Skip to content

A. Phoenix

A Collection of Works by A. Phoenix on SirBacon.org

A. Phoenix YouTube Channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrY7wzlXnZiT1Urwx7jP6fQ/videos

A. Phoenix Twitter Feed
https://twitter.com/BaconSpeare

A. Phoenix Research Papers on Academy.edu
https://aphoenix1.academia.edu/

21 POINTS OF EVIDENCE CONFIRMING FRANCIS BACON’S AUTHORSHIP OF HENRY IV

by A. Phoenix


The Henry IV plays are some of the most Baconian in the whole of the Shakespeare canon and are replete with references and allusions not only to their author Francis Bacon but to several members of the Bacon family and his St Albans home at Gorhambury, the Bacon family estate.


The Holy Grail of the Shakespeare World

by A. Phoenix


This is the Holy Grail of the Shakespeare World: an original manuscript of a Shakespeare play corrected in the hand of its secret concealed author Francis Bacon

126 page Academic Paper  https://aphoenix1.academia.edu/research  

SYNOPSIS

It is little known to virtually all Shakespeare scholars, the ordinary schoolmen, and the rest of the world that there exists an early manuscript version of the play Henry IV. This manuscript is the earliest extant manuscript of a Shakespeare play ever discovered, an historical landmark of the utmost importance, that one might be forgiven for thinking that it would not only be well-known and minutely scrutinised by Shakespeare scholars around the globe, as well as known to all and sundry with only the remotest interest in Shakespeare, but celebrated for what it is: a unique artefact of world-wide significance.

The reason this is not the case is because the manuscript itself conceals an explosive secret which it would be difficult to overestimate of the most far-reaching consequences which completely collapses the fiction and illusion William Shakspere of Stratford wrote the Shakespeare works and at the same time confirms the truth that Francis Bacon is our supreme poet and dramatist Shakespeare.

This manuscript was discovered in 1844 preserved in the collection of the eighth Baronet Sir Edward Dering (1807-96) at Surrenden Hall near Pluckley in Kent. It had previously formed part of the library of the first Sir Edward Dering (1598-1644), an antiquarian with an interest in literature and drama, named after his uncle the Puritan preacher Edward Dering patronised by the Cooke sisters Lady Anne Cooke Bacon, Lady Elizabeth Cooke Hoby Russell, Lady Mildred Cooke Cecil and Lady Cooke Killigrew. The relatively obscure Sir Edward Dering (1598-1644) about whose early life very little is known was-here revealed for the first time-a close friend and relative (twice over) of the author of Henry IV Francis Bacon.

To the present day the so-called Dering manuscript is presented to the world as a handwritten version of an abridgement of I and 2 Henry IV mainly written by a scribe, with revisions in the hand of Sir Edward Dering, possibly for a court performance at the court of James I or a private performance at his house in Kent c.1623. It is said that the manuscript is or is apparently based on the 1613 quarto edition of I Henry IV and 1600 quarto edition of 2 Henry IV meaning the manuscript dates from no earlier than 1613 and as Dering’s revisions appear to incorporate some emendations in the First Folio, the MS or parts of the MS, may be dated sometime between 1622 to 1624.

One hundred and twenty years after the so-called Dering MS was first discovered which was afterwards purchased in  great secrecy by Henry Folger, who secreted it away in the Folger Shakespeare Library, a Secret Baconian-Rosicrucian-Freemasonic Institution, a facsimile edition of it was published in 1974.

The edition entitled The History of King Henry The Fourth as revised by Sir Edward Dering published by the Folger Shakespeare, edited by George Walton Williams and Gwynne Blakemore Evans, is not generally well known and remains unfamiliar to the ordinary schoolmen and casual student, and is not quite what it appears to the uninstructed eye.

Its joint editor G. Blakemore Evans worked for US Intelligence serving in the Army Signal Corps alongside William Friedman at Bletchley run by British Intelligence, the centre of allied cipher and code-breaking during the Second World War. In their book The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined the Fraudulent Friedmans falsely maintained that there were no Baconian ciphers used in the Shakespeare works, in perpetrating one of the greatest academic and literary frauds of all time.

However as the present writer demonstrated in The Fraudulent Friedmans: The Bacon Ciphers in the Shakespeare Works their fraudulent book The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined is itself an elaborate cryptogram containing hidden Baconian ciphers conveying the concealed cryptographic message that Francis Bacon, Brother of the Rosy Cross, is Shakespeare. The Friedmans knew there were Baconian ciphers present in the Shakespeare works, a secret cryptically incorporated throughout their work aided by the Folger Shakespeare Library, revealing and confirming Bacon is Shakespeare.

Similarly, while in the open plain text of The History of King Henry The Fourth as revised by Sir Edward Dering its editors George Walton Williams and Gwynne Blakemore Evans himself an expert in cryptography, maintained the fiction of the so-called Dering manuscript, its title page incorporated a number of hidden Baconian ciphers, revealing and confirming that the manuscript of Henry IV was of Baconian origin and likewise that Bacon is Shakespeare.  

In contrast to Williams and Evans and several other Shakespeare scholars who have maintained and repeated the fiction of the so-called Dering manuscript, the orthodox scholar Professor Hardin Craig observed that the MS contains a number of differences and peculiarities which remain unchanged by any contact with the fifth 1613 quarto of I Henry IV. He further observes that it was written in a normal Elizabethan hand with no discernible Jacobean intermixtures, and most importantly, concludes it may be older than the earliest 1598 quarto edition of I Henry IV, and that it is a manuscript of Shakespeare’s play when it was originally one and not two plays.

This whole illusory house of cards rests entirely on the presence of Dering’s hand in the manuscript. If his hand is not present, Dering self-evidently had nothing whatsoever to do with its composition, or its revision, cuts, its division into acts and scenes, its numerous additions of fifty lines and half lines, the introduction of original material in prose and verse, or its wholesale and extensive corrections. All from a person who never wrote a single drama in his entire life or is known to have heavily revised and amended any other play, never mind a Shakespeare play, in the same fashion or manner. The very premise on which this theory rests is self-evidently absurd and more importantly demonstrably false.

The large formatted edition of The History of King Henry The Fourth as revised by Sir Edward Dering totals two hundred and thirty-eight pages, comprising an introduction, a Note on the Transcription and Textual Notes, The Names of All the Characters, a facsimile and transcription with textual notes of the manuscript itself, and a Descriptive and Historical Collation. There is however one absolutely critical piece of evidence missing, namely a facsimile of Dering’s handwriting.

There is no reasonable and rational explanation whatsoever why Evans and Williams did not reproduce what constitutes the most important evidence in their whole Dering theory. By now the intelligent and alert reader will probably strongly suspect or more likely readily realise there is something wrong, something very wrong when the modern authorities on the Dering manuscript have unmistakably and very deliberately not reproduced facsimiles of Dering’s handwriting in this standard edition of the so-called Dering manuscript.

What was it then they wanted to conceal from other ordinary scholars and the rest of the Shakespearean world? Simple, the hand of Dering is nowhere present in the so-called Dering manuscript, a very simple fact which at a stroke completely and incontrovertibly exposes and collapses this whole charade and irrefutably demolishes a fraud or illusion (secretly known to some for more than a century) once and for all.    

The known and undoubted examples of Dering’s hand bears no resemblance whatsoever to the handwriting (including its corrections) to any of the handwriting in the so-called Dering manuscript, or the handwriting in the obverse and reverse of the scrap of paper. It fact not only is it manifestly plain that Dering’s known hand and the hands in the so-called Dering MS do not even remotely resemble each other, it is difficult to conceive of any other specimens of handwritings, being more different.

What then is the reason for the fraud and the false insistence on Dering’s handwriting being present in the so-called Dering MS? The reason is because it masks and conceals its true status, provenance and date. In other words it misdirects the eye away from a great historical secret, one known to some since it was first discovered, and others who were made privy to the secret afterwards.

The so-called Dering manuscript is a single-five act Shakespeare play of Henry IV and is earlier than the first printed quarto of The Historie of Henrie the fourth issued in 1598 and the quarto edition of The Second part of Henrie the fourth printed in 1600. The MS represents the play as Bacon originally composed it when it was one play and not two before developing his original version into two separate parts. Furthermore, we can be reasonably precise regarding the date of the manuscript. It is widely agreed Henry IV followed closely upon Richard II as not only is Henry IV next chronologically its predecessor Richard II clearly points to a sequel. The earlier Richard II is believed to date to around late 1595 or early 1596, and Henry IV was probably composed shortly after, sometime in 1596.

There appears to be three hands in the so-called Dering MS two of which were scribes. It appears the manuscript was copied from another MS now lost. The so-called Dering MS was begun by one scribe who copied out the whole of page one and for some unknown reason after he had completed the first page the task was turned over to a second scribe, who copied out the rest of the manuscript.

The manuscript is intimately connected to Bacon’s literary workshop of writers, scribes and copyists that produced Bacon’s Northumberland MSS, which once contained his Shakespeare plays Richard II and Richard III, that dates from around 1596/7. On the outside cover of the Northumberland MSS in a contemporary hand there are more than a dozen examples of various forms of the name Bacon or Francis Bacon and his literary mask Shakespeare or William Shakespeare. Above the entry for the Shakespeare play Richard II is written ‘By Mr. ffrauncis William Shakespeare’ and where the name ‘William Shakespeare’ has been written further down the page the word ‘Your’ is written twice across it, so thus reads ‘Your William Shakespeare’. The writing on the outer cover of the manuscript is chiefly in one hand with occasional words in another, and a few words written at angle, possibly by a third. One of the hands was undoubtedly Bacon who was also responsible for the monogram signature ‘W.S.’ at the top right hand corner. As with the so-called Dering manuscript, the main content of Bacon’s Northumberland MSS is written in two or more hands. One of the works contained within it generally referred to by the title Leicester’s Commonwealth is itself written by two different scribes whose identity remains unknown. On examining the facsimiles of the so-called Dering MS and the aforementioned work in Bacon’s Northumberland MSS it appears that one of the scribes who copied out Leicester’s Commonwealth was also responsible for copying out the so-called Dering MS from the second page onwards. It appears that in producing the so-called Dering manuscript one of these scribes was most likely working from Bacon’s original (‘foul papers’) manuscript of I Henry IV, producing an authorial fair copy of the play, which Bacon later gifted to his friend and relative Sir Edward Dering.

The so-called corrector’s hand in the so-called Dering manuscript is Bacon’s own cramped hand, as one would expect, from the author of the play.

It is now more than fitting that instead of it being referred to as the Dering manuscript it is hereafter known by its right and proper designation as Francis Bacon’s 1596 manuscript of Henry IV, the unique and earliest known extant manuscript of a Shakespeare play, the holy grail of Shakespeare scholarship.    

 

The Folger Shakespeare Library A Secret Baconian-Rosicrucian-Freemasonic Institution

by A. Phoenix


THE FOLGER SHAKESPEARE LIBRARY SYNOPSIS

The unique and greatest Shakespeare repository in the world the Folger Shakespeare Library is to the present day still shrouded in secrecy and mystery with an untold secret history which stretches back to Elizabethan and Jacobean England to the time of the publication of the Shakespeare First Folio the bedrock on which the library is founded.

The Folgers trace their colonial descent directly back to Peter Folger (1617-1690) translator and government official born in Norwich, England, in 1617, the son of John Folger and Meriba Gibbs. His father John Folger was born in 1594 in the county of Norfolk and his wife Meriba Gibbs two miles east of the county of Norfolk, England in 1600. Virtually nothing is known about either John and Meriba Gibbs Folger and the early years of their son Peter. There is however every likelihood that the Folgers knew members of the Bacon family. The twin counties of Suffolk and Norfolk of East Anglia were the political strongholds of the prominent Bacon family, whose wide and extensive private and social circles, extended across the whole region. The great scion of the family the philosopher-poet Francis Bacon, concealed author of the Shakespeare works, the inspiration of Henry and Emily Folger for the Folger Shakespeare Library, successively served as the Member of Parliament for Ipswich in the county of Suffolk in 1597, 1601, 1604 and 1610.

This was the period of the great expansion into North America secretly directed by Francis Bacon and his Rosicrucian Brotherhood that was to forever change the future direction of the modern world. In 1606, the Virginia Company was formed to organize and promote the colonisation of Virginia and shortly after the first permanent English speaking settlement in North America was established at Jamestown, Virginia in 1607, the seed which grew and evolved into the first modern constitutional and federal republic, the United States of America.

It is conceivable that through knowledge of the activities of Francis Bacon and the London Virginia Company and the first permanent English settlement in Jamestown, followed by Bermuda (1609), Newfoundland (1610), and afterwards Massachusetts, founded by the Pilgrims transported across the Atlantic in the Mayflower in 1620, that the Folger family developed the idea of emigrating to the New World.

The elusive John Folger and his eighteen year old son Peter Folger emigrated to Massachusetts in 1635. During his voyage to America on the vessel Abigail, Peter first met Mary Morrill, whom he married in 1644. Their youngest daughter Abiah, was the mother of the great writer, scientist, and philosopher Benjamin Franklin, the most important Rosicrucian-Freemason of his time and one of the Founding Freemasonic Fathers of the United States of America. Franklin was also a member of the Baconian-Rosicrucian-Freemasonic Royal Society and for several years he regularly corresponded with the great eighteenth-century Shakespearean actor David Garrick and Dr Samuel Johnson, editor of the Shakespeare works.

