Who Proposed The Shakespeare Oxford Theory First?

I've spent a lot of time reading about the Shakespeare authorship question. The Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship presents compelling arguments that Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford, was the true author behind Shakespeare's works. They point to biographical parallels between de Vere's life and the plays, like his extensive education and travels mirroring the settings in 'Hamlet' and 'The Merchant of Venice.' Another key piece of evidence is the lack of personal manuscripts or letters from William Shakespeare of Stratford, which contrasts sharply with de Vere's documented literary patronage and courtly connections. The Fellowship also highlights the cryptic dedications in Shakespeare's First Folio, suggesting hidden authorship clues. While mainstream scholars disagree, the Oxfordian theory remains a captivating alternative for those who love digging into historical enigmas.

the Shakespeare authorship question is a rabbit hole I’ve spent years exploring. The Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship argues that Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford, is the true author behind the works attributed to William Shakespeare. They highlight discrepancies in Shakespeare’s life records, like his lack of formal education and limited evidence of his literary activities. De Vere, on the other hand, was a well-educated nobleman with firsthand experience of the European courts and cultures depicted in the plays. The Fellowship also points to stylistic similarities between de Vere’s known writings and the Shakespearean canon, as well as the aristocratic themes that permeate the works. The traditional Stratfordian narrative, they argue, relies on shaky evidence and ignores the elitism of Elizabethan society, where plays were often published anonymously or under pseudonyms. The debate is far from settled, but the Oxfordian theory offers a compelling alternative that challenges centuries of academic consensus. Another angle the Fellowship emphasizes is the political and personal subtext in the plays, which they claim aligns closely with de Vere’s life. For instance, 'Hamlet' is seen as a reflection of de Vere’s strained relationship with his father-in-law, Lord Burghley. The plays’ intimate knowledge of Italy, where de Vere traveled extensively, contrasts with Shakespeare’s lack of documented travel. The Fellowship also critiques the First Folio’s provenance, suggesting it was a posthumous effort to credit a figurehead rather than the true author. While mainstream scholars dismiss these claims as conspiracy theories, the Oxfordian perspective invites us to reconsider the cultural and historical biases that shape our understanding of literary genius.