Bardolatry and early doubt Despite adulatory tributes attached to his works, Shakespeare was not considered the world's greatest writer in the century and a half following his death. His reputation was that of a good playwright and poet among many others of his era.
Beaumont and Fletcher's plays dominated popular taste after the theatres reopened in the
Restoration Era in 1660, with Ben Jonson's and Shakespeare's plays vying for second place. After the actor
David Garrick mounted the
Shakespeare Stratford Jubilee in 1769, Shakespeare led the field. Excluding a handful of minor 18th-century
satirical and
allegorical references, there was no suggestion in this period that anyone else might have written the works. By the beginning of the 19th century, adulation was in full swing, with Shakespeare singled out as a transcendent genius, a phenomenon for which
George Bernard Shaw coined the term "
bardolatry" in 1901. By the middle of the century his genius was noted as much for its intellectual as for its imaginative strength. The framework with which early 19th century thinkers imagined the English Renaissance focused on kings, courtiers, and university-educated poets; in this context, the idea that someone of Shakespeare's comparatively humble background could produce such works became increasingly unacceptable. The rise of
historical criticism, which challenged the authorial unity of
Homer's
epics and the historicity of the
Bible, also fuelled emerging puzzlement over Shakespeare's authorship, which in one critic's view was "an accident waiting to happen".
David Strauss's investigation of
the biography of Jesus, which shocked the public with its scepticism of the historical accuracy of the Gospels, influenced the secular debate about Shakespeare. In 1848,
Samuel Mosheim Schmucker endeavoured to rebut Strauss's doubts about the
historicity of Christ by applying the same techniques satirically to the records of Shakespeare's life in his
Historic Doubts Respecting Shakespeare, Illustrating Infidel Objections Against the Bible. Schmucker, who never doubted that Shakespeare was Shakespeare, unwittingly anticipated and rehearsed many of the arguments later offered for alternative authorship candidates.
Open dissent and the first alternative candidate was the first writer to formulate a comprehensive theory that Shakespeare was not the writer of the works attributed to him. Shakespeare's authorship was first openly questioned in the pages of
Joseph C. Hart's
The Romance of Yachting (1848). Hart argued that the plays contained evidence that many different authors had worked on them. Four years later Dr. Robert W. Jameson anonymously published "Who Wrote Shakespeare?" in the ''
Chambers's Edinburgh Journal'', expressing similar views. In 1856
Delia Bacon's unsigned article "William Shakspeare and His Plays; An Enquiry Concerning Them" appeared in ''
Putnam's Magazine''. As early as 1845, Ohio-born Delia Bacon had theorised that the plays attributed to Shakespeare were actually written by a group under the leadership of Sir Francis Bacon, with
Walter Raleigh as the main writer. Their purpose was to inculcate an advanced political and philosophical system for which they themselves could not publicly assume responsibility. She argued that Shakespeare's commercial success precluded his writing plays so concerned with philosophical and political issues, and that if he had, he would have overseen the publication of his plays in his retirement. Francis Bacon was the first single alternative author proposed in print, by William Henry Smith, in a pamphlet published in September 1856 (''Was Lord Bacon the Author of Shakspeare's Plays? A Letter to Lord Ellesmere
). The following year Delia Bacon published a book outlining her theory: The Philosophy of the Plays of Shakspere Unfolded
. Ten years later, Nathaniel Holmes published the 600-page The Authorship of Shakespeare'' supporting Smith's theory, and the idea began to spread widely. By 1884 the question had produced more than 250 books, and Smith asserted that the war against the Shakespeare hegemony had almost been won by the
Baconians after a 30-year battle. Two years later the Francis Bacon Society was founded in England to promote the theory. The society still survives and publishes a journal,
Baconiana, to further its mission. These arguments against Shakespeare's authorship were answered by academics. In 1857 the English critic
George Henry Townsend published
William Shakespeare Not an Impostor, criticising what he called the slovenly scholarship, false premises, specious parallel passages, and erroneous conclusions of the earliest proponents of alternative authorship candidates.
