'THE GREAT DEBATE' Open To All Philosophers, Free Thinkers, Believers,...

» Home » History

'THE GREAT DEBATE' Open To All Philosophers, Free Thinkers, Believers, And Anyone Who Can Argue Convincingly, Plus Some Of The Greatest Minds In The Country Including Every Member Of This Site!

Minds of the world are invited to participate in my final debate on the true author of the Works attributed to Shakespeare. Calvin Hoffman left a huge legacy to anyone who could prove outright that Christopher Marlowe was the true author of Shakespeare's works. All, who take part in this debate, for or against, will share in this legacy should the case be proved. The starting point is Greene's Upstart Crow, beautified with our feathers. Alchemistical terms: Crow is a Prophet, (Top Poet), who remains at the top while the Lamb (RELIGION), and the Phoenix, (QUEEN ELIZABETH), RISE!

joe9

06 Jul 2008 18:15

(What's this?)

Add to Firefox

RSS

Greeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat...
Fantastic......

WHAT EXACTLY IS THE POINT OF THIS DEBATE ANYWAY????

caityjaney

27 Oct 2009 15:58

1 Comment

To educate you caityjaney!

Tomcat

27 Oct 2009 16:08

Comment

When I get bored I will always return to this debate. It has got to be the greatest debate ever! I agree 100% with the evidence exhibited within this amazing intriguing debate!...;-)

Tomcat

27 Oct 2009 15:20

Add a Comment

This is probably by far the most interesting debate on this site. I agree 100%...;-)

Methuselah

29 Jul 2009 18:25

Add a Comment

Undoutedly Christopher Marlowe was indeed the Master Poet/Dramatist who penned the entire works of Shakespeare.

LordDaniel

12 Jul 2009 13:10

4 Comments

I was always more partial to Philip Marlowe.

finsch

12 Jul 2009 14:24

Comment

A very interesting and logical debate with a great deal of analytical reasoning and evidential input on the For side, which has convinced me that Christopher Marlowe was indeed the author of: 'The Complete Works of Shakespeare'.

Dante

05 Jan 2009 15:28

Add a Comment

Probably true.

In a detective's cloak ;-) so to speak, let us examine the idea, that many a JOURNALIST - or the equivalent of such - , have at sundry times, turned Poet or Author, to pay the bills......
(case in point: Edgar Allan Poe: Journalist-cum-Poet and Astronomer).

Chris Marlowe had to pay the bills, that's why he went "Commercial" (Ghost-Writer) for Shakespeare.

This is my best Detective-Work-Summation on the whys of the authorship question of why Chris Marlowe penned Hamlet and Mcbeth.

sylverwyld

25 Nov 2008 19:27

3 Comments

It is undeniable that the whole realm of the perfectly excellent lies open to the imitations of the poet. Excellence is only an outward form, which we can call beauty, this form can be carried and expressed by our characters. A Poet is not compelled to concentrate the picture portrayed by their character into a single moment. They can take up every action portrayed by their hero at its source and pursue it to its issue through all possible variations. The greater the knowledge a poet possesses the greater their characters can become.

For example: In Marlowe's\Shakespeare's King Lear, Edmund, the bastard Count of Gloucester, is no less a villian than Richard, Duke of Gloucester, in King Richard III. How is it, then, that the first excites our loathing so much less than the second? It is simply because when we hear the former, we listen to a devil, but see him as an angel of light; but when we listen to Richard Ill we hear a devil, and see a devil.

Christopher Marlowe's motto on his portrait reads: 'Quod Me Nvtrit Me Destrvit' [Consumed with that which it was nourished by.] Christopher Marlowe was taught from a very early age to inflect Latin words and phrases. A great detective who takes the time to read the whole works of Shakespeare will come across evidence of how this motto has been inflected throughout the works. For example sonnet 1: line 5 the question: But thou, contracted to thine own bright eyes, the inflected motto as the answer: feed'st thy light's flame with self substantial fuel. You can now clearly see by the latter how the motto has been embellished and inflected. CHECK!

Francis I, had a similar motto 'Nutrisco et extinguo', [I nourish and extinguish]. The great founding Latin motto that gave birth to these was 'Nutrisco il buone e spengo il reo', ['I nourish the good and extinguish the bad.'

Well Done on your Detective-Work-Summation...;-)

joe9

01 Dec 2008 10:38

Comment

For example: In Marlowe's\Shakespeare's King Lear, Edmund, the bastard Count of Gloucester, is no less a villian than Richard, Duke of Gloucester, in King Richard III. How is it, then, that the first excites our loathing so much less than the second? It is simply because when we hear the former, we listen to a devil, but see him as an angel of light; but when we listen to Richard Ill we hear a devil, and see a devil.

Christopher Marlowe's motto on his portrait reads: 'Quod Me  Nvtrit Me Destrvit' [Consumed with that which it was nourished by.] Christopher Marlowe was taught from a very early age to inflect Latin words and phrases. A great detective who takes the time to read the whole works of Shakespeare will come across evidence of how this motto has been inflected throughout the works. For example sonnet 1: line 5 the question: But thou, contracted to thine own bright eyes, the inflected motto as the answer: feed'st thy light's flame with self substantial fuel. You can now clearly see by the latter how the motto has been embellished and inflected. CHECK!

Francis I, had a similar motto 'Nutrisco et extinguo', [I nourish and extinguish]. The great founding Latin motto that gave birth to these was 'Nutrisco il buone e spengo il reo', ['I nourish the good and extinguish the bad.'

