Kate

Seeing as the book is about the doublet, I pointed this out before but the interlocking helix shapes on the doublet and the buttons in the Droeshout portrait are evident in the ceiling design of one of the Inns of Court (Lincoln) built by Inigo Jones in …1623! You need to Google this guys VR picture to move around the crypt. Some plays were performed at the Inns, but the link to 1623 and to Bacon as a lawyer is interesting (although he was at Grays).

They only let you have it for an hour. My stress levels were high trying to read it all in an hour. Didn't manage it, but got the gist, and a few gems. Please tell me AP didn't point this out. I recall his quote from the tailor but not the anagram.

And look at that, 555 posts and 22 days won. Pi (3.14) is 22/7 and see the 5s here! So, talking of Pi and circles, you asked about the point. It is (hopefully on your device) in the centre of the circle. It is on my phone. That quote is from one of the Rosicrucian texts. I thought it fitting because a circle with a dot in it represents the Sun in astronomy, and gold in alchemy. The dot (also known as a circumpunct) is: unity; oneness; the one point of light; the point of all potential; the Monad; the All that is; out of which everything else is created. It is representative of “God” or “Universal Mind” whose centre is everywhere and circumference nowhere but in Freemasonry is all the above, but also the dot is Man, and the circle is symbolic of the bounds within which he should keep his passions and morals. In psychology too, it is representative of the Self, and if we look around, our vision is always bounded by our horizon, and we are always at the centre of that circle, wherever we are. So the inference is, we are always at the centre of our own world. But it’s an illusion - as that is only what we can visibly perceive. The reality is that if we move towards the horizon a new one will appear around us, and so on into infinity because Space goes on forever, and if we traverse the globe we will keep going forever, never coming to an edge, always moving towards a new horizon and arriving back where we were. Hashtag Deep! 😄 That’s the beauty of the language of symbolism for you. In geometry to create any shape you have to start at a point and then apply movement.

Wow!

Great find, Eric! I have 'borrowed' it and am reading it now. (I'm glad she calls it the biliteral and not the bilateral cipher!).

Hi I was just watching that great song that Lawrence posted in What’s New We all know (or I think we do) like the composers of this song, that the bright spot on the Droeshout portrait forehead is a symbolic Sun, representing illumination (and possibly the ‘son (sun) of light’ but looking at it again seems there’s a very distinct crescent moon there too. Has anyone ever commented on this before? It’s debatable, due to there also being a thinner arc of light under the left eye, but I thought I’d mention it as a possibility. The light under the eye might even be from a later rendition? As it’s slightly more obvious under only one eye in this next one.

Haha! In all seriousness, I think, although maybe lighthearted, to the casual observer who is dropping in for a quick look for the first time from a Google link or whatever, all the emoticons except the blue like do somewhat detract from the seriousness of what is being presented in many posts. Bit cartoonish? That’s just me being frank though. You’ve designed a top notch forum with exceptional functionality, so it’s a small thing in the overall scheme of things. Thanks for what you do x

You’ve forced me to use the wow emoticon twice in one day! 😂 That’s amazing. Love it. Did you see it is 3.14 mins - pi Must be by design. Do you know the people behind the YouTube account?

I dislike the wow emoticon on here, (even though I was the one who suggested we have one 😬) I dislike it because it’s become so overused. Not everything is ‘wow’ (although many thing’s unearthed on B’Hive are deserving of more than just a bland ‘like’) but this, well this, AP, is a wow and more wow! ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ Videos like this, and the one minute version, deserve to go viral. Short, punchy and with new revelations. Brilliant!

Thanks Eric. I have actually read this before, it’s a great resource to have on the site. It’s good of you to take the time to capture the images and upload for new eyes. To be clear the upload of the first emblem book and the reason I put Shakespeare in quote marks, is because I think it’s a great book to a) learn everything there is to know about emblems and b) as a way to do some reverse engineering, because if (and we know he was) Francis Bacon was Shakespeare then the entire book is really referring to what he would have been consulting.

