 248–9 (218–9); Hackett 2009, pp. 171–2. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Hackett, Helen (2009). Shakespeare and Elizabeth: The Meeting of Two Myths. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-12806-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 4, 42 (5, 39). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 231–2, 239–41 (203–4, 210–2). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Edmondson 2013, pp. 233, 278. Edmondson, Paul (2013). "'The Shakespeare establishment' and the Shakespeare authorship discussion". In Wells, Stanley; Edmondson, Paul (eds.). Shakespeare Beyond Doubt: Evidence, Argument, Controversy. Cambridge University Press. pp. 225–35. ISBN 978-1-107-60328-8.
Edmondson 2013, p. 229. Edmondson, Paul (2013). "'The Shakespeare establishment' and the Shakespeare authorship discussion". In Wells, Stanley; Edmondson, Paul (eds.). Shakespeare Beyond Doubt: Evidence, Argument, Controversy. Cambridge University Press. pp. 225–35. ISBN 978-1-107-60328-8.
Gibson 2005, p. 10. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Gibson 2005, pp. 18–9, 72–6. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Shapiro 2010, p. 107 (95); Holderness 2013, p. 7. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Holderness, Graham (2013). "The unreadable Delia Bacon". In Edmondson, Paul; Wells, Stanley (eds.). Shakespeare Beyond Doubt: Evidence, Argument, Controversy. Cambridge University Press. pp. 5–15. ISBN 978-1-107-60328-8.
Gibson 2005, pp. 72–6. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Gibson 2005, pp. 18–9, 25, 27, 90. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 119–20 (105–6); Halliday 1957, p. 175. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Halliday, Frank E. (1957). The Cult of Shakespeare. Duckworth. OCLC 394225.
Schoenbaum 1991, pp. 387, 389. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2.
Wadsworth 1958, p. 41; Gibson 2005, pp. 151–71; Halliday 1957, p. 177. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Halliday, Frank E. (1957). The Cult of Shakespeare. Duckworth. OCLC 394225.
Gibson 2005, p. 57; Wadsworth 1958, p. 36. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
Bacon 2002, pp. 318, 693. Bacon, Francis (2002). Vickers, Brian (ed.). Francis Bacon: The Major Works. Oxford World's Classics. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-284081-3. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Ruthven 2001, p. 102. Ruthven, K.K. (2001). Faking Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-66965-8. Retrieved 5 January 2011.
Nelson 2003, pp. 13, 248. Nelson, Alan H. (2003). Monstrous Adversary: The Life of Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford. Liverpool University Press. ISBN 978-0-85323-678-8. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Nelson 2003, pp. 386–7. Nelson, Alan H. (2003). Monstrous Adversary: The Life of Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford. Liverpool University Press. ISBN 978-0-85323-678-8. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Shapiro 2010, p. 214. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Schoenbaum 1991, pp. 431–2. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2.
Wadsworth 1958, p. 121; McMichael & Glenn 1962, p. 159; Shapiro 2010, p. 239 (210). Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) McMichael, George L.; Glenn, Edgar M. (1962). Shakespeare and His Rivals: A Casebook on the Authorship Controversy. Odyssey Press. OCLC 2113359. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Schoenbaum 1991, pp. 433–4; Shapiro 2010, p. 294 (258). Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Schoenbaum 1991, pp. 445–6. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2.
Schoenbaum 1987, p. 131. Schoenbaum, S. (1987). William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life (Revised ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-505161-2.
Schoenbaum 1991, pp. 446–7. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2.
Schoenbaum 1991, p. 446. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2.
Shapiro 2010, p. 247 (217). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Gibson 2005, pp. 91–2; Shapiro 2010, p. 215 (189). Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Schoone-Jongen 2008, pp. 106, 164. Schoone-Jongen, Terence G. (2008). Shakespeare's Companies: William Shakespeare's Early Career and the Acting Companies, 1577–1594. Studies in Performance and Early Modern Drama. Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7546-6434-5. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Shapiro 2010, p. 215 (190). Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Lefranc 1918–19, pp. 2, 87–199; Wilson 1969, p. 128; Londré 1997, p. 327. Lefranc, Abel (1918–19). Sous le masque de "William Shakespeare": William Stanley, Vie comte de Derby. Paris: Payot & cie. OCLC 501970. Wilson, J. Dover, ed. (1969) [First published 1923]. Love's Labour's Lost. The Cambridge Dover Wilson Shakespeare (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-07542-8. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Londré, Felicia Hardison (1997). "Elizabethan Views of the 'Other': French, Spanish and Russians in Love's Labour's Lost". In Londré, Felicia Hardison (ed.). Love's Labour's Lost: Critical Essays. Shakespeare Criticism. Vol. 13. Routledge. pp. 325–43. ISBN 978-0-8153-0984-0. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
McCrea 2005, p. 145. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Gibson 2005, p. 274. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
McCrea 2005, p. 144. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Hope & Holston 2009 Hope, Warren; Holston, Kim (2009). The Shakespeare Controversy: An Analysis of the Authorship Theories, 2d ed. McFarland. p. 64. ISBN 978-0-7864-3917-1.
Brustein 2006. Brustein, Robert Sanford (2006). Millennial Stages: Essays and Reviews, 2001–2005. Yale University Press. pp. 121–122. ISBN 978-0-300-13536-7.

byu.edu

scholarsarchive.byu.edu

Morgan 2019 Morgan, Amanda (2019). "WhatsHisFace". Children's Book and Media Review. 40 (12). ISSN 2572-4479. Retrieved 2 September 2024.

cambridge.org

Wells 2023, p. 135 Wells, Stanley (2023). What Was Shakespeare Really Like?. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1009340373.

cmc.edu

The Shakespeare Clinic 2010. The Shakespeare Clinic (22 April 2010). "The Shakespeare Clinic: Students to Report on Latest Findings in Continuing Authorship Question". Press release. Claremont, Calif.: Claremont McKenna College. Retrieved 19 August 2015.

commentarymagazine.com

Gross 2010, p. 39. Gross, John (March 2010). "Denying Shakespeare" (subscription required). Commentary. 129 (3). Commentary: 38–44. ISSN 0010-2601. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Gross 2010, p. 40; Shapiro 2010, pp. 86–9 (76–9). Gross, John (March 2010). "Denying Shakespeare" (subscription required). Commentary. 129 (3). Commentary: 38–44. ISSN 0010-2601. Retrieved 2 March 2011. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.

dispositio.net

Syme 2011 Syme, Holger (19 September 2011). "People Being Stupid About Shakesp... or Someone Else". Dispositio. Archived from the original on 2 February 2014. Retrieved 4 February 2012.