It was Freemason David Garrick who organized the Grand Shakespeare Jubilee of 1769 which put Stratford-upon-Avon, home of William Shakspere, as the false centre of the Shakespeare world on the map, a Rosicrucian-Freemasonic ludibrium, that still fools and deceives nearly all and sundry around the Shakespearean globe to the present day.

In homage to his great ancestor Benjamin Franklin, the originator of the magnificent and unique Folger Shakespeare Library, Henry Clay Folger said that he had not collected Shakespeareana he would have collected Frankliniana.

In her recent work The Millionaire and the Bard on the obsessively secretive Henry Folger and the Shakespeare Folger Library its author Andrea Mays states that ‘The Folger Library maintains the culture of modesty and secrecy established by its founders’ and told how Henry and Emily Folger filled the Folger Shakespeare library with all kinds of ‘sophisticated and obscure symbols and images’ as well as ‘secret words and signs’ that ‘formed a silent composition’ that only ‘a time traveller or a scholar could comprehend’.

She did not however provide an explanation that would shed light on or explain the meaning of all the secret, arcane signs, images, symbols, and the ubiquitous so-called ‘Tudor Rose’, that all formed part of the silent composition encoded into the Folger Shakespeare Library; and thus far, no one has hitherto been able to comprehend, decipher, and decode them.

Disclosed here for the first time, the Folger Shakespeare Library is a complex Baconian-Rosicrucian-Freemasonic cryptogram that when decoded conveys the explosive far reaching secret known to the Folgers, namely, the concealed identity of the true author of the Shakespeare works, Francis Bacon.

PDF – https://aphoenix1.academia.edu/research

The Fraudulent Friedmans

by A. Phoenix


THE FRAUDULENT FRIEDMANS BY A PHOENIX.

We have produced a 340 page book entitled The Fraudulent Friedmans (supported by 81 illustrations and 756 references) accompanied by a I hour and 40 minutes video. Given the length of the book in the following days and weeks we will be providing extracts highlighting important pieces of evidence and information relating to the lives and writings of the Friedmans and their involvement in the greatest literary fraud in history concerning Francis Bacon’s concealed authorship of the Shakespeare works.

Here are the links for the video trailer, the full video and the book:

For the video trailer: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I-hIZPortXAgMupMTs89bcmlq4zzxO2D/view

For the video that explores the full story see: https://youtu.be/fc2ErlSmmjI

For a detailed paper on ‘The Friedman Fraud’ see: https://aphoenix1.academia.edu/research

Please find a synopsis below:

SYNOPSIS OF THE FRAUDULENT FRIEDMANS: THE BACON CIPHERS IN THE SHAKESPEARE WORKS

 By A Phoenix 

For over sixty years deluded Bacon and Shakespeare scholars supported by universities around the four corners of the globe, fanned by the international news media, have deceived the rest of the world into believing that the Friedmans, the two greatest cryptographers of the twentieth century, had once and for all in their book The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined put an end to the notion of Baconian ciphers being present in the Shakespeare plays, a falsehood which continues to deceive the world to the present day.

This is a story about one of the greatest literary frauds of all time fully revealed here for the first time that will absolutely shock Shakespeare scholarship and the rest of the world and necessitate a complete re-assessment of Francis Bacon’s true authorship of the Shakespeare works.

From a very early age Francis Bacon was given a baptism into ciphers and codes and other arcane cryptic devices for concealing and communicating secret and hidden information. His father Lord Keeper and de facto Lord Chancellor of England Sir Nicholas Bacon and his uncle Secretary of State Sir William Cecil were the twin pillars of the Elizabethan Reformation and effectively the heads of the secret state. The lifeblood of the Elizabethan state and the English Secret Service headed by Sir Francis Walsingham were secret ciphers and codes and its three principal pillars Bacon, Cecil and Walsingham went to extraordinary lengths to maintain a cryptographic hegemony over their dangerous European rivals and the domestic enemies of the English government. Early in the Elizabethan reign Sir William Cecil and Sir Nicholas Bacon directed the great mathematician and cryptographic expert Dr John Dee to seek out a rare manuscript copy of Johannes Trithemius’s Steganographia. The spy, intelligencer and secret government agent Dr Dee had a profound and extensive interest in cryptology and after tracking down a prized manuscript of Steganographia on the continent he returned with it to England, where a copy of it was placed in the hands of his political masters. He was afterwards a mentor to the young Francis Bacon who possessed an all-consuming and profound fascination for all ciphers and codes and other cryptographic devices necessary for a life in the English Secret Service.

In 1576 a fifteen year old Francis Bacon travelled in the train of the Ambassador-elect Sir Amias Paulet for a three year stay at the English Embassy in Paris which stood at the very centre of European intrigue and espionage where he was joined by the great English cryptographer Thomas Phelippes with the two of them occupied with ciphers and other areas of cryptography on an almost daily basis. It was during his time in Paris that Bacon later recalled how he invented his famous bi-literal cipher, a cipher system he later secretly inserted into his Shakespeare works. Living in Paris at the time when Bacon was busy working with and inventing new ciphers was the diplomat and cryptographer Blaise de Vigenère with whom Bacon is believed to have collaborated on his Traicte des Chiffre or secret ways of writing.  

In 1591 there appeared in London a Latin edition of a milestone work on cryptology by the Italian polymath and playwright Giambattista della Porta entitled De Fvtivis Literarvm Notis printed by John Wolfe, and dedicated to Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland. Some two centuries later there was discovered at Northumberland House (at the time in the ownership of his ancestor Earl Percy, afterwards the Duke of Northumberland) what has come to be known as the Northumberland MSS that originally contained several of Bacon’s writings among them his Shakespeare plays Richard II and Richard III. On the outer-cover of The Northumberland Manuscript the name of Bacon/Francis Bacon and his pseudonym Shakespeare/William Shakespeare are scribbled on more than a dozen occasions. Down the left side appears Honorificabiletudine a variant of the long word honorificabilitudinitatibus in Loves Labours Lost (5:1:41). Further down the page we are met with the entry ‘revealing day through every crany peepes and see Shak’, line 1086 of The Rape of Lucrece ‘revealing day through every cranny spies’. In particular above the entry for Bacon’s Shakespeare play Richard II appears the entry ‘By Mr. ffrauncis William Shakespeare’ and further down the word ‘Your’ is twice written across his pseudonym William Shakespeare-so it reads ‘Your William Shakespeare’.

With the spymaster Sir Francis Walsingham now dead the headquarters of the English Secret Service had been transferred to Essex House on the Strand the grand stately residence of the royal favourite Robert Devereux, the second Earl of Essex. Under the roof of Essex House, Francis and Anthony Bacon ran a vast domestic and foreign intelligence network of spies and intelligencers operating across the European continent. Working out of Gray’s Inn and Essex House, Francis and Anthony also set up a literary workshop with connections to English printers and publishers employing writers, translators, and scribes for distribution of private manuscripts, books, plays, masques and other entertainments. This Bacon-Essex circle included the Earl of Southampton to whom Bacon dedicated Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece and to whom many of his Shakespeare sonnets were addressed.

Francis and Anthony Bacon were the joint heads of the foreign and domestic arms of the English Secret Service that evolved into British Intelligence in other words the equivalent of MI5 and MI6. They were in charge of gathering intelligence domestically and from all over Europe for which they employed a highly organised network of secret agents and spies whose important intelligence and information was conveyed through secret codes and ciphers and the interception of ciphered correspondence of enemy agents, deciphered by Francis, Anthony, and Thomas Phelippes.

In his first major acknowledged work The Advancement of Learning Bacon sets out a series of cipher systems which he named Simple Cipher, Kay Cipher, Wheel Cipher and his Bi-literal Cipher, that he secretly incorporated into the 1623 Shakespeare First Folio. Shortly before the publication of the First Folio in November 1623 there appeared in Latin Bacon’s truly monumental De Augmentis Scientiarum Libri IX which included a much more expansive and detailed explanation of his Bi-literal Cipher. Soon after the publication of the De Augmentis and the Shakespeare First Folio there appeared the extremely rare work on cryptology entitled Cryptomenytices et Cryptographiae Libri IX by one Gustavus Selenus, a pseudonym for Augustus, Duke of Brunswick-Luneburg, a near five hundred page work published at Luneburg early in 1624. The revealing title page of the Cryptomenytices et Cryptographiae contains a pictorial cryptogram depicting Francis Bacon giving a figure holding a spear dressed in actor’s boots, representing the actor William Shakspere, a quarto or book of plays, who is shown carrying them off into the distance toward a building representing the Globe Theatre.

Some three centuries later the discovery of the presence of Bacon’s Biliteral Cipher was announced to the world in a series of volumes published by the remarkable Elizabeth Wells Gallup entitled The Bi-literal Cypher of Sir Francis Bacon Discovered in his Works. On examining the prefatory material of the 1623 Shakespeare First Folio Gallup deciphered a series of revelations about Francis Bacon’s secret life and enormous corpus of writings revealing that not only was he the secret author of the Shakespeare works but also the works published in the names of among others Spenser, Greene, and Marlowe, and that he was the concealed royal son of Queen Elizabeth and Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester.

News of these revelations soon reached the ears of Colonel George Fabyan who had had set up his  Riverbank estate located west of Chicago which is still shrouded in secrecy and mystery to the present day. It was here that Colonel Fabyan provided Gallup with a staff and extensive resources to continue her investigations into the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher and its presence in the Shakespeare works and other Baconian publications set forth anonymously or in the names of others. She was afterwards joined at Riverbank by William F. Friedman and his future wife Elizebeth Smith, the widely acclaimed duo who went on to become the two greatest cryptographers of the twentieth century and the authors of The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined.

The years spent by the Friedmans at Riverbank are not well-documented and what we know or believe of their time there almost entirely derives from the story told by the Friedmans themselves in a series of unpublished manuscripts and lectures and their book The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined.   

For the next few years the Friedmans worked closely alongside Elizabeth Wells Gallup assisting her in a complex and minute study of the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher and its links to the Shakespeare First Folio and soon after the Friedmans were appointed the joints Heads of the Riverbank Department of Ciphers.

During this period the Riverbank Cipher Department headed by the Friedmans produced a series of pamphlets known as the Riverbank Laboratories Publications on Cryptography. These comprise of a series of important ground-breaking technical monographs dealing with cryptography and cryptanalysis and several dealing with Gallup’s work on the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher. A number of the volumes on the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher were issued anonymously and the identity of their author (s), who were of course known to the Friedmans, remain unknown to the world at large to the present day.

For more than half a century the Friedmans had every opportunity to reveal the identity of the authors of these anonymous Riverbank publications on the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher but repeatedly refused to do so. The reason why, is the Friedmans themselves, were the anonymous authors of these tracts in which it is emphatically stated that the presence of Bacon’s cipher system identified by Elizabeth Wells Gallup has been repeatedly tested and dissected, and was and is, demonstrable beyond any and all doubt.

In 1997 there appeared a still virtually unknown work entitled The Sabines at Riverbank: Their Role in the Science of Architectural Acoustics by John W. Kopec. The book issued by the Acoustical Society of America was limited to only a thousand copies on a subject which falls outside the ordinary scope of literary scholarship and largely for this reason still remains unknown to Baconian and Shakespearean scholarship.

In researching the work Kopec fully immersed himself in the history of Riverbank, a history which has barely been glanced at. Virtually all of what little is known of the Riverbank Cipher Department has come down to us through the lens of the Friedmans. Their three main repositories (two unpublished) where they discussed their time at Riverbank provide us with only a very carefully edited version of the circumstances and events surrounding it and their parts played in the authorship of the Riverbank publications on the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher. Their various accounts about their time at Riverbank are marked by inconsistency, factual discrepancy, deliberate omissions, falsehoods, and deceit. Now here for the very first time was a book on Riverbank by an author who had spent more than two decades on site with unlimited access to what records remained of its secret, obscure and hidden past. Kopec’s book is dedicated to Don Williams, son of Fabyan’s chauffeur Bert Williams, who drove the limousine that picked up Elizebeth Smith Friedman from the Newberry Library in Chicago, marking the beginning of her career at Riverbank from 1916 to 1920.

The long-time Riverbank chauffeur Bert Williams knew the Friedmans well and for the years the couple lived on the estate he was in almost daily contact with them, as he was with Elizabeth Wells Gallup, providing him with first-hand inside information about the Riverbank publications on the Bacon Bi-literal Ciphers and their authorship.  

Outside of the records Don Williams ‘Mr. Riverbank’ who was born there in 1920 was a critical source of information for Kopec. Don ‘Mr Riverbank’ Williams, worked at Riverbank for 35 years before retiring in 1985, and knew more about it than any other person alive. In the main body of the text Kopec devoted several pages to the period spent by the Friedmans at the Riverbank estate. His informative discussions with Don Williams included the explosive and far-reaching statement of enormous historical importance to Baconian and Shakespearean scholarship and the truth about Lord Bacon’s authorship of the Shakespeare works: namely, the anonymous The Greatest Work of Sir Francis Bacon issued by the Riverbank Cipher Department was written by the Friedmans, confirming the presence of the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher in the Shakespeare canon.                 

For the rest of their lives the Friedmans remained silent about their authorship of The Greatest Work of Sir Francis Bacon endorsing the presence of the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher in the Shakespeare works and decades later when both Fabyan and Elizabeth Wells Gallup were long dead wrote The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined wherein they fraudulently pretended in the open plain text that no Bacon ciphers were used in the Shakespeare poems and plays in one of the greatest academic and literary frauds of all time. However revealed and demonstrated here for the first time The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined is itself one very elaborate cryptogram containing hidden secret Bacon ciphers repeatedly conveying the concealed cryptographic message that Francis Bacon, Brother of the Rosy Cross, is Shakespeare.

The Friedmans knew there were Bacon ciphers present in the Shakespeare works and that Bacon is the true secret author of the Shakespeare works, a secret which at a single stroke completely collapses the Stratfordian fiction and illusion that the illiterate/semi-illiterate William Shakspere was the author of the Shakespeare plays. It was a secret they took to the graves but not beyond it. For on the tombstone of William and Elizebeth Friedman, one designed by themselves, the two greatest cryptographers of the twentieth century, left a secret cryptographic message:

FRANCIS BACON IS SHAKESPEARE.

Bacon-Shakespeare Secret Republican Father of the Modern World

by A. Phoenix


Both Bacon and Shakespeare (obviously treated separately by orthodox scholars) have very largely been presented as conservative political thinkers whereas more recently several modern scholars have finally begun to partly recognise the republican themes running through both the canons, which completely revolutionises and transforms our understanding of the first philosopher-poet of the modern world.

Read more…

Folio Ciphers

Video by A. Phoenix


View this video  that illustrates the presence of Baconian ciphers on the title page of the 1623 Shakespeare First Folio cryptographically confirming that Francis Bacon is Shakespeare.

 

The Play’s The Thing

by A. Phoenix


A video to celebrate the birthday of Sir Francis Bacon & his authorship of the Shakespeare Works revealing the clues he left behind in the plays.

Bacon is Shakespeare: Pictorial Proofs Video

by A. Phoenix


See the Video:

Bacon is Shakespeare: Pictorial Proofs Video

Francis Bacon (Bassanio/Bellario) and Anthony Bacon (its titular character Antonio) and The Merchant Of Venice

by A. Phoenix


Following his return to England in February 1592 after a twelve absence abroad working closely with spymaster Sir Francis Walsingham for the English Secret Service, Anthony Bacon went to live with his brother Francis Bacon who was then already heavily in debt at Gray’s Inn. From the moment Anthony returned to England he immediately became involved in supporting and assisting his brother Francis with his money troubles and considerable debts. Francis and Anthony set up a literary workshop with connections to printers and publishers employing writers, translators, scribes and copyists for the distribution of private manuscripts, books, plays, masques and other entertainments. The enormous crippling costs of running and financially supporting this literary workshop resulted in Francis and Anthony further entering into a never ending cycle of debt incurred by having to raise large loans from money-lenders through bonds (legal agreements for loans) and other legal instruments.

The Bacon brothers were still dealing with various loans and mounting debts when in Trinity Term 1597 a goldsmith named Sympson of Lombard Street who held a bond for £300 principal, sued Francis for repayment but agreed to respite the satisfaction of it until the beginning of the following term. However without any warning a fortnight before Michaelmas Term commenced, Bacon was walking from the Tower of London when at the instigation of the moneylender Sympson he was served with an execution and arrested with a view to confining him to the Fleet prison. The events were to inform and colour the most famous legal play in the history of English drama, The Merchant of Venice, whose titular character is named Antonio, the Italianate form of Anthony named after and modelled upon Anthony Bacon. It was entered as a new play on the Stationers’ Register on 22 July 1598 and was first published in 1600 as The Most excellent Historie of the Merchant of Venice.

In the modern Arden edition of the play Professor Drakakis makes the obvious but very important observation ‘The central drama of The Merchant of Venice revolves around the relationship between the merchant Antonio and the Venetian Lord Bassanio.’ The character of Bassanio is modelled upon its author Francis Bacon. In The Merchant of Venice the two characters Antonio and Bassanio mirror the complex relationship and circumstances of Francis and Anthony Bacon before and during the time the play was written, revised and performed.

Apart from Bassanio, the spectral presence of Bacon is dispersed through several other characters in the play. Professor Lamb voices that not only does Bassanio resemble Bacon but so too its heroine Portia. Then there is the character of Dr Bellario who as pointed out by the orthodox scholar Mark Edwin Andrews also represented Bacon which is further substantiated by the videos and lectures of Simon Miles and Christina G. Waldman the first to publish a full-length work on the subject entitled Francis Bacon’s Hidden Hand in Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice (2018). In his work Law Versus Equity in The Merchant of Venice as its title indicates Mark Edwin Andrews reads the play as an allegory of the conflict between law and equity which constitutes the consensus among modern scholars that the trial scene dramatizes the struggle between the common law courts and the equitable Court of Chancery. From the outset of the trial Andrews juxtaposes a prose version alongside the text of the play in which he substitutes Bacon for Dr Bellario.

The Merchant of Venice is about love and friendship particularly focused on the characters of Antonio (Anthony Bacon) and Bassanio (Bacon); about usury (a subject on which Bacon composed an essay and legal paper); money-lending mirroring the real lives of the Bacon brothers; and a bond between Antonio and Shylock similar to the bond between Bacon and Sympson. It’s also partly an allegory about the issue of debt and assumpsit that was finally decided in Slade’s Case (Slade v Morley), in which Bacon appeared for the defendant Morley, whose first substantive arguments made before the Justices of the Exchequer occurred in the Michaelmas Term of 1597 and 1598, at the very time Bacon was planning, writing and revising The Merchant of Venice, the most dramatic legal play in all world literature.

MERCHANT OF VENICE.pdf

See the Video:

Francis Bacon (Bassanio/Bellario) and Anthony Bacon (its titular character Antonio) and The Merchant Of Venice by A. Phoenix

Francis Bacon & The Law In His Early Shakespeare Plays Reflected In His Life & Writings

by A. Phoenix


FRANCIS BACON AND THE LAW.pdf

The philosophical, political and legal DNA of Francis Bacon runs through the very veins and arteries of the Shakespeare poems and plays. As the son of Sir Nicholas Bacon, the Elizabethan Lord Keeper and de facto Lord Chancellor of England from a very early age he drank in, assimilated and internalised, the inner workings of the law, the superstructure of its legal machinery, and all its procedures, practices and operations. Under the guidance of his father Bacon was admitted to Gray’s Inn where with his extraordinary intellectual gifts and masterful comprehension of the law he enjoyed a stellar rise that eventually led to him occupying all the major legal offices of state, solicitor-general, attorney-general, Lord Keeper and Lord Chancellor of England.

During his time at Gray’s Inn Bacon was de facto Master of the Revels writing and producing several masques, entertainments and plays, several of which have survived. Most importantly, Bacon wrote a play entitled The Misfortunes of Arthur (a political allegory about Queen Elizabeth and Mary, Queen of Scots) which was performed by members of Gray’s Inn before Queen Elizabeth at Greenwich on 28 February 1588, a date notable for the very singular fact that it marked the beginning of what is known as the Shakespearean era. Its themes and language find expression and are demonstrably echoed in a significant number of his early Shakespeare plays including the first tetralogy of I Henry VI, 2 Henry VI, 3 Henry VI and Richard III, written around the same time or shortly after the Misfortunes, and from the same early period Titus Andronicus, King John, Richard II and The Comedy of Errors.
These plays display an intimate familiarity with the principles and practices of all the major branches of the law: common law, civil law, statute law, and the maxims of English law, as well as  its principles, complex technicalities, customs and jurisprudence. Their legal language and phrases readily flow from his pen and in the plays his characters talk in a language of the law straight out of Bacon’s Legal Tracts: from Slades Case, The Maxims of the Law, The Postnati Case, The Charge of Francis Bacon Touching Duels, The Elements of the Common Laws of England, etc, none of which were published in his lifetime.

Several of these plays also reflect some of his other political-legal tracts (also not published during his lifetime), most notably Certain Observations Upon a Libel (c. 1592) commissioned by and written in defence of his uncle Sir William Cecil, Lord Burghley (married to Lady Mildred Cooke Cecil, elder sister of his mother Lady Anne Cooke Bacon) aspects of which are reflected in 2 Henry VI wherein the Duke of Gloucester is modelled on Cecil and Dame Eleanor points to his wife Lady Mildred Cecil. Their son Sir Robert Cecil, with whom Bacon grew up, he painted in the titular character of Richard III and in his essay Of Deformity.

In the less well-known The Troublesome Reign of King John Bacon explores the law of bastardy, in particular the law surrounding royal bastardy, through the most important and largest role in the play, the royal bastard Sir Philip Faulconbridge, universally regarded as the hero of the play. It is revealed here for the first time that the character of the royal bastard is a disguised dramatization of its author Bacon, the secret concealed royal son of Queen Elizabeth and Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester.

For the best part of a year Bacon organised and directed the magnificent Gray’s Inn Christmas Revels (1594-5) which witnessed the premier of his legal play The Comedy of Errors in which a programme of legal reforms began by Sir Nicholas Bacon and continued by Francis Bacon found dramatic expression. On the last of its Grand Nights which took place on 3 January 1595 Bacon wrote six speeches on the Exercise of War, the Study of Philosophy, the Eternizement and Fame by Buildings and Foundations, the Absoluteness of State and Treasure, Virtue and a gracious Government, and Persuading Pastimes and Sports, in the fifth of which, he sets forth arguments for the extensive reform of the machinery of the law, the courts of law and justice, and its delays and abuses, necessary for the peace and security of the kingdom, completing the cycle of his early Baconian-Shakespearean legal plays.

Perhaps the most significant and consequential letter ever written to Sir Francis Bacon was written on Oct 11th. by his private secretary and confidant, Thomas Meautys (TM)

Thanks to the A.Phoenix team and the Lambeth Palace Library for providing the original letter.

To find out more about this letter (Pages 41-) and the historical circumstances that it references see :

FRANCIS BACONS DEATH.pdf

Click image for full-sized

Click image for full-sized

Sirbacon.org wishes to thank the A. Phoenix team for permission to share these slides from their Video Slideshow :

Did Francis Bacon die in 1626 or Feign his Death with the help of his Rosicrucian Brotherhood?
Click image for full-sized

Click image for full-sized

“Did Francis Bacon die in 1626? Or did he feign his death with the help of his Rosicrucian-Freemason Brotherhood?”

by A. Phoenix


Francis Bacon’s Death.pdf

SYNOPSIS

DID FRANCIS BACON DIE IN 1626? OR DID HE FEIGN HIS DEATH WITH THE HELP OF HIS ROSICRUCIAN-FREEMASONRY BROTHERHOOD?

Following his fall from grace which was one of the greatest political betrayals in English history, in order that King James could save the favourite George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, and so that he could save himself, Francis Bacon spent the last five years of his recorded life writing, revising and translating his works for publication with the help of his good pens among them Ben Jonson and George Hebert. During the last year of his life the health of James I was steadily deteriorating and he was rarely able to visit London, while the favourite Buckingham who had sacrificed Bacon and in his distress extorted York House from him, took the opportunity to extend his influence over the heir to the throne, Prince Charles. On 27 March 1625 King James died at Theobalds with Buckingham at his bedside. These are the simple facts known to general history. Following the succession there was no return to favour for Bacon or any offer of a position in the new regime or government and the two of them Charles I and Buckingham believed they could jointly rule without the need or advice of the kingdom’s greatest and wisest statesman. He knew better than anyone and had first-hand experience of the behaviour of monarchs towards those they perceived as a threat or had fallen out of favour.

In the weeks and months leading up to Bacon’s supposed death a certain George Eglisham’s, one of King James’s physicians, was busy writing an explosive pamphlet entitled The Forerunner of Revenge which when published caused a sensation and had very far reaching consequences for Charles I and the favourite Buckingham. In the pamphlet Eglisham directly accused Buckingham of poisoning and murdering his lover and royal master James I as well as other members of the nobility including the Earl of Southampton to whom Bacon had dedicated his Shakespeare poems Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece. There were also many who believed that King Charles had been complicit in the murder of his father King James and Bacon too feared King Charles would try to kill him. The great philosopher died to the profane world on Easter Sunday 9 April 1626 and on 8 May the most reviled and hated man in the kingdom Buckingham was impeached by the House of Lords on charges relating to causing evils affecting the state, bribery and corruption on a colossal scale, and the murder of King James. The decision by King Charles not to allow Buckingham’s impeachment to proceed to trial by dissolving parliament at the cost of a much needed subsidy bill led more to believe or strongly suspect he was complicit with Buckingham in the foul act of killing a king, the very progenitor of his own royal blood. These events eventually led to the assassination of Buckingham in 1628 and helped set in train the state execution of Charles I and the English Civil War.