Well worth a scroll - right through to the end. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/50006/50006-h/50006-h.htm

This is what RC wrote Yann. Read back through what I wrote after this post, because I'm at a loss to know why you are being antsy with me.

Yann, you ended your post by saying “….for those who are opened to the idea of a potential link with the Shakespeare Authorship Question.” That’s why we are all here. We are all extremely open to it. I think it’s healthy to have questioning and different views/viewpoints. I particularly value RC for this reason. I don’t know why this is centered, it must have picked up on your formatting but talking of centered, isn’t it true to say Mediocria Firma, The Middle Way is Best, is the Bacon family motto, not specifically Francis Bacon’s? Wasn’t it on the crest that would have been used by Nicholas and Anthony Bacon too? Like when 33 is seen or found by one of us and immediately taken to relate to Bacon himself, when it could just be a wider nod/reference to the ‘brotherhood’ and the Invisible College’s hand at play in whatever is being looked at, the word Bacon could surely, in some instances refer to Nicholas, Anthony or Nathaniel (1585–1627), or even back to Roger Bacon in some cases. I think all possibilities always have to be critically evaluated. That scrutiny is important or we’d all just be seen by the outside world as Bacon obsessives with no critical faculties who just see code and cipher pointing to Francis Bacon absolutely everywhere, when some acrostics, numbers etc, by the law of averages, will just be chance. The person on the Pro Forma emblem certainly has the Droeshout type hair. It is XXII so 22 which is intriguing too as it’s Bacon’s birthday and the whole to/to, two/two, 22 light/dark duality thing that’s been discussed elsewhere. You’ve made lots of other interesting links that support it being a cryptic reference. It’s all both fascinating and intriguing. I wonder if there’s anything more to be gleaned from the marks here. Is it writing or just lines?

You didn’t include RC/CJ! Thanks for the info. 🙏

You beat me to it. I decided to translate the French, Italian and Latin phrases and came up with The disguised hypocrite The fraudulent always covers up the fraud. The vain hypocrite goes looking for praise and the one Rob translated under the emblem The hypocrite puts on a false appearance of piety (diiferent but the same) I did these translations yesterday and decided that, in this case, viewing it as a reference to Bacon and his disguised authorship (of Shakespeare) is too much of a reach. I decided not to say anything, just to keep that conclusion to myself and then woke up this morning and scrolled past this (see image below). Then came and saw what RC had written. The world moves in mysterious ways. On this occasion Yann, due to the repeated use of the word hypocrite I don't think this emblem is a cryptic reference to Bacon, even though it's on page 100, however It's obviously for each person to form their own opinion and thanks for spotting it and all your other incredible observations. Best to throw everything out there as one thing often leads to another - even if some are dead ends. I wrote to Adam McLean to see what he knows about Dr Panurgus. Not sure if he'll reply but that engraving seems as if it could hold a 'smoking gun' link due to the Droeshout connection.

This is all fascinating. That swan arm! Need some time to digest but just quickly, on the full page of Pro Forma, am I right in thinking that the Latin and French translations are referring to hypocrisy? As you are French Yann, is there anything interesting in the text? I just wonder if the mask is conveying the two-facedness of hypocrisy, rather than what I'd like it to be, which is a cryptic clue to the authorship. On the Panurgus pic, the small r is intriguing and also the fact that the understanding wisdom has been made to look like under wisdom standing . While here I'll just mention that when I was reading through the Rosicrucian texts link I posted the other day, https://archive.org/details/RosicrucianTexts/mode/1up I came across a rendering of the word Rosicrucian that I have never come across before - which is strange, as I have read a lot over the decades. It is Rhodo-staurotosophic and Rhodostaurotic. By the way, Adam McLean is a, if not THE, leading authority on alchemy and esotericism. If anyone reading this has never visited his site https://www.alchemywebsite.com/adam.html it's an Aladdin's Cave. He also has a sister site, Levity.com. You'll be on it for hours! Also want to highlight the word Magnalia. I obviously have seen this word before, but not given it much thought. I suddenly realised that perhaps it is the origin of The Book of M ? ChatGPT says this of the word Within the "Fama Fraternitatis" and other Rosicrucian writings, the term "Magnalia" referred to the great and miraculous works attributed to the fraternity and its members. It denoted the extraordinary achievements, mystical powers, and secret wisdom possessed by the Rosicrucians. These works were often described as having a transformative and enlightening effect on individuals and society as a whole. The use of "Magnalia" in Rosicrucian thought emphasized the idea that the fraternity had access to hidden knowledge and possessed extraordinary abilities to bring about positive changes in the world. It added to the aura of mystery and wonder surrounding the Rosicrucians during that time.

Shouldn’t those last two posts be in the Droeshout thread where the meaning of Panurgus was being discussed? Not sure how to copy over

If it is RS (or PS) it could be Rock Spiritual… ‘The house of the Rosicrucians is the House of the Holy Spirit. It is not a house made of stone, and again, a stone cut without hands. Nor is it a house built by magic or false alchemy, but rather it is a spiritual house..."the house of wisdom, built upon the `rational mount' or `rock spiritual'...The house constructed by the Brethren, then, is on the spiritual rock, and is built up of the mystical stones of wisdom’ - levity.com Both the P and R has the dual meaning of Rock (as mentioned above)

ChatGPT on furnaces: In both Mystic Christianity and Rosicrucianism, furnaces can hold symbolic significance. Here is some information on their potential symbolism in these traditions: Mystic Christianity: In Christian mysticism, furnaces are often associated with the concept of purification and transformation. The imagery of a furnace represents the spiritual process of purging and refining the soul, burning away impurities and worldly attachments. It is akin to the metaphorical "fire" of divine love that consumes and transforms the individual, leading to spiritual growth and union with God. The furnace can also symbolize the trials and challenges one encounters on the spiritual path. Just as gold is purified in fire, the individual undergoes spiritual trials and tests that refine their character and strengthen their faith. Rosicrucianism: Rosicrucianism is a mystical and esoteric tradition associated with the concept of alchemy, spiritual transformation, and inner illumination. In this context, the furnace is often linked to the alchemical process of transmutation. It represents the alchemical vessel, known as the "athanor" or "alchemical furnace," where the transformation of base metals into gold takes place. The furnace symbolizes the inner alchemical laboratory within the practitioner, where the transformation of the self occurs. It signifies the intense inner work, purification, and transformation of the individual's psyche and spirit. The alchemical furnace is seen as a metaphorical crucible, where the practitioner undergoes a process of inner purification and refinement to attain spiritual enlightenment and union with the divine. Overall, in both Mystic Christianity and Rosicrucianism, the symbolism of furnaces is closely tied to the themes of purification, transformation, and spiritual growth. It represents the inner process of refining the soul, letting go of impurities, and experiencing a spiritual rebirth or illumination.

Good old chat GPT Yes, the term "Panurgus" can refer to something else besides the specific context you mentioned. In biology, "Panurgus" is the genus name for a group of bees in the family Andrenidae. These bees are commonly known as the polyester bees or the oil-collecting bees. Beehive! Maybe a link to Johannes Valentinus Andreae? * * Hmm maybe maybe not. I prodded further as the Bee genus was only introduced in 1831 and Chat GPT said: Since "Panurgus" as a bee genus did not exist before that time, any symbolic associations or hidden meanings related to bees and their characteristics would not be relevant to a hypothetical use of the name "Panurgus" prior to its taxonomic introduction. It's important to keep in mind that if we are discussing a hypothetical cryptic use of the name "Panurgus" in the 1600s, the associations and symbolism would depend on the intended meaning or code used within that specific context, rather than being directly linked to the characteristics of the bee genus introduced later. Needs more research Also saw this in a John Dee book. https://archive.org/details/themagicsealofdr.johndee.thesigillumdeiaemethbycolind.campbell/mode/1up?view=theater A square is obviously a common symbol so there may be no connection whatsoever to Dee's protective seal.

is it this? https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:7_4_knots

Thanks Eric. Yann, do any of these say Faith, Hope and Charity in a row? You can zoom in, it’s hi-res. I can see he’s pouring wisdom into the guy’s mouth and can also see virtue and reason. That link you posted https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Emblemata_Saecularia_(1596)# Wow! There are some seriously weird images in there!

