> Common knowledge is an odd concept, when you think about it. Powerful as well. It's easy to believe the stories you grew up hearing.

But tempting, too, to believe the most fantastic and revolutionary of ideas. It's simply "no fun" to believe Shakespeare was who he was -- where's the drama in that?

I am undecided on the matter. I note unipeg's arguments for de Vere with interest, admit they are compelling, but also note that some are circumstantial and others could be explained quite simply by a close friendship between the two men. I'm not ruling out the possibility; nor am I rushing to embrace it.

Either way, the question makes for interesting reading.