In the meantime hidden to mainstream history for four hundred years Bacon having feigned his own death with the help of his Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood apparently quietly slipped off to the continent, perhaps travelling first to France and moving on to The Hague in the Netherlands, before eventually spending many years in Germany with Johann Valentin Andreae living to a very old age.

Evidence for his second life includes textual evidence involving indications he did not die in 1626 (‘He is gone, he is gone: it suffices for my woe to have uttered this: I have not said he is dead’), etc. Letters, one written in his prose including the phrase ‘when I was alive’, another letter written by Sir Thomas Meautys to Bacon dating from 11 October 1631, proving he was still very much alive five years after his supposed death in 1626, as stated in every single orthodox biography to the present day. There is also a good deal of evidence supporting that Bacon was responsible for producing, revising and enlarging his own works, and for his direct involvement in writings published in the name of others, post 1626. He also wrote the little known poem ‘On Worthy Master William Shakespeare’ prefixed to the 1632 Second Shakespeare Folio and was responsible for 1,679 changes in what was an attempt to clarify and correct the text including hundreds of alterations in grammar, changes pertaining to the action, and amendments and revisions, affecting metre and style. There is also evidence for his involvement in the publication of the first English translation of the Rosicrucian manifestos the Fama and Confessio (1652) and the publication of the unique version of his New Atlantis known as The Land of the Rosicrucians (1662). This is all supported by extensive cryptographic evidence, Rosicrucian-Freemasonic frontispieces, portraits and engravings, including a portrait with the initials ‘F. B.’ prominently displayed in it depicting Francis Bacon as a very old man. He was born in secrecy and died in secrecy all of which is known to the select elite of his present day Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood who will eventually disclose to the world where Bacon truly died and where he is actually buried, that he is the true author of the Shakespeare works, as well as other secrets about his life and writings. The full truth will truly stagger humankind.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/lTnZDpMy8uM

‘Rare Images of Francis Bacon-Shakespeare the Supreme Head of the Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood’ Video

by A. Phoenix


‘Rare images’ takes a brief pictorial look at some of the powerful evidence revealing Francis Bacon as Shakespeare & the Supreme Head of the Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood.

Rare Images of Francis Bacon-Shakespeare the Supreme Head of the Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood

https://www.youtube.com/embed/IWgiTTALQdM

“The Secret, Hidden, and Obscured, Relationship Between FB and the Jaggards, Printers and Publisher of his Essays and the Shakespeare First Folio.”

by A. Phoenix


For the last four centuries the authoritative Bacon and Shakespeare editors and biographers have systematically suppressed the truth about the relationship between Francis Bacon and the Jaggards, printers and publishers of his Essays and the First Folio of the Shakespeare works. It surely does not need to be said that if somebody is suppressing the full facts and truth from us, and in this instance the rest of the world also, that they are concealing and hiding something. And if we just consider for a single moment the all-encompassing lengths required for this kind of concealment one which has been very carefully maintained over a period of four hundred years, it follows that the commensurate enormity and implications of the secret must be of monumental proportions. A secret is always bound up in its concealment. Thus if what is being withheld from us is the secret relationship between Francis Bacon and the Jaggards the printers and publishers of the Shakespeare First Folio, it is likely to be (and in this case is) that the Folio was printed and published for Francis Bacon by the Jaggards, with whom, which is here revealed for the first time, he had a hidden and obscured relationship over a period of some four decades.

In the second half of the twentieth century the American scholar Charlton Hinman subjected the printing of the First Folio to a forensic technical study in The Printing and Proof-Reading of the First Folio of Shakespeare (Oxford Clarendon Press) based on an investigation of some eighty copies in the Folger Shakespeare Library in Washington. Like most large standard works it remains largely unread from cover to cover and some of its contents remain effectively hidden and unknown to the world. In this work he draws attention to a unique copy of the Shakespeare First Folio with a unique upside down ‘B’ on the first page of the first play The Tempest as well as a defective ‘S’ of ‘Actus primus, Scena prima’ and the mis-signed signature ‘B’ at the bottom of the page: about which he says Baconians will perhaps find meanings in the broken ‘S‘ and in the two ‘B’s ‘that invite such particular attention in the earliest state of page A1.)’. Yet remarkably Professor Hinman does not directly say or explain what meaning Baconians might find in these peculiarities, which is also revealed here for the first time.

The upside down positioning of the ornamental letter ‘B’ is unique to one copy of the Folio, however the same ornamental ‘B’ appears in all other copies but the correct way round. If the large ornamental B is magnified it reveals the name Francis Bacon hidden in the decorative scroll with the name Francis across the top and at the bottom and the name Bacon down the right side. This explosive and decisive evidence completely demolishes the illusion William Shakspere was responsible for the Shakespeare works, a fiction first presented to the world nearly four hundred years ago with the publication of the First Folio, printed in the Jaggard printing shop by William and Isaac Jaggard in 1623.

FB AND THE JAGGARDS.pdf

Bacon is Shakespeare: The Jaggard Connection Video by A. Phoenix:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/tkep5xNEEgQ

Francis Bacon’s Poem “The Life of Man”

by A. Phoenix


https://www.youtube.com/embed/_Y13ndlHVpI

“Francis Bacon, the God-Like Rosicrucian figure of Duke Vincentio, and the Unpublished Speeches of Lord Keeper Sir Nicholas Bacon in Measure for Measure.”

by A. Phoenix


One of the less familiar dramas in the Shakespeare canon Measure for Measure has at its heart the God-like Rosicrucian figure of Duke Vincentio one akin to Prospero in The Tempest described by Dr Yates as a Rosicrucian manifesto. The role of the Duke is one of the longest roles in the Shakespeare canon. He is seen by many Shakespeare scholars as a surrogate of the dramatist himself with the joint Arden editors of Measure for Measure correctly maintaining that its author ‘sets up the correspondences between himself and the duke…extensively’, and that, Measure for Measure ‘persistently hints that the Duke is a playwright made in Shakespeare’s image’. Or put another way the secretive, complex and enigmatic character of Duke Vincentio, who adopts multiple masks, disguises and identities in Measure for Measure represents Shakespeare, that is to say, the true author of the play, who himself outside of the play itself, also adopts multiple identities and disguises behind his various literary living masks including the pseudonym of Shakespeare. The Duke is a complex dramatic portrait of his creator Francis Bacon, the supreme head of the Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood, with the Duke in the play watching over Vienna just like Bacon, reflected in his Rosicrucian utopia New Atlantis, watches over the world and the future of mankind. In the play the Duke seeks to build a new, fair, and just society one based upon love just as Bacon with his Rosicrucian Brotherhood set in motion a plan for A Universal Reformation of the Whole World.

The intertwined themes of law and justice, sex and death, and the Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood that are threaded all the way through Measure for Measure are mirrored and reflected in more than twenty of Bacon’s acknowledged writings and works, among them: unpublished manuscripts, private letters and speeches; his Meditationes Sacrae , Of Colours of Good and Evil, various essays including Of Judicature, Of Seditions and Troubles, and Of Death, one of the central themes of the play; as well as An Inquiry Concerning the Ways of Death and The History of Life and Death; the Gesta Grayorum and other dramatic devices; religious and political tracts including  A Confession of Faith and A Brief Discourse Touching the Happy Union of the Kingdom of England and Scotland; his major philosophical and scientific treatises The Advancement of Learning, Novum Organum and De Augmentis Scientiarum ; and several of his obscure or relatively unknown and unread legal treatises A Proclamation Touching the Marches, The Charge of Owen Indicted for High Treason, A Proposition Touching the Compiling and Amendments of Law, and Touching the Office of Constable; as well as his Rosicrucian utopia New Atlantis (or, The Land of the Rosicrucians) and the first Rosicrucian manifesto the Fama Fraternitatis.

MEASURE FOR MEASURE.pdf

Francis Bacon, the God-like Rosicrucian Figure of Duke Vincentio in Measure for Measure Video by A. Phoenix:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/7_w6qNlX_GE

FRANCIS BACON AND HIS EARLIEST SHAKESPEARE PLAY HAMLET A TUDOR FAMILY TRAGEDY

by A. Phoenix


The Tragedy of Hamlet shadows the most explosive and sensational secrets of the Elizabethan reign in which the not so Virgin Queen Elizabeth was secretly married to Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester with whom she had two concealed royal princes Francis Tudor Bacon and Robert Tudor Devereux. It tells the tale of its author a disinherited royal prince Francis Tudor Bacon in the shape of Hamlet who is denied his rightful kingship by his mother Queen Elizabeth and  the exhaustion and death of the royal Tudor dynasty.

Behind its dramatis personae lies the leading figures of the Elizabethan period: Francis Bacon Tudor concealed Prince of Wales (Prince Hamlet), Queen Elizabeth Tudor (Queen Gertrude) and her secret husband Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester (King Claudius), Robert Tudor Devereux, the second Earl of Essex (Laertes), Sir Nicholas Bacon (the Ghost of Old Hamlet) and Sir William Cecil (Polonius).

It is a story of a lustful Queen Elizabeth and the notorious poisoner and murderer Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester and the strange death possibly through poisoning by Leicester of Sir Nicholas Bacon.  It is a play that is all about revenge, murder and death, with poisonings of Old Hamlet, King Claudius, Queen Gertrude, Laertes and Hamlet himself, and by other means, the deaths of Polonius, Ophelia, and the two state spies, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.

Interspersed throughout the whole of the dissertation of the telling of this royal Tudor tragedy are lines, sentences and passages identical in thought and similar in expression, providing resemblances, correspondences and parallels from more than thirty of Bacon’s writings and works, among them: unpublished manuscripts, private letters and speeches; various essays including Of Revenge and Of Death, the two central themes of the play; as well as An Inquiry Concerning the Ways of Death and The History of Life and Death; short occasional pieces Physiological Remains and Short Notes for Civil Conversation; political works A Brief Discourse Touching the Happy Union of the Kingdom of England and Scotland and The Case of the Post-Nati of Scotland as well as the state sanctioned A Declaration of the Practices and Treasons of the Earl of Essex; his major philosophical and scientific treatises The Advancement of Learning, The Wisdom of the Ancients, Novum Organum, De Augmentis Scientiarum and Sylva Sylvarum; and several of his obscure or relatively unknown and unread legal treatises A Discourse upon the Commission of Bridewell, The Argument in Lowes Case of Tenures, The Charge of Owen Indicted for High Treason, The Reading Upon the Statues of Uses, The Maxims of the Common Law and The Ordinances made by Lord Chancellor Bacon in Chancery.

This and other evidence emphatically demonstrates beyond any reasonable doubt Francis Bacon’s authorship of the earliest and greatest Shakespeare Tudor Tragedy in the history of world literature.

FRANCIS BACON AND HIS EARLIEST SHAKESPEARE PLAY HAMLET A TUDOR FAMILY TRAGEDY.pdf

Francis Bacon’s Hamlet A Tudor Family Tragedy Video by A. Phoenix:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/SV-EODD-fTw

“Francis Bacon’s Unrecognised Cambridge Manuscript and The Taming of The Shrew”

by A. Phoenix


This academic research paper reveals for the first time an unrecognised Francis Bacon philosophical-scientific manuscript entitled Giardino Cosmografico Cultivato (Cultivated Cosmographical Garden) prefaced by Greek and Latin poems from Lady Anne Cooke Bacon and her three sisters Lady Mildred Cooke Cecil, Lady Elizabeth Cooke Hoby and Lady Katherine Cooke Killigrew. The unique manuscript (Cambridge University MS Li.537) presented as being the work of one Dr Bartholo Sylva (who is not known to have written any other work during his lifetime) is copied out in the fine Italic hand of the Bacon family calligraphist and illuminator Petruccio Ubaldini. This little known figure who spent much time with the Bacon family at Gorhambury and York House and had a long hitherto hidden and obscured relationship with Francis Bacon for more than thirty years is here established for the first time as the model for Petruccio in The Taming of the Shrew. In the play Petruccio pursues Katherine who shares the same Christian name of Bacon’s aunt Katherine Cooke Killigrew, younger sister of Lady Anne Cooke Bacon. In The Taming of the Shrew Katherine has a sister named Bianca from which can be derived the anagrammatic contraction AN BAC that clearly suggests the name Anne Bacon. In the play while able to choose from a countless number of names our supreme poet and dramatist gives Petrucci’s father the name Antonio, the Italian form of the Christian name of Anthony Bacon. He also furnishes Petruccio with several servants who are met with after his marriage to Katherine at his country house two of whom are named Nicholas and Nathaniel the same Christian names of his two elder half-brothers (from Lord Keeper Nicholas Bacon’s first marriage) Sir Nicholas and Sir Nathaniel Bacon. Thus hidden in plain sight the controversial comedy The Taming of the Shrew seen for what it is, was a Bacon family affair, a humorous send-up written by the supreme family poet, Francis Bacon.