doi.org

Bate 1998, p. 90: "Their [Oxfordians'] favorite code is the hidden personal allusion ... But this method is in essence no different from the cryptogram, since Shakespeare's range of characters and plots, both familial and political, is so vast that it would be possible to find in the plays 'self-portraits' of, once more, anybody one cares to think of."; Love 2002, pp. 87, 200: "It has more than once been claimed that the combination of 'biographical-fit' and cryptographical arguments could be used to establish a case for almost any individual ... The very fact that their application has produced so many rival claimants demonstrates their unreliability." Shapiro 2010, pp. 304–13 (268–77); Schoone-Jongen 2008, p. 5: "in voicing dissatisfaction over the apparent lack of continuity between the certain facts of Shakespeare's life and the spirit of his literary output, anti-Stratfordians adopt the very Modernist assumption that an author's work must reflect his or her life. Neither Shakespeare nor his fellow Elizabethan writers operated under this assumption."; Smith 2008, p. 629: "...deriving an idea of an author from his or her works is always problematic, particularly in a multi-vocal genre like drama, since it crucially underestimates the heterogeneous influences and imaginative reaches of creative writing." Bate, Jonathan (1998). The Genius of Shakespeare. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-512823-9. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Love, Harold (2002). Attributing Authorship: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-78948-6. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Schoone-Jongen, Terence G. (2008). Shakespeare's Companies: William Shakespeare's Early Career and the Acting Companies, 1577–1594. Studies in Performance and Early Modern Drama. Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7546-6434-5. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Smith, Emma (2008). "The Shakespeare Authorship Debate Revisited". Literature Compass. 5 (April). Blackwell Publishing: 618–32. doi:10.1111/j.1741-4113.2008.00549.x.
Shipley 1943, pp. 37–8; Bethell 1991, pp. 48, 50; Schoone-Jongen 2008, p. 5; Smith 2008, p. 622: "Fuelled by scepticism that the plays could have been written by a working man from a provincial town with no record of university education, foreign travel, legal studies or court preferment, the controversialists proposed instead a sequence of mainly aristocratic alternative authors whose philosophically or politically occult meanings, along with their own true identity, had to be hidden in codes, cryptograms and runic obscurity." Shipley, Joseph T., ed. (1943). "Anti-Shakespeare Theories". Dictionary of World Literature (1st ed.). New York: Philosophical Library. pp. 37–38. OCLC 607784195. Retrieved 2 March 2011. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010. Schoone-Jongen, Terence G. (2008). Shakespeare's Companies: William Shakespeare's Early Career and the Acting Companies, 1577–1594. Studies in Performance and Early Modern Drama. Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7546-6434-5. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Smith, Emma (2008). "The Shakespeare Authorship Debate Revisited". Literature Compass. 5 (April). Blackwell Publishing: 618–32. doi:10.1111/j.1741-4113.2008.00549.x.
Crinkley 1985, p. 517. Crinkley, Richmond (1985). "New Perspectives on the Authorship Question". Shakespeare Quarterly. 36 (4). Folger Shakespeare Library: 515–22. doi:10.2307/2870328. ISSN 1538-3555. JSTOR 2870328.
Price 2001, pp. 213–7, 262; Crinkley 1985, p. 517: "It is characteristic of anti-Stratfordian books that they make a list of what Shakespeare must have been—a courtier, a lawyer, a traveler in Italy, a classicist, a falconer, whatever. Then a candidate is selected who fits the list. Not surprisingly, different lists find different candidates." Price, Diana (2001). Shakespeare's Unorthodox Biography: New Evidence of an Authorship Problem. Greenwood Press. ISBN 978-0-313-31202-1. Crinkley, Richmond (1985). "New Perspectives on the Authorship Question". Shakespeare Quarterly. 36 (4). Folger Shakespeare Library: 515–22. doi:10.2307/2870328. ISSN 1538-3555. JSTOR 2870328.
Saunders 1951, pp. 139–64; May 1980, p. 11; May 2007, p. 61. Saunders, J. W. (April 1951). "The Stigma of Print: A Note on the Social Bases of Tudor Poetry". Essays in Criticism. 1 (2). Oxford University Press: 139–64. doi:10.1093/eic/I.2.139. ISSN 1471-6852. May, Steven W. (1980). "Tudor Aristocrats and the Mythical "Stigma of Print"". In Deneef, Leigh A.; Hester, Thomas M. (eds.). Renaissance Papers. Vol. 1993. Southeastern Renaissance Conference. pp. 11–18. Retrieved 2 March 2011. May, Steven W. (2007). "Early Courtier Verse: Oxford, Dyer, and Gascoigne". In Cheney, Patrick; Hadfield, Andrew; Sullivan, Jr., Garrett A. (eds.). Early Modern English Poetry: A Critical Companion. Oxford University Press. pp. 60–67. ISBN 978-0-19-515387-3.
Smith 2008, p. 621: "The plays have to be pseudonymous because they are too dangerous, in a climate of censorship and monarchical control, to be published openly." Smith, Emma (2008). "The Shakespeare Authorship Debate Revisited". Literature Compass. 5 (April). Blackwell Publishing: 618–32. doi:10.1111/j.1741-4113.2008.00549.x.
Dawson 1953, p. 165: "...in my opinion it is the basic unsoundness of method in this and other works of similar subject matter that explains how sincere and intelligent men arrive at such wild conclusions"; Love 2002, p. 200; McCrea 2005, p. 14; Gibson 2005, p. 10. Dawson, Giles E. (1953). "Review: This Star of England. by Dorothy Ogburn; Charlton Ogburn". Shakespeare Quarterly. 4 (2). Folger Shakespeare Library: 165–70. doi:10.2307/2866177. ISSN 1538-3555. JSTOR 2866177. Love, Harold (2002). Attributing Authorship: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-78948-6. Retrieved 20 December 2010. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 254–5 (224–5); Nelson 1998, pp. 79–82. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Nelson, Alan H. (1998). "George Buc, William Shakespeare, and the Folger George a Greene". Shakespeare Quarterly. 49 (1). Folger Shakespeare Library: 74–83. doi:10.2307/2902208. ISSN 0037-3222. JSTOR 2902208.
Price 1997, pp. 168, 173: "While Hollar conveyed the general impressions suggested by Dugdale's sketch, few of the details were transmitted with accuracy. Indeed, Dugdale's sketch gave Hollar few details to work with ... As with other sketches in his collection, Dugdale made no attempt to draw a facial likeness, but appears to have sketched one of his standard faces to depict a man with facial hair. Consequently, Hollar invented the facial features for Shakespeare. The conclusion is obvious: in the absence of an accurate and detailed model, Hollar freely improvised his image of Shakespeare's monument. That improvisation is what disqualifies the engraving's value as authoritative evidence." Price, Diana (1997). "Reconsidering Shakespeare's Monument". The Review of English Studies. 48 (190). Oxford University Press: 168–82. doi:10.1093/res/XLVIII.190.168. ISSN 1471-6968.
Craig 2011, pp. 58–60. Craig, Hugh (2011). "Shakespeare's Vocabulary: Myth and Reality". Shakespeare Quarterly. 62 (1). Johns Hopkins University Press: 53–74. doi:10.1353/shq.2011.0002. ISSN 1538-3555. S2CID 192242159.
Simonton 2004, p. 203. Simonton, Dean Keith (2004). "Thematic Content and Political Context in Shakespeare's Dramatic Output, with Implications for Authorship and Chronology Controversies". Empirical Studies of the Arts. 22 (2). Baywood Publishing: 201–13. doi:10.2190/EQDP-MK0K-DFCK-MA8F. ISSN 1541-4493. S2CID 143289651.
Simonton 2004, p. 210: "If the Earl of Oxford wrote these plays, then he not only displayed minimal stylistic development over the course of his career (Elliot & Valenza, 2000), but he also wrote in monastic isolation from the key events of his day." Simonton, Dean Keith (2004). "Thematic Content and Political Context in Shakespeare's Dramatic Output, with Implications for Authorship and Chronology Controversies". Empirical Studies of the Arts. 22 (2). Baywood Publishing: 201–13. doi:10.2190/EQDP-MK0K-DFCK-MA8F. ISSN 1541-4493. S2CID 143289651.
Simonton 2004, p. 210, note 4: "For the record, I find the traditional attribution to William Shakespeare of Stratford highly improbable ... I really would like Edward de Vere to be the author of the plays and poems ... Thus, I had hoped that the current study might strengthen the case on behalf of the Oxfordian attribution. I think that expectation was proven wrong." Simonton, Dean Keith (2004). "Thematic Content and Political Context in Shakespeare's Dramatic Output, with Implications for Authorship and Chronology Controversies". Empirical Studies of the Arts. 22 (2). Baywood Publishing: 201–13. doi:10.2190/EQDP-MK0K-DFCK-MA8F. ISSN 1541-4493. S2CID 143289651.
Glazener 2007, p. 331. Glazener, Nancy (Summer 2007). "Print Culture as an Archive of Dissent: Or, Delia Bacon and the Case of the Missing Hamlet". American Literary History. 19 (2). Oxford University Press: 329–49. doi:10.1093/alh/ajm009. S2CID 145277884.
Chandler 1994 Chandler, David (June 1994). "Marlowe: A Hoax by William Taylor". Notes and Queries. 41 (2). Oxford University Press: 220–22. doi:10.1093/nq/41-2-220. ISSN 0029-3970.
Sawyer 2013, pp. 28–9. Sawyer, Robert (Spring 2013). "Biographical Aftershocks: Shakespeare and Marlowe in the Wake of 9/11". Critical Survey. 25 (1). Berghahn Books: 19–32. doi:10.3167/cs.2013.250103.

