> Well, be that as it may. the issue here is evidence
> and historical method. The evidence is absolutely
> overwhelming that WS wrote the plays attributed to
> him, and Bacon or Marlowe or whoever did not. This
> sisn't a question of religious faith. It's not that
> you can choose who you like as the real WS because
> there is a shortage of evidence. There is a deluge of
> evidence and it all points the same way. If you reject
> WS's authorship of his plays, you have suspended
> historical judgment.
Not something I claim much knowledge of but if the evidence is so overwhelming how to explain the abundance of scholarly work questioning authorship? Seems odd to say the least.
John Thornton