Search for proof constructed a "cipher wheel" that he used to search for hidden
ciphers he believed Francis Bacon had left in
Shakespeare's works. In 1853, with the help of Ralph Waldo Emerson, Delia Bacon travelled to England to search for evidence to support her theories. Instead of performing archival research, she sought to unearth buried manuscripts, and unsuccessfully tried to persuade a caretaker to open Bacon's tomb. She believed she had deciphered instructions in Bacon's letters to look beneath Shakespeare's Stratford gravestone for papers that would prove the works were Bacon's, but after spending several nights in the
chancel trying to summon the requisite courage, she left without prising up the stone slab. Ciphers became important to the Baconian theory, as they would later to the advocacy of other authorship candidates, with books such as
Ignatius L. Donnelly's
The Great Cryptogram (1888) promoting the approach. Dr.
Orville Ward Owen constructed a "cipher wheel", a 1,000-foot strip of canvas on which he had pasted the works of Shakespeare and other writers and mounted on two parallel wheels so he could quickly collate pages with key words as he turned them for decryption. In his multi-volume ''Sir Francis Bacon's Cipher Story'' (1893), he claimed to have discovered Bacon's autobiography embedded in Shakespeare's plays, including the revelation that Bacon was the secret son of Queen Elizabeth, thus providing more motivation to conceal his authorship from the public. In 1916, Judge Richard Tuthill presided over a real trial in Chicago. A film producer brought an action against a Baconian advocate,
George Fabyan. He argued that Fabyan's advocacy of Bacon threatened the profits expected from a forthcoming film about Shakespeare. The judge determined that ciphers identified by Fabyan's analysts proved that Francis Bacon was the author of the Shakespeare canon, awarding Fabyan $5,000 in damages. In the ensuing uproar, Tuthill rescinded his decision, and another judge, Frederick A. Smith, dismissed the case. In 1907, Owen claimed he had decoded instructions revealing that a box containing proof of Bacon's authorship had been buried in the
River Wye near
Chepstow Castle on the
Duke of Beaufort's property. His dredging machinery failed to retrieve any concealed manuscripts. That same year his former assistant,
Elizabeth Wells Gallup, financed by George Fabyan, likewise travelled to England. She believed she had decoded a message, by means of a
biliteral cipher, revealing that Bacon's secret manuscripts were hidden behind panels in
Canonbury Tower in
Islington. None were found. Two years later, the American humorist
Mark Twain publicly revealed his long-held anti-Stratfordian belief in
Is Shakespeare Dead? (1909), favouring Bacon as the true author. In the 1920s
Walter Conrad Arensberg became convinced that Bacon had willed the key to his cipher to the
Rosicrucians. He thought this society was still active, and that its members communicated with each under the aegis of the Church of England. On the basis of cryptograms he detected in the sixpenny tickets of admission to Holy Trinity Church in Stratford-upon-Avon, he deduced that both Bacon and his mother were secretly buried, together with the original manuscripts of Shakespeare's plays, in the Lichfield
Chapter house in
Staffordshire. He unsuccessfully petitioned the
Dean of Lichfield to allow him both to photograph and excavate the obscure grave. Maria Bauer was convinced that Bacon's manuscripts had been imported into
Jamestown, Virginia, in 1653, and could be found in the Bruton Vault at
Williamsburg. She gained permission in the late 1930s to excavate, but authorities quickly withdrew her permit. In 1938 Roderick Eagle was allowed to open the tomb of
Edmund Spenser to search for proof that Bacon was Shakespeare, but found only some old bones.
Other candidates emerge By the end of the 19th century other candidates had begun to receive attention. In 1895
Wilbur G. Zeigler, an attorney, published the novel
It Was Marlowe: A Story of the Secret of Three Centuries, whose premise was that Christopher Marlowe did not die in 1593, but rather survived to write Shakespeare's plays. He was followed by
Thomas Corwin Mendenhall who, in the February 1902 issue of
Current Literature, wrote an article based upon his stylometric work titled "Did Marlowe write Shakespeare?"
Karl Bleibtreu, a German literary critic, advanced the nomination of
Roger Manners, 5th Earl of Rutland, in 1907. Rutland's candidacy enjoyed a brief flowering, supported by a number of other authors over the next few years. Anti-Stratfordians unaffiliated to any specific authorship candidate also began to appear.
George Greenwood, a British barrister, sought to disqualify William Shakespeare from the authorship in
The Shakespeare Problem Restated (1908) but did not support any alternative authors, thereby encouraging the search for candidates other than Bacon.
John M. Robertson published
The Baconian Heresy: A Confutation in 1913, refuting the contention that Shakespeare had expert legal knowledge by showing that legalisms pervaded Elizabethan and Jacobean literature. In 1916, on the three-hundredth anniversary of Shakespeare's death,
Henry Watterson, the long-time editor of
The Courier-Journal, wrote a widely syndicated front-page feature story supporting the Marlovian theory and, like Zeigler, created a fictional account of how it might have happened. After the First World War, Professor
Abel Lefranc, an authority on French and English literature, argued the case for William Stanley, 6th Earl of Derby, as the author based on biographical evidence he had gleaned from the plays and poems. 's
Shakespeare Identified (1920) made Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford, the top authorship claimant. With the appearance of
J. Thomas Looney's
Shakespeare Identified (1920), Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford, quickly ascended as the most popular alternative author. Two years later Looney and Greenwood founded the
Shakespeare Fellowship, an international organisation to promote discussion and debate on the authorship question, which later changed its mission to propagate the Oxfordian theory. In 1923 Archie Webster published "Was Marlowe the Man?" in
The National Review, like Zeigler, Mendenhall and Watterson proposing that Marlowe wrote the works of Shakespeare, and arguing in particular that the Sonnets were an autobiographical account of his survival. In 1932
Allardyce Nicoll announced the discovery of a manuscript that appeared to establish
James Wilmot as the earliest proponent of Bacon's authorship, but recent investigations have identified the manuscript as a forgery probably designed to revive Baconian theory in the face of Oxford's ascendancy. Another authorship candidate emerged in 1943 when writer
Alden Brooks, in his ''Will Shakspere and the Dyer's hand'', argued for Sir
Edward Dyer. Six years earlier Brooks had dismissed Shakespeare as the playwright by proposing that his role in the deception was to act as an Elizabethan "play broker",
brokering the plays and poems on behalf of his various principals, the real authors. This view, of Shakespeare as a commercial go-between, was later adapted by Oxfordians. After the Second World War, Oxfordism and anti-Stratfordism declined in popularity and visibility. Copious archival research had failed to confirm Oxford or anyone else as the true author, and publishers lost interest in books advancing the same theories based on alleged circumstantial evidence. To bridge the evidentiary gap, both Oxfordians and Baconians began to argue that hidden clues and allusions in the Shakespeare canon had been placed there by their candidate for the benefit of future researchers. To revive interest in Oxford, in 1952 Dorothy and
Charlton Ogburn Sr. published the 1,300-page
This Star of England, now regarded as a classic Oxfordian text. They proposed that the "fair youth" of the sonnets was
Henry Wriothesley, 3rd Earl of Southampton, the offspring of a love affair between Oxford and the Queen, and that the "Shakespeare" plays were written by Oxford to memorialise the passion of that affair. This became known as the "
Prince Tudor theory", which postulates that the Queen's illicit offspring and his father's authorship of the Shakespeare canon were covered up as an Elizabethan state secret. The Ogburns found many parallels between Oxford's life and the works, particularly in
Hamlet, which they characterised as "straight biography". A brief upsurge of enthusiasm ensued, resulting in the establishment of the Shakespeare Oxford Society in the US in 1957. In 1955 Broadway press agent
Calvin Hoffman revived the Marlovian theory with the publication of
The Murder of the Man Who Was "Shakespeare". The next year he went to England to search for documentary evidence about Marlowe that he thought might be buried in his literary patron
