It’sAPoliticalThing
“Ittakesgreatpowertounderstandthevirtueofsmallthings.”ThisquotebyGreg
Mortensenpointsoutthateventhingstinyinmagnitudemayhavegreatdealtoofferupinother
fields.ThisideaisessentialwhenexaminingtheShakespeareConspiracy,adiscussionthatinthe
grandschemeofthings,appearsminusculebutoffersthosewhopartakeagreaterunderstanding
ofthemotivesbehindShakespeare’splays.Thisconspiracydealswiththeauthorshipofthe
Shakespeariancanon.Theideabroughtupbythemainproponentsoftheconspiracyisthat
WilliamShakespeareofStratforduponAvondidnotwritetheplaysthatareaccreditedtohim
today.However,afterdelvingthroughevidence,itisclearthatthisWilliamShakespearewas
indeedthewriterofthisShakespeariancanon.Commonconspiratorspointtonoblemenor
particularlyesteemedplaywrightsasthepossiblesuspectsofwritingtheplays.Thisview
neglectstheinfluenceplayshadonthepoliticalclimateoftheday.WilliamShakespeare,orat
leastwhohewasthoughttobetoday,wouldhavebeenanauthorwhoactuallypromotedthe
commentarythatoftenappearsintheplaysbecauseofhisexposuretotheneedsofthelower
class.ShakespearewasborninStratforduponAvon,butwaschasedoutoftownat16andwas
notheardofforthenextsevenyears.HethenturnedupinLondon,atwhichpointhiscareerasa
playwrightandactorbegan.There,hefrequentedtheSouthBankoftheThames,whichhadall
thetownstheatersalongwithpeoplewhotodaywouldbeidentifiedasdownontheirluck.This
putShakespeareinanenvironmentwherehewassurroundedbytheverypeoplehewouldgoon
todefendinhisplays.Clearly,ShakespeareofStratforduponAvonwrotetheShakespearian
cannonbecauseofhisidentificationwithcommoners,briningaboutthesympathyevokedfor
andtheempowermentofthepeasantsinHamlet.
Shakespearehimselfwouldhaveidentifiedasacommoner.Itisessentialtounderstand
theperspectiveofWilliamShakespeareinordertorelateitbacktowhatisbeingsaidwithinthe
playsassumedtobewrittenbyhim.Withoutbeinginalowersocialstatus,Shakespearewould
havehadnowaytorelatetothecommonersinhiswriting.Luckily,hewas,asreportedbyan
articlepublishedbyBBC,acommonerinStratforduponAvon,hisplaceofbirth.Hisfatherwas
thetown’stannerandtheequivalentofapresentdaytowncouncilman,sohewouldhavehad
somesortofsocialstanding,butnotmuch(Wood,Charles."TheShakespearePaperTrail:The
EarlyYears."BBCNews).However,Shakespeare’swritingcomesfromwhenhewasinLondon,
notwhenhewasinStratforduponAvon.Accordingtoadocumentpreviouslyexhibitedatthe
BritishMuseum,thenameWilliamShakespeareappearedonalistoftaxevaderscurrently
inhabitingtheareapastthesouthbankoftheThames,whereallofthetheater’sandsuchwere
(DoraThorton,BritishMuseum).Forallofhislife,Shakespearehimselfwasacommoner.He
neverwouldhavebeenatthelevelofthearistocracyorevenofanobleman.Moreimportantly,
atthetimewhenhewaswritinghisplays,hedidnothaveenoughmoneytopaythetaxesthathe
owedtothecrownofEngland(oratleast,that’swhatwehopethereasoningwas).Thefactof
thematteristhatShakespearehimselfwasimmersedwithinthestruggleofthecommoner.He
understoodthesituationthathehimself,alongwithmanyothersinthecountryweregoing
through.Thisprovidedhimwiththeperspectivethatallowedhimtodefendthecommonerswith
thepoliticalcommentaryheofferedwithinhisplays.Conspiratorswillcontendthatnoblemen
toocouldhaveadvocatedforthecommonersinthecommentarywithintheplays,iftheywere
thetrueauthor.Butthatwouldbeimpossiblebecausetheyhadnoviewofhowthecommoners
lived.Theywerenotawareofthestruggleofthecommonerwouldhavenoway,andnowant,
withwhichtoidentifywithit.Shakespeareutilizedtheperspectiveprovidedbytherealityofhis
ownlifetofuelthepoliticalcommentarydefendingcommonerswithinhisplays.