CAMBRIDGE MANUSCRIPT.pdf

Francis Bacon’s Unrecognised Cambridge Manuscript and The Taming of The Shrew Video by A. Phoenix:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/EXMUhRzrOxw

A. Phoenix has produced a video that goes with the recent Essay, “The Misfortunes of Arthur.”

by A. Phoenix


Francis Bacon’s Unacknowledged Play The Misfortunes of Arthur and its Links to his Shakespeare Plays

https://www.youtube.com/embed/OvUjs6MVvtY

21 POINTS OF EVIDENCE CONFIRMING FRANCIS BACON’S AUTHORSHIP OF HENRY IV

by A. Phoenix


The Henry IV plays are some of the most Baconian in the whole of the Shakespeare canon and are replete with references and allusions not only to their author Francis Bacon but to several members of the Bacon family and his St Albans home at Gorhambury, the Bacon family estate.


The Holy Grail of the Shakespeare World

by A. Phoenix


This is the Holy Grail of the Shakespeare World: an original manuscript of a Shakespeare play corrected in the hand of its secret concealed author Francis Bacon

126 page Academic Paper  https://aphoenix1.academia.edu/research  

SYNOPSIS

It is little known to virtually all Shakespeare scholars, the ordinary schoolmen, and the rest of the world that there exists an early manuscript version of the play Henry IV. This manuscript is the earliest extant manuscript of a Shakespeare play ever discovered, an historical landmark of the utmost importance, that one might be forgiven for thinking that it would not only be well-known and minutely scrutinised by Shakespeare scholars around the globe, as well as known to all and sundry with only the remotest interest in Shakespeare, but celebrated for what it is: a unique artefact of world-wide significance.

The reason this is not the case is because the manuscript itself conceals an explosive secret which it would be difficult to overestimate of the most far-reaching consequences which completely collapses the fiction and illusion William Shakspere of Stratford wrote the Shakespeare works and at the same time confirms the truth that Francis Bacon is our supreme poet and dramatist Shakespeare.

This manuscript was discovered in 1844 preserved in the collection of the eighth Baronet Sir Edward Dering (1807-96) at Surrenden Hall near Pluckley in Kent. It had previously formed part of the library of the first Sir Edward Dering (1598-1644), an antiquarian with an interest in literature and drama, named after his uncle the Puritan preacher Edward Dering patronised by the Cooke sisters Lady Anne Cooke Bacon, Lady Elizabeth Cooke Hoby Russell, Lady Mildred Cooke Cecil and Lady Cooke Killigrew. The relatively obscure Sir Edward Dering (1598-1644) about whose early life very little is known was-here revealed for the first time-a close friend and relative (twice over) of the author of Henry IV Francis Bacon.

To the present day the so-called Dering manuscript is presented to the world as a handwritten version of an abridgement of I and 2 Henry IV mainly written by a scribe, with revisions in the hand of Sir Edward Dering, possibly for a court performance at the court of James I or a private performance at his house in Kent c.1623. It is said that the manuscript is or is apparently based on the 1613 quarto edition of I Henry IV and 1600 quarto edition of 2 Henry IV meaning the manuscript dates from no earlier than 1613 and as Dering’s revisions appear to incorporate some emendations in the First Folio, the MS or parts of the MS, may be dated sometime between 1622 to 1624.

One hundred and twenty years after the so-called Dering MS was first discovered which was afterwards purchased in  great secrecy by Henry Folger, who secreted it away in the Folger Shakespeare Library, a Secret Baconian-Rosicrucian-Freemasonic Institution, a facsimile edition of it was published in 1974.

The edition entitled The History of King Henry The Fourth as revised by Sir Edward Dering published by the Folger Shakespeare, edited by George Walton Williams and Gwynne Blakemore Evans, is not generally well known and remains unfamiliar to the ordinary schoolmen and casual student, and is not quite what it appears to the uninstructed eye.

Its joint editor G. Blakemore Evans worked for US Intelligence serving in the Army Signal Corps alongside William Friedman at Bletchley run by British Intelligence, the centre of allied cipher and code-breaking during the Second World War. In their book The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined the Fraudulent Friedmans falsely maintained that there were no Baconian ciphers used in the Shakespeare works, in perpetrating one of the greatest academic and literary frauds of all time.

However as the present writer demonstrated in The Fraudulent Friedmans: The Bacon Ciphers in the Shakespeare Works their fraudulent book The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined is itself an elaborate cryptogram containing hidden Baconian ciphers conveying the concealed cryptographic message that Francis Bacon, Brother of the Rosy Cross, is Shakespeare. The Friedmans knew there were Baconian ciphers present in the Shakespeare works, a secret cryptically incorporated throughout their work aided by the Folger Shakespeare Library, revealing and confirming Bacon is Shakespeare.

Similarly, while in the open plain text of The History of King Henry The Fourth as revised by Sir Edward Dering its editors George Walton Williams and Gwynne Blakemore Evans himself an expert in cryptography, maintained the fiction of the so-called Dering manuscript, its title page incorporated a number of hidden Baconian ciphers, revealing and confirming that the manuscript of Henry IV was of Baconian origin and likewise that Bacon is Shakespeare.  

In contrast to Williams and Evans and several other Shakespeare scholars who have maintained and repeated the fiction of the so-called Dering manuscript, the orthodox scholar Professor Hardin Craig observed that the MS contains a number of differences and peculiarities which remain unchanged by any contact with the fifth 1613 quarto of I Henry IV. He further observes that it was written in a normal Elizabethan hand with no discernible Jacobean intermixtures, and most importantly, concludes it may be older than the earliest 1598 quarto edition of I Henry IV, and that it is a manuscript of Shakespeare’s play when it was originally one and not two plays.

This whole illusory house of cards rests entirely on the presence of Dering’s hand in the manuscript. If his hand is not present, Dering self-evidently had nothing whatsoever to do with its composition, or its revision, cuts, its division into acts and scenes, its numerous additions of fifty lines and half lines, the introduction of original material in prose and verse, or its wholesale and extensive corrections. All from a person who never wrote a single drama in his entire life or is known to have heavily revised and amended any other play, never mind a Shakespeare play, in the same fashion or manner. The very premise on which this theory rests is self-evidently absurd and more importantly demonstrably false.

The large formatted edition of The History of King Henry The Fourth as revised by Sir Edward Dering totals two hundred and thirty-eight pages, comprising an introduction, a Note on the Transcription and Textual Notes, The Names of All the Characters, a facsimile and transcription with textual notes of the manuscript itself, and a Descriptive and Historical Collation. There is however one absolutely critical piece of evidence missing, namely a facsimile of Dering’s handwriting.

There is no reasonable and rational explanation whatsoever why Evans and Williams did not reproduce what constitutes the most important evidence in their whole Dering theory. By now the intelligent and alert reader will probably strongly suspect or more likely readily realise there is something wrong, something very wrong when the modern authorities on the Dering manuscript have unmistakably and very deliberately not reproduced facsimiles of Dering’s handwriting in this standard edition of the so-called Dering manuscript.

What was it then they wanted to conceal from other ordinary scholars and the rest of the Shakespearean world? Simple, the hand of Dering is nowhere present in the so-called Dering manuscript, a very simple fact which at a stroke completely and incontrovertibly exposes and collapses this whole charade and irrefutably demolishes a fraud or illusion (secretly known to some for more than a century) once and for all.    

The known and undoubted examples of Dering’s hand bears no resemblance whatsoever to the handwriting (including its corrections) to any of the handwriting in the so-called Dering manuscript, or the handwriting in the obverse and reverse of the scrap of paper. It fact not only is it manifestly plain that Dering’s known hand and the hands in the so-called Dering MS do not even remotely resemble each other, it is difficult to conceive of any other specimens of handwritings, being more different.

What then is the reason for the fraud and the false insistence on Dering’s handwriting being present in the so-called Dering MS? The reason is because it masks and conceals its true status, provenance and date. In other words it misdirects the eye away from a great historical secret, one known to some since it was first discovered, and others who were made privy to the secret afterwards.

The so-called Dering manuscript is a single-five act Shakespeare play of Henry IV and is earlier than the first printed quarto of The Historie of Henrie the fourth issued in 1598 and the quarto edition of The Second part of Henrie the fourth printed in 1600. The MS represents the play as Bacon originally composed it when it was one play and not two before developing his original version into two separate parts. Furthermore, we can be reasonably precise regarding the date of the manuscript. It is widely agreed Henry IV followed closely upon Richard II as not only is Henry IV next chronologically its predecessor Richard II clearly points to a sequel. The earlier Richard II is believed to date to around late 1595 or early 1596, and Henry IV was probably composed shortly after, sometime in 1596.

There appears to be three hands in the so-called Dering MS two of which were scribes. It appears the manuscript was copied from another MS now lost. The so-called Dering MS was begun by one scribe who copied out the whole of page one and for some unknown reason after he had completed the first page the task was turned over to a second scribe, who copied out the rest of the manuscript.

The manuscript is intimately connected to Bacon’s literary workshop of writers, scribes and copyists that produced Bacon’s Northumberland MSS, which once contained his Shakespeare plays Richard II and Richard III, that dates from around 1596/7. On the outside cover of the Northumberland MSS in a contemporary hand there are more than a dozen examples of various forms of the name Bacon or Francis Bacon and his literary mask Shakespeare or William Shakespeare. Above the entry for the Shakespeare play Richard II is written ‘By Mr. ffrauncis William Shakespeare’ and where the name ‘William Shakespeare’ has been written further down the page the word ‘Your’ is written twice across it, so thus reads ‘Your William Shakespeare’. The writing on the outer cover of the manuscript is chiefly in one hand with occasional words in another, and a few words written at angle, possibly by a third. One of the hands was undoubtedly Bacon who was also responsible for the monogram signature ‘W.S.’ at the top right hand corner. As with the so-called Dering manuscript, the main content of Bacon’s Northumberland MSS is written in two or more hands. One of the works contained within it generally referred to by the title Leicester’s Commonwealth is itself written by two different scribes whose identity remains unknown. On examining the facsimiles of the so-called Dering MS and the aforementioned work in Bacon’s Northumberland MSS it appears that one of the scribes who copied out Leicester’s Commonwealth was also responsible for copying out the so-called Dering MS from the second page onwards. It appears that in producing the so-called Dering manuscript one of these scribes was most likely working from Bacon’s original (‘foul papers’) manuscript of I Henry IV, producing an authorial fair copy of the play, which Bacon later gifted to his friend and relative Sir Edward Dering.

The so-called corrector’s hand in the so-called Dering manuscript is Bacon’s own cramped hand, as one would expect, from the author of the play.

It is now more than fitting that instead of it being referred to as the Dering manuscript it is hereafter known by its right and proper designation as Francis Bacon’s 1596 manuscript of Henry IV, the unique and earliest known extant manuscript of a Shakespeare play, the holy grail of Shakespeare scholarship.    

 

The Folger Shakespeare Library A Secret Baconian-Rosicrucian-Freemasonic Institution

by A. Phoenix


THE FOLGER SHAKESPEARE LIBRARY SYNOPSIS

The unique and greatest Shakespeare repository in the world the Folger Shakespeare Library is to the present day still shrouded in secrecy and mystery with an untold secret history which stretches back to Elizabethan and Jacobean England to the time of the publication of the Shakespeare First Folio the bedrock on which the library is founded.

The Folgers trace their colonial descent directly back to Peter Folger (1617-1690) translator and government official born in Norwich, England, in 1617, the son of John Folger and Meriba Gibbs. His father John Folger was born in 1594 in the county of Norfolk and his wife Meriba Gibbs two miles east of the county of Norfolk, England in 1600. Virtually nothing is known about either John and Meriba Gibbs Folger and the early years of their son Peter. There is however every likelihood that the Folgers knew members of the Bacon family. The twin counties of Suffolk and Norfolk of East Anglia were the political strongholds of the prominent Bacon family, whose wide and extensive private and social circles, extended across the whole region. The great scion of the family the philosopher-poet Francis Bacon, concealed author of the Shakespeare works, the inspiration of Henry and Emily Folger for the Folger Shakespeare Library, successively served as the Member of Parliament for Ipswich in the county of Suffolk in 1597, 1601, 1604 and 1610.

This was the period of the great expansion into North America secretly directed by Francis Bacon and his Rosicrucian Brotherhood that was to forever change the future direction of the modern world. In 1606, the Virginia Company was formed to organize and promote the colonisation of Virginia and shortly after the first permanent English speaking settlement in North America was established at Jamestown, Virginia in 1607, the seed which grew and evolved into the first modern constitutional and federal republic, the United States of America.

It is conceivable that through knowledge of the activities of Francis Bacon and the London Virginia Company and the first permanent English settlement in Jamestown, followed by Bermuda (1609), Newfoundland (1610), and afterwards Massachusetts, founded by the Pilgrims transported across the Atlantic in the Mayflower in 1620, that the Folger family developed the idea of emigrating to the New World.

The elusive John Folger and his eighteen year old son Peter Folger emigrated to Massachusetts in 1635. During his voyage to America on the vessel Abigail, Peter first met Mary Morrill, whom he married in 1644. Their youngest daughter Abiah, was the mother of the great writer, scientist, and philosopher Benjamin Franklin, the most important Rosicrucian-Freemason of his time and one of the Founding Freemasonic Fathers of the United States of America. Franklin was also a member of the Baconian-Rosicrucian-Freemasonic Royal Society and for several years he regularly corresponded with the great eighteenth-century Shakespearean actor David Garrick and Dr Samuel Johnson, editor of the Shakespeare works.

