 |
 |
Ta, dave!!! But, as far as I can see, the documents refer to Shakespeare as (possibly the principal) player, not as writer. Or have I missed something? I seem to remember somewhere a reference to Thomas Heywood as the principal writer for a company, followed by the principal actor., which would parallel a Shakespeare/Burbage sequence, but I still can't find that particular sequence in the documentation cited for the King's Men. The difference between *being* the principal writer, and being named as such. If Shakespeare is anywhere *documented* as "the principal writer [sic]" for KJVI&I's Men, that surely would be A Really Big Deal, Best, Robin (Incidentally, your emails are ending up in my Spam folder, together with any emails which include material quoted from your [full] posts -- as I just found out when I tried to send the original version of this! Something to do with the stuff following your sig., I think. R.) > On 20 January 2017 at 16:55 David Bircumshaw > <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > http://www.shakespearedocumented.org/exhibition/document/account-master-great-wardrobe-recording-issue-red-cloth-shakespeare-and-his > http://www.shakespearedocumented.org/exhibition/document/account-master-great-wardrobe-recording-issue-red-cloth-shakespeare-and-his > > > http://www.shakespearedocumented.org/exhibition/document/king-james-establishes-kings-men-warrant-under-privy-seal > http://www.shakespearedocumented.org/exhibition/document/king-james-establishes-kings-men-warrant-under-privy-seal > > > http://www.shakespearedocumented.org/exhibition/document/king-james-establishes-kings-men-warrant-under-signet-seal > http://www.shakespearedocumented.org/exhibition/document/king-james-establishes-kings-men-warrant-under-signet-seal > > On 20 January 2017 at 12:46, Robin Hamilton > <[log in to unmask] mailto:[log in to unmask] > > wrote: > > > > > > dave, could you expand on this: > > > > > > > In all but one of the lists of the Kin's Men > > > > > in WS's life his name is first, followed by Burbage. > > > > > Burbage is there as principal actor, WS as principal > > > > > writer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... especially, "WS as principal writer". > > > > How many lists? Where? I'm intrigued, but I can't seem to find any > > examples on the Web. > > > > Robin. > > > > [I'd have responded sooner, but I thought I could track it down. No > > luck ... :-( R.] > > > > ----------------------------------- > > > > > > > On 16 January 2017 at 20:49, David Bircumshaw > > > > > <[log in to unmask] > > > > > mailto:[log in to unmask] > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Ok then lets take a look at this > > > > > > > article. > > > > > > > > Paragraph 1 : "For four hundred years there has been a > > > > question about the authorship of the Shakespearean works." > > > > > > > > No, there hasn't. Apart from a sniffy eighteenth century > > > > parson the Question never became prominent until the advent of Delia > > > > Bacon. > > > > > > > > "the problem is that William Shakespeare, the man from > > > > Stratford-upon-Avon, was not acknowledged as a writer in any > > > > documentation of the time." > > > > > > > > Yes he was, from Francis Meres on there are explicit > > > > identifications of Shakespeare as a writer. > > > > > > > > "There is no evidence he was ever present in the royal > > > > court, where most of the plays take place." There are records of the > > > > King's Men being present at the Court, ample documentation of the plays > > > > at court and lists of the players in the Royal Household records > > > > (alongside the pantry staff) with Shakespeare at their head. > > > > > > > > "There is no evidence that anyone noticed when he died." > > > > Except for the First Folio. > > > > > > > > "There are no records from anyone in which Shakespeare > > > > is personally referred to as a writer (read the contemporary mentions of > > > > William Shakespeare carefully—the works are referred to, not the man)." > > > > > > > > Apart from Ben Jonson, Hemming, Condell etc etc. One > > > > might also mention Milton, who, though only 7 when WS died, had no doubt > > > > about his authorship and wrote a poem for the Second Folio. > > > > > > > > Literary London was even tighter and smaller than now - > > > > a deception on the scale required would not have held. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > David Joseph Bircumshaw > >