Shakespeareilluminatesthemanipulativenatureofthearistocracytocreateasenseof
sympathytowardsthecommonersinhisaudience.Hepinpointsthefactthatthearistocracy
imposesthemselvesonothers,ratherthanhavingothersworkwiththemasequals.Themain
groupthatfellpreytothis,inShakespeare’seyes,werethecommoners.But,sincethe
aristocracycontrolledall,theyassuredthatthistruthwouldneverreachthepubliceye.
ShakespearebeginstoworkagainstthisinhisplayHamletwiththecharactersofRosencrantz
andGuildenstern’srelationshipwithKingClaudius,whichbeginswiththisinteraction:
“Welcome,dearRosencrantzandGuildenstern.Moreoverthatwemuchdidlongtoseeyou,The
needwehavetouseyoudidprovokeourhastysending.SomethinghaveyouheardofHamlet’s
“transformation”—socallitSincenorth'exteriornortheinwardmanresemblesthatit
was.”(Hamlet,Shakespeare,II,ii,5-6).Fromtheverystart,Claudiusgetsdowntobusinesswith
thesetwo.Thereisnoformalgreetingorhowareyou,justfeedingstraightintohowhewants
themtoinspectandgetinformationastowhyHamletisgoingcrazy.Theissuehereisthat
Hamletandthetwohavebeenfriendssincetheirschoolsdays.Claudiusissettingthetwo
againstsomebodywhotheyhaveamutualtrustwith.ThereisnosuggestionthatClaudius
himselfwillbedoinganyactuallyworktohelpthetwo.Butthebiggestinjusticeisthatno
compensationisofferedtotheduo.Thekingexpectsthemtodoashesays,movingtotheextent
ofthemviolatingtrustthattheypreviouslyhadwithHamlet.Themanipulationcomesdirectly
fromthefactthatRosencrantzandGuildensternarereceivingnothinginreturn.Themeansthat
thethetwoarenotworkingwithClaudius,butClaudiusiscontrollingthem.Theexpectationis
thatsimplysinceClaudiusistheking,hewillbeabletoguidethetwotodowhateverhedesires
simplybecausetheyarenotatahighofenoughstatustogarnerhisrespect.Thisbreedsasense
ofsympathytowardsRoscencrantzandGuildensternastheaudiencerealizestheinjusticesthat
thetwoaresufferingunderthemanipulationofthearistocracy.
Shakespearehimselfwouldhavefeltamanipulatedbythearistocracy.Hetoowasinthe
socialstandingofacommoner,buttheextendofthearistocracycontrollinghimextendedpast
that.QueenElizabethhadasignificantpullonShakespearewithinhisprofessionasa
playwright.AccordingtoanarticlepublishedbytheGuardian,Shakespeare’sactingcompany,
LordChamberlain’sMen,wasownedpartiallybyQueenElizabethherself.Shereceivedabout
seventypercentofallprofitsthecompanyreceivedfromtheirperformances(Alberge,Dayla.
