Відео

17 with 40 was also significant in medieval texts and paintings. It is associated with Platonist esoteric Christianity. I don’t think those medieval scribes and painters were identifying Edward de Vere as Shakespeare. Supposing that is what 17-40 means here is flawed methodology founded on Waugh’s assumption that it ‘obviously’ refers to Edward de Vere.

Is "rotation" the magic word, you can explain and excuse everything with? I have my doubts ...

Hello - I am here with the saddest of news. My beloved David Shakespeare MA FRCS, husband of 40 years and author of this video presentation and so many others here on UA-cam, sadly died on September 1st. He was 74. He had been fighting MDS, a form of blood cancer, for the past 2 years. He underwent chemotherapy and a stem cell transplant last year. He was beset with complications thereafter, and the last 12 months were incredibly challenging for him. He remained stoical, determined to recover, and to spend more time with his precious family. It was not to be. One of his last wishes was to be remembered. As a family of course we will never forget him. He was an amazing husband, friend and lover to me, a wonderful father to our three daughters and adored our six grandchildren. Those here reading this will know him as an enthusiastic and meticulous researcher into his areas of special interest, Queen Elizabeth 1st, Edward De Vere, and the Shakespeare authorship question. In his life before retirement and UA-cam, David was an outstanding orthopaedic surgeon, specialising in hip and knee replacement. With a career spanning over 40 years, he was highly regarded for his surgical expertise, skill and dedication to improving the lives of countless patients. He was instrumental in advancing surgical techniques and mentoring the next generation of surgeons. He was known not only for his technical excellence, but also for his compassionate approach to patient care. Colleagues, friends and patients remember him as a man of great integrity - he was all of these, but so much more to those who loved him. Thank you for reading - Jackie Shakespeare.

Love your videos, David - and for what it's worth, strongly believe that Southampton was Elizabeth's child. In respect of the idea that this portrait could possibly be her though.. what I can't see past is why - given secrecy about her private life was paramount - would she sit for a portrait at such a time? Or is the suggestion that it was commissioned by someone else? And if so, for what purpose? Intriguing..

Hey David! I reference your excellent work in my latest video, sharing in case you’d like to check it out! ua-cam.com/video/DAyQUlzxGGI/v-deo.html

I have my volume at max and I’m still struggling to hear it.

The recording is far too low. I have to place my cell phone next to my ear !

If Elizabeth’s alleged pregnancy was so scandalous it had to be kept secret, why would she commission a portrait of herself at that time/not instruct the painter to diminish the pregnant look?

Why does no one mention the slight …i don’t know what to call it. His irises do not align but he is slightly wall-eyed. Is that the term? This portrait and the authenticated miniature and the main portrait of him on the cover of various books all share this very personal trait. Seems a highly relevant detail backing the shared identity of all three sitters.

Many interesting points. But I think a better basis for the portrait has been found. Compare the matching of this “overlay” demonstration with what we see in Bonner Cutting’s presentation to the SOF m.ua-cam.com/video/wkB9vjn-nO8/v-deo.html The comparison in Bonner’s presentation is between the folio image and a painting of Susan De Vere, whose role in completing the folio may have been utterly central- connecting De Vere with Pembroke. The match in Bonner’s presentation is stunning and compelling. Maybe 500% closer (many times more accurate in overall and point by point comparison). The one here leaves a lot more to be explained.

David, consider this Hilliard for Southampton circa 1586-88. wikipedia -> Nicholas_Hilliard_008.jpg

There are two extant examples of the type of embroidered fabric seen in the robe (that I know of). One is known as the "Bacton Altar Cloth" and it is the only known example of dress fabric surviving from Queen Elizabeth I herself. The provenance is believed to be through her Lady of the Privy Chamber, Blanche Parry, through a bequest to the Bacton church, where it survived in a second life, curiously, as an altar cloth. It has many very interesting motifs, the embroidery probably having been done at two separate times, with unique themes. The other is an exquisite embroidered jacket, known as Margaret Layton's jacket, which survives in it's entirety, along with the portrait of the Lady Margaret Layton herself wearing it. Both are excellent examples of this distinctive Elizabethan/Jacobean period embroidery, with its botanical scroll-work and natural motifs. I have seen many similar examples in portraits and portrait miniatures particularly from the 1590s and 1610s. A few, one in particular I found, are extremely close to the Pregnancy portrait.

The "black stones" are diamonds. This was the artistic convention of the time--throughout the Elizabethan period, artists depicted diamonds with black (which does seem odd to our eyes--I think of them more as a white stone). I don't have a specific source for this other than I have a fine arts degree and somewhere along the line was taught this in art history.

I think the flower with the "curious, long curled petals" is intended to be a hyacinth.

Oxfordians are just elitists who cannot accept the reality of a *commoner* writing so many masterpieces of early Modern English.