Ah ok I am on to something. The picture that I just added above shows The Rosicrucian Temple of the Rosy Cross picture by Teophilus Schweighardt Constantiens but it’s a pseudonym. He wrote Speculum Sophicum Rhodostauroticum (Mirror of the Wisdom of the Rosy Cross, 1618) under that pseudonym and Jhesus Nobis Omnia – Rosa Florescens (1617) under the pseudonym Florentinus de Valentia. He was a Doctor!! I don’t have time to read it until later but here is the first one. This is a great link as it has all the RC texts. https://archive.org/details/RosicrucianTexts

Normally I’d just have supplied the link, but I know lots of people never click on them, so by copy and pasting (and attributing) the whole notes from the British Museum, someone on here (or reading from outside) may cast their eye over this and spot hitherto missed anomalies or connections. Adding picture so you can see why I see vague similarities

This is a very interesting observation, Rob. I did some digging. The British Museum has a lengthy piece of information under the picture and (not sure if this has already been mentioned) it is a reworking of this There seems to be dispute as to whether the one we are looking at (with a Bacon figure) is Michael or Martin Droeshout’s work. Wellcome Collection says former. BM seem to say the latter but see last paragraph of further down. I can’t find how to zoom into this one, but it would be interesting to see if the bottles here say Faith, Hope and Charity. In the later one; the Baconian figure is said to be the Earl of Somerset but it is surely Bacon shown by the good Sir B reference and what Yann found above in cipher in the numbers. Also notice also the reference to Master C (100) in Master Cittyzsinne and three words beginning with C (so CCC =300) So with the Faith, Hope and Charity bottles (plus link to Tubingen) it all points to this def being a Rosicrucian reworking full of cipher and symbolism and that ‘Stay good …’ line links to Shakespeare’s grave. I see a furnace link to the famous Rosicrucian College picture too. Apologies in advance for length of this but here is the information from the British Museum about the more recent depiction of Doctor Panurgus just incase there is more to uncover. https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/P_1854-1113-154 It reads: Inscriptions Inscription type: inscription Inscription content: Lettered with numerous explanatory engraved texts (all transcribed in BMSat), the engraver's initials 'MD sculpsit', and the later addresses 'Sould by P.Stent' and 'Sould by I.Overton at the White Horse without Newgate neere the fountaine tavern'. The text taken as the title is inscribed by the doctor's head. In the lower margin added in pen 'Licensed October 28 1672 Rbt L'Estrange'. Curator's comments (Text from Antony Griffiths, 'The Print in Stuart Britain', BM 1998, cat.91) This plate has a complicated ancestry. It is based on a composition that is known in at least three earlier Continental versions. It was probably French in origin, and the original title was 'Le medecin guarissant Phantasie purgeant aussi par drogues la folie' (a version overprinted with a German text at Wolfenbüttel is W.Harms, 'Deutsche Illustrierte Flugblätter des 16 und 17 Jahrhunderts', Tübingen 1985, I no.53). In this there are four figures: the doctor in his robes at the left purges with a dose of 'sagesse' one patient, who excretes little fools below. In the centre the doctor's assistant feeds the head of another patient into an oven which cooks follies out of him, which can be seen in a cloud emerging above the oven. In a later German version (reproduced from an impression in the British Museum by W.A.Coupe, 'The German Illustrated Broadsheet in the 17th century', Baden-Baden 1966, pl.72) the doctor is called Doctor Wurmbrandt (worm-burner). Droeshout's version of the 1620s makes significant changes to the standard Continental type. The doctor (now, for some unexplained reason, labelled Panurgus) has lost his assistant, a fashionably dressed couple are added in the middle-ground, and there is a great deal of text added (completely transcribed in the British Museum catalogue of satires). The text makes it certain that the print has nothing to do with the scandal of the Countess of Essex and the Earl of Somerset, as was thought by the earlier literature from Granger onwards (although the woman does bear some resemblance to the Countess, see P.1,278). Panurgus was then interpreted as Dr Forman, who