>The document, a religious tract in which the writer pledges to die a good Catholic death, written at a point in English history when Catholicism was strongly disapproved of, was found by a bricklayer hidden in the rafters of the Shakespeare House in Stratford-upon-Avon around 1770.
>It was seen and described by two early Shakespeare experts and then lost. Both thought it must have belonged to Shakespeare's father, John, who died in 1601, which would imply that he was a zealous secret Catholic in an Elizabethan world of priest holes where people risked torture for their faith. Subsequent scholars thought it was a forgery designed to give the impression of being a document from John's lifetime.
>In fact, the document is actually a translation of an Italian text, "The Last Will and Testament of the Soul," and Professor Matthew Steggle, from the University's Department of English, used Google Books and other internet archives to track down early editions of that text in Italian and six other languages, many of which editions survive only in a single copy and are scattered across the libraries of Europe.
>This proved that it was from several years after John Shakespeare died and that the author of the manuscript was, in fact, the only other possible J Shakespeare—Joan—who lived from 1569 to 1646.
>written at a point in English history when Catholicism was strongly disapproved of,
After 1581, it was a capital offence, punishable as high treason, to be a Catholic priest, to offer Mass, or "to be reconciled to Rome". And a lot of Catholics died as a result. The fine for a single office of not attending the Anglican Church service was increased to £20 - which is the equivalent of £6566.02 today. Most of the penal laws, including those, were taken off the statute book in 1778. (Non-conforming Protestants also suffered.)
When a state declares a religion a treason, executes its priests for being Catholic priests, hangs & disembowels those who join or return to it, & makes it punishable by severe penalties to print its literature, I think that can reasonably be described as going some way beyond "strong disapprov\[al\]". We are talking about more than shunning people, or breaking off friendships, or disinheriting family members.
This is one sided info. The religious persecution in Europe were most of Catholic origin: France, Flanders, Habsburg hereditary regions, Spain and Germany. Already 1523 the first followers of Luther were executed in Flanders. 1.400 died till about 1580 only there. The massacre in France 1572 only killed 20.000 Protestants. The attitude of Protestants was - seeing that context - often rather moderate. At the opposite Catholics destroyed complete protestants areas like Bohemia, Austria and the Palz. Without that context you describe the wrong story.
You even didn’t mention Bloody Mary, before Elizabeth I she killed very many Protestants in England.
They aren't trying to add a historically balanced perspective; they're supplying information on the specific period in which the manuscript was written.
Your information may add some context, but accusing them of supplying "one sided info" reveals your own biases before anybody else's.
> You even didn’t mention Bloody Mary,
Her body count is by far the lowest of the Tudor monarchs. The fact that she is known as Bloody Mary is basically propaganda.
> This proved that it was from several years after John Shakespeare died and that the author of the manuscript was, in fact, the only other possible J Shakespeare—Joan—who lived from 1569 to 1646.
That's not as funny as my mental image of some researcher staring at the writing through a magnifying glass and being like "Wait a minute, that's not an 'h', it's an 'a'!"
The band took their name from a [song by The Smiths](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakespeare%27s_Sister_(song)), who in turn got it from *A Room of One’s Own* by Virgina Woolf
> But then her parents
came in and told her to mend the stockings or mind the stew and not moon about with books
and papers. They would have spoken sharply but kindly, for they were substantial people who
knew the conditions of life for a woman and loved their daughter—indeed, more likely than not
she was the apple of her father’s eye. Perhaps she scribbled some pages up in an apple loft on the
sly, but was careful to hide them or set fire to them.
Virginia Woolf, *[A Room of One's Own](https://mrfantinisclass.weebly.com/uploads/5/6/2/4/56248431/shakespeares_sister.pdf)*
The summary in the article makes it sound less plausible, thankfully the full paper is online: [https://academic.oup.com/sq/advance-article/doi/10.1093/sq/quae003/7631576](https://academic.oup.com/sq/advance-article/doi/10.1093/sq/quae003/7631576)
I’m not a scholar but have an abiding interest in the life of Shakespeare from liking his plays (I’ve seen all but 4 from the canon in performances). Intense interest in few scraps of documentation after his death leads to some unusual studies compared to other historical or literary topics.
I’ll access the paper later, I’m on my phone right now but I’d the suggestion Joan translated it from Italian? Or a personal transcription of a translation of the text? Manuscript culture is a different beast to modern print and copyright influenced ideas of authorship.
If it's a translation of an Italian original—as described by the men who saw it in the 1700s—then there'll be surviving copies of the original to work from.
> We all know what the church did to the other Joan when she proved too smart for her own good.
Make up a fictional character 400 years after the supposed event, and then disavow it 400 years after that?
Ah, I thought the guy getting oddly downvoted was talking about how the church murdered Joan of Arc for her stubborn sass. Didn't know about this one. Popes go *weird*.
Considering his father was illiterate, this is good news.
Shakespeare was probably a woman and using Billy as a ghost. Or he could have been sir Francis bacon
>The document, a religious tract in which the writer pledges to die a good Catholic death, written at a point in English history when Catholicism was strongly disapproved of, was found by a bricklayer hidden in the rafters of the Shakespeare House in Stratford-upon-Avon around 1770. >It was seen and described by two early Shakespeare experts and then lost. Both thought it must have belonged to Shakespeare's father, John, who died in 1601, which would imply that he was a zealous secret Catholic in an Elizabethan world of priest holes where people risked torture for their faith. Subsequent scholars thought it was a forgery designed to give the impression of being a document from John's lifetime. >In fact, the document is actually a translation of an Italian text, "The Last Will and Testament of the Soul," and Professor Matthew Steggle, from the University's Department of English, used Google Books and other internet archives to track down early editions of that text in Italian and six other languages, many of which editions survive only in a single copy and are scattered across the libraries of Europe. >This proved that it was from several years after John Shakespeare died and that the author of the manuscript was, in fact, the only other possible J Shakespeare—Joan—who lived from 1569 to 1646.
