Thank you so much for your kind words about my talk. I did not know that de Vere’s ancestors had been in Calabria (my grandparents’ home) and Puglia. You are right. He would have known that part of his family history well. Norman influence lives on in Sicily, and in Calabria. The better acquainted I become with de Vere, the better I understand why he did what he did. The more I dig into why he did what he did, the better I understand him. Sir Percy Blakeney was not the only one with a double life!
This just amazing Dorothea. Each sentence is so packed with not only facts but indisputable connections to the plays and the corresponding historical evidence of Oxford’s itinerary and experiences being linked to them. Truly a tour de force. Thank you!!!
Bravo! Your research is always fascinating and based in cogent argument. I love the strides you take while attempting to convince your skeptical husband. Congratulations on winning him over.
This is another great talk from someone who knows how to weigh evidence and come to reasoned conclusions based on the evidence. As Dorothea cheekily once said: first, we must convince the lawyers. Dorothea has convinced at least her lawyer husband that Shakspere could not have written the works wrongly attributed to him. Lawyers with the fact behind them argue the facts. If the facts are not on their side, they argue the law. If the law is against them, they discredit the witnesses and dismiss evidence. What do you think the Stratfordians sit now with respect to that sequence? There is a reason why so many lawyers are on board with the Oxfordian theory; the arguments are soundly based on facts. The same goes for a growing number of doctors, psychologists, scientists, engineers, and others. They weigh the evidence and make tentative hypotheses based on that evidence. Should there be more evidence in favour of Oxford, then the case becomes stronger. What Dorothea demonstrates in this talk is that there is more evidence piling up to indicate Edward de Vere was the principal author behind the name "Shakespeare". She most likely discovered the true location of Prospero's island. Everything fits.
It cannot be emphasized sufficiently the importance of the depth of knowledge you amply display on all matters concerning the Italianate Earl. My most cherished of the correlations is that which pertains to Oxfords role as the Knight of the tree of the Sun in his defence of truth. This characters position in the hierarchy of Masonic ritual is to the initiate a familiar role for those on the pilgrims path Additionally the occupation of the Calabrian & Apulian kingdoms by deVere's ancestors in the 11 century while driving off the Moors from Sicily to Syracuse would have been well know to deVere and made these locations attractive to his Norman Sensibilities. The intrigue & intelligences revealed are so welcome to the cannon of the Earl and better place his persona as scarlet pimpernel than wastrel. Cannot wait for the next instalment and taking time to review the first to buttress this weighty addition. Impressive!
Grazie mille per aver guardato il mio video e per i vostri commenti su Florio. Sono d’accordo che Florio ha legami storici attraenti e talenti che potrebbero portarci a concludere che era Shakespeare. Ma per ogni legami storici o abilita che Florio ha, Oxford e dieci volte più grandi. Il più grande ostacolo per Florio e che non c’è traccia che fosse un drammaturgo. Un poeta, si, un traduttore, si, ma non un drammaturgo. Anche Florio non avrebbe potuto criticare l’alta nobilita or satirizzare la regina d’Inghilterra senza perdere la testa. La corte, compresi Burghley, Walsingham e la regina, sapeva molto bene chi era “Shakespeare”. Solo un favorito della regina Elisabetta, con l’accesso constante alle sua corte avrebbe potuto sopravvivere all leggi sul tradimento. Si prega di perdonare i miei errori in italiano. Sto ancora imparando la tua bella lingua.❤ Siamo d’accordo che non e stato Will da Stratford!!
È un discorso molto interessante. In effetti, le prove che Oxford, piuttosto che l'uomo di Stratford, sia stato coinvolto nella creazione delle opere di Shakespeare sono convincenti. Mi sorprende, tuttavia, che nei suoi interventi su Shakespeare e l'Italia non faccia alcun riferimento a Giovanni Florio. È evidente che alcune opere di Shakespeare non avrebbero potuto essere scritte senza il contributo di Florio. Una cosa è far luce sulla scarsità di prove che il Bardo abbia scritto le opere di Shakespeare, un'altra è attribuire tutte le sue opere a un solo uomo, Oxford. C'è un'altra possibilità plausibile che siano stati coinvolti più scrittori (compresi Oxford e Florio). Perdonatemi, sono un avvocato anch'io...........