was alleged to have supplied the Countess of Essex with drugs to make her husband impotent. She thus obtained a divorce on the grounds of non-consummation and remarried her lover, the Earl of Somerset. The manuscript license from the Restoration censor Roger L'Estrange (1616-1704) refers to the republication of this satire by John Overton in 1672, half a century after it was first issued. It is one of five such licenses which have so far been recorded. The others are the set of the Twelve Months by Robert Vaughan in the British Museum (169.b.1; Globe 548); a set of satires on marriage in the Folger Library (Globe 456); a portrait of Mother Louse in the British Museum (BMSat 797); and Hollar's titleplate for 'A new book of flowers and fishes' in Robert Harding's collection (Pennington 2063). All bear the same date, 28 October 1672, and all are publications by John Overton. Clearly Overton had submitted a pile of impressions from his old stock for approval on the same day, presumably in preparation for publishing his broadsheet catalogue which came out shortly afterwards (see Globe p.172). That so many survive implies that they all remained together in some archive for many years. (Text from Malcolm Jones, www.bpi1700.org.uk, "Print of the Month", November 2006) The subject of this extraordinary sheet is perhaps in essence a 'complaint on the times', a satire of universal folly in which a tripartite division of the realm into Cuntry, Citty & the Court is symbolised, respectively, by rude Rusticall being purged by the doctor on the close-stool, spruce master Cittyzsinne standing behind the Doctor, and the Gallant (i.e courtier) whose head is just entering the subliming furnace. But as the young man, prey to multifarious follies and devoted to fashionable fads and fancies, has long been the target of the moralists' especial wrath, and the saeva indignatio of the satirists, the follies of dissolute youth are what I take to be the principal subject of this puzzling sheet which, as Griffiths notes, 'has a complicated ancestry'.[1] The costume of the figures would seem to date to the 1620s, and this agrees with the known dates of activity of the engraver, Martin Droeshout, who has signed the sheet with his monogram: MD sculpsit. The earliest state of the present print to survive, however, was probably issued in the 1650s, bearing Peter Stent's imprint alone, and is held in the Wellcome Institute collection.[2] The composition derives from a print engraved by Matthaus Greuter, probably c.1600 (itself deriving from one of the emblems in the de Brys' hugely influential Emblemata Saecularia of 1596), which was issued in French/German and German-only editions, the former bearing the title Le medecin guarissant Phantasie Purgeant aussi Par drogues la folie [The doctor curing fantasies, and also purging folly with drugs]. But Droeshout made significant changes to his model, dropping the doctor's assistant, adding a richly-dressed couple, an inset panel in which two pluralists confront each other weighed down by the churches on their shoulders, and a great deal of explanatory text in the form of labels within the image-frame. Naming the wonder-working doctor Panurgus seems to have been Droeshout's innovation. Why? It is unlikely Droeshout had read Rabelais – most English intellectuals knew only the French author's name, which they used, like those of Aretino and Macchiavelli, merely as a hate-word. Panourgia is a medical term, and Galen uses it for 'adulterated or false drugs', and although the etymological sense of the name is neutrally 'all-work', later English usage similarly tended to interpret the term pejoratively as 'ready to do any work', i.e. including illegal things, as a criminal would be. Notwithstanding this, however, there is no doubt that in our print Dr. Panurgus is a positive figure, able to cure his patients, who come from all ranks of society - as the verses and the figures themselves make clear – of their manifold follies. Significantly, for dating purposes, the Latinate form of the name – which by itself suggests independence of Rabelais' creation - is known to have been used by two English writers in 1619 and 1623 only, and perhaps strengthens the case for an origin in the 1620s.