harpers.org

Kathman 2003, p. 621: "...antiStratfordism has remained a fringe belief system"; Schoenbaum 1991, p. 450; Paster 1999, p. 38: "To ask me about the authorship question ... is like asking a palaeontologist to debate a creationist's account of the fossil record."; Nelson 2004, pp. 149–51: "I do not know of a single professor of the 1,300-member Shakespeare Association of America who questions the identity of Shakespeare ... antagonism to the authorship debate from within the profession is so great that it would be as difficult for a professed Oxfordian to be hired in the first place, much less gain tenure..."; Carroll 2004, pp. 278–9: "I have never met anyone in an academic position like mine, in the Establishment, who entertained the slightest doubt as to Shakespeare's authorship of the general body of plays attributed to him."; Pendleton 1994, p. 21: "Shakespeareans sometimes take the position that to even engage the Oxfordian hypothesis is to give it a countenance it does not warrant."; Sutherland & Watts 2000, p. 7: "There is, it should be noted, no academic Shakespearian of any standing who goes along with the Oxfordian theory."; Gibson 2005, p. 30: "...most of the great Shakespearean scholars are to be found in the Stratfordian camp..." Kathman, David (2003). "The Question of Authorship". In Wells, Stanley; Orlin, Lena Cowen (eds.). Shakespeare: an Oxford Guide. Oxford Guides. Oxford University Press. pp. 620–32. ISBN 978-0-19-924522-2. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2. Paster, Gail Kern (April 1999). "The Sweet Swan" (subscription required). Harper's Magazine. pp. 38–41. Retrieved 2 March 2011. Nelson, Alan H. (2004). "Stratford Si! Essex No!". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 149–69. ISSN 0040-3288. Carroll, D. Allen (2004). "Reading the 1592 Groatsworth Attack on Shakespeare". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 277–94. ISSN 0040-3288. Pendleton, Thomas A. (1994). "Irvin Matus's Shakespeare, IN FACT". Shakespeare Newsletter. 44 (Summer). University of Illinois at Chicago: 21, 26–30. ISSN 0037-3214. Sutherland, John; Watts, Cedric T. (2000). Henry V, War Criminal?: and Other Shakespeare Puzzles. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-283879-7. Retrieved 16 February 2011. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.

heinonline.org

Elliott & Valenza 2004, p. 331. Elliott, Ward E. Y.; Valenza, Robert J. (2004). "Oxford by the Numbers: What Are the Odds That the Earl of Oxford Could Have Written Shakespeare's Poems and Plays?". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 323–452. ISSN 0040-3288. Retrieved 2 March 2011.

illinois.edu

durer.press.illinois.edu

Baldwin 1944, p. 464. Baldwin, T. W. (1944). William Shakespere's Small Latine & Lesse Greeke. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. OCLC 654144828. Archived from the original on 3 March 2012. Retrieved 2 April 2012.
Baldwin 1944, pp. 164–84; Cressy 1975, pp. 28–9; Thompson 1958, p. 24; Quennell 1963, p. 18. Baldwin, T. W. (1944). William Shakespere's Small Latine & Lesse Greeke. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. OCLC 654144828. Archived from the original on 3 March 2012. Retrieved 2 April 2012. Cressy, David (1975). Education in Tudor and Stuart England. Documents of modern history. St. Martin's Press. ISBN 978-0-7131-5817-5. Thompson, Craig R. (1958). Schools in Tudor England. Washington, D. C.: Folger Shakespeare Library. Quennell, Peter (1963). Shakespeare: The Poet and His Background. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. OCLC 19662775.

jstor.org

Crinkley 1985, p. 517. Crinkley, Richmond (1985). "New Perspectives on the Authorship Question". Shakespeare Quarterly. 36 (4). Folger Shakespeare Library: 515–22. doi:10.2307/2870328. ISSN 1538-3555. JSTOR 2870328.
Price 2001, pp. 213–7, 262; Crinkley 1985, p. 517: "It is characteristic of anti-Stratfordian books that they make a list of what Shakespeare must have been—a courtier, a lawyer, a traveler in Italy, a classicist, a falconer, whatever. Then a candidate is selected who fits the list. Not surprisingly, different lists find different candidates." Price, Diana (2001). Shakespeare's Unorthodox Biography: New Evidence of an Authorship Problem. Greenwood Press. ISBN 978-0-313-31202-1. Crinkley, Richmond (1985). "New Perspectives on the Authorship Question". Shakespeare Quarterly. 36 (4). Folger Shakespeare Library: 515–22. doi:10.2307/2870328. ISSN 1538-3555. JSTOR 2870328.
Dawson 1953, p. 165: "...in my opinion it is the basic unsoundness of method in this and other works of similar subject matter that explains how sincere and intelligent men arrive at such wild conclusions"; Love 2002, p. 200; McCrea 2005, p. 14; Gibson 2005, p. 10. Dawson, Giles E. (1953). "Review: This Star of England. by Dorothy Ogburn; Charlton Ogburn". Shakespeare Quarterly. 4 (2). Folger Shakespeare Library: 165–70. doi:10.2307/2866177. ISSN 1538-3555. JSTOR 2866177. Love, Harold (2002). Attributing Authorship: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-78948-6. Retrieved 20 December 2010. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 254–5 (224–5); Nelson 1998, pp. 79–82. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Nelson, Alan H. (1998). "George Buc, William Shakespeare, and the Folger George a Greene". Shakespeare Quarterly. 49 (1). Folger Shakespeare Library: 74–83. doi:10.2307/2902208. ISSN 0037-3222. JSTOR 2902208.

newyorker.com

Foggatt, Tyler (29 July 2019). "Justice Stevens's Dissenting Shakespeare Theory". The New Yorker.

nytimes.com

Dobson 2001, p. 31; Greenblatt 2005: "The idea that William Shakespeare's authorship of his plays and poems is a matter of conjecture and the idea that the 'authorship controversy' be taught in the classroom are the exact equivalent of current arguments that 'intelligent design' be taught alongside evolution. In both cases an overwhelming scholarly consensus, based on a serious assessment of hard evidence, is challenged by passionately held fantasies whose adherents demand equal time." Dobson, Michael (2001). "Authorship Controversy". In Dobson, Michael; Wells, Stanley (eds.). Oxford Companion to Shakespeare. Oxford Companions to Literature. Oxford University Press. pp. 30–31. ISBN 978-0-19-811735-3. Greenblatt, Stephen (4 September 2005). "Shakespeare Doubters". The New York Times. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 246–9 (216–9); Niederkorn 2005. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Niederkorn, William S. (30 August 2005). "The Shakespeare Code, and Other Fanciful Ideas from the Traditional Camp". The New York Times. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Niederkorn 2007. Niederkorn, William S. (22 April 2007). "Shakespeare Reaffirmed". The New York Times. Retrieved 20 December 2010.

pbs.org

Wadsworth 1958, pp. 163–4; Murphy 1964, p. 4: "For the evidence that William Shakespeare of Stratford-on-Avon (1564–1616) wrote the works attributed to him is not only abundant but conclusive. It is of the kind, as Sir Edmund Chambers puts it, 'which is ordinarily accepted as determining the authorship of early literature.'"; Nelson 2004, p. 149: "Even the most partisan anti-Stratfordian or Oxfordian agrees that documentary evidence taken on its face value supports the case for William Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon ... as author of the poems and plays"; McCrea 2005, pp. xii–xiii, 10, Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) Murphy, William M. (1964). "Thirty-six Plays in Search of an Author". Union College Symposium. 3 (3): 4–11. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Nelson, Alan H. (2004). "Stratford Si! Essex No!". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 149–69. ISSN 0040-3288. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Murphy 1964, p. 5. Murphy, William M. (1964). "Thirty-six Plays in Search of an Author". Union College Symposium. 3 (3): 4–11. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Hoffman 1960, pp. vii–ix. Hoffman, Calvin (1960) [First published 1955]. The Murder of the Man Who Was "Shakespeare". New York: Julian Messner. Retrieved 28 February 2013.

