It’s time to introduce my new book SHAKESPEARE’S SON AND HIS SONNETS, due for release on December 1st, from Martin and Lawrence Press. This is what you might call an “expanded introduction” and “overview” or “synopsis” of THE MONUMENT, my full edition of the Shakespearean sonnets demonstrating the first-ever “macro” theory explaining the entire sequence — its elegant design or structure, its special language and the highly dangerous, even treasonous story preserved for those of us in posterity.
The idea is to provide a clear look at the so-called Monument Theory — actually, what I believe is the correct solution to the longstanding mystery of the Sonnets — for the general public as well as for students, literary scholars, historians, folks involved in the theater and general readers of all stripes.
The 218-page paperback book can be ordered in advance at Amazon using this link.
The Table of Contents looks like this:
Introduction
One ………………….. A Royal Story
Two …………………. A Special Language
Three ………………. A Dynamic Design
Four ………………… A Tudor Prince
Five …………………. The Earl of Southampton
Six …………………… A New Time Frame
Seven ………………. A New Context
Eight ……………….. An Overview of the Story
Nine ………………… The Essex Rebellion
Ten ………………….. The Prisoner
Eleven ……………… Sonnet 107: Liberation
Twelve …………….. Sonnet 107: Commentary
Thirteen …………… Sonnet 133: Awaiting Execution
Fourteen ………….. Oxford in the Sonnets
End Notes
Bibliography
Index
I’ll have more details in the coming days and weeks….
Cheers from Hank!
Hank Whittemore's Shakespeare Blog 
Great news.
Regardless of how you will treat (or skip) Mr. Beauclerk question,
your interpretation of the Sonnets is solid and lucid.
Today I was in a library. There was no oxfordian books on
Shakespeare, and all the Shakespeare’s Sonnets edited for
sell were stratfordian. Literature and power related to censure
and the control of information.
The paradigm is changing. I will comment about your new
book in the literary digital magazine I write for in Málaga.
Congratulations.
Thanks very much. Yes, the shift of paradigm is under way. Not without loud protests and gnarling teeth, I am afraid, but change of this magnitude cannot happen without some great flareups near the end. How long it will take I have no idea, really, but the issue is here to stay and won’t go away until the shift happens and things settle down again.
Charles Beauclerk’s book Shakespeare’s Lost Kingdom is well worth reading; it’s a work of great magnitude in terms of his ability to see through the lines of the plays, with a kind of X-ray vision, and discover the soul of this giant known as Shakespeare. And you are right, the Monument theory of the Sonnets remains valid regardless of what will turn up — and I do expect that the new students and scholars (of literature AND history) will keep uncovering layers of the truth until it can no longer be denied.
Thanks again and cheers…
Congratulations on placing a concise summary of your Monument theory on Amazon books! I look forward to reading this latest development, and comparing to the BIG BOOK. This should also make it easier for reviewers to take on, and grapple with the essentials of your arguments. Best wishes, Marie
Thanks, Marie. Nothing much new in Shakespeare’s Son and His Sonnets except to present a much smaller package at a much more affordable price. And marking off sections of the Monument introduction more clearly, while adding the two sonnets, 107 and 133, to this mix. In 133 I include an early observation (1911) of 133 & 134 as referring to Southampton in the Tower — in a book of legal stuff in Shakespeare. There are other ways to present all the material, and there are many new things to put forth in other books, but this time for me it’s enough to reach much more of the general reading audience. Best – Hank
I just finished reading Sobran’s “Alias Shakespeare”.
His theory about the Sonnets’ homosexual feelings between
de Vere and Southampton did not convince me at all, as the
evidences he show us is not as strong as yours.
Now, how do you reckon Sobran’s theory that de Vere was
writing and publishing sonnets all through the 1590’s and
using nome de plumes as “E.C. Squire” in the book of 40
sonnets called “Emaricdulfe”, as he writes in this article,
http://www.sobran.com/orphans.shtml?