"ShakespeareScholarsUnitetoSeeoffClaimsofthe'BardDeniers'").Thisfactdisplaysthe
directlinkbetweenShakespearehimselfandthearistocracy.Itputshimonalevelinhis
relationshipwiththequeenhigherthanthatofanyoddcitizenwithinEngland.Inaddition,it
revealsatwofoldmanipulationofShakespearecomingfromthearistocracy.First,thefactthat
Elizabethherselfreceivesmostoftheprofits.Thisbecomesaformofmanipulationassheis
performingnoneoftheworkdoneinordertoderivetheseprofits.WhileShakespearewritesand
hisactorsputontheactualperformances,Elizabethgetsthemajorityoftheactualprofitsthey
areworkingtoattain.Shemanipulatesthesystem,leveragingherstatusasthequeentogetall
theprofitthatisnotrightfullyhers.Secondly,therewouldhavebeenapushonShakespeareto
producemoreplaysasfastashecould.Elizabeth’sstakewithinthecompanyisenoughforherto
dowhatevershecantogetthemaximumamountprofitfromtheplaysbeingshown.Thepublic
isnotgoingtoshowuptoseethesameplayputonoverandover.Theyaregoingtowantnew
material.Asaresult,ElizabethwouldhavelikelybeenpushingShakespearetocreatethesenew
playsasfastashecould,whetherhelikeditornot,noquestionsasked.Thisdirectmanipulation
Shakespearesufferedatthehandsofthearistocracywouldhavedrivenhimfurthertoinclude
politicalcommentarywithinhisplaysthatsympathizedwithcommonersandexposedthe
excessivecontrolthatthearistocracyhadoverthem.
Thedesiresofthenoblemendidnotrunparalleltothecommentarygivenwithin
Shakespeare’splays.Aspreviouslystated,noblemen,suchastheEarlofOxford,areseenas
possibleauthorswiththeShakespeareconspiracy.However,offeringcommentarythatopposed
actionsofthearistocracywouldnothavebeenofanyinteresttothem.Infifteenthcentury
England,jurisdictionoflandwasgiventonoblemendirectlyfromthekingorqueenoftheday.
Theyallocatedthespecificsofthelandgivenandwhatabilitiesasarulertheappointed
noblemenwouldhave("WilliamShakespeare|EnglishAuthor."EncyclopediaBritannica
Online).Itisimportanttounderstandthemotivesofthenoblementhemselveswhentheyare
broughtupwithintheShakespeareconspiracy.Thematteroftheirrulegivesuswithinthe
presentdayaperspectiveofhowtheysawtheirownposition.Withrespecttotheirpower,itis
clearthattheywereindebted.Allcapabilitiesandownershipofthenoblemencamedirectlyfrom
thearistocracy.Thisaristocracycouldbothgiveandtakeaway.Iftheyweretohearofa
noblemendefyingtheirpower,theycouldeasilytakeawayanyprivilegethatwasgrantedtosaid
nobleman.Itwouldneverbeintheinterestofthenoblementospeakoutagainstthearistocracy.
Theworstpossibleoptionwouldbetohighlightaninjusticethearistocracynotonlyimposed
andbutalsokeptfromplainview.Sononoblemanwouldevertaketheriskofexposingthe
manipulativenatureofthearistocracyasShakespeareattemptstodoinHamlet.Butevenifthat
couldbedisproved,thesenoblemenwouldbeputinapositionwheretheyhavethecapabilities
toassistpeople.Ifthey,intheirwriting,weredaringtobringsomesympathytowards
commoners,aswasdoneinthesceneinHamletalreadyreferredto,theywouldhavepartakenin
actionsthatfollowedthatpathofsympathy.Thiscouldbebyofferingsupporttothese
commonersinsomeway,whichsimplywasneverdoneinEngland.Theperspectiveandmotives
ofthenoblemeninShakespeare’sEnglandeliminatethemaspossibleauthor’softhe
Shakespeariancannon.
PoliticalcommentarywithinHamletattemptedtoempowercommoners.Shakespeare
offeredaperspectivethatgavethesecommonersthetoolstothinkoutsideofthebox.These
commonerswereallsubjecttotheabuseofthearistocracy.Thisabusewassooverpoweringthat
nocommonerwouldhaveeverthoughtofgoingagainstthearistocracyinanyway.Soinorder
toescapethisabuse,Shakespearewouldhavefirsthadtoalterthemindsetofthecommoners
watchinghisplays.HetrytojustthistowardstheendofHamlet,havingamessengerinform
Claudiusthatheshould“Saveyourself,mylord.Theocean,overpeeringofhislist,Eatsnotthe
flatswithmoreimpiteoushastethanyoungLaertes,inariotoushead,O'erbearsyourofficers.