It was Freemason David Garrick who organized the Grand Shakespeare Jubilee of 1769 which put Stratford-upon-Avon, home of William Shakspere, as the false centre of the Shakespeare world on the map, a Rosicrucian-Freemasonic ludibrium, that still fools and deceives nearly all and sundry around the Shakespearean globe to the present day.

In homage to his great ancestor Benjamin Franklin, the originator of the magnificent and unique Folger Shakespeare Library, Henry Clay Folger said that he had not collected Shakespeareana he would have collected Frankliniana.

In her recent work The Millionaire and the Bard on the obsessively secretive Henry Folger and the Shakespeare Folger Library its author Andrea Mays states that ‘The Folger Library maintains the culture of modesty and secrecy established by its founders’ and told how Henry and Emily Folger filled the Folger Shakespeare library with all kinds of ‘sophisticated and obscure symbols and images’ as well as ‘secret words and signs’ that ‘formed a silent composition’ that only ‘a time traveller or a scholar could comprehend’.

She did not however provide an explanation that would shed light on or explain the meaning of all the secret, arcane signs, images, symbols, and the ubiquitous so-called ‘Tudor Rose’, that all formed part of the silent composition encoded into the Folger Shakespeare Library; and thus far, no one has hitherto been able to comprehend, decipher, and decode them.

Disclosed here for the first time, the Folger Shakespeare Library is a complex Baconian-Rosicrucian-Freemasonic cryptogram that when decoded conveys the explosive far reaching secret known to the Folgers, namely, the concealed identity of the true author of the Shakespeare works, Francis Bacon.

PDF – https://aphoenix1.academia.edu/research

The Fraudulent Friedmans

by A. Phoenix


THE FRAUDULENT FRIEDMANS BY A PHOENIX.

We have produced a 340 page book entitled The Fraudulent Friedmans (supported by 81 illustrations and 756 references) accompanied by a I hour and 40 minutes video. Given the length of the book in the following days and weeks we will be providing extracts highlighting important pieces of evidence and information relating to the lives and writings of the Friedmans and their involvement in the greatest literary fraud in history concerning Francis Bacon’s concealed authorship of the Shakespeare works.

Here are the links for the video trailer, the full video and the book:

For the video trailer: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I-hIZPortXAgMupMTs89bcmlq4zzxO2D/view

For the video that explores the full story see: https://youtu.be/fc2ErlSmmjI

For a detailed paper on ‘The Friedman Fraud’ see: https://aphoenix1.academia.edu/research

Please find a synopsis below:

SYNOPSIS OF THE FRAUDULENT FRIEDMANS: THE BACON CIPHERS IN THE SHAKESPEARE WORKS

 By A Phoenix 

For over sixty years deluded Bacon and Shakespeare scholars supported by universities around the four corners of the globe, fanned by the international news media, have deceived the rest of the world into believing that the Friedmans, the two greatest cryptographers of the twentieth century, had once and for all in their book The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined put an end to the notion of Baconian ciphers being present in the Shakespeare plays, a falsehood which continues to deceive the world to the present day.

This is a story about one of the greatest literary frauds of all time fully revealed here for the first time that will absolutely shock Shakespeare scholarship and the rest of the world and necessitate a complete re-assessment of Francis Bacon’s true authorship of the Shakespeare works.

From a very early age Francis Bacon was given a baptism into ciphers and codes and other arcane cryptic devices for concealing and communicating secret and hidden information. His father Lord Keeper and de facto Lord Chancellor of England Sir Nicholas Bacon and his uncle Secretary of State Sir William Cecil were the twin pillars of the Elizabethan Reformation and effectively the heads of the secret state. The lifeblood of the Elizabethan state and the English Secret Service headed by Sir Francis Walsingham were secret ciphers and codes and its three principal pillars Bacon, Cecil and Walsingham went to extraordinary lengths to maintain a cryptographic hegemony over their dangerous European rivals and the domestic enemies of the English government. Early in the Elizabethan reign Sir William Cecil and Sir Nicholas Bacon directed the great mathematician and cryptographic expert Dr John Dee to seek out a rare manuscript copy of Johannes Trithemius’s Steganographia. The spy, intelligencer and secret government agent Dr Dee had a profound and extensive interest in cryptology and after tracking down a prized manuscript of Steganographia on the continent he returned with it to England, where a copy of it was placed in the hands of his political masters. He was afterwards a mentor to the young Francis Bacon who possessed an all-consuming and profound fascination for all ciphers and codes and other cryptographic devices necessary for a life in the English Secret Service.

In 1576 a fifteen year old Francis Bacon travelled in the train of the Ambassador-elect Sir Amias Paulet for a three year stay at the English Embassy in Paris which stood at the very centre of European intrigue and espionage where he was joined by the great English cryptographer Thomas Phelippes with the two of them occupied with ciphers and other areas of cryptography on an almost daily basis. It was during his time in Paris that Bacon later recalled how he invented his famous bi-literal cipher, a cipher system he later secretly inserted into his Shakespeare works. Living in Paris at the time when Bacon was busy working with and inventing new ciphers was the diplomat and cryptographer Blaise de Vigenère with whom Bacon is believed to have collaborated on his Traicte des Chiffre or secret ways of writing.  

In 1591 there appeared in London a Latin edition of a milestone work on cryptology by the Italian polymath and playwright Giambattista della Porta entitled De Fvtivis Literarvm Notis printed by John Wolfe, and dedicated to Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland. Some two centuries later there was discovered at Northumberland House (at the time in the ownership of his ancestor Earl Percy, afterwards the Duke of Northumberland) what has come to be known as the Northumberland MSS that originally contained several of Bacon’s writings among them his Shakespeare plays Richard II and Richard III. On the outer-cover of The Northumberland Manuscript the name of Bacon/Francis Bacon and his pseudonym Shakespeare/William Shakespeare are scribbled on more than a dozen occasions. Down the left side appears Honorificabiletudine a variant of the long word honorificabilitudinitatibus in Loves Labours Lost (5:1:41). Further down the page we are met with the entry ‘revealing day through every crany peepes and see Shak’, line 1086 of The Rape of Lucrece ‘revealing day through every cranny spies’. In particular above the entry for Bacon’s Shakespeare play Richard II appears the entry ‘By Mr. ffrauncis William Shakespeare’ and further down the word ‘Your’ is twice written across his pseudonym William Shakespeare-so it reads ‘Your William Shakespeare’.

With the spymaster Sir Francis Walsingham now dead the headquarters of the English Secret Service had been transferred to Essex House on the Strand the grand stately residence of the royal favourite Robert Devereux, the second Earl of Essex. Under the roof of Essex House, Francis and Anthony Bacon ran a vast domestic and foreign intelligence network of spies and intelligencers operating across the European continent. Working out of Gray’s Inn and Essex House, Francis and Anthony also set up a literary workshop with connections to English printers and publishers employing writers, translators, and scribes for distribution of private manuscripts, books, plays, masques and other entertainments. This Bacon-Essex circle included the Earl of Southampton to whom Bacon dedicated Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece and to whom many of his Shakespeare sonnets were addressed.

Francis and Anthony Bacon were the joint heads of the foreign and domestic arms of the English Secret Service that evolved into British Intelligence in other words the equivalent of MI5 and MI6. They were in charge of gathering intelligence domestically and from all over Europe for which they employed a highly organised network of secret agents and spies whose important intelligence and information was conveyed through secret codes and ciphers and the interception of ciphered correspondence of enemy agents, deciphered by Francis, Anthony, and Thomas Phelippes.

In his first major acknowledged work The Advancement of Learning Bacon sets out a series of cipher systems which he named Simple Cipher, Kay Cipher, Wheel Cipher and his Bi-literal Cipher, that he secretly incorporated into the 1623 Shakespeare First Folio. Shortly before the publication of the First Folio in November 1623 there appeared in Latin Bacon’s truly monumental De Augmentis Scientiarum Libri IX which included a much more expansive and detailed explanation of his Bi-literal Cipher. Soon after the publication of the De Augmentis and the Shakespeare First Folio there appeared the extremely rare work on cryptology entitled Cryptomenytices et Cryptographiae Libri IX by one Gustavus Selenus, a pseudonym for Augustus, Duke of Brunswick-Luneburg, a near five hundred page work published at Luneburg early in 1624. The revealing title page of the Cryptomenytices et Cryptographiae contains a pictorial cryptogram depicting Francis Bacon giving a figure holding a spear dressed in actor’s boots, representing the actor William Shakspere, a quarto or book of plays, who is shown carrying them off into the distance toward a building representing the Globe Theatre.

Some three centuries later the discovery of the presence of Bacon’s Biliteral Cipher was announced to the world in a series of volumes published by the remarkable Elizabeth Wells Gallup entitled The Bi-literal Cypher of Sir Francis Bacon Discovered in his Works. On examining the prefatory material of the 1623 Shakespeare First Folio Gallup deciphered a series of revelations about Francis Bacon’s secret life and enormous corpus of writings revealing that not only was he the secret author of the Shakespeare works but also the works published in the names of among others Spenser, Greene, and Marlowe, and that he was the concealed royal son of Queen Elizabeth and Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester.

News of these revelations soon reached the ears of Colonel George Fabyan who had had set up his  Riverbank estate located west of Chicago which is still shrouded in secrecy and mystery to the present day. It was here that Colonel Fabyan provided Gallup with a staff and extensive resources to continue her investigations into the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher and its presence in the Shakespeare works and other Baconian publications set forth anonymously or in the names of others. She was afterwards joined at Riverbank by William F. Friedman and his future wife Elizebeth Smith, the widely acclaimed duo who went on to become the two greatest cryptographers of the twentieth century and the authors of The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined.

The years spent by the Friedmans at Riverbank are not well-documented and what we know or believe of their time there almost entirely derives from the story told by the Friedmans themselves in a series of unpublished manuscripts and lectures and their book The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined.   

For the next few years the Friedmans worked closely alongside Elizabeth Wells Gallup assisting her in a complex and minute study of the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher and its links to the Shakespeare First Folio and soon after the Friedmans were appointed the joints Heads of the Riverbank Department of Ciphers.

During this period the Riverbank Cipher Department headed by the Friedmans produced a series of pamphlets known as the Riverbank Laboratories Publications on Cryptography. These comprise of a series of important ground-breaking technical monographs dealing with cryptography and cryptanalysis and several dealing with Gallup’s work on the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher. A number of the volumes on the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher were issued anonymously and the identity of their author (s), who were of course known to the Friedmans, remain unknown to the world at large to the present day.

For more than half a century the Friedmans had every opportunity to reveal the identity of the authors of these anonymous Riverbank publications on the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher but repeatedly refused to do so. The reason why, is the Friedmans themselves, were the anonymous authors of these tracts in which it is emphatically stated that the presence of Bacon’s cipher system identified by Elizabeth Wells Gallup has been repeatedly tested and dissected, and was and is, demonstrable beyond any and all doubt.

In 1997 there appeared a still virtually unknown work entitled The Sabines at Riverbank: Their Role in the Science of Architectural Acoustics by John W. Kopec. The book issued by the Acoustical Society of America was limited to only a thousand copies on a subject which falls outside the ordinary scope of literary scholarship and largely for this reason still remains unknown to Baconian and Shakespearean scholarship.

In researching the work Kopec fully immersed himself in the history of Riverbank, a history which has barely been glanced at. Virtually all of what little is known of the Riverbank Cipher Department has come down to us through the lens of the Friedmans. Their three main repositories (two unpublished) where they discussed their time at Riverbank provide us with only a very carefully edited version of the circumstances and events surrounding it and their parts played in the authorship of the Riverbank publications on the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher. Their various accounts about their time at Riverbank are marked by inconsistency, factual discrepancy, deliberate omissions, falsehoods, and deceit. Now here for the very first time was a book on Riverbank by an author who had spent more than two decades on site with unlimited access to what records remained of its secret, obscure and hidden past. Kopec’s book is dedicated to Don Williams, son of Fabyan’s chauffeur Bert Williams, who drove the limousine that picked up Elizebeth Smith Friedman from the Newberry Library in Chicago, marking the beginning of her career at Riverbank from 1916 to 1920.

The long-time Riverbank chauffeur Bert Williams knew the Friedmans well and for the years the couple lived on the estate he was in almost daily contact with them, as he was with Elizabeth Wells Gallup, providing him with first-hand inside information about the Riverbank publications on the Bacon Bi-literal Ciphers and their authorship.  

Outside of the records Don Williams ‘Mr. Riverbank’ who was born there in 1920 was a critical source of information for Kopec. Don ‘Mr Riverbank’ Williams, worked at Riverbank for 35 years before retiring in 1985, and knew more about it than any other person alive. In the main body of the text Kopec devoted several pages to the period spent by the Friedmans at the Riverbank estate. His informative discussions with Don Williams included the explosive and far-reaching statement of enormous historical importance to Baconian and Shakespearean scholarship and the truth about Lord Bacon’s authorship of the Shakespeare works: namely, the anonymous The Greatest Work of Sir Francis Bacon issued by the Riverbank Cipher Department was written by the Friedmans, confirming the presence of the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher in the Shakespeare canon.                 