Thanks again. Will look it over and get back to you. I did hear Joe give a speech about those sonnets, back in about 1998, I believe, and I was dubious about them having been written by Oxford-Shakespeare. There is an intensity about the Shakespeare sonnets, especially after no. 26, where you can feel the increasing power and compression. But I don’t know and will study and be back with a better answer. Cheers from Hank
I’m readin “Dido”, by Marlowe.
Now, Dido is a satirical portrait of Elisabeth’s tyranny as queen and
as lover, and her famous indecision when setting her mind. See how de Vere’s hand in this:
Iarbas: Come, Dido, leave Ascanius; let us walk.
Dido: Go thou away; Ascanius shall stay.
I: Ungentle queen, is this thy love to me?
D: O stay, Iarbas, and I’ll go with thee!
Cupid: And if my mother go, I’ll follow her.
D: Why stay’st thou here? Thou art no love of mine.
I: Iarbas, die, seeing she abandons thee!
D: No; live, Iarbas. What hast thou deserv’d,
That I should say thou art no love of mine?
Someting thou hast deserve’d. –Away, I say!
Depart from Carthage; come not in my sight.
I: Am I not king of rich Gaetulia?
D: Iarbas, pardon me, and stay a while.
Cupid: Mother, look here.
Act III, Escene I, lines 34-47.
These lines reverberates de Vere’s relationship with Elisabeth.
I mean: look at the irony of Cupid (de Vere) when he says,
after this satire, “Mother, look here”. CRISTAL CLEAR.
This is a smoking gun for de Vere.
There are more references in the play. I’m just enjoying the ride
and having fun at the truth of reading the play “with parted eye”.
And these lines are a resume of your theory of the Sonnets:
Enter Juno to Ascanius [i.e. the Fair Youth, son of Aeneas], who lies asleep.
Juno: Here lies my hate, Aeneas’ cursed brat,
The boy wherein false Destiny delights,
The heir of Fury [i.e. the Boar!], the favourite of the Fates,
That ugly imp that shall outwear my wrath,
And wrong my deity [i.e. his virginity myth!] with high disgrace.
But I will take another order now,
And raze th’ eternal register of Time [i.e. succession of the Tudors!].
Troy shall no more call him her second hope,
Nor Venus triumph in her tender youth [!!].
Dido, Act III, Escene II.
De Vere pleading to Elisabeth for the Fair Youth title to the crown:
Juno.- [She has been caught trying to kill the sleeping boy Ascanius
by Venus; now Juno tries to get a deal]
Venus, sweet Venus (…)
(…)
Thy son, thou know’st, with Dido now remains
And feeds his eyes with favours of her court;
(…)
Why should not they [i.e. Dido and Aeneas], then, join in marriage,
And bring forth mighty kings to Carthage town, [!!]
Whom casualty of sea hath made such friends?
And, Venus, let there be a match confirm’d
Betwixt these two, whose loves are so alike,
And both our deities, conjoin’d in one [Southampton’s motto],
Shall chain felicity unto their throne.
Dido, Act III, Escene II, lines 70-80.
This story is NOT in the Virgil text.
It can be tell louder, but not more clearer than this.
“Dido” is a tragedy of the 1590’s advocating for the Fair Youth as monarch.
After that words of Juno we have seen above, Venus says:
Venus: Sister, I see you savour of my wiles;
Be it as you will have for this once.
Meantime Ascanius shall be my charge;
Whom I shall bear to Ida in mine arms,
And couch him in Adonis’ purple down [!!]
I mean: it is all there. There is nothing more to say, I believe.
Amazing find! Haven’t had time to absorb it fully but yes, seems it’s all there as you say. My, my….! Thanks and happy new year! Hank
But see this.
Aeneas says that he IS THE MOTHER OF HIS SON,
because the queen Dido has been playing his mother:
Cupid: Vain man, what monarchy expect’s thou here?
Aeneas: This was my mother that beguiled the queen ,
And made me take my mother for my son [!!!]
Dido, Act V, Escene I, line 42.
You and Mr. Beauclerks are right, and it is HERE!
It is here.
He is saying that he is the FATHER AND BROTHER
of his son, because Dido has been beguiled as his mother!
Oh my…! The smoking gun!
Sorry, not MOTHER, but BROTHER.