Shakespeare Authorship: The Documentation Needed to Be Considered Conclusive

Posted by Peter Dickson to Phaeton, December 29, 2011.

"I have thought a bit about the weight attached to a manuscript document whether it be in the handwriting of a Bard candidate or whether for the sake of argument it was a letter from the Duchess of Flues who says that she had dinner last night with the author of the Shakespearean works and named that person with specificity.
My conclusion is that at this late date, if anyone puts on the table anything in manuscript form, the opposing camp or camps would cry 'foul' and claim it was a later forgery.
. . There would be a huge battle royal over the authenticity of any such manuscript letter or document. The resistance level would be high on the part of those who stood the most to lose if the document is proven to be authentic.
In my case, no one can lay a glove on me with my Barnfield and Walkley smoking gun evidence in which these two fellows finger Oxford as the author of at least two works - (Venus and Adonis) and Othello - in works they dedicated to Derby or he and his family with the drama's title page bearing the Stanley insignia and with Walkley's 'thank you' note to the Stanley-de Vere family and 'the Illustrious House of Oxford' for the golden precious opportunity to publish Othello in 1621-1622.
All that very tight evidence was in the public domain in printed form. You cannot take that away from me no matter (how) hard you try . .
For his part, Looney never put on the table anything so good and the Stratfordians cannot match this pre-First Folio evidence in favor of Oxford via an Oxford/Derby symbiosis for which there is more evidence.
So it is time to declare the mystery over and celebrate with champagne and cake even if the task of proving who wrote the remaining Shakespearean works still requires a lot of work and may be for the most part beyond achieving. In any case, you now have enough prima facie evidence that the Stratfordian paradigm has been destroyed for once and for all and the focus is now definitively narrowed down tightly on Oxford with some Derby-Stanley input to some degree.
That is all that you need to issue a Declaration of Final Victory to take the place of the Declaration of Reasonable Doubt which served its purpose prior to the new truthful paradigm for the Shakespeare phenomenon."

Also posted by Peter Dickson to another forum December 28, 2011;re-posted to Phaeton December 29.

'Coupled with the Othello title page evidence and the Walkley dedications in Lazarillo to Derby and the final astounding flourish to "The Illustrious House of Oxford" Walkley's handling of the publication of the Othello quarto - the first since 1609 and only the second drama both registered and promptly published since 1602-1603 provides prima facie evidence of a linkage of this drama -- the only one split off from the cache of 17 unpublished dramas before the first folio -- to Oxford via Derby. This was no ordinary Shakespearean quarto in an ordinary time when it suddenly appeared in print in 1622 and the Strats cannot come close to matching what I have found. Barnfield conveys the same message about Oxford as the author of V & A via a work/dedication to Derby and Marston or whoever was the author of Histrio-mastix fingered Derby in a satrical-highly negative manner as the Bard in this work which Thomas Thorpe no less published in 1610.'