[3] From the copious inscription text I excerpt a few salient points. Though concentrating on the foibles and follies of the gallant, who is by definition youthful, the verse makes clear that the Millions who resort to the Doctor come from Cuntry, Citty & the Court – i.e. that folly is no respecter of a person’s rank or origins. By his Waters Drugges ,Conserves & Potions, the Doctor purgeth fancies follies, Idle motions, many of which are detailed in the verses below the image, but also visualised in the phantasmagoria that escapes from the Gallants Fornace. The Doctor is currently pouring a dose labelled Wisdome and Understanding down the throat of a rude Rusticall who sits on a close-stool and through whom passe various animals and birds, including an ass, which is being milked by a man (in the German original only three little fools are excreted). The Doctor informs us that taking the Gallants Braine out and washing it had proved ineffective, but now, subliming his head in the furnace has yielded good Successe - in the form of the Strange Chimaera-Crotchetts visible in the smoke above. They are later referred to as both Projects and ayrie Castles - i.e. 'castles in the air', cf. from Burton’s contemporary Anatomy of Melancholy (1621): That castle in the ayr, that crochet, that whimsie[4] - and include cards, dice, backgammon-board, tobacco-pipes, violin, tennis, masks, feathers, plumed hat, swords, a dressed ape, a woman with a fan, a man teaching a horse to perform tricks, a bear-baiting, a boy flying a kite, a man with wings strapped to his shoulders (attempt at human flight? No Elizabethan/Jacobean candidate known to me, though doubtless they existed – for a while...), a man sliding down a rope from the tower of (Old) St. Paul's (a popular contemporary feat), jug and goblet, limed branch for bird-catching, a man walking a pair of hounds, and a fencer (with wings). Most of these are copied from the German original - the interest for us lies chiefly in those which were not, and which we may thus reasonably consider peculiarly English: they include the bear-baiting, the tobacco-pipes,[5] the St. Paul's rope-slider and the horse being taught tricks - perhaps intended to be William Banks and his celebrated horse 'Marocco'.[6] To the well-dressed lady with her fan and pet squirrel on a lead the Doctor says, Once (faire) I knew the tongues Phlebotomie Had powre to Cure your Sexes Maladie But now youre manly humors boile so highe That you must in the Gallants Fornace lye which looks like a swipe at both the garrulity traditionally attributed to women, as well - interestingly - as evidencing a more contemporary Jacobean concern with manly women, as reflected for instance in the pamplet, 'Hic Mulier: or, The Man-Woman: Being a medicine to cure the Coltish Disease of the Staggers in the Masculine-Feminines of our Times' (1620). The verses claim she has even more wandring Crotchets than the gallant and lists them: Steelettoes[7] girdles patches painted brests Points[8] powders feathers washes[9] & the rest ... Haire breath Complexions all are borrowed ware. The similarly well-dressed gentleman the Doctor addresses mockingly as Sir Briske, spruce master Cittyzsinne, in which the last, clearly eccentric spelling is presumably to point up a pun, as if he embodies the City’s sin.[10] Though, like his lady, he looks more like a courtier than a tradesman – which has led to much complicated historical speculation, principally that the pair are the Countess of Essex and her lover the Earl of Somerset - the contemporary label identifies one of the ingredients of the potion the Doctor will administer as plaine dealing, and one of the things it will expel as couzening weights. But perhaps it is precisely part of this upstart citizen's presumption that, though a mere tradesman, he apes the dress of the gentry. In the probably contemporary sheet, The Common Weales Canker Worms or the Locusts both of Church, and States, the Merchant similarly says, I cosen these foure [i.e the four preceding characters] and his inset emblem is a pair of scales and a yardstick with the motto, libris et labris lucror furtiuis [I gain by fraudulent scales and measures], while in the verse beneath the engraving, he says, Ile ease your purses with a trick of skill/While mine with waights & measures false I fill. Inset into our engraving is a panel – seemingly not a later addition - depicting two divines confronting each other, both with churches on their backs which cause them to stoop, and one of whom carries a second church in his arms. It is tempting to suggest that the square frame in which these pluralists are depicted, and which appears to interrupt the composition, is a post-Droeshout interpolation, perhaps c.1642, when the motif was current (and which is also the earliest known date of Peter Stent’s activity as a print-publisher).