Home Categories About
argument top image
Who was Shakespeare? Who was Shakespeare?
The Stratfordian position The Stratfordian position
The Post-Stratfordian position The Post-Stratfordian position
William Shakespeare was a woman William Shakespeare was a woman
William Shakespeare was part of a collective William Shakespeare was part of a collective
Edward de Vere, the 17th earl of Oxford was Shakespeare Edward de Vere, the 17th earl of Oxford was Shakespeare
It is there in black and white It is there in black and white
Shakespeare was a common man from Warwickshire Shakespeare was a common man from Warwickshire
Where is the documentation? Where is the documentation?
There were rumors during Shakespeare's life There were rumors during Shakespeare's life
An education gap An education gap
Shakespeare’s detailed will makes no mention of books or literature Shakespeare’s detailed will makes no mention of books or literature
Not all of Shakespeare's plays were published in his lifetime Not all of Shakespeare's plays were published in his lifetime
The two Shakespeares The two Shakespeares
The case for Francis Bacon The case for Francis Bacon
The case for Christopher Marlowe The case for Christopher Marlowe
The case for Edward de Vere The case for Edward de Vere
The case for Walter Raleigh The case for Walter Raleigh
The feminization of Shakespeare The feminization of Shakespeare
There is sufficient motive There is sufficient motive
William Shakespeare was an 'excellent gentlewoman' William Shakespeare was an 'excellent gentlewoman'
Shakespeare had a hidden code Shakespeare had a hidden code
The case for Emilia Bassano The case for Emilia Bassano
Several of Shakespeare's plays are collaborative efforts Several of Shakespeare's plays are collaborative efforts
Debate Mini Map

Who was Shakespeare?
Back to question

The Post-Stratfordian position

< (2 of 5) Next position >

Shakespeare’s detailed will makes no mention of books or literature

Shakespeare’s will was meticulous in its details and he seemed to divide all of his materialistic possessions between his children. However, not a single book, manuscript, or instrument was mentioned, though, his supposed writings were filled with them.
John Paul Stevens
< (4 of 10) Next argument >

Context

Wills often provide a glimpse into a person’s life. Depending on what they left to whom, it can reveal not only who was important to the deceased but also what. It would be reasonable to expect that an author of Shakespeare’s prowess would have a passion for literature and reading. But his will does not indicate this.

The Argument

Shakespeare was meticulous in his will. He laid out exactly who should receive his property (down to his “second best bed”). However, startlingly, there was not a single book left to anybody.[1] This is highly irregular for a playwright that refers to rare and elusive literary works in his plays, including several texts in Italian and French that had not yet been translated into English (the plot of Othello comes from an Italian text that had not been translated into English). Also, startlingly, he did not leave a single musical influence, despite his plays featuring more than 300 musical terms and featuring more than 26 instruments. Additionally, his will reveals that he did not place significant importance on the education of his children. He neglected his daughters' education and appears to have not even taught them to read and write. One daughter signed his will with a “mark” (typical for someone that was illiterate), and the other with a signature that was “painfully formed.”

Counter arguments

An absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Yes, it is strange that there are no books in his will. However, this is not evidence for anything other than Shakespeare didn’t give away any books in his will. Using this to cast doubt on his authorship falls into the realm of conjecture.[2] Additionally, many prominent and educated Elizabethans made no mention of books in their last will and testament. Francis Bacon did not leave any books in his will, nor did Richard Hooker, one of the most educated theologians of the Elizabethan period. Reginald Scott, the author of The Discoverie of Witchcraft, also left any mention of books out of his will.[3]

Proponents

Premises

[P1] Shakespeare's will makes no mention of any books or literature, despite being meticulous in its contents. [P2] This does not sound like the will of one of the greatest playwrights that has ever lived. [P3] Therefore, it is unlikely that Shakespeare wrote those plays.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] An absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. [Rejecting P2] Actually, this was quite common for prominent Elizabethan academics and writers.

References

  1. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/06/who-is-shakespeare-emilia-bassano/588076/
  2. https://spectator.us/shakespeare-woman-atlantic/
  3. https://shakespeareauthorship.com/shaxwill.html
This page was last edited on Thursday, 4 Jun 2020 at 18:33 UTC

Explore related arguments