A leading scholar has called for the creation of a Committee for the Protection of Shakespeareās Text.
published earlier this year, claims that 17 of the 44 plays were in fact written collaboratively. Last month, the editors were confronted by their critics at which by all accounts became acrimonious.
Now veteran Shakespearean Sir Brian Vickers, a distinguished senior fellow at the University of Londonās Institute for Advanced Study, has written an open letter to colleagues describing āpublication of The New Oxford Shakespeare as a crisis for our disciplineā, since āa small group of scholarsā¦have been able to apply new and untested ā that is, by anyone outside the NOS circle ā stylometric approaches which have resulted in their edition containing ā38 per cent lessā of Shakespeareās text, that proportion now attributed to [Christopher] Marlowe, [Thomas] Middleton and othersā.
When Gary Taylor, general editor of The New Oxford Shakespeare, referred to ācomputerised textual analysisā, Sir Brian went on, it was āa phrase that strikes fear into the hearts of many scholars in Shakespeare studies who lack sufficient mathematical knowledge to evaluate the claimsā¦Yet those of us familiar with traditional authorship attribution studies have failedā, for example, āto find any evidence of [Christopher] Marloweās hand in either the language or the prosody of the Henry VI ±č±ō²¹²ā²õā.
51³Ō¹Ļ
It was this that spurred Sir Brian to embark on āa worldwide investigation into the methods used to dilute the Shakespeare canon. I plan to set up a Committee for the Protection of Shakespeareās Textā that would āinvite evaluations from a wide range of independent scholarsā. He also produced a satirical poster titled āThe New Oxford Shakespeare-Liteā, advertising an edition where āWe bring you the texts with 38% Less Shakespeare!!!ā
Contacted by 51³Ō¹Ļ, Sir Brian said that he had been āworking on authorship attribution for 20 years nowā and noted that āthe collaborators in the five accepted co-authored [Shakespeare] plays were identified between 1850 and 1920ā. āShockingly,ā he went on, āthe NOS attributionists have ignored objective features of Shakespeareās language that anyone can verify and any other type of non-mathematical evidenceā. His proposed committee was designed to āexplore the assumptions and methods of their experts, because I and several others do not accept their resultsā.
51³Ō¹Ļ
Asked to comment, Gabriel Egan, professor of Shakespeare studies at De Montfort University (and one of the scholars leading The New Oxford Shakespeare project), responded that āThe New Oxford Shakespeare is made by scholars who teach and celebrate Shakespeareās achievement and donāt think it is diminished by his collaboration with other writers ā quite the opposite. At the time, Brian Vickers was appalled by the 1986-87 Oxford Shakespeare claiming that Shakespeare repeatedly co-authored plays, but 15 years later he accepted the fact and published his book Shakespeare, Co-Author.
āVickers is now appalled again by The New Oxford Shakespeare finding more evidence for collaboration. He does not dispute that Shakespeare wrote very little of Henry VI, Part One and very little of Edward III. Vickers prefers Thomas Kyd, rather than Christopher Marlowe, as Shakespeareās collaborator. How does it āpreserve Shakespeareās reputationā to have him write with one playwright rather than another?
āWe predict that Vickers will get over this new shock as he did the last one.ā
Register to continue
Why register?
- Registration is free and only takes a moment
- Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
- Sign up for our newsletter
Subscribe
Or subscribe for unlimited access to:
- Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews
- Digital editions
- Digital access to °Õ±į·”ās university and college rankings analysis
Already registered or a current subscriber?








