View source for Sir Henry Neville Was Shakespeare: The Evidence by John Casson and William D Rubinstein

{{infobox1
|title= Sir Henry Neville Was Shakespeare: The Evidence
|author=John Casson and William D Rubinstein
|reviewer= John Van der Kiste
|genre=History
|summary= Sir Henry Neville, courtier, diplomat and exact contemporary of William Shakespeare, was according to this book the real author of the plays and poetry attributed to the latter, although he was obliged to keep his authorship secret.  This painstakingly-researched work of scholarship is aimed more at the student than the general reader, but for enthusiasts of the Bard of Avon and his works (well, the works traditionally supposed to be his), an essential read. 
|rating=4.5
|buy=Maybe
|borrow=Yes
|pages=320
|publisher=Amberley Publishing
|date=April 2016
|isbn= 978-1445654669
|cover=1445654660
|aznuk=1445654660
|aznus=1445654660
}}
Debunking the Bard of Avon on the grounds that he did not write the plays attributed to him is nothing new.  This scholarly work, based on several years' research and new evidence, is by no means the first to suggest otherwise, and provides a compelling argument as to who really was the author. 

William Shakespeare – or Shakspere, even Shake-speare – probably never went to school, had a knowledge of foreign languages, travelled to Italy, knew anything of life at the royal court, or had access to existing works of literature, history or geography.  To write such plays would have required some or all of these qualifications, and at the very least surely have entailed researching material in libraries at Oxford or Cambridge, or at least the private collections of some of the Tudor nobility.  Could he have acquired the necessary knowledge by speaking to well-travelled or well-read customers in London or Stratford taverns?  Records about the personal life of the man are not surprisingly very sparse.  For example, it is believed that his date of birth and death have gone down to posterity as 23 April, solely as it was thought appropriate that our national playwright should be closely linked with the day of England's national saint. 

Over the years, more likely candidates have been put forward for the authorship of some of our best-loved plays.  Sir Francis Bacon, the Earls of Oxford, Derby and Rutland, and another contemporary dramatist, Christopher Marlowe, were all in the frame at one time or another.  Casson and Rubinstein have applied an 'authorship test', based on such factors as shared vocabulary, handwritten notes in books or manuscript notebooks still in existence, or connections with certain other personalities alive at the time, notably the Earls of Pembroke, to whom the First Folio was dedicated in 1623. 

Only Sir Henry Neville, whose dates of birth and death match those ascribed to Shakespeare almost exactly, passes all the tests.  What we have is an examination in some detail not only of his life and career but also of how his experiences match the evolution of the plays, and invariably explain why the author wrote what he did at the time.  Neville was courtier, politician and diplomat, particularly remembered for his role as an ambassador to France and his efforts to negotiate between James I and the Houses of Parliament.  During the last years of Elizabeth I his career suffered what could have been a fatal reverse when he was implicated in the Earl of Essex's rebellion, imprisoned and released only on the payment of a heavy fine.  It was not mere coincidence that 'Richard II' was written and first staged around the time that Essex and his followers made their abortive rising against the Queen.  The theme of an English sovereign being deposed was a highly delicate one for the time, and had the real Shakespeare been responsible, he would almost certainly have been arrested for sedition.  The point is also emphasised that the great tragedies such as 'Hamlet' and 'Othello' were written about the time that Neville was serving his sentence in the Tower of London, the low point in his life.

One full chapter is devoted to a 'test case' for 'The Merry Wives of Windsor'.  A man with Neville's experiences, not least as a member of the Royal Household, would have been familiar with the town.  There is no evidence that the Stratford man ever set foot there, although the faint possibility exists that as a member of an acting company which performed before the court.  If he did so, he could have gossiped in the local inn, absorbing material about the town – but it is thought unlikely. 

All in all, this painstaking study of Neville's life, aligned with the development of Shakespeare's plays and poetry, and his annotated library books, notebooks and manuscripts amount to a compelling case for his authorship.  Many a courtier during the Tudor age lived dangerously.  Neville was one of the survivors, and it is argued that keeping his authorship secret was a major factor in avoiding the same fate as the Earl of Essex and others. 

This book is a work of scholarship, aimed more at the student than the general reader.  It assumes a certain amount of knowledge on the subject, but as a work of research for the Shakespeare enthusiast, it will however be an essential read.  Perhaps librarians, publishers and above all the Royal Shakespeare Company in particular should not be advised to panic.  Tradition is firmly embedded in the national psyche, and we need not fear a major campaign of reattributing the works just yet. 

For an accessible introduction to the works of Shakespeare (or should it be Neville?), [[Shakespeare on Toast by Ben Crystal]] and [[The Shakespeare Handbook by Michael Schmidt and Robert Maslen]] are recommended as further reading, although both more as a starting point than the present volume. 

{{amazontext|amazon=1445654660}}
{{amazonUStext|amazon=1445654660}} 

{{commenthead}}
[[Category:John Casson]]
[[Category:William D Rubinstein]]