[11] It is captioned Who bore two Churches & complaind of none Nowe being purged findes too much of one. If this pluralists panel is original, however, we can certainly point to the existence of the iconographic motif this early, for it features prominently in The Mappe of the Man of Sinne issued in 1622. Indeed, it might provide a useful dating indication for the Panurgus print, as the Nowe of the caption perhaps suggests some topical ecclesiastical legislation. There may well be a 'quotation' from Doctor Panurgus in a print issued some fifty years later entitled 'The Committee; or Popery in Masquerade' (1680). This holds up the various nonconformist sects for ridicule, including the Quakers; they are depicted as constituting a committee listening to petitions from a dog, a horse, a man and a woman. To the left, the various victims of the Civil War appear in chains, while on the right, a Church of England priest is forced to vomit forth his living - a detail which may well owe something to the fact that its designer, Sir Roger L'Estrange, the most effective of the Tory propagandists at this period, was also the Restoration censor, and in that capacity had personally accorded Doctor Panurgus his imprimatur eight years earlier; indeed, the present impression (one of only two known) is signed and dated by him, 'Licensed October 28 1692, Ro. L'estrange'. FOOTNOTES [1]. Antony Griffiths, The Print in Stuart Britain 1603-89 (London, 1998), pp. 146-8 (no. 91). [2]. This is based on the fact that it does not appear in his first, 1654 advertisement, but is listed in that of 1662 as 'One plat of Dr. Pennargus'. Griffiths was thus mistaken in thinking the British Museum's impression - in a state of 1672 - is the only one known. [3]. Just about everything known about Rabelais 'reception' at this period will be found in A.L. Prescott, Imagining Rabelais in Renaissance England (New Haven, 1998), especially pp. 86-102, 'Quicksilver Interlude: Panurge and Panourgia in England', though Droeshout's use of the name is missed. [4]. I. iii. i. ii. (1651 ed.), p. 187 (cited in Oxford English Dictionary s.v. castle); H. Jackson (ed.), Robert Burton, The Anatomy of Melancholy (London, 1972), p. 394. [5]. These first two, interestingly also figure together in the Itinerary of the German visitor, Paul Hentzner, writing in 1598, who notes in his description of bear-baitings that 'At these spectacles, and everywhere else, the English are constantly smoking the Nicotian weed, which in America is called Tobaca... and generally in this manner: they have pipes on purpose made of clay'- cited in W.B. Rye, England as seen by Foreigners in the Days of Elizabeth and James the First (London, 1865), p. 216. [6]. See J. Bondeson, The Feejee Mermaid and other Essays in Natural and Unnatural History (Ithaca, 1999), pp. 1-18. Banks and Marocco performing are the subject of a woodcut illustrating Maroccus extaticus (1595). [7]. i.e. daggers, not high heels! [8]. laces. [9]. for the complexion. [10]. The same equivoque occurs, for example in Dekker's Lanthorne and Candle Light (1608), sig. C2, in the court of Hell, The Cittizen is sued here and condemned for the Citty-sinnes (and Jonson, Poetaster (1601), II.i.122, Citi-sin). In relation to brisk , note also OED's definition of this sense 3 of the word: 'smartly or finely dressed; spruce', and three citations only, for the period 1590-1603. [11]. Later uses of the motif include two tracts published in 1642, 'Purge for Pluralities, shewing the unlawfulnesse of men to have two Livings, Or, The Downe-fall of Double Benefices', and 'A Remonstrance against the non-residents' - Milton referred to 'The non-resident and plurality-gaping Prelats' [Milton, Works (1851 edition), vol. 3, p. 307, cit. OED s.v. non-resident] in his Apollo Smectymnus published in the same year. It is also to be found on at least two single-sheets issued in 1681, The Protestant Mirrour, in proper Postures and Principles: Or, The Careful resident, and the Careless Non-Resident, and Non-residency and pluralities, justly exposed: or, The Pluralist and non-resident honestly and truly characterized. (additional information) June Schlueter argues on the basis of the form of the monogram that the engraver is not Martin Droeshout, but his father Michael (see 'Print Quarterly' XXVII 2010, pp.253-62).