Sir Thomas More Play - William Shakespeare

Bo Sullivan

Banned
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
1,201
Reaction score
187
Location
South Wales
Website
www.freewebs.com
Does anyone know, like I do, that William Shakespeare did not write the play Sir Thomas More, and yet it is attributed to him. To quote from a letter I received from The British Library, it can be seen that there is some mystery surrounding this play. I will probably bring out an ebook about it some time in the next hour and put it on Mobipocket. It might sell well.

"Thank you for your enquiry of 23rd February [1998].

The ‘Booke of Sir Thomas Moore’ is a collaborative effort by several playwrights. Late last century three of its pages were proposed as Shakespeare’s own autograph contribution, and subsequently the matter was examined in detail by the palaeographer Sir Edward Maunde Thompson in his ‘Shakespeare’s Handwriting, 1916. Thompson’s work, along with that of later scholars, tended to confirm the attribution. More recently, the question of authorship has been subjected to scrutiny of various kinds in Sir Thomas More: essays on the play and its Shakespearian interest, ed. By T.H. Howard-Hill, 1989.

The play has been in print since 1842, and texts are included in several collections of Shakespeare’s works and apocrypha. Some of these are noted in the enclosed photocopies of the relevant entries from our Catalogue of Printed Books and the Index of English Literary Manuscripts, vol. I, ed. Peter Beal, 1980. Among the many reproductions of the Shakespeare leaves that are available I should mention that given, with discussion, by Samuel Schoenbaum in William Shakespeare: records and images, Oxford, 1975, pp., 109-115.

As one of the Library’s greatest treasures the original (Harley MS 7368), which has suffered rather badly from physical deterioration over the years, is not normally made available in our Students’ Room. However, a leaf from it, now temporarily withdrawn from display at the British Museum, is to be transferred to a Shakespeare case in the new exhibition area at St. Pancras in the late spring or early summer. I enclose a draft of the label written to accompany it."




:roll::poke::hooray:
 

scottVee

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 22, 2006
Messages
391
Reaction score
44
Location
San Diego area
Website
scott.virtes.com
Actually, if you have a copy of The Riverside Shakespeare hanging around (it's only slightly smaller than a cinder block), it does a good job of convering the controversies on every one of his plays. There's a 1 to 3 page preface to each work, hinting at the debates and questions about them ... but I couldn't bear to go into any more detail about it than that.

I think the works can stand (or fail) on their own, regardless of who wrote them. But some works have a reality and fiction of their own.

There's also a big 2-volume annotated Sherlock Holmes, another literary author & character that's endlessly scrutinized. I just can't get through it. Though, for me, similar debates about the history of the books in the Bible never seem to get dull. Amazing that literary relics survive the ages.

Another author whose works are hotly debated is Daniel Dafoe ("Robinson Crusoe", etc) -- who left us questioning the very historical existence of some of the people he wrote about. Fun stuff. We can only hope as modern writers that we leave any kind of legend behind.
 

Deleted member 42

The Sir Thomas More thing was figured out in the early 1800s.

We can even point to the bits Shakespeare actually wrote--and computer analysis, three years ago, supported the textual editors' conclusions.

The crowd scene, with the impassioned speech about bigotry, placed in More's mouth, is Shakespeare's and very fine it is.