Listen to Looney's audio books, 'Shakespeare Identify' who had confirmed Edward de vere is the true bard. He also stated that 3rd earl of southampton paid William Shaksper 1000 pound in 1609 to be the front man of the sonnets as nobody would associate the

Published in 1634, the 'Bridal Song' within the play Two Noble Kinsmen (by John Fletcher, whether principally or uniquely) might be construed as lending credence to this account. The second stanza commences, "Primrose, first-born child of Ver"; ostensibly a botanical reference to Spring, but we know that 'Ver' was often deployed as a version of 'Vere' and other floral references within the same verse may be 'unpicked' as representing aspects of a concealed birth.

According to J T Looney, 3rd Earl of Southampton gave William Shaksper one thousand pound in 1609 before publishing the sonnets. apparently to use him as a front man.

Interpretation: Queen Elisabeth pregnant. Loses the child in an abortion. The lover forced into silence.

'Twas grace that taught my heart to fear and grace my fears relieved.' Or, in other words, pain is pain's medicine.

Are there any writers among the descendants of Henry de Vere? Just wondering if supreme wordsmithery is heritable.

Volume is fine for me. The whole presentation was great. Thank you!

Hello David, Just a weird, mad comment here! I was watching the brilliant British (Tradgedic Comedy) 'Hancock's Half Hour' Episode - 'The Television Set'; Over the fireplace is a Lady with a long white veil...next to her is a creature with VERY SPINDERLY LEGS..Almost Animal like! What is this Prop picture a COPY FROM/OF?

Excellent

Fabulous

Fascinating

Fantastic

Hi David, I am a subscriber. I usually view your videos thru my Roku streaming device. For the past few weeks, I have been unable to see any videos listed on your channel page thru my Roku. All appears normal on my computer, tablet & phone. However, I almost always view using Roku; & my tv. My efforts to contact youtube with Roku issues always fall on deaf ears. Probably because there is literally no way to contact them for the streaming app. As the channel owner, could you please draw this to their attention? All efforts to get to your homepage are successful, but once there, not one single video is listed. I do not know if it is a result of a youtube update, sun spots or a hack. I'd very much like to see the situation resolved. Thank you!

Unlikely to be Edward De Vere. The writing analysis from works published under his name doesn’t fit. Furthermore, De Vere wasn’t exactly shy about coming forward with works published under his name which are mediocre in comparison. If De Vere had written this he would have jumped up and down to get attention. Furthermore, there was no claim that was other than Shakespeare until well after Shakespeare’s death, despite this being one of Shakespeare’s most popular works spring his life time. So the evidence doesn’t support De Vere. But just a great conspiracy yarn, good for a Sunday curled up with a hot drink and a nicely put together video:).

I think it is Arbella Stuart. She did marry. She definitely had time to get pregnant. She is alleged to have had a daughter but perhaps the daughter died young. Arbella Stuart was painted more than once. Arbella was born in 1575 and was well connected and would have been well known to Queen Elizabeth I. Queen Elizabeth encouraged others to dress as well as Queen Elizabeth I. Clearly she was wearing a beautiful dress in the painting. Arbella's father died when she was young, She married in secret to William Seymour but this marriage was not approved by the crown. She and her husband tried to leave England. They were not able to escape. She and her husband were imprisoned in the Tower of London. She died in the tower of London in 1615 - this is after Queen Elizabeth I died. So clearly she was still a threat to James I who ascended the throne after Elizabeth I died. I think the painting represents the fact that she was once pregnant during her marriage to William Seymour. It may be that the painting was created before she lost favour and was a tragic figure (a) due to her secret marriage and (b) due to her losing the one child she gave birth to. Subsequently perhaps the picture is a lesson to anyone who goes against the crown - marrying in secret to Seymour. Failing to escape England. Being imprisoned in the tower along with her husband, And finally NOT being forgiven by the King who succeeded Queen Elizabeth I.

Never mind the comments about the volume. I have a control on my headphones or just such an occurrence. Interesting developments in Lavenham recently.

Hello David, I am a grad student doing research on the era. I have come across some alternative ideas based regarding the title and symbolism of the "rainbow". Is there some way I could reach you in a private forum? Thank you.

Some 40 odd years ago my husband and I regularly walked our dog along the path through the pillars that marked the palace. As a history buff myself I often thought of the people who had passed by there. Thank you for your history of the palace.

I clicked on this video to learn about the correct pronunciation for the name Wriothesley and ive concluded that there isn't a single correct way because i havent heard your pronunciation before.

Great video but that chart showing only 20 women tested when billions have gone through it was...lame. In my opinion, I see no problems. Edward didn't have the control he was destined by God to have so he blamed his wife and father in law. He could control others if, in say, a play, for example. Of course he said the child wasn't his in front of the woman he really really wanted. I'm sure everyone laughed. Of course he had sex with his wife when he was drunk at it was his child. Of course, he was pissed at his father in law for not giving a little money but taking it his whole life. Lesson 1: testosterone is a hell of a drug Lesson 2: people are idiots.

David, I come back to these videos over and over again. Are you still making videos? This is one of my favorite channels on UA-cam! Godspeed, I hope this finds you well.

