High Court Won’t Filch From Bard His Good Name : Zounds! Much Ado About Poetic Justice

Turning from legal controversies to a literary one, three Supreme Court justices “ruled” Friday that William Shakespeare is the likely author of the famous plays and sonnets, not the more worldly and talented Earl of Oxford.

Since the mid-19th Century, some scholars have doubted whether an uneducated and largely unknown businessman from Stratford, England, could have written the 36 plays attributed to him. And in recent years, the doubters have focused on an intriguing substitute: Edward De Vere, a poet, world traveler, friend of Queen Elizabeth and the 17th Earl of Oxford.

Never Left England

De Vere had journeyed through France and Italy. Shakespeare never left England. Could the real author of “Romeo and Juliet” and “The Merchant of Venice” never have visited Italy?

Could a small-town investor, not a nobleman, display the knowledge of court life and palace intrigue as in “Macbeth,” “Hamlet” and “Richard III”?

And could a man who went four years to grammar school--believed to be the sum of Shakespeare’s education--display the vocabulary and learning evident in works of the bard?

“These works reveal an author who is highly educated and of wide culture,” attorney Peter Jaszi told three justices during a moot court debate Friday at American University. “It is more likely and more probable they were the work of the Earl of Oxford than the obscure figure to whom they are conventionally attributed.”

Attorney James Boyle, representing Shakespeare, poked a few holes in the case for the earl. De Vere died in 1604, he pointed out, and plays such as “The Tempest” and “Henry VIII” appeared several years later. And why, he asked, would a proud man like De Vere have hidden his authorship of such extraordinary literature?

Debate Called Fascinating

The justices, saying they found the debate both fascinating and unresolvable, peppered the two lawyers with questions and comments.

Shakespeare of Stratford was not “an ignorant butcher boy,” Justice William J. Brennan Jr. said, pointing out that grammar schools of the 16th Century gave students an education in the classics.

Although De Vere was a literary man, he hardly spent his life glued to a desk, one lawyer noted. He fought in the streets, made a spectacle of himself at the queen’s court and was once imprisoned in the Tower of London for a series of amorous affairs.

“Sounds like the conduct of a playwright,” interjected Justice John Paul Stevens.

Three hours later, the justices returned with a unanimous decision in favor of the man from Stratford.

Brennan, the high court’s senior member, said the advocates for De Vere put forth “essentially a conspiracy theory” that they have failed to prove.

Justice Harry A. Blackmun said he would “prefer to leave the issue to historians” but agreed that the case for De Vere is only circumstantial.

Offers Mild Dissent

The bow-tied Stevens, the court’s most regular dissenter, agreed with the majority, but he also offered a mild dissent.

“I do not think the case (for De Vere) is frivolous,” Stevens said. Scholars have dug up remarkably little evidence of Shakespeare’s authorship of the plays and, strangely, few current accounts mention him, he said.

“There is a lingering doubt,” Stevens said. “And if it was not Shakespeare who was the author, there is a high probability it was De Vere.”

Next week, the justices return to more familiar work, meeting behind closed doors to decide which of nearly 1,300 pending appeals they will hear. They begin hearing cases for their fall term on Oct. 5.