• Not a single edition of Hamlet even mentions the possibility that “picture in little” refers to coins, that the “two pictures” scene was almost certainly originally staged with coins, and that the Queen’s “this is the coinage of your brain” is practically a laugh line.

• The only place that I’ve been able to find the suggestion Hamet’s jab that Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern are “soaking up the king’s countenance” refers to the fact that they have been bought and paid for by Claudius is in a Cliffs Notes guide.

• Not a single analysis of the timing of The First Quarto even suggests that it might have based on a version of Hamlet that had been to avoid offense to King James, specifically by making the Queen less like James’s mother, Mary Queen of Scots, by removing all the references to debasement of the coinage, and by removing references to pirates.

• Not a single edition of Measure for Measure mentions the possibility that the Great Soldier Fredericke might have been Federico Spinola, and that this Spanish connection could explain Mariana’s name as well. 

• Not a single edition of Measure for Measure makes any mention of the possibility that seeing Mariana as Juan de Mariana helps tie all of the many already-recognized debasement references in that play together.

• Not a single edition of Measure for Measure observes that Kate Keepdown might be a reference to Shakespeare’s own wife, Ann Hathaway, which reinforces the existing theory that Lucio is Shakespeare’s alter ego. 

• The result has been that even though there has been over two hundred years of serious scholarship on Shakespeare, anyone trying to appreciate Hamlet or Measure for Measure simply doesn’t get the full picture.

If you agree that this is a travesty, then post a link to this site on whatever social media platforms you are on, and spread the word.