Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 11/07/2023 in all areas

  1. Oh my God, the Irony ! Mind blowing the diagonal anagram in Bates' book! Super observant A.P. This is similar to the Fraudelent Friedmans. Great line : The truth as Bacon said, is the daughter of time not authority, and the hidden truth (as stated on the title page of New Atlantis; Land of the Rosicrucians) will be revealed after some time has passed, tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow and Bacon knew more than anyone, as do his Rosicrucian Brotherhood, that ‘All the world’s a stage’; some of whom masquerade as authoritative Shakespeare or Stratfordian scholars. Sad that "smart" people who have studied Shakespeare all their lives don't have a clue who wrote the works. Maybe there should be a book entitled, The Genius of Sir Francis Bacon the Original Shake-Speare instead that includes this rebuttal
    3 points
  2. According to the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust, The Royal Shakespearian Club was already working in the shadows to secure the house on Henley Street: https://www.shakespeare.org.uk/explore-shakespeare/shakespedia/shakespeares-birthplace/purchase-of-birthplace/ In the 1830s The Royal Shakespearian Club had already become involved in the restoration of the bust and grave at Holy Trinity Church. The Club had begun to debate the idea of buying the Henley Street house before the sale became public knowledge, so they set up The Shakespeare Birthplace Committee with the intention of buying the property. The Birthplace Committee was divided between Stratford and London. Charles Dickens was a prominent member of the London branch of the committee. They needed to raise sufficient funds for a deposit and the purchase proper, plus enough money to make a start on the conservation project. Charles Dickens quote 3 months before they purchased the house he expresses his fear that their enterprise might fail if the truth comes out. "It is a great comfort to my thinking that so little is known concerning the poet. It is a fine mystery; and I tremble every day lest something should come out."
    3 points
  3. Stratford is a town without pity living a lie. Souless. Long history of corruption and merchants peddling fake history and trinkets to unsuspecting tourists. The Shakespeare Authorship was never about truth for Stratfordians. Since they hold on to their theory as fact they can only ignore, ridicule, spin and obfuscate. A tale repeated by generations of idiots signifying nothing. In a sane world Stanley Wells would be arrested and sent to the tower with a chisel so he can scrawl his name onto the wall above his cell door.
    3 points
  4. Curious how the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust is so bold to suggest they created the story of Shakespeare on their website. When they bought the property in 1847 they knew exactly what they were going to do. It was not about history, certainly not about truth, it was and still is all about money. They had a plan, and here we are today doing what we can to undue the damage of their deception. No wonder Stanley Wells would rather us "Shut up!" 😉 Reinventing the House
    3 points
  5. It might have been a phonetically accurate pronunciation, with short "u" pronounced like our short "i," (as in "bit") and long "u" pronounced like "ir." See Kieren Windsor, "Welsh Alphabet = + How to Pronounce the Letters," Welsh Guidebook, updated 8/26/23, https://walesguidebook.com/language/welsh-alphabet/; see also http://www.mylanguages.org/welsh_alphabet.php (slightly different info. on long "u"). We call them "Tudors," looking back, but they did not refer to themselves as Tudors yet, it seems. See Sean Coughlan, "Tudor era is misleading myth," says Oxford historian [Cliff Davies], May 29, 2012, https://www.bbc.com/news/education-18240901. The term was an embarrassment due to its Welsh connections. There's a JSTOR article by C. S. L. Davies, "What's in a Name?" vol 97, no 1 (325), Jan. 2012, JSTOR https://www.jstor.org/stable/24429363. I haven't read it; it is not one that is free to read online. Also Univ. of Oxford, May 29, 2012, https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2012-05-29-tudor-england-myth Bacon might not have used the word "Tudor" in his History of the Reign of King Henry the Seventh. It does not appear in the index to Brian Vickers' edition (Cambridge University Press, 1998). I did not see the word "Tudor" in the first part where he tells how the King came to power (pp. 5-22). I wonder who was behind the use of the name. In the Welsh naming system, Owain (Owen) "Tudor," grandfather of Henry VII (through secret marriage to Catherine of Valois, widow of Henry V), should have been called "Maredudd" (Meredith), but the British, when he entered British court service as a youth, called him by the name Owain Tudor. "Tudor" was not a last name in Welsh. Owain was unjustly killed, his bloody head placed on the market cross. I have wondered whether there was a connection here with Owain's unjust execution and the Rosicrucians' "rosy cross" symbolism. Perhaps Essex, in writing "Tidar," was claiming an association with Owen "Tudor" who was killed unjustly, despite his loyalty, just as Essex claimed he remained loyal to his queen (and mother). https://www.britainexpress.com/counties/hereford/owen-tudor-plaque.htm; Thomas Jones Pierce, "Owain Tudor (ca 1400 - 1461)," Dictionary of Welsh Biography, https://biography.wales/article/s-OWAI-TUD-1400; David Nash Ford, "Owen Tudor, 1400-1461," https://www.berkshirehistory.com/bios/otudor.html ("heavily edited from Sir Sidney Lee's Dictionary of National Biography"). https://www.tudorsociety.com/owen-tudor-1400-1461/ Thanks to this discussion, I found this article by Brendan Cunningham, about special watches decorated with the Tudor rose: "Decoding the Tudor Rose, May 24, 2023, https://www.horolonomics.com/2023/05/decoding-tudor-rose.html. The Tudor rose is a hybrid rose, made up of the white rose of the House of York and the red rose of the House of Lancaster. Henry VII invented the symbol.