For the rest of their lives the Friedmans remained silent about their authorship of The Greatest Work of Sir Francis Bacon endorsing the presence of the Bacon Bi-literal Cipher in the Shakespeare works and decades later when both Fabyan and Elizabeth Wells Gallup were long dead wrote The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined wherein they fraudulently pretended in the open plain text that no Bacon ciphers were used in the Shakespeare poems and plays in one of the greatest academic and literary frauds of all time. However revealed and demonstrated here for the first time The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined is itself one very elaborate cryptogram containing hidden secret Bacon ciphers repeatedly conveying the concealed cryptographic message that Francis Bacon, Brother of the Rosy Cross, is Shakespeare.

The Friedmans knew there were Bacon ciphers present in the Shakespeare works and that Bacon is the true secret author of the Shakespeare works, a secret which at a single stroke completely collapses the Stratfordian fiction and illusion that the illiterate/semi-illiterate William Shakspere was the author of the Shakespeare plays. It was a secret they took to the graves but not beyond it. For on the tombstone of William and Elizebeth Friedman, one designed by themselves, the two greatest cryptographers of the twentieth century, left a secret cryptographic message:

FRANCIS BACON IS SHAKESPEARE.

Bacon-Shakespeare Secret Republican Father of the Modern World

by A. Phoenix


Both Bacon and Shakespeare (obviously treated separately by orthodox scholars) have very largely been presented as conservative political thinkers whereas more recently several modern scholars have finally begun to partly recognise the republican themes running through both the canons, which completely revolutionises and transforms our understanding of the first philosopher-poet of the modern world.

Read more…

Folio Ciphers

Video by A. Phoenix


View this video  that illustrates the presence of Baconian ciphers on the title page of the 1623 Shakespeare First Folio cryptographically confirming that Francis Bacon is Shakespeare.

 

The Play’s The Thing

by A. Phoenix


A video to celebrate the birthday of Sir Francis Bacon & his authorship of the Shakespeare Works revealing the clues he left behind in the plays.

Bacon is Shakespeare: Pictorial Proofs Video

by A. Phoenix


See the Video:

Bacon is Shakespeare: Pictorial Proofs Video

Francis Bacon (Bassanio/Bellario) and Anthony Bacon (its titular character Antonio) and The Merchant Of Venice

by A. Phoenix


Following his return to England in February 1592 after a twelve absence abroad working closely with spymaster Sir Francis Walsingham for the English Secret Service, Anthony Bacon went to live with his brother Francis Bacon who was then already heavily in debt at Gray’s Inn. From the moment Anthony returned to England he immediately became involved in supporting and assisting his brother Francis with his money troubles and considerable debts. Francis and Anthony set up a literary workshop with connections to printers and publishers employing writers, translators, scribes and copyists for the distribution of private manuscripts, books, plays, masques and other entertainments. The enormous crippling costs of running and financially supporting this literary workshop resulted in Francis and Anthony further entering into a never ending cycle of debt incurred by having to raise large loans from money-lenders through bonds (legal agreements for loans) and other legal instruments.

The Bacon brothers were still dealing with various loans and mounting debts when in Trinity Term 1597 a goldsmith named Sympson of Lombard Street who held a bond for £300 principal, sued Francis for repayment but agreed to respite the satisfaction of it until the beginning of the following term. However without any warning a fortnight before Michaelmas Term commenced, Bacon was walking from the Tower of London when at the instigation of the moneylender Sympson he was served with an execution and arrested with a view to confining him to the Fleet prison. The events were to inform and colour the most famous legal play in the history of English drama, The Merchant of Venice, whose titular character is named Antonio, the Italianate form of Anthony named after and modelled upon Anthony Bacon. It was entered as a new play on the Stationers’ Register on 22 July 1598 and was first published in 1600 as The Most excellent Historie of the Merchant of Venice.

In the modern Arden edition of the play Professor Drakakis makes the obvious but very important observation ‘The central drama of The Merchant of Venice revolves around the relationship between the merchant Antonio and the Venetian Lord Bassanio.’ The character of Bassanio is modelled upon its author Francis Bacon. In The Merchant of Venice the two characters Antonio and Bassanio mirror the complex relationship and circumstances of Francis and Anthony Bacon before and during the time the play was written, revised and performed.

Apart from Bassanio, the spectral presence of Bacon is dispersed through several other characters in the play. Professor Lamb voices that not only does Bassanio resemble Bacon but so too its heroine Portia. Then there is the character of Dr Bellario who as pointed out by the orthodox scholar Mark Edwin Andrews also represented Bacon which is further substantiated by the videos and lectures of Simon Miles and Christina G. Waldman the first to publish a full-length work on the subject entitled Francis Bacon’s Hidden Hand in Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice (2018). In his work Law Versus Equity in The Merchant of Venice as its title indicates Mark Edwin Andrews reads the play as an allegory of the conflict between law and equity which constitutes the consensus among modern scholars that the trial scene dramatizes the struggle between the common law courts and the equitable Court of Chancery. From the outset of the trial Andrews juxtaposes a prose version alongside the text of the play in which he substitutes Bacon for Dr Bellario.

The Merchant of Venice is about love and friendship particularly focused on the characters of Antonio (Anthony Bacon) and Bassanio (Bacon); about usury (a subject on which Bacon composed an essay and legal paper); money-lending mirroring the real lives of the Bacon brothers; and a bond between Antonio and Shylock similar to the bond between Bacon and Sympson. It’s also partly an allegory about the issue of debt and assumpsit that was finally decided in Slade’s Case (Slade v Morley), in which Bacon appeared for the defendant Morley, whose first substantive arguments made before the Justices of the Exchequer occurred in the Michaelmas Term of 1597 and 1598, at the very time Bacon was planning, writing and revising The Merchant of Venice, the most dramatic legal play in all world literature.

MERCHANT OF VENICE.pdf

See the Video:

Francis Bacon (Bassanio/Bellario) and Anthony Bacon (its titular character Antonio) and The Merchant Of Venice by A. Phoenix

Francis Bacon & The Law In His Early Shakespeare Plays Reflected In His Life & Writings

by A. Phoenix


FRANCIS BACON AND THE LAW.pdf

The philosophical, political and legal DNA of Francis Bacon runs through the very veins and arteries of the Shakespeare poems and plays. As the son of Sir Nicholas Bacon, the Elizabethan Lord Keeper and de facto Lord Chancellor of England from a very early age he drank in, assimilated and internalised, the inner workings of the law, the superstructure of its legal machinery, and all its procedures, practices and operations. Under the guidance of his father Bacon was admitted to Gray’s Inn where with his extraordinary intellectual gifts and masterful comprehension of the law he enjoyed a stellar rise that eventually led to him occupying all the major legal offices of state, solicitor-general, attorney-general, Lord Keeper and Lord Chancellor of England.

During his time at Gray’s Inn Bacon was de facto Master of the Revels writing and producing several masques, entertainments and plays, several of which have survived. Most importantly, Bacon wrote a play entitled The Misfortunes of Arthur (a political allegory about Queen Elizabeth and Mary, Queen of Scots) which was performed by members of Gray’s Inn before Queen Elizabeth at Greenwich on 28 February 1588, a date notable for the very singular fact that it marked the beginning of what is known as the Shakespearean era. Its themes and language find expression and are demonstrably echoed in a significant number of his early Shakespeare plays including the first tetralogy of I Henry VI, 2 Henry VI, 3 Henry VI and Richard III, written around the same time or shortly after the Misfortunes, and from the same early period Titus Andronicus, King John, Richard II and The Comedy of Errors.
These plays display an intimate familiarity with the principles and practices of all the major branches of the law: common law, civil law, statute law, and the maxims of English law, as well as  its principles, complex technicalities, customs and jurisprudence. Their legal language and phrases readily flow from his pen and in the plays his characters talk in a language of the law straight out of Bacon’s Legal Tracts: from Slades Case, The Maxims of the Law, The Postnati Case, The Charge of Francis Bacon Touching Duels, The Elements of the Common Laws of England, etc, none of which were published in his lifetime.

Several of these plays also reflect some of his other political-legal tracts (also not published during his lifetime), most notably Certain Observations Upon a Libel (c. 1592) commissioned by and written in defence of his uncle Sir William Cecil, Lord Burghley (married to Lady Mildred Cooke Cecil, elder sister of his mother Lady Anne Cooke Bacon) aspects of which are reflected in 2 Henry VI wherein the Duke of Gloucester is modelled on Cecil and Dame Eleanor points to his wife Lady Mildred Cecil. Their son Sir Robert Cecil, with whom Bacon grew up, he painted in the titular character of Richard III and in his essay Of Deformity.

In the less well-known The Troublesome Reign of King John Bacon explores the law of bastardy, in particular the law surrounding royal bastardy, through the most important and largest role in the play, the royal bastard Sir Philip Faulconbridge, universally regarded as the hero of the play. It is revealed here for the first time that the character of the royal bastard is a disguised dramatization of its author Bacon, the secret concealed royal son of Queen Elizabeth and Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester.

For the best part of a year Bacon organised and directed the magnificent Gray’s Inn Christmas Revels (1594-5) which witnessed the premier of his legal play The Comedy of Errors in which a programme of legal reforms began by Sir Nicholas Bacon and continued by Francis Bacon found dramatic expression. On the last of its Grand Nights which took place on 3 January 1595 Bacon wrote six speeches on the Exercise of War, the Study of Philosophy, the Eternizement and Fame by Buildings and Foundations, the Absoluteness of State and Treasure, Virtue and a gracious Government, and Persuading Pastimes and Sports, in the fifth of which, he sets forth arguments for the extensive reform of the machinery of the law, the courts of law and justice, and its delays and abuses, necessary for the peace and security of the kingdom, completing the cycle of his early Baconian-Shakespearean legal plays.

Perhaps the most significant and consequential letter ever written to Sir Francis Bacon was written on Oct 11th. by his private secretary and confidant, Thomas Meautys (TM)

Thanks to the A.Phoenix team and the Lambeth Palace Library for providing the original letter.

To find out more about this letter (Pages 41-) and the historical circumstances that it references see :

FRANCIS BACONS DEATH.pdf

Click image for full-sized

Click image for full-sized

Sirbacon.org wishes to thank the A. Phoenix team for permission to share these slides from their Video Slideshow :

Did Francis Bacon die in 1626 or Feign his Death with the help of his Rosicrucian Brotherhood?
Click image for full-sized

Click image for full-sized

“Did Francis Bacon die in 1626? Or did he feign his death with the help of his Rosicrucian-Freemason Brotherhood?”

by A. Phoenix


Francis Bacon’s Death.pdf

SYNOPSIS

DID FRANCIS BACON DIE IN 1626? OR DID HE FEIGN HIS DEATH WITH THE HELP OF HIS ROSICRUCIAN-FREEMASONRY BROTHERHOOD?

Following his fall from grace which was one of the greatest political betrayals in English history, in order that King James could save the favourite George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, and so that he could save himself, Francis Bacon spent the last five years of his recorded life writing, revising and translating his works for publication with the help of his good pens among them Ben Jonson and George Hebert. During the last year of his life the health of James I was steadily deteriorating and he was rarely able to visit London, while the favourite Buckingham who had sacrificed Bacon and in his distress extorted York House from him, took the opportunity to extend his influence over the heir to the throne, Prince Charles. On 27 March 1625 King James died at Theobalds with Buckingham at his bedside. These are the simple facts known to general history. Following the succession there was no return to favour for Bacon or any offer of a position in the new regime or government and the two of them Charles I and Buckingham believed they could jointly rule without the need or advice of the kingdom’s greatest and wisest statesman. He knew better than anyone and had first-hand experience of the behaviour of monarchs towards those they perceived as a threat or had fallen out of favour.

In the weeks and months leading up to Bacon’s supposed death a certain George Eglisham’s, one of King James’s physicians, was busy writing an explosive pamphlet entitled The Forerunner of Revenge which when published caused a sensation and had very far reaching consequences for Charles I and the favourite Buckingham. In the pamphlet Eglisham directly accused Buckingham of poisoning and murdering his lover and royal master James I as well as other members of the nobility including the Earl of Southampton to whom Bacon had dedicated his Shakespeare poems Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece. There were also many who believed that King Charles had been complicit in the murder of his father King James and Bacon too feared King Charles would try to kill him. The great philosopher died to the profane world on Easter Sunday 9 April 1626 and on 8 May the most reviled and hated man in the kingdom Buckingham was impeached by the House of Lords on charges relating to causing evils affecting the state, bribery and corruption on a colossal scale, and the murder of King James. The decision by King Charles not to allow Buckingham’s impeachment to proceed to trial by dissolving parliament at the cost of a much needed subsidy bill led more to believe or strongly suspect he was complicit with Buckingham in the foul act of killing a king, the very progenitor of his own royal blood. These events eventually led to the assassination of Buckingham in 1628 and helped set in train the state execution of Charles I and the English Civil War.

In the meantime hidden to mainstream history for four hundred years Bacon having feigned his own death with the help of his Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood apparently quietly slipped off to the continent, perhaps travelling first to France and moving on to The Hague in the Netherlands, before eventually spending many years in Germany with Johann Valentin Andreae living to a very old age.