Therabblecallhim“lord”and—astheworldwerenowbuttobegin,Antiquityforgot,custom
notknowntheratifiersandpropsofeveryword—Theycry,“Choosewe!Laertesshallbeking!”
Caps,hands,andtonguesapplaudittotheclouds:“Laertesshallbeking,Laertes
king!””(Hamlet,IV,v,72-82)ThepeasantswithintheplayofHamletareattemptingacoup
d’etatoftheirown.Theyhaveoverriddentheconstructthatallowsthearistocracytoholdthem
down.TheynowcalloutofLaertestobetheirnewruler,astheythinkhewillrulemorejustly.
ThesituationofthepeasantsinHamletcanbedirectlyparalleledtothatofthecommonersin
Shakespeare’sEngland.TherewasnocontemporarystruggleversusQueenElizabethIbecause
thecommonersofthedayacceptedtheirposition.Theyunderstoodthattheywereinnoway
equalswiththequeenandhadnoleveragewhatsoever.Shakespeareaimstoprovidean
alternativetothisideabyshowingthemtheirwayout.Shakespeare’sargumentisthatifthe
commonersallbandtogether,theircollectiveforcecanovercomethatoffthearistocracy.He
understandsthattheywillonlyhaveasayiftheydemandit.Shakespeare’slevelof
understandingofthisprocessisnotsharedbyanyofhiscontemporaries.Soheprovidesan
indiscreetexampleofhowtheycanovercometheiroppression,completewithmethodand
rallyingcry.
Contemporaryphilosophywouldhavebeencalledforthesecommonerstoestablish
themselves.ItwasnotonlyShakespearepushingforthecommonerstohaveavoiceoftheir
own.Infact,hewouldhavegottenthedesiretowritetoempowerthecommonersafterreading
someworksofthetime.OneinparticularthatcomestomindisThePrincebyNiccolo
Machiavelli.Inthiswork,Machiavellioftenusesthewords“prowess”and“fortune”todescribe
twodistinctwaysinwhichaprincecancometopower.“Prowess”referstoanindividual’s
talents,while“fortune”implieschanceorluck.PartofMachiavelli’saiminwritingThePrinceis
toinvestigatehowmuchofaprince’ssuccessorfailureiscausedbyhisownfreewillandhow
muchisdeterminedbynatureortheenvironmentinwhichhelives.(Machiavelli,Niccolo."The
Prince."ProjectGutenberg)Theideaheredealsmainlywiththewayinwhichthenoblemenof
thedayactuallyreceivedtheirauthority.WhatMachiavellicontendsisthatmuchoftheirpower
mayjustbebecauseoftheirbirthright,notbecauseofwhetherornottheywereasuitableruler.
Shakespeare,whoaccordingtoYaleInsights,wouldhavehadthecapabilitytoreadthiswork
sincemanyRenaissanceliteratureworksweremakingtheirwaythroughEnglandduringthe
time(Harrison,Robert."WhatCanYouLearnfromMachiavelli?"YaleInsights),usesthisidea
inordertoprovideempowermenttothecommonersoftheday.Thepremisethatnoblemenand
thearistocracyhavetheirpoweronlybyluckwouldbearevolutionaryidea.Itisexactlywhat
Shakespearewouldhaveneededtochangethecommoner’smindsetinordertoconvincethem
thatitwastheirplaceandtimetostepupandchallengetheabusethattheysuffered.However,
thecommonersmaynothavebeenabletounderstandthecomplexlanguageandstructurethat
Machiavellipresentstheideawith,soShakespeareputsitwithinthecontextofaplay.Thepart
ofthephilosophythatquestionstheauthorityofthenoblemenringsloudly,butalmost
overshadowstheclauseof“prowess”.Shakespeareintegratedthisintogivethecommonersa
whyforchallengingthearistocracy.Ifandwhenthecommonersweretoexcepttheirnatural
capabilities,theywouldrealizethatthebestmodeofactionforthem,inordertodefend
themselves,wouldbetodefythearistocracythatcontinuedtopushthemdown.Theyarenot
maximizingtheirpersonalutilitybyhavingtheirrealitybecontrolledbythearistocracy.The
havetheabilitytocreatearealitythattheyareincommandofaslongastheybelieve.