    2 points
  6. The Good news is that soon we will have Dodd's Martrydom book fully available on sirbacon
    2 points
  7. THE GENIUS OF SHAKESPEARE BY SIR JONATHAN BATE WIDELY SEEN AS THE HIGHEST ORTHODOX SHAKESPEARE/STRATFORDIAN AUTHORITY IN THE WORLD AND THE BACONIAN-ROSICRUCIAN CRYPTIC DEVICES ON PAGE 157 THE NUMBER REPRESENTING THE BROTHERHOOD OF THE ROSY CROSS. The prolific and voluminous Sir Jonathan Bate is now widely regarded as the highest Stratfordian authority in the world. He was educated at Seven Oaks School where he was a contemporary of Jonathan Evans, Director General of MI5 (2007-13). He went to St Catherine’s College, Cambridge (the same university as Bacon) where he earned his PhD on ‘Shakespeare and the English Romantic Imagination’ and then became a Research Fellow at Harvard University founded in 1636 (most probably by Bacon’s Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood), the oldest university in the United States of America, first established by Bacon and his Rosicrucian Brotherhood at Jamestown, Virginia, three decades earlier, in 1607. He was a Fellow at Trinity Hall, Cambridge and afterwards appointed King Alfred Professor of English Literature at Liverpool University, before becoming Professor of Shakespeare and Renaissance Literature at the University of Warwick. In 2011 Professor Bate was elected Provost of Worcester College, Oxford and served as a Governor and a senior Board member of the Royal Shakespeare Company. He sits on the European Advisory Board of the Princeton University Press and is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature and Fellow of the British Academy. He is also the General Editor of the Internet Shakespeare Editions project-one of the most visited Shakespeare websites in the world. At various times Professor Bate has held visiting professorships at Yale University, the Huntington Library, which houses one of the most important Bacon collections in the world, and the Folger Shakespeare Library, which holds the world’s largest collection of printed works of Shakespeare and arguably the largest collection of printed works on Francis Bacon and the Bacon-Shakespeare Authorship Controversy. His impressive list of publications include Shakespeare and Ovid (Oxford Clarendon Press, 1993), The RSC Shakespeare: Complete Works (Macmillan, 2007: edited with Eric Rasmussen), Soul of the Age: The Life, Mind and World of William Shakespeare (Penguin Books, 2009), and The Genius of Shakespeare (London: Picador, 1997). In his ‘Acknowledgements’ at the back of The Genius of Shakespeare Professor Bate expresses his various debts of support and gratitude ‘The writing of this book was made possible by the award of a British Academy Research Readership, a visiting fellowship at the Folger Shakespeare Library in Washington, DC, and an Andrew Mellon Fellowship at the Huntingdon Library in San Marino, California’.1 In the preface Professor Bate tells his readers ‘a library devoted to him [Shakespeare] stands on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC a stone’s throw away from the legislature-where every other author has to make do with a niche in the vast Library of Congress [founded on the personal library of President Thomas Jefferson, believed by many to be linked to the Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood, based on Bacon’s system of memory, reason and imagination], the Bard of Avon has his special place across the road, the Folger Shakespeare Library.’2 A secret Baconian-Rosicrucian-Freemasonic Institution.3 To which Professor Bate may also have added is equally only a stone’s throw from The Supreme Mother Council of the World, 330 Ancient And Accepted Rite of Freemasonry, at the heart of the Rosicrucian-Freemasonic capital of United States of America. In The Genius of Shakespeare he devotes a chapter to ‘The Authorship Controversy’: 'There is a mystery about the identity of William Shakespeare. The mystery is this: why should anyone doubt that he was William Shakespeare, the actor from Stratford-upon-Avon? It is the first question which the professional Shakespearean is always asked in casual conversation outside the walls of the academy-who wrote the plays? When told of the hard core of evidence that the man from Stratford did so, people are surprised. Sometimes it is suspected that the academics are covering up a scandal…'4 In my experience most of the schoolmen of the second and third rank downwards do not often know what Shakespeare day of the week it is and therefore a vast historical conspiracy perpetrated down the centuries of world-wide proportions is light years beyond their limited comprehension. What the ordinary schoolmen do not know is the great Bacon-Shakespeare secret is reserved for their betters much higher up of exalted rank sublimely residing on an invisible Rosicrucian plain directing the hallowed walls of academia. In The Genius of Shakespeare Professor Bate states 'the theory that it was Bacon failed to convince because the deduction of it depended upon elaborate cryptograms.'5 Leaving the reader with the impression that the Baconians had little or no other evidence supporting Bacon's authorship of the Shakespeare works! The observant reader will have noticed that Professor Bate italicized 'it was Bacon' in a sentence in which there was absolutely no need to do so. In an attempt to ridicule Baconian ciphers after stating that the 'chief device of the late-nineteenth-and early twentieth century Baconians was the cryptogram', Professor Bate presented an example taken from Ignatius Donnelly's The Great Cryptogram: Francis Bacon's Cipher in the so-called Shakespeare Plays.6 This is all stated in the open text. However, concealed in the text elsewhere in The Genius of Shakespeare for those with eyes to see is a cryptogram conveying the secret that Francis Bacon, Brother of the Rosy Cross, is Shakespeare. In The Genius of Shakespeare Professor Bate begins his chapter 6 (3 plus 3: 33 Bacon in simple cipher) on page 157: 157 Fra Rosicrosse in simple cipher. The chapter is titled ‘The Original Genius’ and subtitled ‘The idea of genius’. The sentence which also constitutes the first paragraph reads ‘Consider the statement ‘Shakespeare was a genius’. Is this a fact or an opinion?’ The first printed line of it contains 56 letters: 56 Fr Bacon in simple cipher and the full sentence has 63 letters and carries four marks of punctuation: two quotation marks, one full stop and a question mark. This provides a total of 67 Francis in simple cipher. The title and the subtitle comprise 32 letters and one digit at the head of the page: 32+1=33 Bacon in simple cipher. Thus far we have a concealed cryptogram which reads Francis Bacon-Brother of the Rosy Cross. Furthermore, it will be noted that the first sentence begins with ‘Consider’, which first three letters contain the second syllable of the name Bacon. If the eye strays further down the page, it will be noticed, the almost subliminal line ‘flashing into our minds’ is followed by a noticeably larger than usual gap between it and the beginning of the Hamlet quote ‘To be or not to be’. This citation is followed by citations from Macbeth ‘Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow’, As You Like it ‘All the world’s a stage’ and the equally famous line from The Tempest ‘Our Revels now are ended’. The phrase ‘To be or not to be’ is found in arguably the most metaphysical line in the whole of the Shakespeare canon. The truth as Bacon said, is the daughter of time not authority, and the hidden truth (as stated on the title page of New Atlantis; Land of the Rosicrucians) will be revealed after some time has passed, tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow and Bacon knew more than anyone, as do his Rosicrucian Brotherhood, that ‘All the world’s a stage’; some of whom masquerade as authoritative Shakespeare or Stratfordian scholars. It is often thought the line ‘Our revels now are ended’ represents his departure to the world-with his secret identity as the poet Shakespeare to be discovered at a later date, after some considerable time had passed. After this considerable passage of time let us see if we can find him again on the page before us. If we use the same secret method of delivery that Bacon employed at the end of The Rape of Lucrece and draw a line starting from the right of the syllable ‘Con’ beginning the first paragraph through the capital letter A in ‘And’ (line 😎down through the ‘b’ of the multi-layered meaning of the line ‘To be or not to be’ on to the ‘f’, ending the apposite word ‘proof’, upwards we read the letters yielding the name F Bacon, ‘The Original Genius’ of Shakespeare, that taken together provides us with the concealed cryptogram Francis Bacon, Brother of the Rosy Cross, is Shakespeare. 1. Jonathan Bate, The Genius of Shakespeare (London: Picador, 1997), p. 371. 2. Ibid., p. VII. 3. A. Phoenix, ‘The Fraudulent Friedmans: The Bacon Ciphers in the Shakespeare Works’ (2022), pp. 1-340, esp. pp. 172-225, available at www.sirbacon.org. 4. Jonathan Bate, The Genius of Shakespeare (London: Picador, 1997), p. 65. 5. Ibid., p. 102. 6. Ibid., pp. 89-90.
    2 points
  8. Hi A Phoenix You are causing little explosions in my brain. Please keep it up.
    2 points
  9. PLAYS JULIUS CAESAR During 1599 Bacon turned to one of the figures in classical history the Roman leader Julius Caesar who had clearly fascinated him and had already featured in a diverse range of his works: the religio-political tract An Advertisement Touching the Controversies of the Church of England (1589), the dramatic device Of Tribute or giving that which is due (c. 1591-2), Certain Observations Upon a Libel (c. 1592-3), The Orations for the Gray’s Inn Revels (1594-5) and his private note-book the Promus of Formularies and Elegances (1594-5). He also referred to Julius Caesar in several of his essays and penned a ‘Character of Julius Caesar’ likely about the same time as his Shakespeare play of the same name. He was also of course familiar with the standard works on Roman history and Julius Caesar and the critical literature relating to the subject and the man. Both the Greek and Roman historians Plutarch and Suetonius state that Julius Caesar was stabbed 23 times, however in his Shakespeare Roman history play this is deliberately altered to 33 times: 33 Bacon in simple cipher. www.spearshakerproductions.com https://www.youtube.com/@SpearshakerProductions/videos
    2 points
  10. PLACES THE WHITE HART INN, ST ALBANS Located at the edge of the Bacon family estate at Gorhambury on Holywell Hill is the White Hart Inn at St Albans, Francis Bacon's local tavern. The White Hart Inn, Holywell Hill, St Albans Parts of the building dates back to the fifteenth or sixteenth century and much of its architecture has been preserved. The ground floor is now occupied by a pottery shop. In 1985 during renovations undertaken at the White Hart Inn by Benskins the brewers who owned the building, a mural of 20ft x 10ft was discovered over one wall known as the Venus and Adonis Mural depicting the death of Adonis killed by a Boar dating around or before 1600, about the time or shortly after the publication of Bacon’s Shakespeare poem Venus and Adonis. The medieval archaeologist Dr Clive Rouse together with experts from the Warburg Institute at London University confirmed that the mural depicted the Death of Adonis, the theme of the Shakespeare poem Venus and Adonis. The White Hart Inn is believed to have been a sixteenth/seventeenth century Rosicrucian Lodge, with the mural probably commissioned for its meetings, which contains Rosicrucian symbolism. Next to Adonis in the mural is the Boar which is striking similar to the boar depicted in Bacon’s crest. Above the boar in the mural stands a large house that presumably represents Bacon’s house at Gorhambury. Section of the The Venus and Adonis Mural c. 1600 The red rose seen in the mouth of the horse is the central symbol of his Rosicrucian Brotherhood. The word Rosicrucian is derived from ‘Rose Cross’ and Christian Rosencreutz in the Rosicrucian Chemical Wedding wears a red cross and roses as symbols of the Rosicrucian Brotherhood. The invisible order is often referred to as the Brotherhood of the Rosy Cross and title pages of its works depict the symbol of the rose. The phrase sub rosa which means to communicate or done in secret is a central tenet of the Rosicrucian Brotherhood who to the present day jealously guard and watch over Bacon’s secret life and writings including his authorship of the Shakespeare works. www.spearshakerproductions.com https://www.youtube.com/@SpearshakerProductions/videos
    2 points
  11. People Marguerite de Valois Sometime in 1576 Francis Bacon learnt the secret of his royal parentage in a ferocious and violent outburst at court from Queen Elizabeth his royal mother. Bitterly regretting the revelation of the long concealed secret, it was decided by Queen Elizabeth and Robert Dudley that Bacon was to be sent to France in the train of the ambassador Sir Amias Paulet whilst she decided what was to be done with him. In Autumn 1576 the 15 year old Bacon was originally supposed to be starting his legal training at Gray’s Inn, instead he found himself in Paris with all the considerable delights of the French Court and the 23 year old Marguerite de Valois, daughter of Catherine de Medici and reluctant wife of King Henry of Navarre. The French court was vastly different to the English court with its harsh and course manners where learning was not held with the esteem that Bacon felt it warranted. By contrast the French court was libertarian in its outlook and honoured discussions of philosophy, poetry, art, science and literature. The Pleiades were a group of poets dedicated to the promoting and developing of the French language, their muse was Marguerite a brilliant and beautiful intellectual. Bacon later spoke often of the profound effect that his time in France had on him in terms of his cryptography work at the Intelligence bureau and the realisation that England too needed a massive shake up in terms of its attitudes towards learning and the importance and power that language gave to its country. The elevation of the English language became one of Bacon’s major preoccupations which he largely accomplished through his Shakespeare works. Central to the early plays Love’s Labour’s Lost set in Navarre, Romeo and Juliet and later Troilus and Cressida was his doomed love affair with Marguerite. Although a divorce and marriage were explored, the course of true love certainly didn’t run smooth especially when Marguerite was a married Catholic queen and Francis a Protestant concealed royal prince, a nigh on impossible situation in those days. Years later, Marguerite did divorce her husband but time had now moved on and there was to be no reunion for the star crossed lovers. Marguerite was Bacon’s first experience of love and would forever be part of one of the most influential times of his life and would become immortalised in his Shakespeare works. www.spearshakerproductions.com https://www.youtube.com/@SpearshakerProductions/videos
    2 points
  12. Kenneth C. Jack is not square enough for my taste. He brings up the subject of Bacon's bribery without acknowledging that Bacon was innocent despite having claimed he was guilty. We know Bacon pleaded guilty only to save James from further political problems and James promised to pardon Bacon which he didn't do because that was the type of guy James was. So this tells me he has not read deeply enough in his research. If he admires Bacon as he seems to he should get this right without passing on the false narrative that so many others have and still continue to do. Reading Alfred Dodd's The Martyrdom of Francis Bacon and Nieves Mathews (Francis Bacon : History of a Character Assassination)https://www.google.com/books/edition/Francis_Bacon/ZYDv5C6th2kC?hl=en a thorough vindication of Bacon's innocence. The Bribery charges against Bacon and not receiving his pardon may have been another reason for him to remain anonymous to the 1623 First Folio. Jack writes "Whether Francis Bacon was a so-called Rosicrucian or Freemason may never be known, and the question will probably remain forever within the domain of the “Speculators”. Speculation runs rife, as many also believe that Francis Bacon was the true author of the works attributed to William Shakespeare – and moreover; many see Masonic symbolism in the Bard’s works." If Jack was familiar with the brethren Alfred Dodd a journalist and Freemason and his work especially, "Shakespeare Creator of Freemasonry" and George Tudhope's "Bacon Masonry" he would have a deeper and more enlightened understanding than that of "Speculator."
