Given that memorials commonly depicted the deceased's former profession, the sack is no surprise - the Stratford William's source of prosperity centred on dealings in bagged grains and malt. Not one Stratfordian reference or recorded remark has ever been found alluding to any literary activity whatsoever.
Mentioned last week was a possible other Mr William Shakespeare, a prominent London theatre manager, actor, co-owner, and purported prodigious literary genius.
This William was cited as author of various major pieces of verse and drama, and later also as author of the collection of plays known as the First Folio, published seven years after the death of the Stratford Shakespeare in 1616.
Whether one or two, neither has left so much as a single scrap of provenanced written material - be it note, letter, list, script, personal reference book or text of any type other than a few possible signatures on legal papers.
Of these six signatures, three are on a final will, two concern a London property, and one is on a deposition. But the signatures are problematic - they are all shaky and wayward, as though penned by an unpractised hand. Same individual letters are shaped differently, and actual spellings of both Christian and surname differ.
It was also common practice for either lawyers or their clerks to sign on behalf of clients, so there is not even surety of authenticity.
Contemporaneous writers such as Ben Johnson made a few cryptic references to a William Shakespeare, writer, but never anything unequivocal as a note saying: "Oi, Willy, 'urry up an' finish that bluddy 'Amlet so we can neck a few lagers at t'Rose."
On the other hand, the fact also remains that his crediting as author of substantial works of poetry and drama didn't seem to provoke serious opposition at the time, apart from one accusation of plagiarism.
Perhaps this was because writers sat rather lowly on the pecking order.
Even successful playwrights could only expect modest stipends, and so veracity of authorship may not have been of any moment.
In addition, most (if not all) of the so-called Shakespeare plays are re-hashes of earlier works. Hamlet, for instance, started life as a story related by the Zealand-born Danish historian Saxo Grammaticus in the 13th century.
The audiences, then, perhaps saw them more as re-makes, with the latest "author" not considered important.
Last week I mentioned a couple of tantalising strands that may connect the "two" Shakespeares.
One is the similarity of signature on a Blackfriars, London, property conveyance to a signature on the final Stratford will.
This may only mean, though, that the prosperous Stratfordian had occasion to buy realty in London, transacted by the same legal agent.
The other is that - and this is a doozy - the Stratford Shakespeare bequeathed 26s 8d each to "my fellows John Heminge, Richard Burbage, and Henry Condell" for the purchase of memorial rings. These gentlemen were London-based actors and fellow theatre shareholders. All very intriguing.
So we see what tangled webs are woven. And if neither of these Shakespeares was the real author, then who?
Popular demand insists that the truth be finally outed ... but alas, space limitation decrees disclosure be postponed till next week.
