Jump to content

RoyalCraftiness

Members
  • Posts

    815
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Everything posted by RoyalCraftiness

  1. One must go forth from 1,2 and 3. The fourth T is concealed in the the T.T. when that is taken to be in reference to the Triple Tau. One ought to also go forth and try and figure out what that means. In the symbolic emblem of the Triple Tau each Tau has it's orientation. This evokes the spatial idea of the cardinal points with and the importance of the tetrad in the material world (something we can also take to be an eclipse cycle of 4 consecutive total eclipses, because that is also what a tetrad refers to). Tetrads were known to exist from very early times. The idea is extended to the tetragrammaton in how to represent God's name. In the case of the one we keep being presented with, it is the fist occurrence of it in the Old Testament from Genesis 2-4 where the heavens and the Earth are created. 1,2 and 3 are all elegantly accounted for in 11, 12 and 13. If you went forth to the fourth that might be 14, but it could also be 10. The four would sum to fifty in the case of 14, and 100 would represent the first harmonic of it (in one octave ratio of 2:1). Bacon would have identified with both 50 and 100, because the fundamental relationship of the square of 10x10 is that it is made up of 2 rectangles capturing 50 units of area. The half square is the representation of the human life which is only going to be completed in death. Freemasonry calls this the foundation stone and the perfect square ashlar. In life we are meant to polish our foundation stone. There is an extended Pythagorean mathematical idea here also. We could consider the fourth as either 10 or 14, and this might send us in the direction of noticing that 10^2 + 11^2 + 12^2 = 13^2 + 14^2 . The left side of the equation is 100+121+144=365, or one year in days. The left is 169 + 196=365 or one year in days. How could this be so? This, my friend, is how you start off a mystery in empirical terms and then move it into the figurative. Why does the simplest of all Maths using 1,2,3 and 4 come to capture so much in the Tetractys? Why do the 5 consecutive numbers 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 have this property? It goes further than that with the Sonnets. There are two triangles (two Ts) in the text of the dedication. One is 82 characters in number and the other is 64. If you omit the character in superscript in M^r W H by considering it may be alluding to an accent in Hebrew you have 81 and 64. Both are squares of 9 and 8 which multiply to give 72, which are the number of the names of God in Hebrew. Furthermore, 81 x 64 is 1/5 of the 25920 years which happens to be the length of the cycle of precession of the axial tilt plane of the Earth. That number is the average time for the appearance of the next pole star in years (there are 5 in the precession cycle which travels around the constellation of Draco). What's is going on here? Why are the Sonnets being dedicated to ideas of God who is a poet and to eternity and rewards in heaven which are potentially mathematically equated? The basic idea is that God's creation (his Sonnets) are given to us as a silent song of the harmonious spheres which have a basis in geometry. This sort of current idea works if we attribute it to 1609. Galileo and Copernicus will come and upset the ideas, but that is for later. Whoever wrote the Sonnets was highly taken by the apparent mathematical and harmonic beauty of the arrangement. In large part that is why Bacon was resistant in accepting heliocentricity, but that is another matter.
  2. The hieroglyph is atop the arch that leads into the confines of the hermetic knowledge. The words atop the arch appear to be Latin for "I shall not wholly die". It's a message which is sympathetic to the Christian view. The road leading to the arch describes Mysterium: mystery, secret service, rite and worship. It is not hard to see how this could be the seed idea for something like Freemasonry. I don't quite know what to make of the diagonal "leg up" which in on the let side of the bottom of the hieroglyph. The other elements in it seem familiar and part of existing symbolism. It is usually seen as reflecting what is to the right to suggest fire/ignis (Sun and Moon operating on the elements to ignite). Maybe it is wanting to implicate Mars.
  3. You shouldn't. Assigning meaning to a coincidence is fraught with peril. However, it's the sort of thing that people who are prone to giving causal significance to astrology might do. Rawley could be telling us Bacon is that sort of type. If you read Sylva Sylvarum there is evidence that Bacon may have prone to this sort of belief in the influence of things which are otherwise in harmony.
