The Earl of Oxford or the glover from Avon? Richard Whalen's is the second book I've read about this dispute, and I'm convinced that Edward de Vere was the real Shakespeare. The reasons are legion. Shakespeare's will is awfully suspect; the man was barely literate. He left his second best bed to his wife. Then there's de Vere's Bible with underlined passages that fit the various plays almost word-for-word.

De Vere's own life parallels the happenings in the plays. Lord Burghley was de Vere's guardian and he fits the Polonius character in Hamlet like the proverbial glove. The author of the SONNETS also dedicates them to the Earl of Southampton, with whom de Vere had a (homosexual?) relationship. De Vere spent sixteen months in France and Italy, where many of the plays were set. De Vere was once injured in a street fight. Remind you of anything? De Vere was also a lawyer. There's lots of legal jargon in the plays. De Vere was a soldier. Any battle scenes in Shakespeare?

Whalen also states that the First Folio was dedicated to de Vere's son- in-law. To top it off, de Vere was a playwright and once used Shake-spear as a pen name.

What of the fact that de Vere died in 1604? Whalen counters with the contention that Shakespeare's greatest output occurred between the years 1593-1604, most of them published anonymously and that when Shakespeare of Avon died, nobody seemed to notice.Perhaps because they knew the real one was already dead?

If there's anything to complain about here, it's that the book is too short. There's a longer one on the topic I plan to buy (See other Shakespeare bio review, "Shakespeare by Another Name".

Dave Schwinghammer's humorous mystery, SOLDIER'S GAP, is available on Authorsden and at Amazon.com, new and used. Thank you for your support.