polygon.com

Polo 2020. Polo, Susana (5 August 2020). "The newest Sandman comic is chasing the true identity of Shakespeare in the best way". Polygon. Retrieved 31 May 2021.

prestel.co.uk

www2.prestel.co.uk

Webster 1923, pp. 81–6; Wadsworth 1958, p. 155. Webster, Archie W. (September 1923). "Was Marlowe the Man?". National Review. Vol. LXXXII. pp. 81–86. Archived from the original on 2 October 2010. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)

semanticscholar.org

api.semanticscholar.org

Craig 2011, pp. 58–60. Craig, Hugh (2011). "Shakespeare's Vocabulary: Myth and Reality". Shakespeare Quarterly. 62 (1). Johns Hopkins University Press: 53–74. doi:10.1353/shq.2011.0002. ISSN 1538-3555. S2CID 192242159.
Simonton 2004, p. 203. Simonton, Dean Keith (2004). "Thematic Content and Political Context in Shakespeare's Dramatic Output, with Implications for Authorship and Chronology Controversies". Empirical Studies of the Arts. 22 (2). Baywood Publishing: 201–13. doi:10.2190/EQDP-MK0K-DFCK-MA8F. ISSN 1541-4493. S2CID 143289651.
Simonton 2004, p. 210: "If the Earl of Oxford wrote these plays, then he not only displayed minimal stylistic development over the course of his career (Elliot & Valenza, 2000), but he also wrote in monastic isolation from the key events of his day." Simonton, Dean Keith (2004). "Thematic Content and Political Context in Shakespeare's Dramatic Output, with Implications for Authorship and Chronology Controversies". Empirical Studies of the Arts. 22 (2). Baywood Publishing: 201–13. doi:10.2190/EQDP-MK0K-DFCK-MA8F. ISSN 1541-4493. S2CID 143289651.
Simonton 2004, p. 210, note 4: "For the record, I find the traditional attribution to William Shakespeare of Stratford highly improbable ... I really would like Edward de Vere to be the author of the plays and poems ... Thus, I had hoped that the current study might strengthen the case on behalf of the Oxfordian attribution. I think that expectation was proven wrong." Simonton, Dean Keith (2004). "Thematic Content and Political Context in Shakespeare's Dramatic Output, with Implications for Authorship and Chronology Controversies". Empirical Studies of the Arts. 22 (2). Baywood Publishing: 201–13. doi:10.2190/EQDP-MK0K-DFCK-MA8F. ISSN 1541-4493. S2CID 143289651.
Glazener 2007, p. 331. Glazener, Nancy (Summer 2007). "Print Culture as an Archive of Dissent: Or, Delia Bacon and the Case of the Missing Hamlet". American Literary History. 19 (2). Oxford University Press: 329–49. doi:10.1093/alh/ajm009. S2CID 145277884.

shakespeareauthorship.com

Kathman (1). Kathman (1), David. "The Spelling and Pronunciation of Shakespeare's Name". The Shakespeare Authorship Page. David Kathman and Terry Ross. Retrieved 17 December 2010.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
Saunders 1951, pp. 139–64; May 1980, p. 11; May 2007, p. 61. Saunders, J. W. (April 1951). "The Stigma of Print: A Note on the Social Bases of Tudor Poetry". Essays in Criticism. 1 (2). Oxford University Press: 139–64. doi:10.1093/eic/I.2.139. ISSN 1471-6852. May, Steven W. (1980). "Tudor Aristocrats and the Mythical "Stigma of Print"". In Deneef, Leigh A.; Hester, Thomas M. (eds.). Renaissance Papers. Vol. 1993. Southeastern Renaissance Conference. pp. 11–18. Retrieved 2 March 2011. May, Steven W. (2007). "Early Courtier Verse: Oxford, Dyer, and Gascoigne". In Cheney, Patrick; Hadfield, Andrew; Sullivan, Jr., Garrett A. (eds.). Early Modern English Poetry: A Critical Companion. Oxford University Press. pp. 60–67. ISBN 978-0-19-515387-3.
Kathman (3); McMichael & Glenn 1962, p. 41. Kathman (3), David. "Seventeenth-century References to Shakespeare's Stratford Monument". The Shakespeare Authorship Page. David Kathman and Terry Ross. Retrieved 17 December 2010.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link) McMichael, George L.; Glenn, Edgar M. (1962). Shakespeare and His Rivals: A Casebook on the Authorship Controversy. Odyssey Press. OCLC 2113359.
Kathman (2). Kathman (2), David. "Shakespeare's Will". The Shakespeare Authorship Page. David Kathman and Terry Ross. Retrieved 17 December 2010.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
Kathman (4). Kathman (4), David. "Why I Am Not an Oxfordian". The Shakespeare Authorship Page. David Kathman and Terry Ross. Retrieved 8 February 2010.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
Ross (Oxfordian Myths). Ross, Terry. "Oxfordian Myths: The Oxford Anagram in Minerva Britanna". The Shakespeare Authorship Page. David Kathman and Terry Ross. Retrieved 17 December 2010.
May 1980, pp. 8–. May, Steven W. (1980). "Tudor Aristocrats and the Mythical "Stigma of Print"". In Deneef, Leigh A.; Hester, Thomas M. (eds.). Renaissance Papers. Vol. 1993. Southeastern Renaissance Conference. pp. 11–18. Retrieved 2 March 2011.

sourcetext.com

Ogburn & Ogburn 1952. Ogburn, Charlton; Ogburn, Dorothy (1952). This Star of England. New York: Coward-McCann. OCLC 359186. Archived from the original on 17 July 2011. Retrieved 16 December 2010.

spectator.co.uk

blogs.spectator.co.uk

Steerpike (1 May 2014). "The great Shakespeare authorship question". The Spectator. Archived from the original on 2 October 2019. Retrieved 1 October 2019.

telegraph.co.uk

Singh 2024. Singh, Anita (25 May 2024). "Shakespeare's plays were written by a woman, says Jodi Picoult". The Daily Telegraph. ISSN 0307-1235. Retrieved 26 May 2024.

theatlantic.com

Shipley 1943, pp. 37–8; Bethell 1991, pp. 48, 50; Schoone-Jongen 2008, p. 5; Smith 2008, p. 622: "Fuelled by scepticism that the plays could have been written by a working man from a provincial town with no record of university education, foreign travel, legal studies or court preferment, the controversialists proposed instead a sequence of mainly aristocratic alternative authors whose philosophically or politically occult meanings, along with their own true identity, had to be hidden in codes, cryptograms and runic obscurity." Shipley, Joseph T., ed. (1943). "Anti-Shakespeare Theories". Dictionary of World Literature (1st ed.). New York: Philosophical Library. pp. 37–38. OCLC 607784195. Retrieved 2 March 2011. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010. Schoone-Jongen, Terence G. (2008). Shakespeare's Companies: William Shakespeare's Early Career and the Acting Companies, 1577–1594. Studies in Performance and Early Modern Drama. Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7546-6434-5. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Smith, Emma (2008). "The Shakespeare Authorship Debate Revisited". Literature Compass. 5 (April). Blackwell Publishing: 618–32. doi:10.1111/j.1741-4113.2008.00549.x.
Bethell 1991, p. 56. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Bethell 1991, p. 48. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Price 2001, p. 157; Matus 1991, p. 201. Price, Diana (2001). Shakespeare's Unorthodox Biography: New Evidence of an Authorship Problem. Greenwood Press. ISBN 978-0-313-31202-1. Matus, Irvin L. (October 1991). "The Case for Shakespeare". Atlantic Monthly. Vol. 268, no. 4. pp. 64–72. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Bethell 1991, p. 47; Gibson 2005, pp. 48, 72, 124; Kathman 2003, p. 620; Schoenbaum 1991, pp. 430–40; Shapiro 2010, pp. 229–49 (202–19). Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Kathman, David (2003). "The Question of Authorship". In Wells, Stanley; Orlin, Lena Cowen (eds.). Shakespeare: an Oxford Guide. Oxford Guides. Oxford University Press. pp. 620–32. ISBN 978-0-19-924522-2. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Bethell 1991. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Matus 1991. Matus, Irvin L. (October 1991). "The Case for Shakespeare". Atlantic Monthly. Vol. 268, no. 4. pp. 64–72. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Bethell 1991, pp. 46, 47, 50, 53, 56, 58, 75, 78. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Bethell 1991, p. 47. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Bethell 1991, p. 61. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.

