An idea for those who scorn authority:
The actual name Shakespeare holds the key to discovering the names behind the works. If someone in the past had buried clues for posterity - whether in the earth or in the texts - the keys might easily be lost. But no matter how deteriorated a manuscript or book might become, the name of the author is more likely left intact. There are many examples: names such as Geoffrey Chaucer, John Bunyan, Milton, Albert Einstein, or even the anglicized Pythagoras of Samos. And names in other tongues are just as likely to be preserved: Giambattista Marino (18 October 1569 — 25 March 1625) the Italian. He is known for his epic L'Adone.
The names of authors tend to remain intact. But this seems not to be quite true for Shakespeare. What documents there are show that the name varies: Shaxper, Shakspeare and even Shagspere. But the names printed on the two large and authentic books ensured that, the final version passed down to us is Shakespeare. This writer suspects that it was not by chance. There was a good reason for the different spellings of the name. As for the first name, there was only ever one version of the first name William, except, that is, for the Latin version, written according to the law of the time. The church baptism record supposedly on 26 April 1564, has "Gulielmus filius Iohannes Shakspere" or, in English, "William son of John Shakespeare". Here we see the first alteration of the name Shakespeare.
Why then did the name Shakespeare get this treatment: to attract attention to it. The name holds the keys to unlock lot's of hidden information, concerning those characters who were behind the name, and their relationships with each other. The first name William, is in the English tongue, and the Latin version is Gulielmus. The reason why the records show that the only alteration of William is the Latin version is almost beyond belief.
Life in the late 16th and early 17th century must have been a bore. Compared, that is, with this age. For those who were uneducated the main anaesthetic to reality was alcohol, music and dancing. The educated were usually wealthy and spent their spare time reading, writing and riding horses. Of course the richer classes also drank, danced and enjoyed music.
Without radio or televisions, the main reading matter was the bible. By the time the last great book bearing the name of Shakespeare was published, king James I was on the throne, and his new Authorised bible was available to those who could read, and were rich.
As far as those people were concerned, the word of God, as set out in the bible, would remain constant. The bible would always be printed. So the bible was a good bet to place any clues to finding the truth. But where in the bible would one expect future generations to begin their searches? The problem is that the bible contains a massive amount of text. Just where would one begin? Where would the first clue be likely to be revealed?