An interesting question!
OPINIONS (1)
There are various opinions about William Shakespeare, one is that he never existed at all! Of course, if he never existed, who wrote all those plays? One answer to that might be that various folios of plays were collected into one compendium, and printed under the fictitious name 'William Shakespeare', as if just one person authored them all, but in reality they may just have been a collection of play scripts that had been used by touring play/performing groups of itinerent play-actors who travelled around the country (and around the world, maybe?) performing.
Such a 'theater-group' would be keen to acquire new material, and printing had only relatively recently been invented. Consequently Europe was flooded with printed texts, often from Italy, but also from other European countries, and folklore and national 'fictional/historical' tales were circulated and adapted by various 'companies' of play-actors.
OPINIONS (2)
Another theory is that it was a particular person such as Francis Bacon or Christopher Marlow, who actually wrote all that is attributed to Shakespeare.
USE OF LANGUAGE
Another factor that adds weight to the argument that Shakespeare could not have written all that is attributed to him is that computer anysis of his writings show he had a far wider vocabulary than any other person! Far exceeded that of the most erudite of speakers and writers! Based on this fact, they claim is that 'Shakespeare's Works' could not have been written by any one man, because such a huge and diverse knowledge of langauge and words was humanly impossible!
NAME
It is also worthy of note that 'shakespeare' didn't always spell his own name the same way! That is either strange, or may indicate that he either couldn't spell(!) or that people weren't too concerned about consistent spelling in those days.
NO WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE?
Finally, it should be pointed out that there is absolutely no record of any 'William Shakespeare' ever being born! There is a baptism record in Holy Trinity Church, Straford, the town where 'William Shakespeare' is supposed to have lived, which records the baptism of a "Guliemus filius Johannes Shakspere" in 1564, but a 'William Shakespeare'? No!
WHAT NOW?
Enjoy the works attributed to him. They contain a wealth of information, deal with 'true life' situations, are very entertaining, and often extremely funny!
Some of it may be hard to undertand. But when 'tasted' and understood, can a be a great source of pleasure, either as reading material and/or by watching a 'Shakespeare' film, or by going to one of his plays. The admission fee used to be four people for a groat. They may charge more nowadays, but his plays are still very popular and well worth the entry cost.
William Shakespeare. Spelling variations abound, but he did not have any other name."William Shakespeare" William shakespere was quite literly his full name he was never given a middle name.
There are no records of William Shakespeare appearing in any productions
What do you mean if Shakespeare have it? If you mean does Shakespeare have what it takes, then yes. He should any way.
His name was William Shakespeare. He didn't have any others.
There is no evidence that Shakespeare was an adoptive parent.
The concept of a "real name" would mean nothing to Shakespeare or to any of his contemporaries. They did not care if you used a variant spelling of his name or the Latin form Guilliermus instead of the more common William. What Shakespeare would say is "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." In other words, names aren't real. Nobody has a real name. Convention has settled on the form William Shakespeare. That doesn't make it more real than any other form though.
William Shakespeare. Spelling variations abound, but he did not have any other name."William Shakespeare" William shakespere was quite literly his full name he was never given a middle name.
There are no records of William Shakespeare appearing in any productions
I only know of the Makers of the Millennium coin with William Shakespeare.
People in Shakespeare's day had no concept of a "real name". Thus William Shakespeare's name is William Shakespeare even though the entry in the baptismal register reads "Guliemus filius Johannes Shakspere", or in English, "William the son of John Shakspere" The number of spelling variants for Shakespeare's last name is legendary, and as far as Shakespeare's contemporaries were concerned, none was more "real" than any other. Centuries of custom have hallowed the form "William Shakespeare". This is the standard spelling. You can call him "Guliemus Shakspere" if you like, but this is no more "real" than any other spelling.
What do you mean if Shakespeare have it? If you mean does Shakespeare have what it takes, then yes. He should any way.
Yes he did!
sure why not?
His name was William Shakespeare. He didn't have any others.
William Shakespeare died in 1616.
There is no evidence that Shakespeare was an adoptive parent.
Shakespeare's works are displayed in the Shakespeare section of any reputable bookstore.