Cheers for “Malice Aforethought” by Paul H. Altrocchi M.D.

We are finally getting around to reprinting the wonderful Amazon customer review of Dr. Paul Altrocchi’s new book MALICE AFORETHOUGHT, The Killing of a Unique Genius, by  Gary L. Livacari D.D.S., of Park Ridge, Illinois

Full Disclosure: Dr. Altrocchi has one chapter featuring my book THE MONUMENT (and I thank him for that, while thanking Gary for mentioning my work); otherwise the review needs no more introduction or comment from me, so here goes:

Review by Gary L. Livacari, D.D.S.

Take it from a committed Oxfordian who has been following the Shakespeare-Authorship question for almost 25 years: “Malice Aforethought, The Killing of a Unique Genius,” by Oxfordian author Paul Altrocchi, M.D., is an outstanding book. It certainly belongs in the library of all Oxfordians, but it will also be of great value to everyone, especially those who are new to the controversy, wondering what all the fuss is about. Unfortunately, our friends on the Stratfordian side will likely dismiss it as “more of the same.” As usual, they will be profoundly mistaken.

In addition to providing a thorough summation of the strong circumstantial case for Edward DeVere as the true author of the Shakespeare cannon (writing under the hyphenated pseudonym, “William Shake-speare”), Paul Altrocchi details the incredibly weak case for William Shaksper of Stratford. Many newcomers will be suprised to learn that Shaksper was an illiterate, uneducated villager who never wrote a word of prose or poetry in his life – hardly the resume one would expect to find from the author of the greatest works of literature in the English language.

Dr. Altrocchi offers up plenty of new information that long-time Oxfordians will savor. His original research into the symbolism found in the Pregnancy Portrait of Queen Elizabeth yields fascinating results and is well worth the cost of the book by itself. Of special note is his deciphering of the portrait’s here-to-fore unexplained third Latin motto: “Dolor est medicina ed tori.” Without revealing the secret – one which has gone unresolved for over 400 years – it comes close to being a “smoking gun” for Edward DeVere.

The Pregnancy Portrait of Queen Elizabeth I of England (1533-1603)

Also noteworthy is his interesting, even-handed discussion of the Roscius annotation (an original discovery that the author made himself) with Stratfordian author Alan Nelson. This may well be the first-ever combined research project conducted between an Oxfordian and a Stratfordian where the only goal was the discovery of the truth. There are also interesting discussions of the power of conventional wisdom (how it is often times wrong and how it is perpetuated), and the difficulty of initiating a paradigm shift in any field.  These topics are of particular relevance to the Shakespeare-authorship question.

The best feature of the book is that Altrocchi is the first to fit all the pieces of this intriguing puzzle together. Other authors have touched upon many of the topics covered in the book, but none to my knowledge has “put it all together” from beginning to end.  Altrocchi’s refreshing approach throughout the book is to base his conclusions solely on the known facts relating to the case, and he makes a concerted effort to refrain from unfounded speculation, even if it hurts the Oxforian case.  Of course, this is the diametrically opposite approach employed by virtually all Stratfordian authors, where unsupported speculation is often the order of the day.  What else do they have to go on?

Combining his research with that of other recent findings (most notably that of Hank Whittemore in his ground-breaking book, “The Monument”), Paul Altrocchi offers credible explanations for the entire authorship mystery. Along with “The Monument”, this may well be the biggest step forward for the Edward DeVere case since “The Mysterious William Shakespeare.” Oxford…Shaksper…the myth of the Virgin Queen…William and Robert Cecil…the Essex Rebellion…Southhampton…Succession to the throne…the Prince Tudor theory:  these and many other topics all come together in Paul Altrocchi’s skilled hands.

“Malice Aforethought” is well worth the investment in time and money and will keep your interest from beginning to end.  I highly recommend it to Oxfordians of all stripes, and to all others with an open mind who have no vested interest in this important question other than a burning quest for the truth.

Again, thanks to Gary Livacari … and cheers from Hank!

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

7 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. I read “Doctor Faustus”.

    If you read it you will see another Lear.
    In the end, Faustus’s anguish, which surprised
    his fellows scholars, cannot be explained but
    with de Vere’s sin: his incest with his mother (Helen, in the play).

    Now, there are passages concerning some Robin (Clown),
    and some Horse-Courser (he seems to be Shaxpere) which
    you must read: there lies some truth.

    In those passages there is a phrase like this from Horse-Courser:
    “I am a made man for ever. I’ll never leave the horse for 40.”

    Now, 40 is de Vere in the correspondence with James and Cecil.
    And “made for ever” was suppressed in the 1616 edition; the
    other one is from 1604. Both dates are important in the authorship
    question. In fact, there is one Benbolio and Acteon myth in the
    first act. Doctor Faust has many layers from de Vere’s life: from his
    youth and his senectude.

    “The Jew from Malta” is poorly written. It seems to be from his youth.
    “Edward II” has another Acteon myth reference. There are many
    truths in Marlowe to be found.

    Happy new year!

  2. Your new book is extraordinary. Concise, clear, and conclusive.

    A delight to read. Thank you.

    • Thanks very much. By the way, I have neither forgotten nor dismissed your Marlowe comments, which I believe are quite important. You know, there are some Oxfordians – or at least one, who leads one of our online chat groups – who argues that Oxford-Shakespeare wrote most or all of the works attributed to Marlowe. If this person is correct, then your insights into Dido and Faustus would make even more sense. In any case, thanks again and keep up the great sleuthing! Hank

      • I should add that the person I mentioned re: Marlowe is also vehemently against the Prince Tudor theory of the sonnets, i.e., that Southampton was Oxford’s son by the Queen and an heir by blood to the throne — which would be an interesting dilemma for the person, since it would be Oxford, writing as Marlowe, confirming the PT theory! Cheers from Hank

  3. I loved your book Dr. Altrocchi. I am an avid reader of the authorship research. Just met Bonner Cutting and she, of course, speaks very highly of you. I hope I can meet you one day and share my de Vere project with you. Ben August – on facebook as Edward de Vere – Shakespeare

    • Thanks. I share your admiration for Dr. Altrocchi’s work and have sent you his email address. Tell us about your de Vere project whenever you wish. Cheers from Hank

      • You’re right about that. Thanks for reminding us!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: