The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.2212 Friday, 1 December 2000
[1] From: P. D. Holland <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Thursday, 30 Nov 2000 18:45:22 -0000
Subj: Re: SHK 11.2199 Re: "Invention in a noted weed"
[2] From: David Kathman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Thursday, 30 Nov 2000 20:14:37 -0600
Subj: Re: SHK 11.2199 Re: "Invention in a noted weed"
[3] From: David Schalkwyk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Friday, 1 Dec 2000 11:39:48 +0200
Subj: Re: SHK 11.2199 Re: "Invention in a noted weed"
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: P. D. Holland <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Thursday, 30 Nov 2000 18:45:22 -0000
Subject: 11.2199 Re: "Invention in a noted weed"
Comment: Re: SHK 11.2199 Re: "Invention in a noted weed"
Just to clarify the provenance of the pipes. I have consulted with the
people at the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust. Some were found at New Place
in an excavation in the 1920s. All of these pipes were made in the 1660s
or later and hence can have no possible link with Shakespeare himself.
Others do date from Shakespeare's time but there is no indication
whatsoever where they came from. They may have come from Stratford;
they may have come from London; they may have come from Cornwall or
Edinburgh or or or or. There is nothing to link any of the pipes which
are of early enough date with New Place, let alone Shakespeare himself.
So now can we drop the subject?!
[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Kathman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Thursday, 30 Nov 2000 20:14:37 -0600
Subject: 11.2199 Re: "Invention in a noted weed"
Comment: Re: SHK 11.2199 Re: "Invention in a noted weed"
Mike Jensen wrote:
>Does it matter what the pipes contain? Are not they far more likely to
>have belonged to the man who owned New Place after Shakespeare's death
>than to da Bard himself? Is there any possible reason to believe they
>were smoked by W. S.? Surely, I'm not the only one who has thought of
>this? Have these behind this theory addressed it?
I've been keeping out of this, but now I can't hold back any longer.
The original news story said that these pipes were taken from
Shakespeare's home, "New Place". But New Place was demolished in the
mid-1700's, and all that remains is the garden and some foundation
stones. This leads me to wonder where the pipes in question actually
came from. Could they have come from the Birthplace on Henley Street?
If so, I'm very skeptical about any claims that they belonged to
Shakespeare, because all the "Elizabethan" furniture and implements in
the Shakespeare Birthplace are replicas placed there in the 19th century
or later. Unless we get some answers about the provenance of these
pipes, all the chemical testing in the world would seem to be pretty
much moot.
Dave Kathman
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Schalkwyk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Friday, 1 Dec 2000 11:39:48 +0200
Subject: 11.2199 Re: "Invention in a noted weed"
Comment: Re: SHK 11.2199 Re: "Invention in a noted weed"
Whether Shakespeare smoked the pipes or not is not the issue. That's a
red herring and may be ignored. What is interesting is that his
contemporaries smoked nutmeg and cocaine...
David Schalkwyk