Sir Thomas Walsingham's tomb. Nothing was found. A series of critical academic books and articles held in check any appreciable growth of anti-Stratfordism, as academics attacked its results and its methodology as unscholarly. American
cryptologists William and
Elizebeth Friedman won the
Folger Shakespeare Library Literary Prize in 1955 for a study of the arguments that the works of Shakespeare contain hidden ciphers. The study disproved all claims that the works contain ciphers, and was condensed and published as
The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined (1957). Soon after, four major works were issued surveying the history of the anti-Stratfordian phenomenon from a mainstream perspective:
The Poacher from Stratford (1958), by
Frank Wadsworth,
Shakespeare and His Betters (1958), by Reginald Churchill,
The Shakespeare Claimants (1962), by H. N. Gibson, and
Shakespeare and His Rivals: A Casebook on the Authorship Controversy (1962), by George L. McMichael and Edgar M. Glenn. In 1959 the
American Bar Association Journal published a series of articles and letters on the authorship controversy, later anthologised as
Shakespeare Cross-Examination (1961). In 1968 the newsletter of The Shakespeare Oxford Society reported that "the missionary or evangelical spirit of most of our members seems to be at a low ebb, dormant, or non-existent". In 1974, membership in the society stood at 80.
Authorship in the mainstream media The freelance writer
Charlton Ogburn Jr., elected president of The Shakespeare Oxford Society in 1976, promptly began a campaign to bypass the academic establishment; he believed it to be an "entrenched authority" that aimed to "outlaw and silence dissent in a supposedly free society". He proposed fighting for public recognition by portraying Oxford as a candidate on equal footing with Shakespeare. In 1984 Ogburn published his 900-page
The Mysterious William Shakespeare: the Myth and the Reality, and by framing the issue as one of fairness in the atmosphere of conspiracy that permeated America after
Watergate, he used the media to circumnavigate academia and appeal directly to the public. Ogburn's efforts secured Oxford as the most popular alternative candidate. He also kick-started the modern revival of the Oxfordian movement by adopting a policy of seeking publicity through moot court trials, media debates, television, and other outlets. These methods were later extended to the Internet, including
Wikipedia. 's
Minerva Britanna (1612) has been used by Baconians and Oxfordians alike as coded evidence for concealed authorship of the Shakespeare canon. Ogburn believed that academics were best challenged by recourse to law, and on 25 September 1987 three
justices of the
Supreme Court of the United States convened a one-day
moot court at the
Metropolitan Memorial United Methodist Church, to hear the Oxfordian case. The trial was structured so that literary experts would not be represented, but the burden of proof was on the Oxfordians. The justices determined that the case was based on a conspiracy theory and that the reasons given for this conspiracy were both incoherent and unpersuasive. Although Ogburn took the verdict as a "clear defeat", Oxfordian columnist
Joseph Sobran thought the trial had effectively dismissed any other Shakespeare authorship contender from the public mind and provided legitimacy for Oxford. A retrial was organised the next year in the United Kingdom to potentially reverse the decision. Presided over by three
Law Lords, the court was held in the
Inner Temple in London on 26 November 1988. On this occasion Shakespearean scholars argued their case, and the outcome confirmed the American verdict. Due in part to the rising visibility of the authorship question, media coverage of the controversy increased, with many outlets focusing on the
Oxfordian theory. In 1989 the
Public Broadcasting Service television show
Frontline broadcast "The Shakespeare Mystery", exposing the interpretation of Oxford-as-Shakespeare to more than 3.5 million viewers in the US alone. This was followed in 1992 by a three-hour
Frontline teleconference, "Uncovering Shakespeare: an Update", moderated by
William F. Buckley, Jr. In 1991
The Atlantic Monthly published a debate between Tom Bethell, presenting the case for Oxford, and
Irvin Leigh Matus, presenting the case for Shakespeare. A similar print debate took place in 1999 in ''
