by Charles Bryce

STIFF upper lip, chaps. Mustn’t let the side down. Say not a word.
A mind reader can find the above counsel raging beneath the outward calm of England’s Literary Establishment, which has apparently been struck dumb since publication of a certain book earlier this year.The work contained irrefutable proof of Shakespeare’s real identity.
Significantly, loud silence has greeted overwhelming evidence that the Bard of Avon never was. Lack of counter argument indicates No Contest to the submission in Sir Henry Neville Was Shakespeare, written by a pair of  literary detectives, Professor William D. Rubinstein and Dr John Casson. Where is the riposte?
Experts who rejected previous claims to the Shakespeare authorship are now speechless. And yet thy fiercely opposed eight earlier books that nominated Neville as the true creator of the famous plays and sonnets. Scholarly arguments had surged against Neville being Shakespeare ever since author Brenda James nominated him in 2005. This time, in the year marking 400 years since Shakespeare’s death, there comes strange silence. I’ve googled in vain for a rebuttal to the Casson/Rubinstein research. Why is there none?
The answer is in the quietly sensational deposition by Messs Casson and Rubinstein. Each had written previous tomes citing Neville. The Shakespeare pundits spurned such heresy, as they did all prior nominations for the genius behind the  country lad from Stratford Upon Avon. This time in tandem the Neville champions present testimony that is apparently undeniable:
Writer of the great comedies, the histories, the tragedies and the poetry was a courtier residing near the hamlet of Waltham St Lawrence in Berkshire. A Member of Parliament, ambassador, and eventually prisoner in the Tower of London, Neville kept his authorship secret for fear of being sentenced to death for treason. He came close to losing his head when supporting rebellion against Queen Elizabeth by the Earl of Essex, her former favourite who met that grim end.
Ironically, the truth is revealed in the very year England holds 400^th anniversary shows, events and celebrations to honour ‘The Bard of Avon’.
It is no wonder, but a literary shambles, that the Shakespeare industry refuses to hear dissenters against their nationwide festivities. Absorbed in jubilant worship, it would cast a pall for celebrants to even consider the possibility that the much vaunted Bard of Avon wrote nothing. Nevertheless, for the book’s authors, the timing is perfect to insist that ‘William Shakspere, gentleman of Stratford’, penned not a single line to enrich world literature.
The Shakespeare Authorship Question has for many years debated who was he (or she?). Because an unlettered country lad from Stratford upon Avon could never own such easy familiarity with court circles, knowledge of European places and languages, and the life experiences evident in Shakespeare's creations. A host of candidates have long been suggested as the true author against vigorous defence from Stratford believers -- who over the years have theorised the many ways young Wil came to own such erudition in so many diverse areas.
The main past Shakespeare aliases included the Earl of Oxford, Sir Francis Bacon, Christopher Marlowe, the Countess of Pembroke, the Earl of Derby, the Earl of Rutland and others. When eventually – as they must -- authoritative sources accept Sir Henry Neville it would destroy a Bard of Avon ideology built over 400 years. Lauding Neville would embarrass England's tourist promoters who pull visitors from all over the world to the alleged birthplace of Shakespeare. Would a new idol supplant the Stratford pretender?
Neville’s birthplace is a small village between Maiden

head and Reading and ten miles from Royal Windsor. Could the appeal of Stratford Upon Avon fade before the thrill of treading the ancient lanes of Waltham St Lawrence (population 1500)? The famous Anne Hathaway Cottage would have to bow out to a totally different heritage in Waltham, such as The Bell pub --  or maybe the Neville Community Hall?
Most alarming, tourists would spurn ‘Shakespeare’s tomb’ at the Stratford Holy Trinity Church in order to seek Neville’s grave at St Lawrence Church in Waltham.
It is a serious issue for Stratford Upon Avon, the economy of which centres around Shakespeare and five million tourists a year. In contrast, Waltham St Lawrence is off the tourist map, although not without minor fame as a television clone site for episodes of Pie In The Sky, Rosemary And Thyme and Midsummer Murders.
It is hard to imagine what Stratford can do to retain the town’s reputation and prosperity. Doubtless the mute pro-Stratfordians are desperately seeking (and failing) how to respond to the Casson/Rubinstein apparently absolute proof.
Dr Casson, now retired, is a psychotherapist specialising in psychodrama – which includes how an individual uses language. He is also an expert on ancient documents.
Professor Rubinstein is a historian with enormous experience and scholarship, a Royal Historical Society member whose work is well known internationally and highly regarded.
They solve the Shakespeare puzzle by comparing undisputed chronology of the famous works with events in the life of Sir Henry Neville of Waltham St Lawrence and that of William Shakspere of Stratford, actor, theatre manager and property investor.
Also, they detail scribbles and annotations by Neville in books recognised as source material for many Shakespeare plays. They compare Neville’s letters with words and phrases used at a later date by Shakespeare. Handwriting too. They point out a change of genre in the plays, from comedy through history to tragedy, as Neville’s parliamentary career progressed to imprisonment in the Tower of London when linked to the Essex Rebellion of 1601.
They explain why Neville chose to write secretly – his head was at risk. They show how Shakespeare had Neville family members in his histories, and how he often twisted facts to turn historical Neville baddies into goodies.
Most enlightening, they insist Shakespeare was not just writing for fun or profit. They identify themes coinciding with dangerous ideas about dethroning an English monarch.
As for Shakespeare’s sonnets, these are analysed to show motive and relationship with Neville’s Tower of London accomplice.
This book is well produced by Amberley Publishing, with extensive endnotes and a massive bibliography. It is so convincing that I declare the Bard of Avon to be well and truly dead. Long live Wil Shakespeare of Waltham St Lawrence.
At the age of 15, Neville matriculated from Merton College, Oxford and toured the Continent with his tutor. He was Member of Parliament for New Windsor (1584, 1586, 1593), Sussex (1589), Liskeard (1597) and Berkshire (1604, 1614). His father (also Sir Henry) took custody of Mary Queen of Scots 1584-1585 before her beheading in 1587.
Neville succeeded his father as High Sheriff of Berkshire in 1595. He owned a business that made cannons. He was Deputy Lieutenant of Berkshire in 1596 and knighted in 1597. Appointed Ambassador to France, he returned to became involved with the 1601 rebellion against Queen Elizabeth by the Earl of Essex. Confined to the Tower, he was released 1603 when James of Scotland succeeded to the throne.
Like all writers, Neville used biographical experience in his fiction, leaving an uncanny trail now brilliantly exposed before a nation reluctant to acknowledge him