theguardian.com

Dugdale 2016; Low 2018. Dugdale, John (28 October 2016). "How close were Marlowe and Shakespeare?". The Guardian. Retrieved 31 May 2021. Low, Valentine (11 September 2018). "Mark Rylance ridiculed by upstarts over comedy of errors". The Times. Retrieved 31 May 2021.

thestage.co.uk

Smith 2011. Smith, Alistair (1 September 2011). "Shakespeare Birthplace Trust launches authorship campaign". The Stage. Retrieved 13 May 2011.

thetimes.com

Dugdale 2016; Low 2018. Dugdale, John (28 October 2016). "How close were Marlowe and Shakespeare?". The Guardian. Retrieved 31 May 2021. Low, Valentine (11 September 2018). "Mark Rylance ridiculed by upstarts over comedy of errors". The Times. Retrieved 31 May 2021.

web.archive.org

Steerpike (1 May 2014). "The great Shakespeare authorship question". The Spectator. Archived from the original on 2 October 2019. Retrieved 1 October 2019.
Baldwin 1944, p. 464. Baldwin, T. W. (1944). William Shakespere's Small Latine & Lesse Greeke. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. OCLC 654144828. Archived from the original on 3 March 2012. Retrieved 2 April 2012.
Baldwin 1944, pp. 164–84; Cressy 1975, pp. 28–9; Thompson 1958, p. 24; Quennell 1963, p. 18. Baldwin, T. W. (1944). William Shakespere's Small Latine & Lesse Greeke. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. OCLC 654144828. Archived from the original on 3 March 2012. Retrieved 2 April 2012. Cressy, David (1975). Education in Tudor and Stuart England. Documents of modern history. St. Martin's Press. ISBN 978-0-7131-5817-5. Thompson, Craig R. (1958). Schools in Tudor England. Washington, D. C.: Folger Shakespeare Library. Quennell, Peter (1963). Shakespeare: The Poet and His Background. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. OCLC 19662775.
Webster 1923, pp. 81–6; Wadsworth 1958, p. 155. Webster, Archie W. (September 1923). "Was Marlowe the Man?". National Review. Vol. LXXXII. pp. 81–86. Archived from the original on 2 October 2010. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
Ogburn & Ogburn 1952. Ogburn, Charlton; Ogburn, Dorothy (1952). This Star of England. New York: Coward-McCann. OCLC 359186. Archived from the original on 17 July 2011. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Syme 2011 Syme, Holger (19 September 2011). "People Being Stupid About Shakesp... or Someone Else". Dispositio. Archived from the original on 2 February 2014. Retrieved 4 February 2012.
Edmondson & Wells 2011 Edmondson, Paul; Wells, Stanley (2011). Shakespeare Bites Back. The Shakespeare Birthplace Trust. Archived from the original on 22 December 2014. Retrieved 26 June 2013.

worldcat.org

search.worldcat.org

Prescott 2010, p. 273: "'Anti-Stratfordian' is the collective name for the belief that someone other than the man from Stratford wrote the plays commonly attributed to him."; McMichael & Glenn 1962, p. 56. Prescott, Paul (2010). "Shakespeare in Popular Culture". In De Grazia, Margreta; Wells, Stanley (eds.). The New Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare. Cambridge University Press. pp. 269–84. ISBN 978-0-521-71393-1. McMichael, George L.; Glenn, Edgar M. (1962). Shakespeare and His Rivals: A Casebook on the Authorship Controversy. Odyssey Press. OCLC 2113359.
Kathman 2003, p. 621: "...antiStratfordism has remained a fringe belief system"; Schoenbaum 1991, p. 450; Paster 1999, p. 38: "To ask me about the authorship question ... is like asking a palaeontologist to debate a creationist's account of the fossil record."; Nelson 2004, pp. 149–51: "I do not know of a single professor of the 1,300-member Shakespeare Association of America who questions the identity of Shakespeare ... antagonism to the authorship debate from within the profession is so great that it would be as difficult for a professed Oxfordian to be hired in the first place, much less gain tenure..."; Carroll 2004, pp. 278–9: "I have never met anyone in an academic position like mine, in the Establishment, who entertained the slightest doubt as to Shakespeare's authorship of the general body of plays attributed to him."; Pendleton 1994, p. 21: "Shakespeareans sometimes take the position that to even engage the Oxfordian hypothesis is to give it a countenance it does not warrant."; Sutherland & Watts 2000, p. 7: "There is, it should be noted, no academic Shakespearian of any standing who goes along with the Oxfordian theory."; Gibson 2005, p. 30: "...most of the great Shakespearean scholars are to be found in the Stratfordian camp..." Kathman, David (2003). "The Question of Authorship". In Wells, Stanley; Orlin, Lena Cowen (eds.). Shakespeare: an Oxford Guide. Oxford Guides. Oxford University Press. pp. 620–32. ISBN 978-0-19-924522-2. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2. Paster, Gail Kern (April 1999). "The Sweet Swan" (subscription required). Harper's Magazine. pp. 38–41. Retrieved 2 March 2011. Nelson, Alan H. (2004). "Stratford Si! Essex No!". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 149–69. ISSN 0040-3288. Carroll, D. Allen (2004). "Reading the 1592 Groatsworth Attack on Shakespeare". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 277–94. ISSN 0040-3288. Pendleton, Thomas A. (1994). "Irvin Matus's Shakespeare, IN FACT". Shakespeare Newsletter. 44 (Summer). University of Illinois at Chicago: 21, 26–30. ISSN 0037-3214. Sutherland, John; Watts, Cedric T. (2000). Henry V, War Criminal?: and Other Shakespeare Puzzles. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-283879-7. Retrieved 16 February 2011. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Bate 1998, p. 73; Hastings 1959, p. 486; Wadsworth 1958, pp. 8–16; McCrea 2005, p. 13; Kathman 2003, p. 622. Bate, Jonathan (1998). The Genius of Shakespeare. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-512823-9. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Hastings, William T. (1959). "Shakspere Was Shakespeare". The American Scholar. 28. Phi Beta Kappa Society: 479–88. ISSN 0003-0937. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Kathman, David (2003). "The Question of Authorship". In Wells, Stanley; Orlin, Lena Cowen (eds.). Shakespeare: an Oxford Guide. Oxford Guides. Oxford University Press. pp. 620–32. ISBN 978-0-19-924522-2.
Gross 2010, p. 39. Gross, John (March 2010). "Denying Shakespeare" (subscription required). Commentary. 129 (3). Commentary: 38–44. ISSN 0010-2601. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Wadsworth 1958, pp. 163–4: "The reasons we have for believing that William Shakespeare of Stratford-on-Avon wrote the plays and poems are the same as the reasons we have for believing any other historical event ... the historical evidence says that William Shakespeare wrote the plays and poems."; McCrea 2005, pp. xii–xiii, 10; Nelson 2004, p. 162: "Apart from the First Folio, the documentary evidence for William Shakespeare is the same as we get for other writers of the period..." Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Nelson, Alan H. (2004). "Stratford Si! Essex No!". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 149–69. ISSN 0040-3288.
Bate 1998, p. 73: "No one in Shakespeare's lifetime or the first two hundred years after his death expressed the slightest doubt about his authorship."; Hastings 1959, pp. 486–8: "...no suspicions regarding Shakespeare's authorship (except for a few mainly humorous comments) were expressed until the middle of the nineteenth century". Bate, Jonathan (1998). The Genius of Shakespeare. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-512823-9. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Hastings, William T. (1959). "Shakspere Was Shakespeare". The American Scholar. 28. Phi Beta Kappa Society: 479–88. ISSN 0003-0937.
Wells 2003, p. 388; Dobson 2001, p. 31: "Most observers, however, have been more impressed by the anti-Stratfordians' dogged immunity to documentary evidence"; Shipley 1943, p. 38: "the challenger would still need to produce evidence in favour of another author. There is no such evidence."; Love 2002, p. 198: "...those who believe that other authors were responsible for the canon as a whole ... have been forced to invoke elaborate conspiracy theories."; Wadsworth 1958, p. 6: "Paradoxically, the skeptics invariably substitute for the easily explained lack of evidence concerning William Shakespeare, the more troublesome picture of a vast conspiracy of silence about the 'real author', with a total lack of historical evidence for the existence of this 'real author' explained on the grounds of a secret pact"; Shapiro 2010, p. 255 (225): "Some suppose that only Shakespeare and the real author were in the know. At the other extreme are those who believe that it was an open secret". Wells, Stanley (2003). Shakespeare: For All Time. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-516093-2. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Dobson, Michael (2001). "Authorship Controversy". In Dobson, Michael; Wells, Stanley (eds.). Oxford Companion to Shakespeare. Oxford Companions to Literature. Oxford University Press. pp. 30–31. ISBN 978-0-19-811735-3. Shipley, Joseph T., ed. (1943). "Anti-Shakespeare Theories". Dictionary of World Literature (1st ed.). New York: Philosophical Library. pp. 37–38. OCLC 607784195. Retrieved 2 March 2011. Love, Harold (2002). Attributing Authorship: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-78948-6. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Shipley 1943, pp. 37–8; Bethell 1991, pp. 48, 50; Schoone-Jongen 2008, p. 5; Smith 2008, p. 622: "Fuelled by scepticism that the plays could have been written by a working man from a provincial town with no record of university education, foreign travel, legal studies or court preferment, the controversialists proposed instead a sequence of mainly aristocratic alternative authors whose philosophically or politically occult meanings, along with their own true identity, had to be hidden in codes, cryptograms and runic obscurity." Shipley, Joseph T., ed. (1943). "Anti-Shakespeare Theories". Dictionary of World Literature (1st ed.). New York: Philosophical Library. pp. 37–38. OCLC 607784195. Retrieved 2 March 2011. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010. Schoone-Jongen, Terence G. (2008). Shakespeare's Companies: William Shakespeare's Early Career and the Acting Companies, 1577–1594. Studies in Performance and Early Modern Drama. Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7546-6434-5. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Smith, Emma (2008). "The Shakespeare Authorship Debate Revisited". Literature Compass. 5 (April). Blackwell Publishing: 618–32. doi:10.1111/j.1741-4113.2008.00549.x.
Nelson 2004, p. 149: "The Shakespeare authorship debate is a classic instance of a controversy that draws its very breath from a fundamental disagreement over the nature of admissible evidence."; McCrea 2005, pp. 165, 217–8; Shapiro 2010, pp. 8, 48, 112–3, 235, 298 (8, 44, 100, 207, 264). Nelson, Alan H. (2004). "Stratford Si! Essex No!". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 149–69. ISSN 0040-3288. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Wadsworth 1958, pp. 163–4; McCrea 2005, pp. xii–xiii, 10; Nelson 2004, p. 149. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Nelson, Alan H. (2004). "Stratford Si! Essex No!". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 149–69. ISSN 0040-3288.
Crinkley 1985, p. 517. Crinkley, Richmond (1985). "New Perspectives on the Authorship Question". Shakespeare Quarterly. 36 (4). Folger Shakespeare Library: 515–22. doi:10.2307/2870328. ISSN 1538-3555. JSTOR 2870328.
Price 2001, pp. 213–7, 262; Crinkley 1985, p. 517: "It is characteristic of anti-Stratfordian books that they make a list of what Shakespeare must have been—a courtier, a lawyer, a traveler in Italy, a classicist, a falconer, whatever. Then a candidate is selected who fits the list. Not surprisingly, different lists find different candidates." Price, Diana (2001). Shakespeare's Unorthodox Biography: New Evidence of an Authorship Problem. Greenwood Press. ISBN 978-0-313-31202-1. Crinkley, Richmond (1985). "New Perspectives on the Authorship Question". Shakespeare Quarterly. 36 (4). Folger Shakespeare Library: 515–22. doi:10.2307/2870328. ISSN 1538-3555. JSTOR 2870328.
