Shakespeare's Lost Kingdom: The True History of Shakespeare and Elizabeth

It is perhaps the greatest story never told the truth behind the most enduring works of English literature Who was the man behind Hamlet, King Lear, and the sonnets In Shakespeare s Lost Kingdom, critically acclaimed historian Charles Beauclerk pulls off an enchanting feat, humanizing the bard who for centuries has remained beyond our grasp Beauclerk has spent thaIt is perhaps the greatest story never told the truth behind the most enduring works of English literature Who was the man behind Hamlet, King Lear, and the sonnets In Shakespeare s Lost Kingdom, critically acclaimed historian Charles Beauclerk pulls off an enchanting feat, humanizing the bard who for centuries has remained beyond our grasp Beauclerk has spent than two decades researching the authorship question, and he convincingly argues that if the plays and poems of Shake speare were discovered today, we would see them for what they are shocking political works written by a court insider, someone whose status and anonymity shielded him from repression in an unstable time of armada and reformation But the author s unique status and identity were swept under the rug after his death The official history of an uneducated Stratfordian merchant writing in obscurity and of a virginal queen married to her country dominated for centuries Shakespeare s Lost Kingdom delves deep into the conflicts and personalities of Elizabethan England, as well as into the plays themselves, to tell the true story of the Soul of the Age You ll never look at Shakespeare the same way again.
Shakespeare s Lost Kingdom The True History of Shakespeare and Elizabeth It is perhaps the greatest story never told the truth behind the most enduring works of English literature Who was the man behind Hamlet King Lear and the sonnets In Shakespeare s Lost Kingdom crit

  • Title: Shakespeare's Lost Kingdom: The True History of Shakespeare and Elizabeth
  • Author: Charles Beauclerk
  • ISBN: 9780802119407
  • Page: 101
  • Format: Hardcover
  • 1 thought on “Shakespeare's Lost Kingdom: The True History of Shakespeare and Elizabeth”

    1. Heavens to Betsy. The Earl of Oxford was not only the author of Shakespeare's plays but also the secret son of Elizabeth I, AND was a product of Elizabeth's incestuous relationship with her uncle?! AND THEN the Earl ALSO had a relationship with his mother who gave birth to Henry Wriothesley--Shakespeare's "fair youth" ?? Can the ICK factor get any stinkier?oddly enough, i'm finding it more and more difficult to believe that the humble glovemaker was "the author."

    2. I must confess I was a little apprehensive at first about throwing my hat into the ring with the "Oxfordians" - but I can honestly say that after reading this book, and watching a number of the Shakespeare plays, and reading six other biographies about Shakespeare, I feel comfortable saying the Earl of Oxford was the "Bard". Read this book and everything else out there for that matter and judge for yourself.

    3. I just started this and I love it already! Fie on the spurious gloveseller theory!.I do like it a lot but it's dense and I'm giving it a rest for a bit. It's the kind of book that needs to be absorbed.

    4. It's all too much for a weekend read! I'm suffering from overload!I have long wondered why the man whose very name is sometimes synonymous with "Elizabethan Drama" hardly ever appears in bios of Elizabeth (except for prior to the Essex Rebellion). I had read Beauclerk's wonderful bio of his forbearer: Nell Gwyn: Mistress to a King and looked forward to a similarly fun and delightful read on Shakespearean theater. I thought I'd learn, for instance, which of these plays were actually staged for EI [...]

    5. Brilliant (Even though we will never know for sure if Edward de Vere was the son of Elizabeth and Seymour).

    6. This book posits not just one theory that most scholars would call a 'crackpot theory' (the idea that the Shakespeare was not William of Stratford - more on this later), but is also says that Queen Elizabeth I (yes, that virgin queen) has not just one, but a handful of bastard children (and then went on to have bastard children with her bastard children???), one of whom was SHAKESPEARE. (WHAT???) So yeah. That was a little hard to get past.Don't get me wrong, I think the question of Shakespearea [...]

    7. I thought about simply listing the errors I found in the first couple chapters for my review and just let them stand on their own as explanation for my one star rating and why I shelved this under the worst books that I have ever read. That of course provides an easy route for dismissing the book, but my feelings go deeper than that: besides hating this book, I hate the "research" that went into it, and I hate Oxfordianism for claiming a kind of "academic prowness" when this book is not an aberr [...]

    8. At first this book was intriguing but by the time I got halfway though it was just outlandish. I originally picked it up because of the quote on the cover from Mark Rylance. I shouldn't have. I'm open to the idea that someone else wrote Shakespeare's plays. I'm not open to poorly researched and unconvincing conspiracy theories. What really sunk this book for me wasn't when Beauclerk claimed Oxford was Elizabeth's illegitimate son, I thought 'okay I don't believe you, but I can gloss over this an [...]

    9. I first heard of the Anti-Avonian arguments when I was in college. My immediate thought then was this sort of theory does not give credit to the individual. Half a century later, watching a documentary about Greenwich Village, I realized that Woody Allen and Richard Pryor and Bob Dylan either did not go to college or never finished college and they, like Shakespeare, are admired as writers and entertainers.Why not a glover's son from a rural town? First, I do not think Beauclerk's book is partic [...]

    10. I had no intentions of starting this book now, but after browsing through the dustjacket and the first few pages I could not put it down. A historical eye-opener.Not being a Shakespeare scholar, I have to admit being over my head at times. This book presents an indepth look at the works attributed to William Shakespeare and the history of the times. Very interesting and I will probably read it again.

    11. I wish I had the strength to get all the way through the book. I didn't find it an easy read and I skipped a couple of chapters, but the author did convince me that De Vere was Shakespeare. If you're interested in Elizabethean history, this book is worth the read. I had to rate it down for being somewhat difficult to work through in spite of a really interesting subject matter and some good history research.

    12. A compelling read for anyone interested in the Shakespeare authorship question. Beauclerk's assertions are generally well-supported, although he does sometimes too readily accept the "We don't know who wrote this, but if Oxford did, it would support my hypothesis" argument. However, for the sheer outrageousness of his claims, this book is recommended. I won't give it away here, but it changed my reading of every mother-son relationship in the canon. A tad long-winded, but quite interesting.

    13. Who are you, Charles Beauclerk? Beautifully done, and convincing. Moving on in a hurry to read the most recent.

    14. Interesting premise, but support was drawn from interpretation of Shakespeare's plays, which often seemed a bit far fetched.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *