This, in the whole compendium of Oxfordian dishonesty, is the most brutal departure from truth and common sense. In the very small small world of Elizabethan theatre, it might well have been possible for the author of one or two plays to remain anonymous and even have them published anonymously. But this is not what Oxfordians claim.
They claim, preposterously, that Shakespeare used an allonym - the name of another real human being, alive at the time. Rather than common, as publishing poetry under a pseudonym was, this would be unique in the history of theatre and impossible to carry out successfully even once, let alone on the many volumes which were published under Shakespeare's name.
Nor are plays that bore his name which were not written by him exemplary of the Oxfordian process. That's common fraud and we know that Shakespeare protested when sonnets of his were pinched and others passed off as his when The Passionate Pilgrim was published. The motive here is not to conceal the true author but to take advantage of the reputation of another. Not unheard of. Unlike everything Oxfordians claim with respect to title pages.