Bethell 1991, p. 56. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Baldwin 1944, p. 464. Baldwin, T. W. (1944). William Shakespere's Small Latine & Lesse Greeke. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. OCLC 654144828. Archived from the original on 3 March 2012. Retrieved 2 April 2012.
Baldwin 1944, pp. 164–84; Cressy 1975, pp. 28–9; Thompson 1958, p. 24; Quennell 1963, p. 18. Baldwin, T. W. (1944). William Shakespere's Small Latine & Lesse Greeke. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. OCLC 654144828. Archived from the original on 3 March 2012. Retrieved 2 April 2012. Cressy, David (1975). Education in Tudor and Stuart England. Documents of modern history. St. Martin's Press. ISBN 978-0-7131-5817-5. Thompson, Craig R. (1958). Schools in Tudor England. Washington, D. C.: Folger Shakespeare Library. Quennell, Peter (1963). Shakespeare: The Poet and His Background. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. OCLC 19662775.
Honan 2000, pp. 49–51; Halliday 1962, pp. 41–9; Rowse 1963, pp. 36–44. Honan, Park (2000). Shakespeare: A Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-282527-8. Halliday, Frank E. (1962). The Life of Shakespeare. Penguin Books. OCLC 353820. Rowse, A. L. (1963). William Shakespeare: A Biography. New York: Harper & Row. OCLC 352856.
Bethell 1991, p. 48. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Nelson 2004, p. 164: "...most anti-Stratfordians claim that he was not even literate. They present his six surviving signatures as proof." Nelson, Alan H. (2004). "Stratford Si! Essex No!". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 149–69. ISSN 0040-3288.
Saunders 1951, pp. 139–64; May 1980, p. 11; May 2007, p. 61. Saunders, J. W. (April 1951). "The Stigma of Print: A Note on the Social Bases of Tudor Poetry". Essays in Criticism. 1 (2). Oxford University Press: 139–64. doi:10.1093/eic/I.2.139. ISSN 1471-6852. May, Steven W. (1980). "Tudor Aristocrats and the Mythical "Stigma of Print"". In Deneef, Leigh A.; Hester, Thomas M. (eds.). Renaissance Papers. Vol. 1993. Southeastern Renaissance Conference. pp. 11–18. Retrieved 2 March 2011. May, Steven W. (2007). "Early Courtier Verse: Oxford, Dyer, and Gascoigne". In Cheney, Patrick; Hadfield, Andrew; Sullivan, Jr., Garrett A. (eds.). Early Modern English Poetry: A Critical Companion. Oxford University Press. pp. 60–67. ISBN 978-0-19-515387-3.
Price 2001, p. 157; Matus 1991, p. 201. Price, Diana (2001). Shakespeare's Unorthodox Biography: New Evidence of an Authorship Problem. Greenwood Press. ISBN 978-0-313-31202-1. Matus, Irvin L. (October 1991). "The Case for Shakespeare". Atlantic Monthly. Vol. 268, no. 4. pp. 64–72. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Montague 1963, pp. 123–4. Montague, William Kelly (1963). The Man of Stratford – The Real Shakespeare. Vantage Press. OCLC 681431.
Wadsworth 1958, pp. 163–4; Murphy 1964, p. 4: "For the evidence that William Shakespeare of Stratford-on-Avon (1564–1616) wrote the works attributed to him is not only abundant but conclusive. It is of the kind, as Sir Edmund Chambers puts it, 'which is ordinarily accepted as determining the authorship of early literature.'"; Nelson 2004, p. 149: "Even the most partisan anti-Stratfordian or Oxfordian agrees that documentary evidence taken on its face value supports the case for William Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon ... as author of the poems and plays"; McCrea 2005, pp. xii–xiii, 10, Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) Murphy, William M. (1964). "Thirty-six Plays in Search of an Author". Union College Symposium. 3 (3): 4–11. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Nelson, Alan H. (2004). "Stratford Si! Essex No!". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 149–69. ISSN 0040-3288. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Shipley 1943, pp. 37–8, Shipley, Joseph T., ed. (1943). "Anti-Shakespeare Theories". Dictionary of World Literature (1st ed.). New York: Philosophical Library. pp. 37–38. OCLC 607784195. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Dawson 1953, p. 165: "...in my opinion it is the basic unsoundness of method in this and other works of similar subject matter that explains how sincere and intelligent men arrive at such wild conclusions"; Love 2002, p. 200; McCrea 2005, p. 14; Gibson 2005, p. 10. Dawson, Giles E. (1953). "Review: This Star of England. by Dorothy Ogburn; Charlton Ogburn". Shakespeare Quarterly. 4 (2). Folger Shakespeare Library: 165–70. doi:10.2307/2866177. ISSN 1538-3555. JSTOR 2866177. Love, Harold (2002). Attributing Authorship: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-78948-6. Retrieved 20 December 2010. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Bate 1963, pp. 259–60; Morita 1980, pp. 22–3. Bate, Walter Jackson (1963). John Keats. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. OCLC 291522. Morita, Sōhei (1980). Natsume Sōseki, 3 vols. Vol. 1. Kōdansha Gakujutsu Bunko. OCLC 39729914.
Martin 1965, p. 131. Martin, Milward W. (1965). Was Shakespeare Shakespeare? A Lawyer Reviews the Evidence. New York: Cooper Square Press. OCLC 909641.
Martin 1965, p. 135. Martin, Milward W. (1965). Was Shakespeare Shakespeare? A Lawyer Reviews the Evidence. New York: Cooper Square Press. OCLC 909641.
Montague 1963, pp. 93–4; Loomis 2002, p. 83. Montague, William Kelly (1963). The Man of Stratford – The Real Shakespeare. Vantage Press. OCLC 681431. Loomis, Catherine, ed. (2002). William Shakespeare: A Documentary Volume. Dictionary of Literary Biography. Vol. 263. Detroit: Gale Group. ISBN 978-0-7876-6007-9. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Loomis 2002, p. 85; Montague 1963, pp. 93–4. Loomis, Catherine, ed. (2002). William Shakespeare: A Documentary Volume. Dictionary of Literary Biography. Vol. 263. Detroit: Gale Group. ISBN 978-0-7876-6007-9. Retrieved 2 March 2011. Montague, William Kelly (1963). The Man of Stratford – The Real Shakespeare. Vantage Press. OCLC 681431.
Montague 1963, pp. 71, 75. Montague, William Kelly (1963). The Man of Stratford – The Real Shakespeare. Vantage Press. OCLC 681431.
Montague 1963, p. 71; Loomis 2002, p. 104. Montague, William Kelly (1963). The Man of Stratford – The Real Shakespeare. Vantage Press. OCLC 681431. Loomis, Catherine, ed. (2002). William Shakespeare: A Documentary Volume. Dictionary of Literary Biography. Vol. 263. Detroit: Gale Group. ISBN 978-0-7876-6007-9. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Montague 1963, p. 71; Loomis 2002, p. 174. Montague, William Kelly (1963). The Man of Stratford – The Real Shakespeare. Vantage Press. OCLC 681431. Loomis, Catherine, ed. (2002). William Shakespeare: A Documentary Volume. Dictionary of Literary Biography. Vol. 263. Detroit: Gale Group. ISBN 978-0-7876-6007-9. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Montague 1963, p. 98; Loomis 2002, p. 233. Montague, William Kelly (1963). The Man of Stratford – The Real Shakespeare. Vantage Press. OCLC 681431. Loomis, Catherine, ed. (2002). William Shakespeare: A Documentary Volume. Dictionary of Literary Biography. Vol. 263. Detroit: Gale Group. ISBN 978-0-7876-6007-9. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Montague 1963, pp. 77–8. Montague, William Kelly (1963). The Man of Stratford – The Real Shakespeare. Vantage Press. OCLC 681431.
Nelson 2004, p. 155: "Throughout the First Folio, the author is called 'Mr.' or 'Maister,' a title exactly appropriate to the social rank of William Shakespeare." Nelson, Alan H. (2004). "Stratford Si! Essex No!". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 149–69. ISSN 0040-3288.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 254–5 (224–5); Nelson 1998, pp. 79–82. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Nelson, Alan H. (1998). "George Buc, William Shakespeare, and the Folger George a Greene". Shakespeare Quarterly. 49 (1). Folger Shakespeare Library: 74–83. doi:10.2307/2902208. ISSN 0037-3222. JSTOR 2902208.
Pendleton 1994, p. 29: "...since he had, as Clarenceux King, responded less than three years earlier to Brooke's attack on the grant of arms to the father of 'Shakespeare ye Player' ... Camden thus was aware that the last name on his list was that of William Shakespeare of Stratford. The Camden reference, therefore, is exactly what the Oxfordians insist does not exist: an identification by a knowledgeable and universally respected contemporary that 'the Stratford man' was a writer of sufficient distinction to be ranked with (if after) Sidney, Spenser, Daniel, Holland, Jonson, Campion, Drayton, Chapman, and Marston. And the identification even fulfils the eccentric Oxfordian ground-rule that it be earlier than 1616." Pendleton, Thomas A. (1994). "Irvin Matus's Shakespeare, IN FACT". Shakespeare Newsletter. 44 (Summer). University of Illinois at Chicago: 21, 26–30. ISSN 0037-3214.
McCrea 2005, p. 191; Montague 1963, p. 97. McCrea, Scott (2005). The Case for Shakespeare: The End of the Authorship Question. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-275-98527-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Montague, William Kelly (1963). The Man of Stratford – The Real Shakespeare. Vantage Press. OCLC 681431.
Kathman (3); McMichael & Glenn 1962, p. 41. Kathman (3), David. "Seventeenth-century References to Shakespeare's Stratford Monument". The Shakespeare Authorship Page. David Kathman and Terry Ross. Retrieved 17 December 2010.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link) McMichael, George L.; Glenn, Edgar M. (1962). Shakespeare and His Rivals: A Casebook on the Authorship Controversy. Odyssey Press. OCLC 2113359.
