Great Folio in 1623, for example, if we consider the image of Shakespeare on the tombstone as a portrait on the engraving in the Folio, accurate (both in fact made by his contemporaries) then why are they so deadly unlike! The engraving from the Folio - a frozen mask of Lord, which Stratford was not and could not be - fat smug sausage twist with tendrils - this could hardly be the author of "Romeo and Juliet" and "Hamlet".

Unexplained discrepancy if we consider Stratford and the author of Shakespeare's plays and poems one and the same person. But if you don't count?

Doubt has over the years accumulated enough. Doubt, however, is not the authorship of the Poet (it is undoubtedly), but who exactly is hiding behind the mask of the pseudonym of Shakespeare. Stratford Shakespeare (or rather so it was recorded in the Church books at the baptism and the burial service) is just one of the possible contenders for authorship.

These doubts first appeared a long time ago, in 1747, when the priest George green found invaluable document - a Testament Shakespeare. Priceless it is not only the fact that all documents reflecting any of the events of Shakespeare's life, a little bit, and then actually hand signed, and recorded with his last will, and many household items, and, most importantly, developing in them the human nature.

So: character, this is quite cheap, simply does not fit the personality of the artist, especially the artist's genius. Counted everything in the house to the last fork, painted to the percentage of capital generation expected heirs, and with not a word about manuscripts, about books, and about them to forget he could not, at least as of the value of material - then they were expensive. So, they were not. And this "Lord of language"! We will add that in England in those years not a single public library was not. Grin literally became sick, shaken by a jerk of a man, revered for the genius.

The bust of Shakespeare in Holy Trinity Church in Stratford and more and more. Generations of researchers collected as many of the facts that the belief in the authorship Shakespeare no stone has been left unturned. It turned out, Shakespeare were engaged in usury and dragged through the courts poor neighbors - the blacksmith, the time has not managed to pay. Somehow it is not enough accompanied with the character of the man who wrote "the merchant of Venice". Even less combined vast erudition in various fields and unparalleled vocabulary of Shakespeare (20 thousand - none of the European writers none on all subsequent times and this was not close). Illiteracy, in the best case - with illiteracy Shakespeare. He signed his documents on the hard output. However, on the monument in Stratford Church, Shakespeare depicted holding a pen in his hand. But attack: feather, it turns out, was "attached" somewhere in the eighteenth century, contemporaries with his pen never seen, and never seen a single line written by his hand.

In 1622, when the monument was erected, his hands lay on some sort of bag - either with money, or with wool is documented by the engravings. And, of course, never studying, never having been outside of England, could not Shakespeare to know French, which reads a scene in "Henry V", or to read in the original Italian or Spanish books. Were illiterate and both his daughters! And so on and so forth.

Sometimes you can hear that doubts about the authorship Shakespeare born, they say, only the machinations of the envious and spiteful critics. Then recall that these "envious and spiteful critics" was Charles Dickens, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Bismarck, Disraeli, Lord Palmerston, Walt Whitman, Sigmund Freud - the list is far from complete. Mark Twain called Shakespeare the greatest of never existing people in the world.

Since the late nineteenth century were looking for "authentic Shakespeare". Who only was not available on the "vacancy"! The first candidate for it was the philosopher Francis bacon, later called the names of the counts of Rutland, Oxford, Derby, king James I, Queen Elizabeth executed her favorite Essex, sir Walter Raleigh, playwright Christopher Marlowe. Was and version of group authorship: the total number of "Shakespeare's" reached fifty. Many of the versions stood their arguments, sometimes more, sometimes less good, but none of them has established itself as undeniable. The controversy then subsided, then flared - there was no answer.

Now before proceeding to describe the first Italian city, talk about the interesting custom, which I observed in all Italian cities, big and small, and similar to whom have not seen in other countries where I happened to be travelling; probably, such a custom generally there in any other Christian country.

When during the meal, the Italians (and most of the foreigners living permanently in the country) cut roast, they use special items, like small forks. While with a knife, which he holds with one hand, the Italian cuts a piece of meat from the roast General, in another hand he holds the flyer by pressing it with the blade roast. If someone (whoever he was), dining in their company, lightly take your fingers for roast, served for the entire company, this will see an insult to everyone present, ignoring the law of good manners, and, for a mistake will treat him with great contempt, and he may even receive a public reprimand for his lack of manners and inappropriate behavior.

This method of eating, as I have seen, adopted in Italy, and they make that their forks for the most part of iron or steel, and some even of silver, but silver forks only by their own gentlemen. As I understand it, the reason for their amazing custom - under any circumstances not to take served the meat with hands is that the fingers people may not always be clean.

Then I also thought that it would be a good thing to follow this Italian tradition to hold the meat when cutting like forks, and I did this not only while you were in Italy but also in Germany, and then, upon returning home, and in our England, and one day, he's a very enlightened gentleman, Mr. Lawrence Whitaker, known for his cheerful disposition, called me behind the Desk channels only for the fact that I used a fork, and not for any other reason.

Now somehow it is hard to believe that in relatively recent times (and these lines refer to the beginning of the XVII century) almost all of enlightened Europe, already knowing the printing press, has penetrated in the West and East Indies, created great masterpieces of art and architecture, did not know such basic things, like fork. Alas, they did not know. She found out about her thanks to Thomas Corito and his voluminous book "Coriaty of absurdity" (from where we have borrowed the above quote), who described his journey with a length of almost 2 thousand miles. Thanks to him, England found out the unprecedented assignment of the subject forks, and it was able to begin to use not only the channels but also people easier.