Well Done on your Detective-Work-Summation...;-)

Comment

Well Done on your Detective-Work-Summation...;-)

Comment

Many great minds have reached the conclusion that William Shakespeare could not have possibly have been the author of the complete works claimed by him. Enoch Powell, educated at Trinity College, Cambridge, for instance, spent all his early years with his head buried in books. When ever he got bored he would bring up the authorship problem, it's a fascinating subject. And, very very educational, for anyone willing to delve deeply into the problem. Of all candidates Christopher Marlowe has got to be the first choice, even to the most uneducated adventurer into the realms of literature.

Endy1

24 Nov 2008 10:07

2 Comments

well, the only two works of "Shakespeare" that I have ever found even remotely interesting, are both of the same......literatural-flavour: both by whom many say, was actually penned by Christopher Marlowe:

1. Hamlet, 2. McBeth.

"to thine own self be true"..............;-)

you delightful creature you, Endy1 XOXOXOXO.

sylverwyld

25 Nov 2008 19:19

Comment

I now agree that Christopher Marlowe is a more likely candidate for the Works of Shakespeare.

This is a debate, which I found very interesting. I have always had my doubts about William Shakespeare, after studying both Marlowe and Shakespeare at school, (I always thought both works must be by the same author). However, after reading the submitted evidence both For and Against in this debate, I can only conclude that there is an intriguing mystery unravelling. I'm now convinced that Christopher Marlowe's finger-prints are all over Shakespeare's work.

JohnnyBig

19 Jul 2008 10:18

4 Comments

Christopher Marlowe was taught from a very early age how to translate, inflect, and embellish poetry. Three examples taken from Calvin Hoffman's book: Marlowe: By shallow rivers to whose falls Mellodious birds sing madrrigals. And I will make thee beds of roses, And a Thousand fragrant posies. Passionate Shepherd to his Love. However, Marlowe in his new guise as Shakespeare inflects this verse into the Merry Wives of Windsor - ACT III, SC,1'To shallow rivers, to whose falls Melodious birds sing madrigals: There will we make our beds of roses And a thousand fragrant posies. Marlowe - Tr. Ovid's Amores 'The moon sleeps with Endymion every day.' Inflected as Shakespeare: 'The moon sleeps with Endymion. Merchant of Venice-Act V, Sc 1. And one of Marlowe's most famous lines in Dr. Faustus: 'Was this the face that launched a thousand ships.' can be found inflected by Shakespeare in Troilus and Cressida Act II, Sc. 2: Whose price hath launch'd a thousand ships. The finger print evidence of Marlowe's inflected genius can be found throughout Shakespeare's work.

joe9

25 Jul 2008 17:11

Comment

Christopher Marlowe was taught from a very early age how to translate, inflect,  and embellish poetry. Three examples taken from Calvin Hoffman's book: Marlowe: By shallow rivers to whose falls Mellodious birds sing madrrigals. And I will make thee beds of roses, And a Thousand fragrant posies. Passionate Shepherd to his Love. However, Marlowe in his new guise as Shakespeare inflects this verse into the Merry Wives of Windsor - ACT III, SC,1'To shallow rivers, to whose falls Melodious birds sing madrigals: There will we make our beds of roses And a thousand fragrant posies. Marlowe - Tr. Ovid's Amores 'The moon sleeps with Endymion every day.' Inflected as Shakespeare: 'The moon sleeps with Endymion. Merchant of Venice-Act V, Sc 1. And one of Marlowe's most famous lines in Dr. Faustus: 'Was this the face that launched a thousand ships.' can be found inflected by Shakespeare in Troilus and Cressida Act II, Sc. 2: Whose price hath launch'd a thousand ships. The finger print evidence of Marlowe's inflected genius can be found throughout Shakespeare's work.

Comment

Christopher Marlowe was taught from a very early age how to translate, inflect,  and embellish poetry. Three examples taken from Calvin Hoffman's book: Marlowe: By shallow rivers to whose falls Mellodious birds sing madrrigals. And I will make thee beds of roses, And a Thousand fragrant posies. Passionate Shepherd to his Love. However, Marlowe in his new guise as Shakespeare inflects this verse into the Merry Wives of Windsor - ACT III, SC,1'To shallow rivers, to whose falls Melodious birds sing madrigals: There will we make our beds of roses And a thousand fragrant posies. Marlowe - Tr. Ovid's Amores 'The moon sleeps with Endymion every day.' Inflected as Shakespeare: 'The moon sleeps with Endymion. Merchant of Venice-Act V, Sc 1. And one of Marlowe's most famous lines in Dr. Faustus: 'Was this the face that launched a thousand ships.' can be found inflected by Shakespeare in Troilus and Cressida Act II, Sc. 2: Whose price hath launch'd a thousand ships. The finger print evidence of Marlowe's inflected genius can be found throughout Shakespeare's work.

Comment

As I have stated in 'Shakespeare was a Thief', I believe Shakespeare filched all the works attributed to him, unless the Thief's name was a nom de plume for a master university educated bard of that era. No uneducated person could have possibly written with such excellence. The man who wrote such magnificent dramas was undoubtedly a Renaissance polymath, evidentially, this is supported by the names of 200 plants, 60 birds, 85 animals in his vocabulary, also he must have had an intimate acquaintance with foreign lands, and new philosophies. He also had enough medical knowledge to set himself up as an Elizabethan doctor, and enough legal knowledge... In-addition, a mastery of languages, dialects, court manners, and the confidence to play before one of the mightiest Queen's England has ever known.

Janz6

16 Jul 2008 13:58

2 Comments

I agree entirely. Around this era there is only one man with suitable qualifications: the British Spy 'Christopher Marlowe'. Master Christopher Marlowe BA & MA. In mediaeval England the full course consisted of three subjects, which constituded the TRIVIUM, and four subjects, which constituted the QUADDRIVIUM: the TRIVIUM was grammar, logic, and rhetoric. The QUADRIVIUM was music, arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy. The master of arts was a person qualified to teach or be master of students in arts, as a doctor Marlowe was also qualified to teach theology, law, or medicine. Again there is no evidential documentation that Shakespeare even attended Grammar School, let alone University.

joe9

16 Jul 2008 14:22

Comment

I think yes

fuzzy2bear

13 Jul 2008 17:30

1 Comment

... no resins

fuzzy2bear

13 Jul 2008 17:31

Comment

Well i think harder now from the great debate I've been learning about it

markrjg

09 Jul 2008 08:13

3 Comments

WELL DONE Markrjg. It would be good to know what you have learnt so far? there's such an awful lot to take in. Have you read Hoffman's book yet? 'The Man who was Shakespeare'.

joe9

09 Jul 2008 08:37

Comment

By inventing Shakespeare, Marlowe created an altruistic action. Following a similar ploy to Ovid, (the eternity promised by our ever-living poet, in the opening gambit of the sonnets), he left his fingerprints of inflecting words, and Latin, and Greek phrases throughout his brilliant work. I believe Marlowe was beautified with the feathers, (quills) of his fellow playwrights, as Greene pointed out in his UPSTART CROW. However, he embellished everything he touched. Shakespeare was either a Thief or Marlowe's invention. Whichever, Marlowe built for himself a literary obelisk, which shall outlast time itself.

joe9

08 Jul 2008 21:04

2 Comments

"Shakespeare was either a Thief or Marlowe's invention."
Thief, no, just because i take a line that sounds cool from another person doesn't make me a thief its one line not an entire play.
Marlowes invention- quiet possibly i wont argue against that. The thing you aren't bringing into account though is maybe shakespeare was a genius and greater then marlowe? You've etched into your mind that marlowe is god and if anybody does anything as good as god or better then they either stole from god or god taught them how to do it.

Smito

13 Jul 2008 14:43

Comment

Yes true the guy wrote in mono-sylbols the rest was robbed. The folk-laws were past down and but together. You can take away the legend.

Brake

07 Jul 2008 01:40

8 Comments

The following Brake: St. Balders, Meat, Mastermov, Snipex, Smito, Finsch, Quincel, Janz, Grenache, Hidell, Muin 13, Boy2Girl 3 and Corted, along with yourself are all founding members of this debate. The new evidence I have submitted i.e. The alchemistical terminology for a Crow unlocks the Shakespeare authorship problem! And there is enough evidence submitted now by the aforementioned to win this debate. And collect the two million dollar legacy left by the late Calvin Hoffman. However, we need to prove his case in an analytical way, without fear of contradiction and within the realms of logic and pure reason. People say Shakespeare was a genius, and his work compliments this fact. However, even genius's need to get their education somewhere. Yet there is no record of Shakespeare attending school, yet alone university. So who's invention was Shakespeare's?

joe9

07 Jul 2008 06:11

Comment

The debate revolves around a couple of issues. Probably the biggest issue is the fact that the Bard was born into an illiterate family and did not receive a formal education. The second issue is that there is no documentation that supports Shakespeare himself writing all those plays - not to mention no original manuscript in Shakespeare's own handwriting existing (that we know of).

Christopher Marlowe was the equivalent of college educated. Marlowe is often named as the author who really wrote all of those plays.

Mark Twain, Orson Welles, and Charlie Chaplin are among the skeptics that believe he's a fraud. . But just saying that a couple of famous names says it's true doesn't convince me.

Some people think that Shakespeare wrote it with the help of a group, of which he was the leader of.

Ultimately, I think he wrote it himself. The evidence is too circumstantial to be trustworthy.

Homestar

23 Nov 2008 17:58

11 Comments

Thanks for your response Homestar, it was well written!!

joe9

23 Nov 2008 18:04

Comment

If this is a debate of free thinkers, one would not expect criticism for those same free thoughts: My disclaimer.

Shakespeare wrote very little of actual literary interest or value, other than perhaps Macbeth and Hamlet.

RagTatter

11 Oct 2008 02:59

1 Comment

My second motion was, is Shakespeare is a Thief? And did he possibly steal all the work from Christopher Marlowe, who deserves full credit for the work! Unless Shakespeare was Marlowe's invention which Venus and Adonis substantiates, and Shakespeare is Marlowe's pseudonym? This motin presumes the latter!

joe9

22 Nov 2008 11:33

Comment

This debate sound interesting on so-call drama of our heart, personally, where the historical proof on Christopher Marlowe's true works, where his intended plays being play in Globe Theater? Where I see it, William Shakespeare would simply adopt the works of Mr. Marlowe, and improvise to make it better. Now, show me the everlasting works of Marlowe in paper from or in history books?

P20088

25 Jul 2008 01:44

1 Comment

I'd agree with you on this point, if, you were to say: that Marlowe's development from a genius, who wrote for the elite, turned his hand to writing for the masses. Only a literary genius, with the same knowledge, style, and mastery of the quill as Christopher Marlowe, could possibly have adopted, improvised, and embellished those plays. Ben Jonson, even points out in one of his later plays, how many people in those days knew who Hero, and Leander were, or for that fact where the Hellespont was. To offer the supposition that Shakespeare simply adopted Marlowe's work, and improvised, or embellished the work of a genius is not logical. The style, and fingerprints are one in the same. Compare: 'The Jew of Malta' with 'The Merchant of Venice', or 'Edward II', with 'Richard III'. The hand that wrote these plays was obviously a literary genius, with matching source, style, and fingerprint.

joe9

25 Jul 2008 09:31

Comment

William Shakespeare isn't a fictional character. He was and still is all over Stratford Upon Avon. It is like saying Jesus didn't exist.
People try to say that too. With more than half of the world living in the 21st Century. And everything before that being B.C. There are a lot of people to convince. I am not convinced that Shakespeare didn't wright his own verses.

keepmindok

16 Jul 2008 13:06

8 Comments

Thanks for bringing the non-fictional Shakespeare to this debate table: the original bust of Shakespeare is different altogether to the one in trinity church, Stratford. The illustration, in Sir William Dugdale's Atiquities of Warwickshire, 1656, (shows an angular face with sullen cheeks). There is no quill or sheet of parchment. Shakespeare has his hands resting upon a bag of grain, showing him for what he was, a grain merchant. A theatrical manager, John Hall, replaced the original bust with the face of a self satisfied pork butcher, (as Enoch Powell described it), that we see today. It was Hall who tried to make the bust more like the original Droeshout engraving, and he also altered the text to make it seem as if the deceased had been a writer. Did Jesus exist, you better consult Hidell?

joe9

16 Jul 2008 13:28

Comment

William Shakespeare was a jerk: His comments in the taming of the shrew, so misogynistic.

And much ado about nothing: Sex not being God's greatest and divine gift is just heretical.

Only thing worth mentioning Shakespeare wrote was, "to thine own self be true'.

Other than that? Just drivel.

Scorpion

15 Jul 2008 02:19

14 Comments

Thanks for your input!

This debate's not about whether you like Shakespeare!

Here's a Guy no formal education, there's no evidential record of him even attending a grammar school, let alone a university, - (a BA & an MA is the very least education you'd need to write such drivel as you call it), - the majority however, think it is some of the most brilliant works known to us. Don't you think any school would boast about producing a genius like Shakespeare. How any learned scholar could possibly state that an illiterate grain merchant's son could have possibly written such outstanding historical dramas when not one scrap of his educational background exists completely dumbfounds the logic of reasoning.

joe9

15 Jul 2008 09:42

Comment

Thanks for your humble opinion it has been greatfully noted. They have done series upon series of brain writing tests on Shakespeare's work, and the only person of the Elizabethan era who's work is of a perfect match is Christopher Marlowe. Dr. Thomas Corwin Mendenhall, professor at the college that later became Ohio State University, who revealed more than fifty years ago that he had developed a plan of investigation whereby the identity of an author, through his writing, could scientifically be detected - and that, from a mechanical point of view, a style of composition would be uniquely individual throughout. Professor Mendenhall stated for the record: "it was from the counting and plotting the brain-writing of Christopher Marlowe compared with all the other Elizabethan playwrights, that something akin to a sensation was produced. In the characteristic curves of his plays Christopher Marlowe agrees with Shakespeare as well as Shakespeare agrees with himself. You can take a closer look at Professor Mendenhalls discovery on pages 158 to 161 of Calvin Hoffman's book 'The Man who was Shakespeare'.

Comment

Aye Scorpion, yes he did write Shakespeare's "to thine own self be true!" It is a well known fact that Christopher Marlowe was working on a play called Hamlet, with one of the best known tragic poets of the Elizabethan era, one Thomas Kyd. Many lines used in works known to be Marlowe's have been inflected into works claimed to be Shakespeares. The operative word here being inflected, (INFLECT: which Marlowe was taught to do from a very early age). EXAMPLE: Marlowe's Jew of Malta: now, gentle Ithinore, lie in my lap as opposed to Shakespeare's Hamlet: Lady, shall I lie in your lap. Marlowe's Edward II: Weep not for Mortimer, That scorns the world and as a traveller Goes to discover countries yet unknown as opposed to Shakespeare's Hamlet: The undiscovered country from whose bourn No traveller returns. Marlowe's Dr Fautus: Ugly hell gape not. Shakespeare's Hamlet: though hell itself shall gape... As I have stated Marlowe was taught to inflect lines he had translated from classic Greek and Latin Poets from a very early age... Marlowe's finger printing is evident throughout the works of Shakespeare with numerous more examples... Thank you for raising this point.

Comment

oh Joe9..............thank you so much for your INTELLIGENT well-EDUCATED, as well as THOUGHTFUL reply.

(i am listening now to Joshua Bell's virtuoso violin performance at this time while writing this to you at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ja-c1fsZd0&feature=related

Joe9,

My British-English Ancestors rise up, and thoroughly enjoy your debate input.....Thank you so very much for coming to this site.
I really appreciate talking to you you have a brain in your head, which is really very refreshing and you have the charming English manners, I really like.;-)
;-)

Now, as to the topic of Shakespeare and Marlowe:

You know, this is of a very great relief to me to know my fav quotation was not Wm. Shakespeare's work......because it would have been inconsistent: I have never been attracted to any of the playwright's other work......and wondered WHY this one, Hamlet, was excellent work, almost like another man's soul.....
do you know what I mean, Joe9? ?