    2 points
  13. Hi everyone, Kate has just sent over this very interesting monthly publication with an article (with great images) on the Great One. https://www.thesquaremagazine.com/mag/article/202210sir-francis-bacon-and-salomons-house/
    1 point
  14. The Bacon Blindness & Ignorance of Shakespeare Authorship Commentators Professor William D. Rubinstein I have for quite a while had some very warm exchanges with quite a few Shakespeare authorship commentators regarding Lord Bacon's authorship of the Shakespeare works. Invariably, their level of knowledge about the life and writings of FB is to put it mildly frankly shocking, and their ignorance of the evidence and facts demonstrating his authorship of the Shakespeare works, actually beggars belief. Many of these being professors and academics who present themselves as experts and authorities on Shakespeare and the authorship of the Shakespeare works. A case in point is the current exchange I am at the moment having with Professor Rubinstein on the Oxford is Shakespeare Group Page who himself maintains that Sir Henry Neville (d. 1615) is the secret author of the Shakespeare works. He is the co-author of the following two full-length works: Brenda James and William D. Rubinstein, The Truth Will Out Unmasking the Real Shakespeare (Harlowe: Pearson Longman, 2005) John Casson and William D. Rubinstein, Sir Henry Neville Was Shakespeare: The Evidence (2016). My surreal exchange with Professor Rubinstein has been going for the best part of a week much of which on his part has to be seen to be believed. For those who wish to read it see the Oxford is Shakespeare Group Page. https://www.facebook.com/groups/506798023644643/posts/1101327620858344/?comment_id=1101930054131434&reply_comment_id=1102754627382310&notif_id=1698984190323304&notif_t=group_comment He put up the following post yesterday which can be read below followed by my point by point response to the statements made therein. Professor Rubinstein 'Again, I simply don't agree with you, and all that "Rosicrucian-Freemason" stuff is absurd conspiracy theory nonsense. I re read Bacon's entry on wikipedia and in the ODNB, and I cannot find the slightest evidence that he had anything to do with the plays. There are numerous obvious deficiencies in the Baconian theory. Let me set out some briefly: 1. Shakespeare's oeuvre changed dramatically in 1601. From then, and not before, he wrote the Great Tragedies, starting with Hamlet in 1601, Othello in 1602, etc. All biographers of Shakespeare know that something traumatic must have happened then to alter his work so radically, but simply cannot explain it. What happened to Bacon to explain it? Nothing, so far as I can see. In contrast, Neville was thrown into the Tower, along with Southampton, for his part in the Essex rebellion, where he stayed until James came to the throne (he was able to write, etc.). 2. Bacon does not appear to have been a director of the London Virginia Company. Only directors of the Company were allowed to read the Strachey Letter of 1610, which was clearly used as one of the bases of The Tempest of 1611. This also lets Shakespeare out- he had no connection with the Company. Neville in contrast was a director. 3. You have to provide some explanation of the Sonnets dedication, and why it was published just then in April 1609, who "Mr. W.H." was, and the many other mysteries about it. With Neville you can. How did Thomas Thorpe obtain all 154 Sonnets from Bacon, and why? With or without his knowledge and approval? There are dozens of other points I could raise, but will stop now.' Dear Professor Rubinstein, REPLY No. 1 You raised several points which I will address in order. 1] Firstly, you stated ‘I simply don't agree with you, and all that "Rosicrucian-Freemason" stuff is absurd conspiracy theory nonsense’. I assume it had not occurred to you a similar dismissive response might be made regarding your belief Sir Henry Neville wrote the Shakespeare plays as nothing more than ‘absurd conspiracy theory nonsense’. It is hard to know precisely what you meant by your unacademic and pejorative phrase ‘all that "Rosicrucian-Freemason" stuff’, however regarding evidence and facts about Francis Bacon and his Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood see some of the following works for you instruction and enlightenment: W. F. C. Wigston, Bacon Shakespeare and the Rosicrucians (London: George Redway, 1888) W. F. C. Wigston, Francis Bacon Poet, Prophet, Philosopher versus Phantom Captain Shakespeare the Rosicrucian Mask (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner and Co., Ltd, 1891) C. M. Pott, Francis Bacon and his Secret Society (London: Robert Banks & Son, 1911) Alfred Dodd, Shakespeare Creator of Freemasonry Being a Remarkable Examination of the Plays and Poems, which proves incontestably that these works were saturated in Masonry, that Shakespeare was a Freemason and the Founder of the Fraternity (London: Rider & Co, 1937) Alfred Dodd, Francis Bacon’s Personal Life-Story (London: Rider & Company, 1986) Karl F. Hollenbach, Francis Rosicross (Ekron, Kentucky: Dunsinane Hill Publications, 1996) Peter Dawkins, Bacon, Shakespeare & Fra. Christian Rose Cross (Francis Bacon Research Trust, 1989) Peter Dawkins, Building Paradise the Freemasonic and Rosicrucian Six Days’ Work (Francis Bacon Research Trust, 2001) A. Phoenix, ‘Francis Bacon, the God-like Rosicrucian Figure of Duke Vincentio and the Unpublished Speeches of Lord Keeper Sir Nicholas Bacon, in Measure for Measure’, (2021), pp. 1-48 A. Phoenix, The Shakespeare First Folio: A Baconian-Rosicrucian-Freemasonic Illusion (2023) For a list of nearly fifty articles on Francis Bacon, Shakespeare and the Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood see A. M. Challinor, Francis Bacon Philosopher, Statesman, Poet: An Index to Baconiana and its predecessors, 1886-1999 (The Francis Bacon Society, 2001), pp. 100, 134. REPLY No. 2 Secondly you stated ‘I re read Bacon's entry on wikipedia and in the ODNB, and I cannot find the slightest evidence that he had anything to do with the plays’. I think this tells us everything we need to know. You clearly have very little or virtually no knowledge of Francis Bacon-his life or works-and the mountainous evidence overwhelmingly demonstrating his authorship of the Shakespeare works. So much so that the extent of your ‘research’ began and ended with the entry of FB in Wikipedia and the ODNB! Nevertheless, even though you know virtually nothing about Bacon and his authorship of the Shakespeare works, you proceed to offer opinions in terms of certainty regarding evidence pertaining to it, that you don’t know and have never read. The inherent contradictory absurdity of your position and statements will no doubt be self-evident to everyone reading this post. This is after I sent you links to one book and two long articles on three primary documents as follows, which you ignored and have clearly not read: A. Phoenix, The Bacon-Shakespeare Manuscript (Hitherto known as the Northumberland Manuscript) which originally Contained Copies of his Shakespeare Plays Richard II and Richard III (2022), 239 pages. A. Phoenix, ‘Francis Bacon and the so-called ‘Dering’ Manuscript of Henry IV, the Unique and Earliest Known Manuscript of a Shakespeare play: or the Holy Grail of Shakespeare Scholarship a Shakespeare Manuscript (c.1596) Originating from Bacon's Literary Workshop and Corrected in his Hand’, (2022), pp. 1-126. A. Phoenix, ‘Francis Bacon's Private