Price 1997, pp. 168, 173: "While Hollar conveyed the general impressions suggested by Dugdale's sketch, few of the details were transmitted with accuracy. Indeed, Dugdale's sketch gave Hollar few details to work with ... As with other sketches in his collection, Dugdale made no attempt to draw a facial likeness, but appears to have sketched one of his standard faces to depict a man with facial hair. Consequently, Hollar invented the facial features for Shakespeare. The conclusion is obvious: in the absence of an accurate and detailed model, Hollar freely improvised his image of Shakespeare's monument. That improvisation is what disqualifies the engraving's value as authoritative evidence." Price, Diana (1997). "Reconsidering Shakespeare's Monument". The Review of English Studies. 48 (190). Oxford University Press: 168–82. doi:10.1093/res/XLVIII.190.168. ISSN 1471-6968.
Johnson 1969, p. 78. Johnson, Samuel (1969). "Preface". In Wimsatt, William Kurtz Jr. (ed.). Dr. Johnson on Shakespeare. Penguin Shakespeare Library. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. pp. 57–143. OCLC 251954782.
Craig 2011, pp. 58–60. Craig, Hugh (2011). "Shakespeare's Vocabulary: Myth and Reality". Shakespeare Quarterly. 62 (1). Johns Hopkins University Press: 53–74. doi:10.1353/shq.2011.0002. ISSN 1538-3555. S2CID 192242159.
Elliott & Valenza 2004, p. 331. Elliott, Ward E. Y.; Valenza, Robert J. (2004). "Oxford by the Numbers: What Are the Odds That the Earl of Oxford Could Have Written Shakespeare's Poems and Plays?". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 323–452. ISSN 0040-3288. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
Simonton 2004, p. 203. Simonton, Dean Keith (2004). "Thematic Content and Political Context in Shakespeare's Dramatic Output, with Implications for Authorship and Chronology Controversies". Empirical Studies of the Arts. 22 (2). Baywood Publishing: 201–13. doi:10.2190/EQDP-MK0K-DFCK-MA8F. ISSN 1541-4493. S2CID 143289651.
Simonton 2004, p. 210: "If the Earl of Oxford wrote these plays, then he not only displayed minimal stylistic development over the course of his career (Elliot & Valenza, 2000), but he also wrote in monastic isolation from the key events of his day." Simonton, Dean Keith (2004). "Thematic Content and Political Context in Shakespeare's Dramatic Output, with Implications for Authorship and Chronology Controversies". Empirical Studies of the Arts. 22 (2). Baywood Publishing: 201–13. doi:10.2190/EQDP-MK0K-DFCK-MA8F. ISSN 1541-4493. S2CID 143289651.
Simonton 2004, p. 210, note 4: "For the record, I find the traditional attribution to William Shakespeare of Stratford highly improbable ... I really would like Edward de Vere to be the author of the plays and poems ... Thus, I had hoped that the current study might strengthen the case on behalf of the Oxfordian attribution. I think that expectation was proven wrong." Simonton, Dean Keith (2004). "Thematic Content and Political Context in Shakespeare's Dramatic Output, with Implications for Authorship and Chronology Controversies". Empirical Studies of the Arts. 22 (2). Baywood Publishing: 201–13. doi:10.2190/EQDP-MK0K-DFCK-MA8F. ISSN 1541-4493. S2CID 143289651.
Friedman & Friedman 1957, pp. 1–4 quoted in McMichael & Glenn 1962, p. 56; Wadsworth 1958, p. 10. Friedman, William F.; Friedman, Elizebeth S. (1957). The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-05040-1. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) McMichael, George L.; Glenn, Edgar M. (1962). Shakespeare and His Rivals: A Casebook on the Authorship Controversy. Odyssey Press. OCLC 2113359. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
Gross 2010, p. 40; Shapiro 2010, pp. 86–9 (76–9). Gross, John (March 2010). "Denying Shakespeare" (subscription required). Commentary. 129 (3). Commentary: 38–44. ISSN 0010-2601. Retrieved 2 March 2011. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Halliday 1957, p. 176. Halliday, Frank E. (1957). The Cult of Shakespeare. Duckworth. OCLC 394225.
McMichael & Glenn 1962, p. 199; Wadsworth 1958, pp. 74–5; Niederkorn 2004, pp. 82–5. McMichael, George L.; Glenn, Edgar M. (1962). Shakespeare and His Rivals: A Casebook on the Authorship Controversy. Odyssey Press. OCLC 2113359. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) Niederkorn, William S. (2004). "Jumping O'er Times: The Importance of Lawyers and Judges in the Controversy over the Identity of Shakespeare, as Reflected in the Pages of the New York Times". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 67–92. ISSN 0040-3288.
Schoenbaum 1991, p. 446; Zeigler 1895, pp. v–xi. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2. Zeigler, Wilbur Gleason (1895). It Was Marlowe: A Story of the Secret of Three Centuries. Donohue & Henneberry. OCLC 228707660. Retrieved 13 December 2010.
Chandler 1994 Chandler, David (June 1994). "Marlowe: A Hoax by William Taylor". Notes and Queries. 41 (2). Oxford University Press: 220–22. doi:10.1093/nq/41-2-220. ISSN 0029-3970.
Greenwood 1908; Wadsworth 1958, pp. 99–100. Greenwood, George (1908). The Shakespeare Problem Restated. London: John Lane. OCLC 65308100. Retrieved 13 December 2010. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
Robertson 1913; Vickers 2005. Robertson, John M. (1913). The Baconian Heresy: A Confutation. London: H. Jenkins. OCLC 2480195. Retrieved 13 December 2010. Vickers, Brian (19 August 2005). "Idle Worship". Times Literary Supplement. No. 5342. p. 6.
May 2004, p. 222. May, Steven W. (2004). "The Seventeenth Earl of Oxford as Poet and Playwright". Tennessee Law Review. 72 (1). Tennessee Law Review Association: 221–54. ISSN 0040-3288.
Nicoll 1932, p. 128. Nicoll, Allardyce (25 February 1932). "The First Baconian". Times Literary Supplement. No. 1569. p. 128. ISSN 0307-661X.
Ogburn & Ogburn 1952. Ogburn, Charlton; Ogburn, Dorothy (1952). This Star of England. New York: Coward-McCann. OCLC 359186. Archived from the original on 17 July 2011. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Bethell 1991, p. 47; Gibson 2005, pp. 48, 72, 124; Kathman 2003, p. 620; Schoenbaum 1991, pp. 430–40; Shapiro 2010, pp. 229–49 (202–19). Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010. Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Kathman, David (2003). "The Question of Authorship". In Wells, Stanley; Orlin, Lena Cowen (eds.). Shakespeare: an Oxford Guide. Oxford Guides. Oxford University Press. pp. 620–32. ISBN 978-0-19-924522-2. Schoenbaum, S. (1991). Shakespeare's Lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-818618-2. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Bethell 1991. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Matus 1991. Matus, Irvin L. (October 1991). "The Case for Shakespeare". Atlantic Monthly. Vol. 268, no. 4. pp. 64–72. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Shapiro 2010, pp. 119–20 (105–6); Halliday 1957, p. 175. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011. Halliday, Frank E. (1957). The Cult of Shakespeare. Duckworth. OCLC 394225.
Wadsworth 1958, p. 41; Gibson 2005, pp. 151–71; Halliday 1957, p. 177. Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) Gibson, H. N. (2005) [1962]. The Shakespeare Claimants. Routledge Library Editions – Shakespeare. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-35290-1. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Halliday, Frank E. (1957). The Cult of Shakespeare. Duckworth. OCLC 394225.
Halliday 1957, p. 174. Halliday, Frank E. (1957). The Cult of Shakespeare. Duckworth. OCLC 394225.
Halliday 1957, p. 176 note. Halliday, Frank E. (1957). The Cult of Shakespeare. Duckworth. OCLC 394225.
Bethell 1991, pp. 46, 47, 50, 53, 56, 58, 75, 78. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Wadsworth 1958, p. 121; McMichael & Glenn 1962, p. 159; Shapiro 2010, p. 239 (210). Wadsworth, Frank (1958). The Poacher from Stratford: A Partial Account of the Controversy over the Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01311-7. Retrieved 28 January 2011. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) McMichael, George L.; Glenn, Edgar M. (1962). Shakespeare and His Rivals: A Casebook on the Authorship Controversy. Odyssey Press. OCLC 2113359. Shapiro, James (2010). Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?. US edition: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-4162-2. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
Bethell 1991, p. 47. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Bethell 1991, p. 61. Bethell, Tom (October 1991). "The Case for Oxford (and Reply)". Atlantic Monthly. 268 (4): 45–61, 74–78. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
Lefranc 1918–19, pp. 2, 87–199; Wilson 1969, p. 128; Londré 1997, p. 327. Lefranc, Abel (1918–19). Sous le masque de "William Shakespeare": William Stanley, Vie comte de Derby. Paris: Payot & cie. OCLC 501970. Wilson, J. Dover, ed. (1969) [First published 1923]. Love's Labour's Lost. The Cambridge Dover Wilson Shakespeare (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-07542-8. Retrieved 20 December 2010. Londré, Felicia Hardison (1997). "Elizabethan Views of the 'Other': French, Spanish and Russians in Love's Labour's Lost". In Londré, Felicia Hardison (ed.). Love's Labour's Lost: Critical Essays. Shakespeare Criticism. Vol. 13. Routledge. pp. 325–43. ISBN 978-0-8153-0984-0. Retrieved 20 December 2010.
Morgan 2019 Morgan, Amanda (2019). "WhatsHisFace". Children's Book and Media Review. 40 (12). ISSN 2572-4479. Retrieved 2 September 2024.
Singh 2024. Singh, Anita (25 May 2024). "Shakespeare's plays were written by a woman, says Jodi Picoult". The Daily Telegraph. ISSN 0307-1235. Retrieved 26 May 2024.