Christopher Marlowe, WAS another man's soul.............:-)
(A much more BEAUTIFUL soul if you want my candid opinion).

"to thine own self be true"...........as if words penned from The Holy Bible.

Comment

Your candid opinion has been noted and greatly appreciated: "to thine ownself be true." The foundation of the King James Bible was formed at Cambridge University, and this is why you find so many extracts in Shakespeare's works. In December 1580, when he was not quite 17, Christopher Marlowe entered Corpus Christi, one of fourteen colleges that composed Cambridge University. Corpus Christi, while not a theological school in the purest sense, was a seat of learning where the religious theme predominated. Upon graduation, students were expected to become divines, especially those who like Marlowe, came from the King's school, (which was in the grounds of the Great Canterbury. Cathedral). Marlowe studied, therefore, in a university rich in prestige, and tradition. He mingled with the sons of some of England's most illustrious families. He was a poor boy in an intellectual paradise. Here were laid the seeds of Marlowe's greatness. You are right Hamlet is an excellent work, which can raise the hairs on the nape of your neck, and send exquisite tingles down your spine. - Marlowe won a scholarship to Cambridge via the Archbishop of Canterbury, Mathew Parker, his bible, called the Bishop's Bible, *i.e. The Leda Bible* was a forerunner of the King James bible. The third edition published in 1572, and so called because the decoration to the initial at the Epistle to the Hebrews is a startling and incongrous woodcut of Jupiter visiting Leda as a Swan. This, and sevaral other decorations in the New Testament of this edition, were from an edition of Ovid's Metamorphoses; they created such a storm of protest that they were never afterwards used. This is why Marlowe inflected so much of Ovid into the works of Shakespeare. I hope and wish to your own self you will always be true...;-)... Thank you for raising the aforementioned.

Comment

I would rate Keats above Poe as a Poet. However, compared to Marlowe Keats was a very minor Poet indeed:

If you study John Keats 'Endymion', i.e. Endymion in Greek Mythology is a beautiful man, sometimes said to be a King and sometimes a Shepherd, who, as he slept on Mount Latmus, so moved the cold heart of Selene, the moon Goddess, that she came down and gave him lots of hugs and kisses, and lay at his side every night. He woke the following morning to find her gone, but the dreams which she gave him were such that he begged Zues to give him immortality, and to allow him to sleep perpetually on Mount Latmus. Their Love grew from that night on...
;-) Lol

The poem portrays that the imagination of a girl or boy is healthy, and the mature imagination of a woman or a man is healthy; but there is a space of life between, in which the soul is in a ferment, the character undecided, the way of life uncertain, the ambition??? Is simply to find your perfect Soul Mate...;-)

I'm sure you will discover after reading Endymion that:
A thing of pure delectable beauty is a glamorous wonderful joy for ever. It's gorgeous amazing loveliness increases and burns fiercely nightly, increasing with every full moon: and the amazing Soul Mate relationship will never pass into nothingness...;-)

Comment

It seems clear to me that if Shakespeare did not write some or all his attributed works it was either at the behest of whoever his contributor was or because he was in fact an invented persona. Neither of which makes him a thief. Now as to who this shadowy second gunman might be, well, intellectual conceit could lead one in several directions but conclusive evidence leaves one adrift on calm seas.

finsch

08 Jul 2008 22:25

2 Comments

That's a Brilliant piece of logical deductive detective work Finsch. Probably too elementary for some one with your adept intellectual ability. You have clearly discovered that there is huge gaps in the authenticity of the Shakespeare authorship problem. As they say you can't fit a round conclusion into a square debate. With Greene's 'Groats Worth of Wit' taken care of, it is clear that the Shakespeare invention obviously occured in the introduction of Venus and Adonis. Entered in the Stationer's register on April 18th 1593. there is now no further evidence to establish Shakespeare wrote plays, poems or sonnets before this date.

We can now turn our attention to Marlowe's protrait, which bears the Latin motto "Quod me nutrit me destrut," i.e. "That which nourishes me, destroys me." This is a very rare 'Fire' motto. How strange that Marlowe's portrait was painted in 1585, yet his motto appears as line 12 of Shakespeare's sonnet numbered 73, check it out! The square debate gets bigger, and the round conclusions begin to drop a subtle clue of whom the true author of Shakespeare's work could have been, unless you now agree Shakespeare was a Thief. Only problem is it is not evidentially recorded that Shakespeare even attended school, let alone University, so how would an uneducated chap be able to translate Marlowe's motto, which was in the confines of Corpus Christi College Cambridge. Even Ben Jonson stated Shakespeare had very little Latin, and even less Greek.

joe9

09 Jul 2008 07:58

Comment

We can now turn our attention to Marlowe's protrait, which bears the Latin motto "Quod me nutrit me destrut," i.e. "That which nourishes me, destroys me." This is a very rare 'Fire' motto. How strange that Marlowe's portrait was painted in 1585, yet his motto appears as line 12 of Shakespeare's sonnet numbered 73, check it out! The square debate gets bigger, and the round conclusions begin to drop a subtle clue of whom the true author of Shakespeare's work could have been, unless you now agree Shakespeare was a Thief. Only problem is it is not evidentially recorded that Shakespeare even attended school, let alone University, so how would an uneducated chap be able to translate Marlowe's motto, which was in the confines of Corpus Christi College Cambridge. Even Ben Jonson stated Shakespeare had very little Latin, and even less Greek.

