Who Was William Shakespeare: Fact Or Fiction?

Did William Shakespeare really write his plays?

If not him, then who, and why hide behind a pseudonym?

Did William Shakespeare even truly exist?

This is a rather endearing and quintessentially British rabbit hole that has given me many hours of ponderous entertainment over the years.

The question “Who was William Shakespeare really?” has been debated amongst scholars for some time, to the point where we can safely assume William Shakespeare, the playwright, was indeed a total fabrication… But who fabricated him and why?

Of all the many theories that I have researched (most of which are rather tenuous), and all the many rabbit holes, this little nugget of intrigue has taken me down. I think the most compelling case has been put forward by Alexander Waugh.

His presentation on the subject tickled my fancies like no other. As Mr. Waugh decodes encrypted messages hidden in the original texts, this delightfully clever treasure hunt, and the genius of the minds that created it, unfolds before our very eyes. Clues, clues, so many clues, all superbly tangible and sensical. This is the kind of pristine research that beautifully elucidates a topic, thus lending itself to my full respect.

Most of us know that Shakespeare’s plays are enlightening tales that explore human nature. They cover a myriad of relatable themes: love, loss, betrayal, magic, mystery, power, politics, drama, comedy, the list goes on. These stories have stood the test of time, being still relevant and enjoyed by audiences today. So, it might surprise you to know that some of these plays were used to seed propaganda.

Now here comes the facetious bit… How else does one control the narrative of the collective without television and social media? Perhaps build the Globe Theatre in the middle of London, charge the wealthy good money to sit in seats but also create a standing area for the poor people (after all, while in receipt of mind control, one must remember one’s place). There, the people of all class divides can congregate en masse to indulge in whatever the powers that be wishes them to know.

The play King Richard the III was a very powerful propaganda tool that stood the test of time and still influences how we view King Richard III to this day (but more on this juicy tangent another time). The person, or persons, responsible for propagating this narrative in particular clearly had the intention of solidifying a victor’s narrative. The victors being the Tudors in this case, who had a rather dubious claim to the throne. I highly suspect that the same people influencing the narrative all those years ago are linked to the same people controlling the narrative today, as there are clues in the lecture below to support this hypothesis.

Please do give it a watch, not only is it a perfect example of a historical cover-up but also a shining example of diligence, intelligence, and sound research to back up one’s case when presenting a theory.

I highly recommend a trip to Westminster Abbey to see the evidence for yourself. There is much to discover there. Once you start to get into the minds of the clue-givers, you’ll know exactly what to look out for. It’s always hidden in plain sight.

However, I’ve already said too much. I don’t wish to give the game away as it’s far more fun discovering these things for yourself.

Enjoy, and happy treasure hunting.

Please note: I have no affiliations with Alexander Waugh, nor does he have any affiliations with Tartaria Britannica. I found his video on YouTube independently, a believe it should be shared far and wide.