Comparative Plausibility of Authors of Sir Thomas More.

This article explores the authorship of Sir Thomas More, specifically examining the likelihood of Anthony Munday and William Shakespeare as potential authors. The study conducted by Ward E.Y. Elliott and Robert J. Valenza found that Munday's play, John a Kent and John a Cumber, was less likely to be attributed to Shakespeare compared to their edited version of Sir Thomas More. Further analysis revealed that Munday's authorship of Sir Thomas More was significantly reduced when compared to Shakespeare. The article includes tables comparing the frequency of words in Shakespeare's First Folio, John a Kent and John a Cumber, and Sir Thomas More, which can be useful for researchers studying Shakespeare's writing style and themes. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is used to compare the verbal similarities between the texts, indicating a closer relationship between Sir Thomas More and Shakespeare's works. While the evidence does not definitively prove Shakespeare's authorship, it does make it more plausible than Munday's. The use of mathematical methods in literature analysis is important for determining authorship. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Notes & Queries is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)