OFFICIAL EXPLANATION


C

This is an all-that-apply Weaken question. You'll need to determine which of the answer choices make the anti-Stratfordians's claim less likely to be true. First, summarize that claim: Shakespeare could not have written the plays attributed to him. Their evidence is that the plays are sophisticated and there's no proof that Shakespeare had formal schooling. To weaken this claim, a correct answer choice may show how he could have written these plays without having gotten a formal education or how he could have received schooling even though there is no evidence of his enrollment.

(C) is the only correct answer. If the school in Shakespeare's hometown has no records of any kind from that time, then the fact that there are no records of Shakespeare specifically has no special importance. This choice opens up the possibility that Shakespeare did have an education after all, so it weakens the anti-Stratfordian claim. (A) shows that other successful playwrights of the era came from similar backgrounds as Shakespeare, but neither piece of this statement addresses the argument made by the anti-Stratfordians, whose argument rests on Shakespeare's lack of education (not his means) and the sophistication (not the success) of the plays. (B) shows a weakness in the anti-Stratfordians' thinking about the plays. However, the claim being refuted here is that the author was not Shakespeare; even if they can't agree on who wrote them, they may be right that the author was not Shakespeare, so (B) does not weaken this argument.