She’s an ancestor of mine. Thank you for this. ❤

At 31:33, “When dressing a wound, pain is pain’s medicine.” Could this relate to how some dressings which might clean a wound - even soap and water - sting, hurt, but do or can lead to healing? In labor, sometimes bearing down can help in the birthing process, thus reducing time in labor. And the bearing down can, for some or in some cases bring some relief? Sort of meeting and going with the pain? Maybe a labor and delivery nurse, midwife, Dr could advise?

At time mark 43:02, could there be a thin blue line going back and up between the trees, suggesting a stream, maybe even a waterfall, but connecting to the pond in the back ground, and be the origin of the stream you’re already identified to the right of the stag? Any symbology to a pond, stream, waterfall? The flow, stream of life over generations? Could overpaintaings be attempts to suggest a different woman than in the original, perhaps to enhance its value or, if the truth is scandalous, disguise it? Do inferences about motivation help in seeing patterns in such “editing”? Not just ways to improve or clean up areas that had become obscure?

All the historical proof was that the Stratford man was not a gentleman. That you have assumed. I'm afraid Jonson was too clever for you as was Droueshout. You've spent all your breath to explain dozens of details that were DONE ON PURPOSE not in error.

There is a Hilliard miniature shown on the Wikipedia site for Katherine Knyvet that doesn't look like her, but looks much closer to the portraits shown here of Elizabeth. No idea of governance or dating, but eyebrows don't match Knyvet's portrait at all.

Need to watch both parts again, a lot to assimilate. Off the cuff, the geometric/Greek letter content seems pretty far fetched. Do you need to go that far to establish the likelihood of DeVere’s parentage? Any reasonable, informed, unbiased person has to grant that he is Shakespeare. I’d like to learn about stuff such as who was where when, integrating historical facts like how his trips to the continent might have played into their relationship…his marriage…his outrage at his own loss of good reputation. How would that have been such a blow if he himself was carrying on with the queen… or was that simply explained by the double standard for men and women? So intriguing. Please make more more more videos!

If Anne conceived in October 1574, why was Oxford not informed before he left for France on Feb 1, 1575 nearly 4 months later. This discredits the July 2nd date and gives credence to the late Sep 1575 date. James Warren gives good arguments in his 2023 Oxfordian article.

Your research is impeccable! Nicely done.

The Rainbow Portrait has always been my favourite painting of any Queen. Were all the eyes on her robe coloured brown? Perhaps resembling the person who commissioned it? Presumably John Dee had drawn up her Astrological chart, and listed which gem stones, colours and plants etc would be auspicious for her...which might explain some aspects of her costumes? You've made the picture seem even more fascinating than it was before.Thank you for listing the many symbols in it.

Who objected to the DNA tests? (I'd think it great fun to dig up my relatives and do that sort of thing to them)...perhaps whoever's in charge now is ok with the idea? It's a lovely painting, I shall try to listen to the sonnets while visiting it. Another talk mentioned Spanish and French ambassadors writing home that the Queen was looking pregnant in January 1561 just before the birth of Francis Bacon ? And he's registered as being born in Elizabeths residence and the house next door? Perhaps we can do a DNA test on him? With Bacon's interest in science, surely it's the type of experiment he'd love to participate in?

I like the double A representing the Gods you mentioned, also Amor? Ars Amatoria by Ovid ? And perhaps snails in this context might be appropriate for being male, female, hermaphroditic or parthenogenitic ?...The computer thinks the word ought to be parthenogenetic...and it doesn't like my spelling of Ars Amatoria either, so sorry if they're wrong, but you hopefully get what I mean.

Sir Henry Neville (the Younger) is the true author of the Shake-Speare canon, and a step-cousin of Sir Francis Bacon, Verulem. Bacon was deeply involved in the production of the First Folio (1623). Two facts about Oxford: he was born too late and died too early. Neville was distantly related to the Arden family and he used Shaxper as a “straw man”.

Interesting additional information. Robert Prechter wrote a good piece about how little the "Penelope Rich" thesis holds true in a thorough reading of Willoghby His Avisa. The evidence does not seem to be there for the De Vere -Wriothesley-Rich foster parent/parent/parent story that a certain reading of the poem seems to support (robertprechter.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Prechter-Avisa.pdf). A better case seems to exist, in my opinion, that the poem is actually meant to honor the chastity of Queen Elizabeth and not condemn Penelope Rich. I must say your generalizations about "the woke brigade" combine with your occasional leaps of logic (as when you argue the paternity of De Vere's first child) to reveal a strange limit to what you want to consider fairly. Here, your objection to this inquiry into the life of a "Black Knight" is more rightly stated as addressing the interest of a particular person, not a "brigade." According to this video, you have no direct evidence about what motivated this person's inquiry, just a vague (and mocking) overview. It's your channel to run as you choose, of course, but I wonder if this kind of sloppy political generalization helps your videos?

I've been watching a few of your videos today and have subscribed. Wonderful stuff and very thought provoking. Thank you and a happy 2024 to all.