Manuscript Notebook (Known as the Promus of Formularies and Elegancies) the Source of Several Hundred Resemblances, Correspondences and Parallels Found Throughout his Shakespeare Poems and Plays’, (2023), pp. 1-133. Furthermore, I sent you a link to 3 recent books and 30 academic papers containing extensive and irrefutable evidence that Bacon wrote the Shakespeare works which again you ignored and have clearly not read: https://aphoenix1.academia.edu/research REPLY No. 3 Thirdly, you then astonishingly on the basis you know very little about Francis Bacon and his secret authorship of the Shakespeare works proceeded to state ‘There are numerous obvious deficiencies in the Baconian theory. Let me set out some briefly’: ‘1. Shakespeare’s oeuvre changed dramatically in 1601. From then, and not before, he wrote the Great Tragedies, starting with Hamlet in 1601, Othello in 1602, etc. All biographers of Shakespeare know that something traumatic must have happened then to alter his work so radically, but simply cannot explain it. What happened to Bacon to explain it? Nothing, so far as I can see. In contrast, Neville was thrown into the Tower, along with Southampton, for his part in the Essex rebellion, where he stayed until James cam [sic] to the throne (he was able to write, etc.).’ This again clearly demonstrates you know nothing about some of the most important and well-known aspects of the life and times of Francis Bacon. There is not enough space here for an extensive answer but one or two points in passing should suffice. You mention Bacon’s cousin Sir Henry Neville was thrown in the Tower with the Earl of Southampton and the Earl of Essex. From 1590 onwards Bacon acted as special adviser to the Earl of Essex. Francis and Anthony Bacon ran the English Secret Service from Essex House on the Strand where they both at times resided, with Essex acting as some kind of de facto Foreign Secretary, and where Southampton visited on an almost daily basis. The first two volumes of the standard work of The Letters and Life of Francis Bacon by his great editor and biographer James Spedding are taken up with the relationship between Bacon and Essex and orthodox and Baconian full-length works have been written on their open and secret relationship. It was the devastating tragedy of Essex’s trial and execution in 1601 that served as a traumatic trigger to Bacon’s Shakespeare tragedies beginning with The Tragicall Historie of Hamlet Prince of Denmark See A. Phoenix, ‘Francis Bacon and his earliest Shakespeare play Hamlet: A Tudor Family Tragedy’, (2021), pp. 1-109 https://www.academia.edu/48910078/Francis_Bacon_and_his_earliest_Shakespeare_play_Hamlet_A_Tudor_Family_Tragedy 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). 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 Lowe’s 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 confirm beyond any reasonable doubt Francis Bacon’s authorship of the greatest Shakespeare tragedy in the history of world literature. REPLY No. 4 You state: ‘2. Bacon does not appear to have been a director of the London Virginia Company. Only directors of the Company were allowed to read the Strachey Letter of 1610, which was clearly used as one of the bases of The Tempest of 1611. This also lets Shakespeare out- he had no connection with the Company. Neville in contrast was a director.’ 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 the continent of North America was established at Jamestown, Virginia in 1607, the seed that grew and evolved into the first modern constitutional and federal republic, the United States of America. One man Francis Bacon was more than any other responsible for directing this grand enterprise. Those behind it issued its first charter in 1606 which established a Virginia Council in England comprised of thirteen unnamed members who it says were to be ‘appointed by us, our heirs and successors’, and that it shall have the superior managing and direction of all matters concerning the government of the colonies. The second charter issued in 1609 lists the names of Francis Bacon, Henry Wriothesley, third Earl of Southampton, William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke and Sir Henry Neville. A third charter in 1612 registers Mary, Countess of Pembroke and her other son Philip Herbert, Earl of Montgomery, and Sir Henry Wotton. All three charters were written by Bacon. In an attempt to allay the growing disquiet about the Virginia colony and to raise much needed funds the Virginia Council entered in the Stationers’ Register on 14 December 1609 A Trve and Sincere declaration of the purpose and ends of the Plantation begun in Virginia anonymously written by Bacon, which was most probably published shortly after. On 8 November 1610 the Virginia Council entered on the Stationers’ Register a second similarly titled document A Trve Declaration of the estate of the Colonie in Virginia, with a confutation of such scandalous reports as haue tended to the disgrace of so worthy an enterprise again anonymously written by its prime mover Bacon. For self-evident reasons the Virginia Council of which Bacon was the key member attached strict secrecy to all communications, manuscripts and writings relating to the colony that it did not want conveying to the public, that might in any way jeopardise the success of the project and future of the North American continent. Having access to Strachey’s True Reportory of the Wrack dated 15 July 1610 (not published until 1625) Bacon made use of it for the latter A True Declaration a direct and immediate source for his New World masterpiece The Tempest. The first recorded performance of The Tempest took place on 1 November 1611 at the royal court of James I. It opens with an inspired dramatic enactment of the tempest faced by the Sea Venture which occurred off the coast of Bermuda as the colonists headed to Virginia, representing a dramatic symbolic portrayal of the birth of what became the United States of America. In search of his fortune Strachey left London and set sail for the New World on the Sea Adventure. While still in Virginia, or shortly after returning to England he began to write The Historie of Travaile into Virginia Brittania which he probably completed around the end of 1612. It was first published in 1849 by R. H. Major. Three manuscripts of the work survive. The third and revised manuscript was presented to Bacon in 1618 ‘To the Right Honourable SIR FRANCIS BACON, Knight, Baron of Verulam, Lord High Chancellor of England, and of His Majesties most honorable Privy Counsell’, accompanied by the following dedicatory letter: Most worthely honor’d Lord Your Lordship ever approving yourself a most noble fautor of the Virginian Plantation, being from the beginning (with other lords and earles) of the principal counsell applyed to propogate and quide yt: and my poore self (bound to your observaunce, by being one of the Graies-Inne Societie) having bene there three yeares thither, imploied in place of secretarie so long there present; and setting downe with all my welmeaning abilities a true narration or historie of the countrie: to whome shoulde I submitt so aptly, and with so much dutye, the most humble present thereof, as to your most worthie and best-judging Lordship? who in all vertuous and religious endeavours have ever bene, as a supreame encourager, so an inimitable patterne and perfecter: nor shall my plaine and rude composition any thought discourage my attempt, since howsoever I should feare to appeare therein before so matchles a maister in that facultie (if any opinionate worth of mine owne worke presented me) yet as the great Composer of all things made all good with his owne goodnes, and in our only will to his imitation takes us into his act, so be his goodnes your good Lordship’s in this acceptation: for which with all my poore service I shall abide ever Your best Lordship's most humbly, WILLIAM STRACHEY. For a detailed discussion of the above see A. Phoenix, The Fraudulent Friedmans: The Bacon Ciphers in the Shakespeare Works, (2022), pp. 173-80. https://www.academia.edu/81465877/The_Fraudulent_Friedmans_The_Bacon_Ciphers_in_the_Shakespeare_Works REPLY NO. 5 You state ‘You have to provide some explanation of the Sonnets dedication, and why it was published just then in April 1609, who "Mr. W.H." was, and the many other mysteries about it. With Neville you can. How did Thomas Thorpe obtain all 154 Sonnets from Bacon, and why? With or without his knowledge and approval?’ Why do I? But while we are here, see the following: Alfred Dodd, The Personal Poems of Francis Bacon (Our Shake-speare) The Son of Queen Elizabeth. As Revealed by The Sonnets arranged in the correct numerical and chronological order (Liverpool: Daily Post Printers, 1945). Edward D Johnson, Shake-speares Sonnets (London: The Francis Bacon Society, 1962). For a list of more than 40 articles on Bacon and his Shakespeare Sonnets see A. M. Challinor, Francis Bacon Philosopher, Statesman, Poet: An Index to Baconiana and its predecessors, 1886-1999 (The Francis Bacon Society, 2001), pp. 140-41. THE SECRET SIGNATURES OF FRANCIS BACON IN THE 1609 EDITION OF THE SHAKE-SPEARE SONNETS: The first lines of the opening Sonnet in the 1609 edition of the Shake-speare Sonnets begins with a monogram, a motif of two or more letters, signifying a person’s initials used as an overt or cryptic device. The large capital F and capital R (and following the indentation) a capital B in the first Sonnet provides the initials of Fr[ancis] B[acon] author of the Shakespeare Sonnets. The Shakespeare narrative poem A Lover’s Complaint published as part of the first edition of the Shakespeare Sonnets again commences with a large capital F and enclosed within it are two other capital letters R and A and down below it the letters which make up MY NAME and from the ‘b’ in the third line reading upwards ‘a’ and ‘con’ for Bacon: thus it reads MY NAME IS FRA [NCIS] BACON.
    1 point
  15. EXCELLENT A.P ! All's Not Well with Stanley. This man suffers from Cognitive Dissonance, unknowingly. photo by Antonine Lakosh "Thy sin's not accidental, but a trade." Measure for Measure "These we call Idols of the Theatre, for we account all invented systems of philosophy as so many stage-plays, representing scenic and fictitious worlds.......Nor in this do we comprehend only the universal philosophies, but all principles and axioms of Knowledge which have thrived on tradition, credulity and negligence........"-Francis Baconnot accidental, but a trade." Measure for Measure Stanley Wells President of the Shakespeare Birthplace MIStrust, Fraud in Chief and Obfuscator of Shakespeare Idolatry, Paid Pied Piper of the Faustian $tratfordian THEORY, incapable of connecting the dots of truth, Honorary member and Perennial Winner of the Francis Bacon The Four Idols Club Award, on his cell phone outside the New Theatre Royal in Bathe maybe finding out that he's taking a royal bath during the public 1997 authorship debate? See : Sir Francis Carr debates Wells https://sirbacon.org/links/debate.html
    1 point
  16. PROFESSOR STANLEY WELLS From his student graduate days Professor Stanley Wells steadily rose through the Stratfordian ranks to eventually replace his veritable hero Samuel Schoenbaum as Mr Shakespeare. Wells joined the Shakespeare Institute at Stratford in 1959 beginning his long association with the Royal Shakespeare Company later serving as its director and vice-chairman of the governors. The Shakespeare Institute forms part of the University of Birmingham where he taught at undergraduate and graduate level allowing him to undertake research and publish his first work the Royal Shakespeare. He also worked on the New Penguin Shakespeare edition and edited three of the plays. In 1978 he was appointed to head the newly formed Shakespeare Department at Oxford University Press where he worked for the next ten years preparing a new edition of The Oxford Shakespeare: The Complete Works published by Clarendon Press in 1986 with Gary Taylor as its joint general editor followed by a Textual Companion the next year. The Oxford edition was described by Shakespeare scholar Professor John Carey as ‘the most interesting since the First Folio’ and is probably the most widely available scholarly edition of Shakespeare in the English-speaking world. He also edited the Shakespeare Survey issued by Cambridge University Press. With the Oxford Shakespeare completed Wells returned to the Shakespeare Institute in 1998 as its director, a position he retired from in 1997, enabling him to concentrate on his activities at the Shakespeare Centre as Chairman of the Birthplace Trust. Throughout this time Professor Wells tells us ‘I have led the life of a professional Shakespearian, lecturing, attending and organizing conferences at home and overseas (some of them in my capacity as chairman of the International Shakespeare Association), reviewing books and performances, broadcasting, and producing editions, books, and articles.’ (Stanley Wells, Shakespeare For All Time, London: Macmillan, 2002), pp. xix, 384-86). His omnipresence and contribution around the globe in all orthodox areas of Shakespeare has been immense. His multi-various positions as head of the Shakespeare Department at Oxford University Press, general editor of the Oxford Shakespeare Works, director of the Shakespeare Institute at Stratford, Chairman of the Birthplace Trust, and Chairman of the International Shakespeare Association, as well as his innumerable publications, many of them carrying the imprint weight of the Oxford and Cambridge University Press, secured for him an international reputation as the highest living world authority on Shakespeare. His publications of course include the obligatory fictional biography on William Shakspere of Stratford entitled Shakespeare: A Dramatic Life (1994), wherein he addresses the doubts about whether Shakspere wrote the Shakespeare works, by making a series of misleading and false statements that there are 3 pieces of contemporary evidence that link him with the dramatist: Those who doubt that Shakespeare wrote the works often claim that there is nothing to connect William Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon with the writer, but this is not true. Admittedly, references to him in local records do not identify him as a man of the theatre, but neither do they ascribe any other trade or profession to him. And three pieces of contemporary evidence firmly link the Warwickshire gentleman (as he became) with the London playwright. One is his will, with its bequests to Heminges, Burbage, and Condell. Another is his monument, which bears an inscription linking him with Socrates and Virgil and stating that with him ‘quick nature died’, and that ‘all that he hath writ/Leaves living art but page to serve his wit’ (a cryptic remark which I take to mean that everything that he has written leaves an art that lives, if only on the page, to demonstrate his genius, with perhaps a pun on page as ‘side of sheet of paper’ and ‘pageboy’). And third is Ben Jonson’s linking in his poem of this ‘Star of poets’ with his home territory, as the ‘Sweet swan of Avon’. [Stanley Wells, Shakespeare A Dramatic Life (London: Sinclair-Stevenson, 1994), p. 10] 1] In the will which it has been claimed is a forgery or is in one way or another fraudulent there is the following interpolation which reads ‘to my fellowes John Hemynge Richard Burbage & Henry Cundell xxvjs viijd a peece to buy them Ringes’ (E. K. Chambers, William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems (Oxford Clarendon Press, 1930), II, p. 172). The statement by Professor Wells that it links William Shakspere of Stratford with the dramatist Shakespeare is false. The interpolation (fraudulent or otherwise) says he left money for bequests to Heminges, Burbage and Condell, which in no way whatsoever links him, to the dramatist Shakespeare. 