I read this because I wanted to learn more about the Shakespeare authorship debate. As far as history of the debate goes, it was excellent. Shapiro possesses an immense knowledge of Shakespeare's works, his times, and the authorship controversy. Shapiro firmly believes that the common man from Stratford is the author of Shakespeare's plays and I found his arguments convincing. Having read the book, I would place myself firmly in the camp of those who believe that Shakespeare was indeed Shakespeare, and not a pseudonym for some better-educated nobleman.

Shapiro starts by giving a general history of the search for documents written by Shakespeare. Four centuries of digging has unearthed (the word "unearth" was first used by Shakespeare, I learned) nothing more than a legal will and a few financial documents, which has given rise to the claim that a common moneylender from Stratford couldn't be the author of the plays. Shapiro summarizes the history of these claims, focusing on those of Francis Bacon and the Earl of Oxford, the most prominent candidates of the non-Stratford crowd. The arguments for these candidates range from uncompelling to absurd.

Finally, Shapiro concludes by giving his arguments for Shakespeare, which consist mostly of documents from Shakespeare's lifetime. While we have almost nothing in the hand of Shakespeare, we have many documents from Shakespeare's fellow dramatists and thespians and these documents seem to reflect a strong acquaintance with William Shakespeare the actor and writer. There is no suggestion of a pseudonym or that Shakespeare was anything but a common actor and writer, well-acquainted with his fellow dramatists. I find this evidence convincing. In fact, having read this book, I find it hard to believe otherwise.

I will however say that the main flaw with the book is Shapiro's treatment of the claims of other candidates. He focuses too much on the cast of characters who supported rival candidates and not enough on the actual substance of their claims. This had two negative consequences: 1) it made his overall argument less convincing; and 2) it made the middle of the book tedious and less interesting.

But on the whole this was a well-written, meticulously researched book on a subject that I thought it was quite interesting.