This video has elicited several questions which deserve to be answered:  A good friend wrote:  'How could Edward de Vere have been 'devout' while actively encouraging a married woman to bear him a son by another man? How could he have taken a vow of chastity while sharing a mistress with his young friend, Wriothesley?  Why did his detractors hate him so?' .  I replied as follows:

'I am sorry if I have unintentionally misled you or others by the phrase 'shared mistress'.  I do not mean 'shared-at-the-same-time mistress'.  My chronology, which is highly speculative, works backwards from the only fixed point of which I am certain - the birth of Henry Vere in February 1593.  His conception therefore took place in May 1592, so Oxford must have persuaded Penelope and Wriothesley to surrogate his heir in the early months of 1592.  He married his second wife, Elizabeth Trentham, at the end of 1591.  I speculate that he took a vow of chastity sometime before that, maybe as early as April 1590.  His affair with Penelope Rich took place in the 1580s.  In 'Willobie His Avisa' (1594) it is suggested that the Vere-Rich liaison was over by the time he came to advise Wriothesley on how to seduce her.  The same thing is hinted by Barnfield.  Two headings by Soowthern make me suspect that the Oxford-Penelope affair might have been active as early as 1584.

Oxford calls his surrogated heir  'the first heir of my invention' and Wriothesley the 'godfather' of it.  Though devout and God-fearing, his regard for biblical strictures (such as those concerning adultery) were highly unconventional and he was critical (among close friends) of the Bible and those who wrote it, believing it to be a work of divine origin booby-trapped by human error.  It was his view that Mary, mother of Jesus, was an adulteress and Joseph a cuckold.  So his reasoning, I suspect, would have been along the lines:  'if Jesus was born in this way the first heir of my invention should be also?' or 'because Jesus was born in this way, my actions are legitimate in the eyes of God'.  The difficulty with Oxford is to reconcile his spiritual beliefs with his overt criticisms of the scriptures, but as I have long been saying he was some kind of proto-Mason/Templar/Rosicrucian, hence the theory concerning his vow of chastity.  He once boasted he could write a better scripture in six days, and only Shakespeare could have done that!

I hope this is useful, AW

PS. Unconventional geniuses, especially those with great wit and access to high places, are invariably hated by lesser, straight-laced men on the rise.’

The genius of Shakespeare's generation, and in you (sadly lonely by comparison) in recovering it, is humbling and awe-inspiring.  Thrice praised.

RIP Alexander.   You've opened up a whole new world and ALSO show us how the truth is so elusive.

I am 68 and just finding all this stuff out. This to me is just amazing. Thanks so much for the information.

Alexander is a superb academic writer and his breath of knowledge about who really wrote Shakespeare words and De Vere is outstanding and probably the leading academic on this subject in the World today!! Keep up the outstanding work Alexander! Also just touching on Alexanders genius is from his coding 6-2-4  Edward-De-Vere! Fascinating!!

That darn dedication....... Just when you're certain you've wrapped your brain around it...

I can't watch enough of these. Thanks so much for putting out so many!

Thanks Alexander. Reading your article in THE OXFORDIAN, Volume XVI 2014 regarding Jonson’s “Sweet Swan of Avon” it reminded me of a couple of things that Jonson might have linked. “The ancient Greeks believed that a swan was mute throughout its life, but right before it died it sang a beautiful, melodious song, happy that it would be joining its master, the god Apollo.” (Alexander Atkins 2014). Also, the legal doodah “The Case of Swans” in 1592 decided that Elizabeth I could claim ownership of all unmarked mute swans in English waters. (Katy Barnett 2020). She owned De Vere  the mute swan.

Not sure who is the greater genius here -  the cypher or decryptor.

The Sonnet 17 reference has me titling towards Waugh - whose first name contains the letters DEE...

KP

Excellent work. Neither too complicated, nor esoteric... Thank you.

Bravo. Can’t wait for the Netflix documentary.

That reading of the iconography of Sonnet 17 as signalling 1740, and the quadruple anagrams to Wriostheley is quite fascinating (among other things in the video).

Wonderful and wow! Thank you again Alexander, for your work, for your succinct explanations and for an extremely entertaining and enlightening presentation. Who could dispute that so much (symbolism, meaning, placement) relating to Oxford is crammed into this (just) 146 letter dedication?

” William Shakespear” was De Veres alter Ego…just like David Bowies Ziggy Stardust. The person Will Shakspers parents were Illitarate…his two daughters were Illitarate…he himself could barely spell his own name.

Your research and presentation of this evidence is hugely Impressive. I hope you're working toward a book on the subject yourself eventually.

Yet another superb presentation Alexander.., 👏🏻

Stunning encryption... indeed a marvel to behold...

Absolutely amazing!

WOW! Four Wriothesley (s) in Sonnet 17!
Another wonderful presentation Mr. Waugh, thank you.

Thank you for your wonderful and inspiring series of presentations on Edward de Vere. RIP.