Machiavelli’sphilosophygaveShakespearetheideaspresentedwithinHamletthatempowered
thecommonerstostandupforthemselves.
WilliamShakespeareofStratforduponAvonwasthewriteroftheShakespeariancannon,
asevidencedbyhisownpositionasacommonerofferingtheabilitytoprovidepolitical
commentarythatevokedsympathyandempoweredthecommonersoftheday.Heilluminates
theoppressionthecommonerssufferbythemanipulativenatureofthearistocracy,anduses
contemporaryphilosophytocallthecommonerstoaction.Nonoblemanwouldhavethewantor
theperspectivetodefendthecommonerswiththeinsightthatShakespeareprovided,namely
becausetheywouldnotintheirrightmindsspeakoutagainstthecrown.Thecomplexityaround
theauthorshipoftheShakespeariancannonallboilsdowntotheabilityandmotivationtooffer
upthepoliticalcommentarythatwaspresentwithinShakespeare’splays.Justasthequotefrom
GregMortensensuggests,theabilitytounderstandtheanswertosmallthingslikethequestionof
whowrotetheworksweaccredittoShakespeareisdifficult,withhavingtosortthroughthe
politicalmessthatcreatesthewholedrama,butwhentheanalysisandworkisputin,thevirtue
ofthisunderstandingwillbefelt.
Bibliography
Alberge,Dayla."ShakespeareScholarsUnitetoSeeoffClaimsofthe'BardDeniers'"The
Guardian.N.p.,30Mar.2013.Web.11Dec.2015.
Carmichael,Allison."History.hanover.edu-/hhr/00/."History.hanover.edu-/hhr/00/.Hanover
College,n.d.Web.14Dec.2015.
Gilyeat,Dave.BBCNews.BBC,27Nov.2009.Web.14Dec.2015.
Harrison,Robert."WhatCanYouLearnfromMachiavelli?"YaleInsights.N.p.,1Jan.2011.
Web.11Dec.2015.
Knapp,Alex."Yes,ShakespeareReallyDidWriteShakespeare."Forbes.ForbesMagazine,19
Oct.2012.Web.14Dec.2015.
King,Rachel."CoinedbyShakespeare?ThinkAgain-TheBostonGlobe."BostonGlobe.com.
N.p.,n.d.Web.14Dec.2015.
Lancas,James."ComparingEmpires."GoogleBooks.N.p.,n.d.Web.14Dec.2015.
Machiavelli,Niccolo."ThePrince."ProjectGutenberg.N.p.,16Feb.2006.Web.
Shakespeare,William.Hamlet.London:Methuen,1982.Print.
"TheStratfordGrammarSchool."TheStratfordGrammarSchool.RoyalShakespeare
Company,1Sept.2015.Web.14Dec.2015.
Thorton,Dora."Videos."BritishMuseum.N.p.,12Feb.2004.Web.14Dec.2015.
Thrope,Vanessa."ShakespeareWasaPoliticalRebelWhoWroteinCode."TheGuardian.
N.p.,27Aug.2005.Web.11Dec.2015.
"WilliamShakespeare|EnglishAuthor."EncyclopediaBritannicaOnline.Encyclopedia
Britannica,n.d.Web.14Dec.2015.
Wood,Charles."TheShakespearePaperTrail:TheEarlyYears."BBCNews.BBC,11Apr.
2014.Web.14Dec.2015.