Harper's Magazine'' under the title "The Ghost of Shakespeare". Beginning in the 1990s Oxfordians and other anti-Stratfordians increasingly turned to the Internet to promulgate their theories, including creating several articles on Wikipedia about the candidates and the arguments, to such an extent that a survey of the field in 2010 judged that its presence on Wikipedia "puts to shame anything that ever appeared in standard resources". On 14 April 2007 the Shakespeare Authorship Coalition issued an
Internet petition, the
"Declaration of Reasonable Doubt About the Identity of William Shakespeare", coinciding with
Brunel University's announcement of a one-year Master of Arts programme in Shakespeare authorship studies (since suspended). The coalition intended to enlist broad public support so that by 2016, the 400th anniversary of Shakespeare's death, the academic Shakespeare establishment would be forced to acknowledge that legitimate grounds for doubting Shakespeare's authorship exist, a goal that was not successful. More than 1,200 signatures were collected by the end of 2007, and as of 23 April 2016, the 400th anniversary of Shakespeare's death and the self-imposed deadline, the document had been signed by 3,348 people, including 573 self-described current and former academics. On 22 April 2007,
The New York Times published a survey of 265 American Shakespeare professors on the Shakespeare authorship question. To the question of whether there is good reason to question Shakespeare's authorship, 6 per cent answered "yes", and 11 percent "possibly". When asked their opinion of the topic, 61 per cent chose "A theory without convincing evidence" and 32 per cent chose "A waste of time and classroom distraction". In 2010
James S. Shapiro surveyed the authorship question in
Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare? Approaching the subject sociologically, Shapiro found its origins to be grounded in a vein of traditional scholarship going back to
Edmond Malone, and criticised academia for ignoring the topic, which was, he argued, tantamount to surrendering the field to anti-Stratfordians. Shapiro links the revival of the Oxfordian movement to the cultural changes that followed the
Watergate conspiracy scandal that increased the willingness of the public to believe in governmental conspiracies and cover-ups, and Robert Sawyer suggests that the increased presence of anti-Stratfordian ideas in popular culture can be attributed to the proliferation of
conspiracy theories since the
9/11 attacks. In September 2011,
Anonymous, a feature film based on the
"Prince Tudor" variant of the Oxfordian theory, written by
John Orloff and directed by
Roland Emmerich, premiered at the
Toronto International Film Festival. De Vere is portrayed as a literary
prodigy who becomes the lover of
Queen Elizabeth, with whom he sires Henry Wriothesley, 3rd Earl of Southampton, only to discover that he himself may be the Queen's son by an earlier lover. He eventually sees his suppressed plays performed through the front man, William Shakespeare, who is portrayed as an opportunistic actor and the movie's comic foil. Oxford agrees to Elizabeth's demand that he remain anonymous as part of a bargain for saving their son from execution as a traitor for supporting the
Essex Rebellion against her. Two months before the release of the film, the
Shakespeare Birthplace Trust launched a campaign attacking anti-Stratfordian arguments by means of a web site,
60 Minutes With Shakespeare: Who Was William Shakespeare?, containing short audio contributions recorded by actors, scholars and other celebrities, which was quickly followed by a rebuttal from the Shakespeare Authorship Coalition. Since then, Paul Edmondson and
Stanley Wells have written a short e-book,
Shakespeare Bites Back (2011), and edited a longer book of essays by prominent academic Shakespeareans,
Shakespeare Beyond Doubt (2013), in which Edmondson says that they had "decided to lead the Shakespeare Authorship Campaign because we thought more questions would be asked by our visitors and students because of
Anonymous, because we saw, and continue to see, something very wrong with the way doubts about Shakespeare's authorship are being given academic credibility by the Universities of Concordia and Brunel, and because we felt that merely ignoring the anti-Shakespearians was inappropriate at a time when their popular voice was likely to be gaining more ground". ==Alternative candidates==