Comment

OK you have badgered me so much about me commenting upon the truth behind who really wrote Shakespeare. I say it was Shakespeare. Why the hell not. I have seen a picture of him. It seems you are wrapped up in some treasure hunt and good luck to you. If and when you claim the money come back with your castle, yacht and phat gold chains and laugh in our faces. Until then.....give it a rest.

StBalders

06 Jul 2008 21:22

21 Comments

Note you need to read the full comments of St. Balders to see the whole scenario unfolding. You could possibly be right St.! However, I know you're right about what you said about one should finish a debate once you have started it, and I have commented on that particular debate you started! Although you seem to have given up on it! I'm not on a treasure hunt. I've stated for the record I'll share whatever poke comes our way with everybody who takes part for or against. Thing is I'm not going to do all the work for you young bright sparks! I've given you the biggest clue to solving this mystery once and for all in the title. Problem is the more that get involved the less booty there is going to be. That is if the mystery gets solved. Ha, ha!! Only joking folks i've now got enough evidence in my three debates to prove my case out! Problem is when's someone going to start asking intelligent questions. I thought this was a debating site!!

joe9

06 Jul 2008 21:32

Comment

Bang! Bang! Due to the fact that I'm arguing against two or is it two and a half Snipex? I'll try to keep my opening argument as short as possible! My argument is based on two plays. Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay, centred on the Alchemist Roger Bacon's talking brass head, by the witty bohemian Robert Greene. And, Dr. Faustus by Christopher Marlowe. Marlowe was the new star of Elizabethan Theatre. Greene the old fading star, who died destitute! A close inspection of these two plays will reveal Marlowe's emerging brilliant style as supreme playwright, far outshining Greene's fading classic. Marlowe's description of Helen: ' was this the face that launched a thousand ships', clearly puts Greene's description in the shade! His bombastic Tamburlaine, (Ghengis Khan), having already smashed all box office records. Greene died not long after this on a bender of pickled herrings, and rhenish wine. However, before he died he wrote 'Groatsworth of Wit bought for a million of Repentance' in which he reputedly attacked Shakespeare, (first ever record of shakespeare's involvement in theatre, substantiated by numerous doctors and professors), including two leading authorities Doctor A.L. ROWSE of Oxford University, and Professor Samuel Schoebaum of the University of Maryland in: Shakespeare the Evidence! My point being: Greene's attack was aimed at an Upstar Crow! Did that shot hiss past both your ears? I thought Shane was a Hero? My aurgument is this: the aforementioned evidence is absolute Bull-Sh***! By the way Mr. Hidell please get your facts right Hoffman's legacy is one million pounds. You can check this out if you approach the King's School Canterbury. It's a 6k prize for a dissertation. And, furthermore I've stated for the record I'll share it with all who participate in this debate. Should Hoffman's theory be proved? And we're half way there now!!

Comment

Thank You Smito. WELL DONE! I'm glad someone's actually doing a bit of research. YOU'VE HIT THE NAIL RIGHT ON THE HEAD. For those interested, the passage in question with eplanations in brackets goes: an UPSTART CROW, (the only new Poet, Prophet or CROW as Greene expounded in alchemistical terminology, in London, pre 1592 was Christopher Marlowe, his plays had knocked Greene's off top spot) beautified with our feathers, (Probably meant Marlowe was embellishing the plays written by the quills of the university wits?) that with his tiger's heart wrapped in a player's hide [this parodied line in Henry VI, part III, comes from a powerful moment in which Henry's wife Queen Margaret, with the Duke of York her helpless prisoner, heartlessly mocks him with a handkerchief soaked in the blood of his dead son, and because of this fact Shakespearian scholars lay claim that this leaves the identification of this play in no doubt that it was Shakespeare's) supposes that he is well able to bombast out blank verse as the best of you (Hidell has made a very important statement in 'Shakespeare the Biggest Thief in History', that the only person bombasting out blank verse pre 1592, before Green's death, was Christopher Marlowe, he'd perfected the art). and being an absolute Iohanus fac totum (Jack of all trades) is in his own conceit the only Shake-scene in the country. (Shake-scene being another direct reference by the Strattfordian scholars to Shakespeare, instead of a reference to a brilliant young new playwright at the top of his profession who could Shake a scence with his bombastic blank verse).

The unravelling of the alchemistical esoteric terminology was so obvious to Christopher Marlowe, that when Henry Chettle printed Greene's UPSTART CROW... he in the aftermath received a direct complaint from Christopher Marlowe, who was by then a very important gentleman indeed.

However, Shakesperian scholars go on to quote further passages fron Green's Groatworth of wit, and in doing so in their efforts contradict their own reasoning: 'what is your profession?' said Roberto, (they state a clear disguise for Greene) 'I took you rather for a gentleman of great living; for.. by outward habit... you would be taken for a substantial man, 'so I am, where I dwell', quoth the player, reputed able at my proper cost build a windmill.. (and goes on to quote), for I was a country author, passing at a moral, for it was I that penned the Moral of man's wit, the Dialogue of Dives, and for seven years space was absolute interpreter of the puppets.

Here Doctor A.L. ROWSE, University of Oxford states, (without sound foundation),  this is a reference to where Shakespeare served his missing seven year apprenticeship, (there is absolutely no record of Shakespeare as an actor before this time). The contradiction to Dr. Rowse's flim flam is the Crow is refered to as a player, like Greene, (an OMBRE, a Playwright\Poet), well able to bombast blank verse. He is not referred to as a puppet, a common actor, who was well below the rank of gentleman in those days. Professor Schoenbaum, University of Maryland goes one step further by stating this was a direct SHAFT, pointed at Shakespeare.

With this new evidence now laid out before you, you can now clearly see that the achemistical reference to a UPSTART CROW, becoming the new Master Playwright\Poet, a position Greene had once held, i.e. Prophet at the top of his profession, while the Lamb, (RELIGION), and the Phoenix (QUEEN ELIZABETH), RISE!

Can only be in all logical, and analytical analysis, without fear of contradiction, be the new Master Poet\Playwright on the London scene at that precise moment in time, one Christopher Marlowe. Which to pardon the pun had made Robert Greene, green with envy.

Therefore, Henry V1, PART 1,2 and 3, being performed at the rose pre 1592, before Greene's death, cannot be Shakespeare's play. This rattles  the very foundation of Shakespeare's invention. I suggest you now borrow Hoffman's book from the library and see just how big a thief Shakespeare was, illustrated by how many of Marlowe's lines he inflected with his pen.

Comment

Well most of that was explaining the fight between green and marlowe in which they brought shakespeare into it without his consent. 
" in London, pre 1592 was Christopher Marlowe, his plays had knocked Greene's off top spot) beautified with our feathers, (University educated) that with his tiger's heart wrapped in a player's hide [this parodied line in Henry VI, part III, comes from a powerful moment in which Henry's wife Queen Margaret, with the Duke of York her helpless prisoner, heartlessly mocks him with a handkerchief soaked in the blood of his dead son, and because of this fact Shakespearian scholars lay claim that this leaves the identification of this play in no doubt that it was Shakespeare's" This is the closest thing to evidence in the whole thing. But as you stated "this parodied line" 
Parody-make a spoof of or make fun of 
a composition that imitates or misrepresents somebody's style, usually in a humorous way 
humorous or satirical mimicry 
We can assume that maybe shakespeare used that line as a sort of "biting his thumb" to get back at Marlowe for what they said about him. Now we cant prove that without asking shakespeare maybe he just liked how it sounded and used it but 1 line is not stealing a play. 
"for I was a country author, passing at a moral, for it was I that penned the Moral of man's wit, the Dialogue of Dives, and for seven years space was absolute interpreter of the puppets."
ahh we are back to the missing evidence of education. From this line we can assume that it was common for a playwright to take a seven year apprenticeship. "common" is not fact. 
Maybe he had a private tutor who kept no records of shakespeare. For all we know maybe marlowe was his master or greene was his master. Neither would want to admit that maybe shakespeare would surpass them one day and this could explain the close ties between the three, their focus on destroying the others reputations.
"Can only be in all logical, and analytical analysis, without fear of contradiction, the new Master Poet\Playwright on the London scene at that precise moment in time, one Christopher Marlowe. Which to pardon the pun had made Robert Greene, green with envy." i'm not sure how that's relevant to shakespeare but ok. 
I do agree though that i doubt greene would have had the ability to do such a new technique, blank verse. 
We how ever cannot assume that anything that is written in blank verse and by shakespeare is stolen from marlowe, a expert in blank verse.

Some scholars assume that after marlowes "faked" death that marlowe fled to italy and continued to write plays and had shakespeare perform them.

Shakespeare lived from 1564-1616 During this time the only transport was either by foot or by boat. The distance between rome and london is about 889 miles. With shakespeares busy schedule, performing plays for kings and queens in many different countries, is it possible for marlowe to have some how gotten plays to shakespeare and would shakespeare have had the time to train his actors and make scenes for these plays? its highly doubtable.  I am not saying that its impossible that shakespeare could have gained ideas from other playwrights but i am saying that its highly doubtable that he stole the plays from other playwrights.

"Therefore, Henry V1, PART 1,2 and 3, being performed at the rose pre 1592, before Greene's death, cannot be Shakespeare's play. This rattles the very foundation of Shakespeare's invention" Why? the only plausible evidence you provided was that one line in the play was parodied from marlowe.

Comment

Dude, Joe, you are pathetic. Get a life. Who cares THAT much about Shakespeare? What ideas an author stole hundreds of years ago doesn't make a difference in today's world.

mastermov

06 Jul 2008 20:43

29 Comments

Hey Man, a warm greetings. I'll tell you how important it is:
The Bible and the whole of enlightenment are supported and bound up in this argument. You state your case about enlightenment, and then when enlightenment is reflected back at you, you turn away, either stand your ground, or turn away. There's something inside so strong so strong! Or so the song goes! Just take a look at Hoffman's book dude if you can get hold of a copy? They're very rare these days, BIT LIKE HEN'S TEETH!! Thought you were into politics? Machiavellian a bit too strong for you? Have you ever read the Prince? There's a bit in it where the question: what animal are you? is asked. Mac's answer is half Lion, half Fox, although Lion's are very brave, and can chase away wolves, they are suseptable at falling into traps. Whereas, the fox can scent a trap, and will go a long way around it, often leading the chasing pack down raliway tunnels to face oncoming trains if you get my drift???

