Empirical studies of Shakespeare's plays have usually assumed that the traditional Stratfordian chronology is basically correct. This assumption is cast in doubt by Oxfordians who claim that the plays were authored by Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford. However, prior investigations have shown that Stratfordian chronologies are more strongly supported by stylometric analyses than are Oxfordian chronologies. In this study the two authorship positions are evaluated by examining the correlation between the thematic content of the plays and the political context in which the plays would be written according to rival sets of dates. Stratfordian chronologies, when lagged just two years, yield substantively meaningful associations between thematic content and political context, whereas Oxfordian chronologies yield no relationships, however lagged. Hence, only the Stratfordian results are consistent with previous research indicating that artistic creativity is responsive to conspicuous political events.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrainerdB. (1980). The chronology of Shakespeare's plays: A statistical study. Computers and the Humanities, 14, 221–230.
2.
CeruloK. A. (1984). Social disruption and its effects on music: An empirical analysis. Social Forces, 62, 885–904.
3.
ClarkE. T. (1930). Hidden allusions in Shakespeare's plays: A study of the early court revels and personalities of the times.New York: Farquhar Payson.
4.
CraigH., & BevingtonD. (Eds.). (1973). The complete works of Shakespeare (rev. ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
5.
DerksP. L. (1989). Pun frequency and popularity of Shakespeare's plays. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 7, 23–31.
6.
DerksP. L. (1994). Clockwork Shakespeare: The Bard meets the Regressive Imagery Dictionary. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 12, 131–139.
7.
ElliottW. E. Y., & ValenzaR. J. (2000). Can the Oxford candidacy be saved? A response to W. Ron Hess: “Shakespeare's dates: The effect on stylistic analysis.”The Oxfordian, 3, 71–97.
8.
FaustD. (1984). Limits of scientific reasoning.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
9.
HessW. R. (1999). Shakespeare's dates: Their effect on stylistic analysis. The Oxfordian, 2, 25–59.
10.
HutchinsR. M. (Ed.). (1952). Great books of the Western world.Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica.
11.
LooneyJ. T. (1920). “Shakespeare “ identified in Edward De Vere, the seventeenth earl of Oxford (1st ed.) London: Palmer.
12.
MartindaleC. (1975). Romantic progression: The psychology of literary history.Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
13.
MartindaleC. (1990). The clockwork muse: The predictability of artistic styles.New York: Basic Books.
14.
McCurdyH. G. (1953). The personality of Shakespeare.New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
15.
MeehlP. (1954). Clinical versus statistical prediction: A theoretical analysis and a review of the evidence.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
16.
OgburnC. (1984). The mysterious William Shakespeare: The myth and the reality.New York: Dodd, Mead.
17.
OgburnD. (1952). This star of England: “William Shakespeare,” man of the Renaissance.New York: Coward-McCann.
18.
PriceD. (2001). Shakespeare's unorthodox biography: New evidence of an authorship problem.Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
19.
QuételetA. (1835/1968). A treatise on man and the development of his faculties.New York: Franklin. (Reprint of 1842 Edinburgh translation of 1835 French original.)
20.
SimontonD. K. (1976). The sociopolitical context of philosophical beliefs: A transhistorical causal analysis. Social Forces, 54, 513–523.
21.
SimontonD. K. (1980a). Thematic fame and melodic originality in classical music: A multivariate computer-content analysis. Journal of Personality, 48, 206–219.
22.
SimontonD. K. (1980b). Thematic fame, melodic originality, and musical zeitgeist: A biographical and transhistorical content analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 972–983.
23.
SimontonD. K. (1983). Dramatic greatness and content: A quantitative study of eighty-one Athenian and Shakespearean plays. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 1, 109–123.
24.
SimontonD. K. (1986a). Aesthetic success in classical music: A computer analysis of 1935 compositions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 4, 1–17.
25.
SimontonD. K. (1986b). Popularity, content, and context in 37 Shakespeare plays. Poetics, 15, 493–510.
26.
SimontonD. K. (1987a). Musical aesthetics and creativity in Beethoven: A computer analysis of 105 compositions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 5, 87–104.
27.
SimontonD. K. (1987b). Why presidents succeed: A political psychology of leadership.New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
28.
SimontonD. K. (1989a). Shakespeare's sonnets: A case of and for single-case historiometry. Journal of Personality, 57, 695–721.
29.
SimontonD. K. (1989b). The swan-song phenomenon: Last-works effects for 172 classical composers. Psychology and Aging, 4, 42–47.
30.
SimontonD. K. (1990). Lexical choices and aesthetic success: A computer content analysis of 154 Shakespeare sonnets. Computers and the Humanities, 24, 251–264.
31.
SimontonD. K. (1995). Drawing inferences from symphonic programs: Musical attributes versus listener attributions. Music Perception, 12, 307–322.
32.
SimontonD. K. (1997a). Creative productivity: A predictive and explanatory model of career trajectories and landmarks. Psychological Review, 104, 66–89.
33.
SimontonD. K. (1997b). Imagery, style, and content in 37 Shakespeare plays. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 15, 15–20.
34.
SimontonD. K. (1997c). Products, persons, and periods: Historiometric analyses of compositional creativity. In HargreavesD. & NorthA. (Eds.), The social psychology of music (pp. 107–122). New York: Oxford University Press.
35.
SimontonD. K. (1998a). Mad King George: The impact of personal and political stress on mental and physical health. Journal of Personality, 66, 443–466.
36.
SimontonD. K. (1998b). Political leadership across the life span: Chronological versus career age in the British monarchy. Leadership Quarterly, 9, 195–206.
37.
SimontonD. K. (1999). William Shakespeare. In RuncoM. A. & PritzkerS. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (Vol. 2; pp. 559–563). San Diego: Academic Press.
38.
SimontonD. K.TaylorK., & CassandroV. (1998). The creative genius of William Shakespeare: Historiometric analyses of his plays and sonnets. In SteptoeA. (Ed.), Genius and the mind: Studies of creativity and temperament in the historical record (pp. 167–192). New York: Oxford University Press.
39.
SkinnerB. F. (1939). The alliteration in Shakespeare's sonnets: A study in literary behavior. Psychological Record, 3, 186–192.
40.
WinterD. G. (1973). The power motive.New York: Free Press.
