'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

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

1 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.

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.

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

1 Comment

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

7 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

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

5 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

13 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