Evidence for his second life includes textual evidence involving indications he did not die in 1626 (‘He is gone, he is gone: it suffices for my woe to have uttered this: I have not said he is dead’), etc. Letters, one written in his prose including the phrase ‘when I was alive’, another letter written by Sir Thomas Meautys to Bacon dating from 11 October 1631, proving he was still very much alive five years after his supposed death in 1626, as stated in every single orthodox biography to the present day. There is also a good deal of evidence supporting that Bacon was responsible for producing, revising and enlarging his own works, and for his direct involvement in writings published in the name of others, post 1626. He also wrote the little known poem ‘On Worthy Master William Shakespeare’ prefixed to the 1632 Second Shakespeare Folio and was responsible for 1,679 changes in what was an attempt to clarify and correct the text including hundreds of alterations in grammar, changes pertaining to the action, and amendments and revisions, affecting metre and style. There is also evidence for his involvement in the publication of the first English translation of the Rosicrucian manifestos the Fama and Confessio (1652) and the publication of the unique version of his New Atlantis known as The Land of the Rosicrucians (1662). This is all supported by extensive cryptographic evidence, Rosicrucian-Freemasonic frontispieces, portraits and engravings, including a portrait with the initials ‘F. B.’ prominently displayed in it depicting Francis Bacon as a very old man. He was born in secrecy and died in secrecy all of which is known to the select elite of his present day Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood who will eventually disclose to the world where Bacon truly died and where he is actually buried, that he is the true author of the Shakespeare works, as well as other secrets about his life and writings. The full truth will truly stagger humankind.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/lTnZDpMy8uM

‘Rare Images of Francis Bacon-Shakespeare the Supreme Head of the Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood’ Video

by A. Phoenix


‘Rare images’ takes a brief pictorial look at some of the powerful evidence revealing Francis Bacon as Shakespeare & the Supreme Head of the Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood.

Rare Images of Francis Bacon-Shakespeare the Supreme Head of the Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood

https://www.youtube.com/embed/IWgiTTALQdM

“The Secret, Hidden, and Obscured, Relationship Between FB and the Jaggards, Printers and Publisher of his Essays and the Shakespeare First Folio.”

by A. Phoenix


For the last four centuries the authoritative Bacon and Shakespeare editors and biographers have systematically suppressed the truth about the relationship between Francis Bacon and the Jaggards, printers and publishers of his Essays and the First Folio of the Shakespeare works. It surely does not need to be said that if somebody is suppressing the full facts and truth from us, and in this instance the rest of the world also, that they are concealing and hiding something. And if we just consider for a single moment the all-encompassing lengths required for this kind of concealment one which has been very carefully maintained over a period of four hundred years, it follows that the commensurate enormity and implications of the secret must be of monumental proportions. A secret is always bound up in its concealment. Thus if what is being withheld from us is the secret relationship between Francis Bacon and the Jaggards the printers and publishers of the Shakespeare First Folio, it is likely to be (and in this case is) that the Folio was printed and published for Francis Bacon by the Jaggards, with whom, which is here revealed for the first time, he had a hidden and obscured relationship over a period of some four decades.

In the second half of the twentieth century the American scholar Charlton Hinman subjected the printing of the First Folio to a forensic technical study in The Printing and Proof-Reading of the First Folio of Shakespeare (Oxford Clarendon Press) based on an investigation of some eighty copies in the Folger Shakespeare Library in Washington. Like most large standard works it remains largely unread from cover to cover and some of its contents remain effectively hidden and unknown to the world. In this work he draws attention to a unique copy of the Shakespeare First Folio with a unique upside down ‘B’ on the first page of the first play The Tempest as well as a defective ‘S’ of ‘Actus primus, Scena prima’ and the mis-signed signature ‘B’ at the bottom of the page: about which he says Baconians will perhaps find meanings in the broken ‘S‘ and in the two ‘B’s ‘that invite such particular attention in the earliest state of page A1.)’. Yet remarkably Professor Hinman does not directly say or explain what meaning Baconians might find in these peculiarities, which is also revealed here for the first time.

The upside down positioning of the ornamental letter ‘B’ is unique to one copy of the Folio, however the same ornamental ‘B’ appears in all other copies but the correct way round. If the large ornamental B is magnified it reveals the name Francis Bacon hidden in the decorative scroll with the name Francis across the top and at the bottom and the name Bacon down the right side. This explosive and decisive evidence completely demolishes the illusion William Shakspere was responsible for the Shakespeare works, a fiction first presented to the world nearly four hundred years ago with the publication of the First Folio, printed in the Jaggard printing shop by William and Isaac Jaggard in 1623.

FB AND THE JAGGARDS.pdf

Bacon is Shakespeare: The Jaggard Connection Video by A. Phoenix:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/tkep5xNEEgQ

Francis Bacon’s Poem “The Life of Man”

by A. Phoenix


https://www.youtube.com/embed/_Y13ndlHVpI

“Francis Bacon, the God-Like Rosicrucian figure of Duke Vincentio, and the Unpublished Speeches of Lord Keeper Sir Nicholas Bacon in Measure for Measure.”

by A. Phoenix


One of the less familiar dramas in the Shakespeare canon Measure for Measure has at its heart the God-like Rosicrucian figure of Duke Vincentio one akin to Prospero in The Tempest described by Dr Yates as a Rosicrucian manifesto. The role of the Duke is one of the longest roles in the Shakespeare canon. He is seen by many Shakespeare scholars as a surrogate of the dramatist himself with the joint Arden editors of Measure for Measure correctly maintaining that its author ‘sets up the correspondences between himself and the duke…extensively’, and that, Measure for Measure ‘persistently hints that the Duke is a playwright made in Shakespeare’s image’. Or put another way the secretive, complex and enigmatic character of Duke Vincentio, who adopts multiple masks, disguises and identities in Measure for Measure represents Shakespeare, that is to say, the true author of the play, who himself outside of the play itself, also adopts multiple identities and disguises behind his various literary living masks including the pseudonym of Shakespeare. The Duke is a complex dramatic portrait of his creator Francis Bacon, the supreme head of the Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood, with the Duke in the play watching over Vienna just like Bacon, reflected in his Rosicrucian utopia New Atlantis, watches over the world and the future of mankind. In the play the Duke seeks to build a new, fair, and just society one based upon love just as Bacon with his Rosicrucian Brotherhood set in motion a plan for A Universal Reformation of the Whole World.

The intertwined themes of law and justice, sex and death, and the Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood that are threaded all the way through Measure for Measure are mirrored and reflected in more than twenty of Bacon’s acknowledged writings and works, among them: unpublished manuscripts, private letters and speeches; his Meditationes Sacrae , Of Colours of Good and Evil, various essays including Of Judicature, Of Seditions and Troubles, and Of Death, one of the central themes of the play; as well as An Inquiry Concerning the Ways of Death and The History of Life and Death; the Gesta Grayorum and other dramatic devices; religious and political tracts including  A Confession of Faith and A Brief Discourse Touching the Happy Union of the Kingdom of England and Scotland; his major philosophical and scientific treatises The Advancement of Learning, Novum Organum and De Augmentis Scientiarum ; and several of his obscure or relatively unknown and unread legal treatises A Proclamation Touching the Marches, The Charge of Owen Indicted for High Treason, A Proposition Touching the Compiling and Amendments of Law, and Touching the Office of Constable; as well as his Rosicrucian utopia New Atlantis (or, The Land of the Rosicrucians) and the first Rosicrucian manifesto the Fama Fraternitatis.

MEASURE FOR MEASURE.pdf

Francis Bacon, the God-like Rosicrucian Figure of Duke Vincentio in Measure for Measure Video by A. Phoenix:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/7_w6qNlX_GE

FRANCIS BACON AND HIS EARLIEST SHAKESPEARE PLAY HAMLET A TUDOR FAMILY TRAGEDY

by A. Phoenix


The Tragedy of Hamlet shadows the most explosive and sensational secrets of the Elizabethan reign in which the not so Virgin Queen Elizabeth was secretly married to Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester with whom she had two concealed royal princes Francis Tudor Bacon and Robert Tudor Devereux. It tells the tale of its author a disinherited royal prince Francis Tudor Bacon in the shape of Hamlet who is denied his rightful kingship by his mother Queen Elizabeth and  the exhaustion and death of the royal Tudor dynasty.

Behind its dramatis personae lies the leading figures of the Elizabethan period: Francis Bacon Tudor concealed Prince of Wales (Prince Hamlet), Queen Elizabeth Tudor (Queen Gertrude) and her secret husband Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester (King Claudius), Robert Tudor Devereux, the second Earl of Essex (Laertes), Sir Nicholas Bacon (the Ghost of Old Hamlet) and Sir William Cecil (Polonius).

It is a story of a lustful Queen Elizabeth and the notorious poisoner and murderer Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester and the strange death possibly through poisoning by Leicester of Sir Nicholas Bacon.  It is a play that is all about revenge, murder and death, with poisonings of Old Hamlet, King Claudius, Queen Gertrude, Laertes and Hamlet himself, and by other means, the deaths of Polonius, Ophelia, and the two state spies, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.

Interspersed throughout the whole of the dissertation of the telling of this royal Tudor tragedy are lines, sentences and passages identical in thought and similar in expression, providing resemblances, correspondences and parallels from more than thirty of Bacon’s writings and works, among them: unpublished manuscripts, private letters and speeches; various essays including Of Revenge and Of Death, the two central themes of the play; as well as An Inquiry Concerning the Ways of Death and The History of Life and Death; short occasional pieces Physiological Remains and Short Notes for Civil Conversation; political works A Brief Discourse Touching the Happy Union of the Kingdom of England and Scotland and The Case of the Post-Nati of Scotland as well as the state sanctioned A Declaration of the Practices and Treasons of the Earl of Essex; his major philosophical and scientific treatises The Advancement of Learning, The Wisdom of the Ancients, Novum Organum, De Augmentis Scientiarum and Sylva Sylvarum; and several of his obscure or relatively unknown and unread legal treatises A Discourse upon the Commission of Bridewell, The Argument in Lowes Case of Tenures, The Charge of Owen Indicted for High Treason, The Reading Upon the Statues of Uses, The Maxims of the Common Law and The Ordinances made by Lord Chancellor Bacon in Chancery.

This and other evidence emphatically demonstrates beyond any reasonable doubt Francis Bacon’s authorship of the earliest and greatest Shakespeare Tudor Tragedy in the history of world literature.

FRANCIS BACON AND HIS EARLIEST SHAKESPEARE PLAY HAMLET A TUDOR FAMILY TRAGEDY.pdf

Francis Bacon’s Hamlet A Tudor Family Tragedy Video by A. Phoenix:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/SV-EODD-fTw

“Francis Bacon’s Unrecognised Cambridge Manuscript and The Taming of The Shrew”

by A. Phoenix


This academic research paper reveals for the first time an unrecognised Francis Bacon philosophical-scientific manuscript entitled Giardino Cosmografico Cultivato (Cultivated Cosmographical Garden) prefaced by Greek and Latin poems from Lady Anne Cooke Bacon and her three sisters Lady Mildred Cooke Cecil, Lady Elizabeth Cooke Hoby and Lady Katherine Cooke Killigrew. The unique manuscript (Cambridge University MS Li.537) presented as being the work of one Dr Bartholo Sylva (who is not known to have written any other work during his lifetime) is copied out in the fine Italic hand of the Bacon family calligraphist and illuminator Petruccio Ubaldini. This little known figure who spent much time with the Bacon family at Gorhambury and York House and had a long hitherto hidden and obscured relationship with Francis Bacon for more than thirty years is here established for the first time as the model for Petruccio in The Taming of the Shrew. In the play Petruccio pursues Katherine who shares the same Christian name of Bacon’s aunt Katherine Cooke Killigrew, younger sister of Lady Anne Cooke Bacon. In The Taming of the Shrew Katherine has a sister named Bianca from which can be derived the anagrammatic contraction AN BAC that clearly suggests the name Anne Bacon. In the play while able to choose from a countless number of names our supreme poet and dramatist gives Petrucci’s father the name Antonio, the Italian form of the Christian name of Anthony Bacon. He also furnishes Petruccio with several servants who are met with after his marriage to Katherine at his country house two of whom are named Nicholas and Nathaniel the same Christian names of his two elder half-brothers (from Lord Keeper Nicholas Bacon’s first marriage) Sir Nicholas and Sir Nathaniel Bacon. Thus hidden in plain sight the controversial comedy The Taming of the Shrew seen for what it is, was a Bacon family affair, a humorous send-up written by the supreme family poet, Francis Bacon.

CAMBRIDGE MANUSCRIPT.pdf

Francis Bacon’s Unrecognised Cambridge Manuscript and The Taming of The Shrew Video by A. Phoenix:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/EXMUhRzrOxw

A. Phoenix has produced a video that goes with the recent Essay, “The Misfortunes of Arthur.”

by A. Phoenix


Francis Bacon’s Unacknowledged Play The Misfortunes of Arthur and its Links to his Shakespeare Plays

https://www.youtube.com/embed/OvUjs6MVvtY