Thank you so much for your kind words about my talk. I did not know that de Vere’s ancestors had been in Calabria (my grandparents’ home) and Puglia. You are right. He would have known that part of his family history well. Norman influence lives on in Sicily, and in Calabria. The better acquainted I become with de Vere, the better I understand why he did what he did. The more I dig into why he did what he did, the better I understand him. Sir Percy Blakeney was not the only one with a double life!
This was both fascinating and beautifully written. Thank you
Hats off! Astoundihng!
This just amazing Dorothea. Each sentence is so packed with not only facts but indisputable connections to the plays and the corresponding historical evidence of Oxford’s itinerary and experiences being linked to them. Truly a tour de force. Thank you!!!
she's the antidote to stratfordianism
Bravo!
Your research is always fascinating and based in cogent argument. I love the strides you take while attempting to convince your skeptical husband. Congratulations on winning him over.
This is another great talk from someone who knows how to weigh evidence and come to reasoned conclusions based on the evidence.
As Dorothea cheekily once said: first, we must convince the lawyers. Dorothea has convinced at least her lawyer husband that Shakspere could not have written the works wrongly attributed to him. Lawyers with the fact behind them argue the facts. If the facts are not on their side, they argue the law. If the law is against them, they discredit the witnesses and dismiss evidence. What do you think the Stratfordians sit now with respect to that sequence?
There is a reason why so many lawyers are on board with the Oxfordian theory; the arguments are soundly based on facts. The same goes for a growing number of doctors, psychologists, scientists, engineers, and others. They weigh the evidence and make tentative hypotheses based on that evidence. Should there be more evidence in favour of Oxford, then the case becomes stronger.
What Dorothea demonstrates in this talk is that there is more evidence piling up to indicate Edward de Vere was the principal author behind the name "Shakespeare".
She most likely discovered the true location of Prospero's island. Everything fits.
It cannot be emphasized sufficiently the importance of the depth of knowledge you amply display on all matters concerning the Italianate Earl.
My most cherished of the correlations is that which pertains to Oxfords role as the Knight of the tree of the Sun in his defence of truth.
This characters position in the hierarchy of Masonic ritual is to the initiate a familiar role for those on the pilgrims path
Additionally the occupation of the Calabrian & Apulian kingdoms by deVere's ancestors in the 11 century while driving off the Moors from Sicily to Syracuse would have been well know to deVere and made these locations attractive to his Norman Sensibilities.
The intrigue & intelligences revealed are so welcome to the cannon of the Earl and better place his persona as scarlet pimpernel than wastrel.
Cannot wait for the next instalment and taking time to review the first to buttress this weighty addition.
Impressive!
Grazie mille per aver guardato il mio video e per i vostri commenti su Florio. Sono d’accordo che Florio ha legami storici attraenti e talenti che potrebbero portarci a concludere che era Shakespeare. Ma per ogni legami storici o abilita che Florio ha, Oxford e dieci volte più grandi. Il più grande ostacolo per Florio e che non c’è traccia che fosse un drammaturgo. Un poeta, si, un traduttore, si, ma non un drammaturgo. Anche Florio non avrebbe potuto criticare l’alta nobilita or satirizzare la regina d’Inghilterra senza perdere la testa. La corte, compresi Burghley, Walsingham e la regina, sapeva molto bene chi era “Shakespeare”. Solo un favorito della regina Elisabetta, con l’accesso constante alle sua corte avrebbe potuto sopravvivere all leggi sul tradimento. Si prega di perdonare i miei errori in italiano. Sto ancora imparando la tua bella lingua.❤ Siamo d’accordo che non e stato Will da Stratford!!
In deed!
È un discorso molto interessante. In effetti, le prove che Oxford, piuttosto che l'uomo di Stratford, sia stato coinvolto nella creazione delle opere di Shakespeare sono convincenti. Mi sorprende, tuttavia, che nei suoi interventi su Shakespeare e l'Italia non faccia alcun riferimento a Giovanni Florio. È evidente che alcune opere di Shakespeare non avrebbero potuto essere scritte senza il contributo di Florio. Una cosa è far luce sulla scarsità di prove che il Bardo abbia scritto le opere di Shakespeare, un'altra è attribuire tutte le sue opere a un solo uomo, Oxford. C'è un'altra possibilità plausibile che siano stati coinvolti più scrittori (compresi Oxford e Florio). Perdonatemi, sono un avvocato anch'io...........