2] The statement made by Wells that the monument bears an inscription linking Shakspere with Socrates and Virgil is disingenuous and misleading. It does not link Shakspere of Stratford with the dramatist Shakespeare, rather it alludes to the true author of the Shakespeare works. On the present-day tablet of the Stratford monument there is the following engraving: IVDICIO PYLIVM GENIO SOCRATEM, ARTE MARONEM, TERRA TEGIT, POPVLVS MAERET, OLYMPVS HABET. A free translation of the Latin inscription at the head of the monument is given by B. Roland Lewis: Him who in judgement was a Nestor, in intellect was a Socrates, in art was a Virgil, the earth encloses, the populace mourn, and Olympus holds. In the months following Bacon’s recorded death his private secretary and Rosicrucian Brother Dr Rawley compiled and published a commemorative work in his honour entitled Memoriae honoratissimi Domini Francisci, Baronis de Verulumio, vice-comitis Sancti Albani sacrum, otherwise known as Manes Verulamiani. This rare volume contains thirty-two Latin verses in praise of Bacon with an introduction by Dr Rawley. The orthodox editors and biographers of Bacon (and those of Shakspere including Wells) have continued to suppress and pass over the contents of this critically important work to the present day. Several of these verses portray Bacon as a secret supreme poet and dramatist of comedies and tragedies written under the pseudonym Shakespeare: Similar sentiments to those expressed in the Latin inscription on the Stratford Monument are very closely echoed by several of the verses in the Manes Verulamiani: THE STRATFORD MONUMENT THE MANES VERULAMIANI JUDICIO PYLIUM For if venerable Virtue, if Wisdom’s A Nestor in judgement wreaths make an ancient, you were (Nestor was the king of Pylus and older than Nestor. renowned for his wisdom, eloquence [Elegy 27] and justice) Genius and eloquence flowing with mighty stream, the ornament equally of the philosopher and the judge. [Elegy 8] GENIO SOCRATEM . ...so did Philosophy entangled in the A Socrates in his genius subtleties of Schoolmen seek Bacon as a deliverer… he renovated her (philosophy) walking lowly in the shoes of Comedy. After that more elaborately he rises on the loftier tragic buskin. [Elegy 4] The very nerve of genius, the marrow of persuasion, the golden stream of eloquence, the precious gem of concealed literature… [Elegy 9] ARTE MARONEM You have written, O! Bacon! the A Maro (Virgil) in his art history of the life and death of us all; (Virgil was recognized as who, I ask, is capable of (writing) the greatest Roman poet) the history either of your life or death? alas! Nay, give place, O Greeks! give place, Maro, first in Latin story. [Elegy 16] OLYMPUS HABET The Verulamian star now glitters in He resides in Olympus ruddy Olympus. [Elegy 23] [A. Phoenix, The 1623 Shakespeare First Folio: A Baconian-Rosicrucian-Freemasonic Illusion (2023), pp. 181-82] 3] The statement by Wells that Ben Jonson’s poem in the 1623 Shakespeare First Folio links him the ‘Sweet swan of Avon’ is also illusory and deceptive. During the period the Shakespeare First Folio was going through the Jaggards’ printing presses Jonson was living with Bacon at Gorhambury working alongside him preparing and composing some of its prefatory material. With his customary dexterity and using his powers of guile and ambiguity, Jonson repeatedly alludes to the secret identity of his beloved author Bacon-Shakespeare. He slyly hints that its hidden author is still alive ‘Thou art a Moniment without a tombe,/And art aliue still, while thy book doth liue’, insinuating he is still literally alive as well as metaphorically through his work, which will be read till the end of time. His beloved poet Bacon-Shakespeare out-compares all that Greece and Rome had to offer: Leave thee alone, for the comparison Of all, that insolent Greece, or haughtie Rome sent forth, or since did from their ashes come. In his posthumously published meditations Timber: Or, Discoveries Jonson again writes of his king Bacon by repeating the wording he used for him in his verse prefixed to the Shakespeare First Folio: He [Bacon], who hath fill’d up all numbers; and perform’d that in our tongue, which may be compar’d, or preferr’d either to insolent Greece, or haughty Rome. In his verse Ben Jonson refers to the soul of the age as the Sweet Swan of Avon. In typical Jonsonian fashion the ambiguous line is introduced for the purposes of misleading those simple souls who merely read and understand things on a literal plain (children and schoolmen, etc): Sweet Swan of Auon! what a sight it were To see thee in our waters yet appeare, And make those flights vpon the bankes of Thames, That so did take Eliza, and our Iames! On one level read literally it seems to be an apparent allusion to William Shakspere of Stratford intended as a misdirection for maintaining the Rosicrucian illusion of Bacon’s pseudonymity. The artful Jonson knew the nom de plume Shakespeare would stealthily secure for Bacon his unparalleled place in the pantheon of immortality, one secretly safeguarded for posterity by a divine Baconian swan, carried on to immortality by his Rosicrucian-Freemasonry Brotherhood. With his Rosicrucian-Freemasonic Grand Master Bacon, Rare Ben had a love of anagrams and he thoughtfully incorporated one in the last six lines of his verse ‘To the memory of my beloued, The Avthor Mr. William Shakespeare’, communicating a secret message to posterity regarding the true identity of our immortal poet Shakespeare, by spelling out down the left-hand side his name, BACON: But stay, I see thee in the Hemisphere Aduanc’d and made a Constellation there! Shine forth, thou Starre of Poets, and with rage, Or influence, chide, or cheere the drooping Stage; Which, since by flight fro[m] hence, hath mourn’d like night, And despaires day, but for thy Volumes light. BACON. [A. Phoenix, The 1623 Shakespeare First Folio: A Baconian-Rosicrucian-Freemasonic Illusion (2023), pp. 144-49] As shown above there is no hard incontrovertible ‘contemporary evidence’ to ‘firmly link the Warwickshire gentleman (as he became) with the London playwright’. Professor Wells, honorary President of the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust, honorary Emeritus Governor of the Royal Shakespeare Theatre, Emeritus Professor of Shakespeare Studies of the University of Birmingham, and honorary Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford, seen as the world’s foremost expert on Shakespeare, is an apologist and sophist for the greatest literary fraud in the history of literature.
