Experts plan to exhume Shakespeare's body

icBirmingham ^ | Nov 1, 2005 | Name not given

[SpringheelJack]

Controversial plans to dig up William Shakespeare's grave, to find out whether he was murdered by his son-in-law, have been revealed by American scientists.

The US experts, who are convinced the Bard's death was anything but natural, are hoping to be granted permission by his descendants to exhume his body.

Shakespeare died on his birthday on April 23, 1616, and was buried two days later at Stratford-upon-Avon's Holy Trinity Church.

His grave has remained untouched for more than 350 years, but now American pathologists want to disturb his resting place, in spite of warnings of a curse on Shakespeare's tomb if anyone tries to disturb his bones.

They are convinced scientific advances including DNA testing will end years of speculation about Shakespeare being murdered.

Professor James Starrs, of George Washington University in the US, said: " Shakespeare has made it clear that there is no justification for removing his bones. However, there is some consideration of foul play and the possibility that we could positively identify his body, so permission for this project becomes easier to find."

[NotJustAnotherPrettyFace]

LOL - good one...

[carola]

There wouldn't be anything left but some very dry bones, though it might be interesting to check out what is left of his clothing. I don't there are any Shakespeare descendants, but I doubt if permission would be granted in any case.

[RobbyS]

I read somewhere they they already have opened his grave, and found only mud.

[Charles Henrickson]

You gonna take this lying down?

[Lancey Howard]

Professor James Starrs, of George Washington University in the US, said: " Shakespeare has made it clear that there is no justification for removing his bones. However, there is some consideration of foul play and the possibility that we could positively identify his body, so permission for this project becomes easier to find."

?

[Publius]

Bones? It depends on how they buried him.

If he was sealed in a lead coffin, common at that time, anaerobic bacteria would have liquified all of him, including bones, leaving only a smelly green goo.

When they opened up some ancient lead Walsingham family coffins to look for original Skahespeare manuscripts, that's all they found. It took days to air out the chapel to get rid of the stench.

[Dead Dog]

They'll probably want to tell us he was actually an Arab or something.

[Charles Henrickson]

"I come to raise Shakespeare, not to bury him."

[fat city]

LOLOLOL- Great!!!

[gcruse]

That would be a great time to find out if Shakespeare was a she instead of a he.

[SpringheelJack]

I don't there are any Shakespeare descendants, but I doubt if permission would be granted in any case.

If memory serves, his last descendant was a granddaughter who died in the 1670s. I don't think permission will be granted either. Kind of hard to ignore Shakespeare's direct wishes inscribed on his grave.

[SpringheelJack]

I read somewhere they they already have opened his grave, and found only mud.

Nobody's gotten into Shakespeare's grave since he was put there.

[starbase]

You know the ongoing controversy about whether or not Shakespeare really is the author of all his works? Here's a synopsis of the other possible candidates:

---

http://www.onlineshakespeare.com/whowrote.htm

If Shakespeare didn't write Shakespeare, then who did?

Since Shakespeare's four centuries' ago, hypotheses put forward are that: Francis Bacon wrote Shakespeare, Edward de Vere (Earl of Oxford) wrote Shakespeare, William Stanley (Earl of Derby) wrote Shakespeare, Roger Manners (Earl of Rutland) wrote Shakespeare, Christopher Marlowe wrote Shakespeare, several of these (and others) wrote Shakespeare or that Shakespeare himself stole others' works!

---

[SpringheelJack]

It's not really a "controversy". Those who believe he didn't write his works are firmly on the marginal crank fringe, along with those who believe Jack Kennedy escaped Dallas and Neil Armstrong faked the moon landing.

[WillamShakespeare]

ALAS! BEGONE THY SPIRITS OF DEMON! Thoust shall NOT dig up mine soil wherest I rest for thee long! What foul manner of beast beget this assault on mine own breast? Is this foul stench of a demon a liberal? I am rolling rolling in thine own grave! Thee will HALT say I! Dig up thy skeletons in Hillarys closet, much more wilst be revealed!

[carola]

Lovely.

[starbase]

Perhaps it's not so wacky as that, considering:

---

http://www.onlineshakespeare.com/whowrote.htm

The source of all doubts about the authorship of the plays lies in the disparity between the greatness of Shakespeare's literary achievement and his comparatively humble origin, the supposed inadequacy of his education and the obscurity of his life. In Shakespeare's writings, people have claimed to discover a familiarity with languages and literature, with such subjects as law, history, politics and geography, and with the manners and speech of courts, which they regard as inconceivable in a common player, the son of a provincial tradesman. This range of knowledge, it is said, is to be expected at that period only in a man of extensive education, one who was familiar with such royal and noble personages as figure largely in Shakespeare's plays. And the dearth of contemporary records has been regarded as incompatible with Shakespeare's eminence and as therefore suggestive of mystery. That none of his manuscripts has survived has been taken as evidence that they were destroyed to conceal the identity of their author.

---

[Verginius Rufus]

So if they prove that Shakespeare was murdered, what do they intend to do to punish his killer?

[SpringheelJack]

Perhaps it's not so wacky as that, considering:

Yes it is wacky, and the passage you link to is nothing but bloviation. Take the illogic of this statement, "That none of his manuscripts has survived has been taken as evidence that they were destroyed to conceal the identity of their author." If that's evidence, then what are we to make of the lack of manuscripts for Christopher Marlowe, Robert Greene, Thomas Kyd, Thomas Nashe, John Webster, John Ford, ad nauseum?

And the statement is false anyways, since a portion of "Sir Thomas More" written by Shakespeare does survive in manuscript. An extremely rare bit of luck. If I remember correctly, out of thousands of plays written during Shakespeare's time only about 20 have been preserved in manuscript. People who make arguments such as the one you cite really know nothing of the period.

[SpringheelJack]

So if they prove that Shakespeare was murdered, what do they intend to do to punish his killer?

Dig him up, and place him on trial. They did that once to a pope in the 9th century.