joe9

06 Jul 2008 20:52

Comment

Joe is seems that you aren't listening to anybody who argues against you. You focus on the few people who ever agree with you and continue to try to prove some that is mostly unprovable. The point of a debate is to prove your opponents points wrong. What you are tending to do is saying that they are wrong, without evidence, and preaching that you are right, without evidence. My example of this is the following debate: "http://www.forandagainst.com/Shakespeare_Is_The_Biggest_Fraud_In_History" . Your first comment to what i stated was "Your case is weak ! You are already stating that he plagiarized! Come on you've got to have a better argument than that to convince me! " You didn't state how he plagiarized and thus you didn't state why my case was weak.
A response you made to another person was" The bible and Shakespeare are being knocked on this site. These are the two greatest works on this planet! If you knock one then you completely disregard the other. Without God, the bible, and religious teaching in schools, morality flys out of the window. However, if you are stating you know better than God fair play. Let's hear what you've got to say! How do you know Shakespeare did good things if he is the first invention of Marlowe's reign as supreme poet of the times?" With this you completely disregarded any time before the bible was written or the idea of god occur ed. Also you gave zero evidence of how Shakespeare and the bible were relative to each other. "Without God, the bible, and religious teaching in schools, morality flys out of the window." what does that have to do with Shakespeare? Please elaborate. I mean this with no offense joe but please provide some evidence other wise you are just "preaching"

Smito

06 Jul 2008 18:31

10 Comments

A warm greetings and salutations Smito! This is not about me, i'm totally impartial. If you refer to, and fully read, (all comments), in my Shakespeare was the Biggest Fraud, and Shakespeare was a Thief debates, you will clearly see one for and one against. It is my intention to bring the mass media to this site to investigate my claims. This should in-turn create a whole lot of interest in For or Against.com. Obviously the owners of the site can close my debate down it's entirely up to them. However, the legacy of 2,000,000 dollars is genuine, and there is a prize of around six thousand quid presented by the King's School Canterbury, for a dissertation on the similarities between Shakespeare and Marlowe's work, should anyone wish to continue their enlightenment on this final debate, and post their work to compete for that particular prize. However. it was Hoffman who came very close to exposing The Biggest Thief in History. And, IF there had been computers around in his day he may well have succeeded! Maybe, you should read his book and see just how many verses of Marlowe's were inflected by Shakespeare's pen, before you state that I have no proof Shakespeare was a thief. The big prize is roughly two million dollars for any layman who can prove Hoffman's point, i'm a layman, and I'm willing to share the priZe with all who participate in this debate. I can't pronounce my Ts, As, SsS or Hs, So I can't say fairer than that can I? AND IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU CAN'T SPELL IN THIS DEBATE IT'S HARD FACTS I'M AFTER!!

joe9

06 Jul 2008 18:51

Comment

joe9: just consider the source.......;-) folks on the bottom of the intellectual-food-chain are not worthy of your attention much less any response......Hon, take your gifts and share only with those who have the capacity to grasp and understand...........the rest? all water off a duck's back ;-)

pearls before swine, to waste your valuable time on such creatures;-)

I love it that you are here, joe9: you are the most intelligent person here: if you ever left there would be no reason to try and engage conversations with the omebas..............(although there are a few others worthy of debate/attention also. the point I make is, your input ? it is needed. it is invaluable.
just you mind that now, okay?)

you have some friends in here, joe9.
we are here: let's talk.

this site can be really great !it  is all in what we as individuals make of it, and collectively it becomes really something.
I appreciate and enjoy this site. And you, belong here! period.
That about covers that, because I said so :-)
:-)

Sincerely,
Your Partner In Debate,
Scorpion.

Comment

Sign In

Sign Up?

Login and Debate!
Username:
Password:
Forgot your Password?

For and Against Recent Activity

Latest Responses

Latest Comments

2 hours ago

Gray is blah, thus satisfying no-one but is safe! The bold get color. Look at the Cat Walks! I vote against your assertion... read more...

2 hours ago

Sounds siege-like and not what life is about. You have to trust someone, to take a risk. While there are many one cannot... read more...

6 hours ago

Definately but not the best. read more...

6 hours ago

I live in northern Minnesota (USA) here there were no wolves (timber wolves) due to trapping and hunting then the state decided... read more...

7 hours ago

No way. read more...

Related Debates

	I Believe That If Hitler Was Not As Mad Then He Would Have Been The Greatest Man That Was Ever Linked...
	It Is Fact That Jesus Did Exist.
	The Moon Landings Really Happened
	People Who Say The Holocaust Never Happened Really Believe It DID Happen
	Socially, 1968 Never Ended.
	Government Is The Cause For Today's Pain
	Biggie DID NOT Kill Tupac!
	Steel Is Stronger Than Water.
	God Made The World
	Jerusalem Is The Greatest City EVER.

New Debates

	Porche 911 Turbo Is A Noticable Car On The Streets.
	Is It Creul To Leave A Pet At Home (dog)
	Is Coke The Best Cola
	Is God More Renowned Than Buda!
	Should There Be Another Major Event Created Like Christmas.
	Is Taco Bell The Best Place To Eat Tacos
	Should An Animal Get Introduced To Australia To Kill The Cane Toads.
	If You Meet An Alien It Will Suck Out Your Brains.
	Chicken Is Nice
	Should Scientists Keep Working On The Value Of Pi?