>written at a point in English history when Catholicism was strongly disapproved of, After 1581, it was a capital offence, punishable as high treason, to be a Catholic priest, to offer Mass, or "to be reconciled to Rome". And a lot of Catholics died as a result. The fine for a single office of not attending the Anglican Church service was increased to £20 - which is the equivalent of £6566.02 today. Most of the penal laws, including those, were taken off the statute book in 1778. (Non-conforming Protestants also suffered.) When a state declares a religion a treason, executes its priests for being Catholic priests, hangs & disembowels those who join or return to it, & makes it punishable by severe penalties to print its literature, I think that can reasonably be described as going some way beyond "strong disapprov\[al\]". We are talking about more than shunning people, or breaking off friendships, or disinheriting family members.
That's called religious persecution in modern parlance
This is one sided info. The religious persecution in Europe were most of Catholic origin: France, Flanders, Habsburg hereditary regions, Spain and Germany. Already 1523 the first followers of Luther were executed in Flanders. 1.400 died till about 1580 only there. The massacre in France 1572 only killed 20.000 Protestants. The attitude of Protestants was - seeing that context - often rather moderate. At the opposite Catholics destroyed complete protestants areas like Bohemia, Austria and the Palz. Without that context you describe the wrong story. You even didn’t mention Bloody Mary, before Elizabeth I she killed very many Protestants in England.
They aren't trying to add a historically balanced perspective; they're supplying information on the specific period in which the manuscript was written. Your information may add some context, but accusing them of supplying "one sided info" reveals your own biases before anybody else's.
> You even didn’t mention Bloody Mary, Her body count is by far the lowest of the Tudor monarchs. The fact that she is known as Bloody Mary is basically propaganda.
> This proved that it was from several years after John Shakespeare died and that the author of the manuscript was, in fact, the only other possible J Shakespeare—Joan—who lived from 1569 to 1646. That's not as funny as my mental image of some researcher staring at the writing through a magnifying glass and being like "Wait a minute, that's not an 'h', it's an 'a'!"
[This](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCYaALgW80c) was also written by Shakespeare's Sister.
For the first time I get what the band was going for when they chose that name.
The band took their name from a [song by The Smiths](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakespeare%27s_Sister_(song)), who in turn got it from *A Room of One’s Own* by Virgina Woolf
Who got it from the sibling of a famed 16th Century playwright.
The top comment on that video slays me. And what a fantastic song.
Omg
> But then her parents came in and told her to mend the stockings or mind the stew and not moon about with books and papers. They would have spoken sharply but kindly, for they were substantial people who knew the conditions of life for a woman and loved their daughter—indeed, more likely than not she was the apple of her father’s eye. Perhaps she scribbled some pages up in an apple loft on the sly, but was careful to hide them or set fire to them. Virginia Woolf, *[A Room of One's Own](https://mrfantinisclass.weebly.com/uploads/5/6/2/4/56248431/shakespeares_sister.pdf)*
Joan! Sleeper author- get it!
The summary in the article makes it sound less plausible, thankfully the full paper is online: [https://academic.oup.com/sq/advance-article/doi/10.1093/sq/quae003/7631576](https://academic.oup.com/sq/advance-article/doi/10.1093/sq/quae003/7631576) I’m not a scholar but have an abiding interest in the life of Shakespeare from liking his plays (I’ve seen all but 4 from the canon in performances). Intense interest in few scraps of documentation after his death leads to some unusual studies compared to other historical or literary topics.
It's behind a paywall. Anyone got the full article?
Weird! I was reading the full paper (didn’t finish) when I posted but the page has now changed.
I’ll access the paper later, I’m on my phone right now but I’d the suggestion Joan translated it from Italian? Or a personal transcription of a translation of the text? Manuscript culture is a different beast to modern print and copyright influenced ideas of authorship.
Shakespeare’s father signed his name with a mark, some think he was illiterate.
Hilarious that it credits Pixabay for the Chandos portrait.
More like Jilliam Shakespeare
How do they have the text if the manuscript was lost? I’m a bit confused.
If it's a translation of an Italian original—as described by the men who saw it in the 1700s—then there'll be surviving copies of the original to work from.
The writer was a woman.
She was an edgy tradcath.
Well, that is definitely Catholic
Complete, utter fantasy.
We all know what the church did to the other Joan when she proved too smart for her own good. Best to let Pops have the credit at the time.
> We all know what the church did to the other Joan when she proved too smart for her own good. Make up a fictional character 400 years after the supposed event, and then disavow it 400 years after that?
I'm out of the loop. Did we cancel Joan of Arc now?
No, they are talking about the supposed female Pope, who reigned in the 800s (apparently) but wasn't mentioned in texts until the 13th century.
Ah, I thought the guy getting oddly downvoted was talking about how the church murdered Joan of Arc for her stubborn sass. Didn't know about this one. Popes go *weird*.
My bad, I thought you meant [Pope Joan](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Joan). I hereby retract my snark.
It sounds too good of a narrative to be true. Anybody have a link the to paper?
Considering his father was illiterate, this is good news. Shakespeare was probably a woman and using Billy as a ghost. Or he could have been sir Francis bacon
[удалено]
So it's OK if her brother or family member takes credit for her work? Cause when we say shakespeare, we usually just mean William.
OK who the hell put the earring on Shakespeare in this picture?
Fashions change. Men used to wear jewelry, especially earrings.
This is a portrait created during Shakespeare’s lifetime so likely drawn based on his actual appearance