    1 point
  17. Confessio Fraternitatis: "Believe us, Truth is simple and unconcealed, while falsehood is complex, deeply hidden, proud, and its worldly knowledge, seemingly a glitter with godly luster, is often mistaken for divine wisdom." The word "glitter" or "glister" rings a bell.
    1 point
  18. Hi A Phoenix Thank you from me also for posting your lengthy "conversation" with the immaculately credentialed Prof. Never mind him. You know that the omnipresent AI is listening and learning from everything you publish online.
    1 point
  19. Hi Rob, On reading The Truth Will Out: Unmasking the Real Shakespeare (2005) co-authored by Brenda James and Professor William D. Rubinstein I asked myself just how much of it was written by Professor Rubinstein, a Professor of Modern History at the University of Wales, Professor at Deakin University in Australia, Fellow of the Royal Historical Society, Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities, Fellow of the Academy of the Social Sciences, and Associate of the Shakespeare Authorship Trust. The work is marred by inaccuracies, misleading statements, simplistic distortions, misrepresentations and omissions, all bound up in a quagmire of woeful and lamentable ignorance. Here is an example: 1] 'Bacon wrote no surviving poetry or drama' (p. 150). FB wrote several surviving poems or pieces of poetry. For The world's a Bubble and The translations of Certain Psalms see Brian Vickers, Francis Bacon A Critical Edition of the Major Works (Oxford University Press, 1996), pp. 332-40. Before the appearance of a printed quarto edition of a Shakespeare play with the pseudonym William Shake-speare printed on its title page which first occurred in 1598 Bacon wrote several surviving dramatic devices, masques, entertainments and a play which ushered in the Shakespearean era: For The Misfortune of Arthur (1588) see A. Phoenix, 'Francis Bacon and his First Unacknowledged Shakespeare Play The Misfortunes of Arthur and its Extensive Links to his other Shakespeare Works', (2021), pp. 1-136; 547 references. For the dramatic devices written by Bacon for Essex for presentation before Queen Elizabeth on her Anniversary Day 'Of Tribute; or giving what is due' (1592) and 'Of Love and Self-Love' (1595) see Brian Vickers, Francis Bacon A Critical Edition of the Major Works (Oxford University Press, 1996), pp. 22-51, 61-68 and Alan Stewart with Harriet Knight, The Oxford Francis Bacon Early Writings 1584-1596 (Oxford Clarendon Press, 2012), pp. 235-97, 675-722. For their links to his Shakespeare poems and plays see A. Phoenix, The Bacon-Shakespeare Manuscript (Hitherto known as the Northumberland Manuscript) which originally Contained Copies of his Shakespeare Plays Richard II and Richard III (2022), pp. 51-61, 73-93. For the dramatic entertainment at the Christmas Gray's Inn Revels (1594-5) see Brian Vickers, Francis Bacon A Critical Edition of the Major Works (Oxford University Press, 1996), pp. 52-60; Alan Stewart with Harriet Knight, The Oxford Francis Bacon Early Writings 1584-1596 (Oxford Clarendon Press, 2012), pp. 583-606; N. B. Cockburn, The Bacon Shakespeare Question (Guildford and Kings Lynn: Biddles Limited, 1988), pp. 105-28 and for its law and themes linked to The Comedy of Errors premiered at the Gray's Inn Revels, see A. Phoenix, 'Francis Bacon & The Law In His Early Shakespeare Plays Reflected In His Life & Acknowledged Writings', (2021), pp. 57-68.
    1 point
  20. Statements like that from a "professional academic and an independent scholar" help clarify who he is, where he has been, and how much (or little) he knows. EDIT: Seems to me that Brenda James probably wrote the book and somehow got Will P to agree to "co-author" it. So he would be very ignorant about a lot. Brenda seems to stay in the shadows even with a few books out.
    1 point
  21. The book has a teaser online for free on Google Books. I will not likely pay for or read it, but might poke around in the teaser randomly. I see Mark Rylance wrote the forward ending with the following including a Bacon quote: https://books.google.com/books?id=BsEtDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT210&lpg=PT210#v=onepage&q&f=false
    1 point
  22. Thank you AP for sharing this dialogue with William Rubinstein. It is of great service to all by illustrating how many shallow authorship researchers get so caught up in their zealousness that it causes them to be compelled to think they can get away with an unresearched opinion while allowing themselves permission to spread their dogma as fact. It's equally embarrassing and pitiful that he is or was a Professor and that he relies on wikipedia as his source for Bacon research. People like this use the Authorship controversy for personal aggrandizement and if the historical truth doesn't fit into their mind set, then cognitive dissonance will set in and protect their fragility from an advancement of learning. Rubinstein should go to this room and read about Bacon's The Four Idols which he predictably will not do.
    1 point
  23. On SirBacon.org since the book came out, which is why it was familiar to me. LOL https://sirbacon.org/truthwillout.htm
    1 point
  24. Professor "Willy" Rubinstein has again thus proven himself to be a fool and hopefully your points will go into the footnotes of any biography that may be written about him. I remember when his book came out about 15 years ago and flopped due to being a foolish folly. LOL Thank you A. Phoenix for having the iron stomach to dialog with him and revealing his continuing deception (as I do not believe he is a blind as he appears).
    1 point
  25. 1 point
  26. "Ring" takes on another level of meaning, doesn't it? 😉
    1 point
  27. Intriguing 3 minute video about the Essex ring. https://www.westminster-abbey.org/teaching-resources/the-so-called-essex-ring
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...