Shakespeare was a fraud

[Georg Ebner]

Absurdest is the F.BACON-HypoThesis. But one has to understand the situation of the XIXth.
German romanticism had brought the big revolution in hermeneutics, wonderfully described by W.DILTHEY: Viewing the work no longer for its own sake as had happened in classicism; instead the work being an ExPression of the author like the petrified lava of a volcano. The historian going back from external facts/works into the internal thoughts&emotions of the creators. What establishing serious HistorioGraphy, was at the same time misled by GOETHE, as the romanticists thought, that all poets, painters, composers must have lived a great, symbolic life as the overwhelming giant did directly in front of their noses. Only after lots of failed BioGraphies realizing, that most poets - let alone painters or composers - had expressed themselves mainly/only in great poetry, not in a great private life.

[Georg Ebner]

No, the most absurd hypothesis is that Edmund Spenser faked his death and continued to write under the pseudonym of William Shakespeare. Of all the potential alt-Shakespeares, Oxford is the only plausible one and even the case for him isn't persuasive.

From a non-literarical point of view a faked death is indeed "the most absurd hypothesis". But otherwise E.SPENSER with His harmless "FairyQueen" aso. is less absurd than F.BACON, whose whole PhiloSophy was really farest away from S..