Jessica Edmondes
is an independent scholar and modern collections cataloguer at the Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford. Her work explores early modern English verse in manuscript, especially the social and scribal networks that shaped its circulation. Her edition, Elizabethan Poetry in Manuscript: an Edition of British Library Harley MS 7392(2) (Iter Press, 2022), exemplifies her interest in recovering unprinted and overlooked poetry. As a short-term Folger Fellow, she’s contributing to the collaborative project Rare or Unique Poems in Manuscript, 1500–1660 (RUP), helping to identify, transcribe, and format for digital access hundreds of poems that survive in only a few manuscript copies—work that expands the literary map well beyond the canonical and the printed. — View all posts by Jessica Edmondes
Comments
Excellent–thank you! As an Oxfordian researcher at the Folger for the past 23 years, I’m naturally curious as to why you’re looking for witnesses of Oxford’s poem.
In addition, I’m fascinated that you cite Fred Schurink. Schurink published an article titled “An unnoticed early reference to Shakespeare” in Notes and Queries in March 2006. There, he identifies a new reference to “Shake-speare” in the 1628 edition of Thomas Vicars’s Manuductio ad Artem Rhetoricam. Vicars used a Latin phrase referring to “that well-known poet who takes his name from ‘shaking’ and ‘spear'” to a list of English poets. The sole poet not identified by his given name.
Finally, I’m pleased you cite the anonymous 1589 Arte of English Poesie. Some scholars attribute the book to George Puttenham. But Steve May did extensive research in Puttenham’s archives, and found no conclusive evidence for this attribution. There is much evidence that the real Shake-speare was its author. For example, the author’s quirky Englishing of the classical terms of rhetoric.
Please tell us more about your interest in Oxford’s poem! Thank you.
Richard M. Waugaman, M.D. — November 28, 2025