  4. Bacon was born a few days before the penumbral lunar eclipse (Saros 97) of Jan. 31, 1561. Approximately one year later, on Jan. 20, 1562 a rare tetrad of lunar eclipses began. These are called tetrads because 4 successive lunar eclipses in the same cycle are total eclipses. There was a second tetrad that occurred in that century when he was 19. Bacon would have observed/experienced a total lunar eclipse on July 26, 1580. If it interests you, Bacon seems to have been particularly interested in the prognostication of the annular solar eclipse (Saros 128) of October 14, 1651. He appears to have been attracted by the date and location of it's first occurrence.
  5. Shakespeare himself says In Macbeth, Act 4 scene 1: "Ditch-deliver'd by a drab, " ...to possibly suggest someone was symbolically still-birthed. That's included immediately after what appears to be very essential ingredients in the make up of a another aspect of this mystery: Slivered in the moon’s eclipse, Nose of Turk and Tartar’s lips, Hobson in Hobson's Nose has an etymological meaning of "son of Robert". To get your copy of the book you must first go to the Great Turk's head.
  6. The glass would need to be pointed to Cassiopeia for the Queen to see a likeness of herself (The constellation of the vain sitting Queen). In Persia Cassiopeia had long been portrayed holding the crescent moon in her hand. From Wikipedia: "She was forced to wheel around the north celestial pole on her throne, spending half of her time clinging to it so she does not fall off". Get yourself to latitude 33N and she is completely visible in the Northern sky year round. She is circumpolar to many observers in the British isles. Tycho Brahe's observed Nova of 1572 (the first of the famous 3 that preceded the Halley's comet occurrence of 1607) appeared at the tip of Cassiopeia on Nov. 11. It had the brightness of Venus for approximately 14 days (half the cycle of the moon) when it was visible with the naked eye. It surely must have something to say about Elizabeth to astrologers like Dee who were quick to use these events as either omens or as confirmations of fate. In 1572, "The Parliament was called, following pressure from the Privy Council, to discuss the consequences of the Ridolfi plot, a Catholic conspiracy which had attempted to put Elizabeth's cousin, Mary Stuart (Queen of Scots), on the throne of England in her place." She did indeed cling to her throne at times. With this we can see how it would have been possible to groom the Queen with all sorts of ideas and have them be confirmed by celestial events. It's a powerful way to control a vain woman. If you, as a monarch, function with the certainty that you are ordained to be great by God's stars then you will have the required confidence to be bold and lead the English to their manifest destiny. It is always a great story that creates the magic that forces individuals caught in those spells to act.
  7. Synodic month=29.530588853 days. 12 of those are 354.367 days. I solar year is 365.242222 days. The ratio 365.2422222/354.367=1.0306889. The decimal part, 0.03068889, has to eventfully contribute 1 full cycle for the two to coincide again The reciprocal of 33 is 0.0303 (33x0.030303=1). There's a slight error of about 4 parts per ten thousand. New year would coincide with the new moon again if that was your starting reference point.
  8. On the matter of 33, much of the ancient cyclical meaning (if not all) can be attributed to the lunar cycle which gets out of phase with the solar cycle at the rate of 11 days per solar year. It takes 33 years for the Sun and moon to come back in phase. This is one aspect the alchemical wedding of the Rosicrucians. The three cycles in a century and the 10 centuries in the millennium are important layers to those who have cyclical time-based ideas of the recurring events of past and future. The division of the Zodiacal age into two periods of 1000 years is part of the End Times arithmetic that greatly mattered to German Protestants whose Christianity began to reflect the flavor of a natural science. Men like Dee, and others, sought to interpret events within cycles and to foretell of events with the knowledge of cycles. We can only imagine how Bacon thought about his own particular letter to number relation to 33, 67 to and 100 and how that scheme could be worked to apply a geometry to the globe which also reflected the character of the cyclical body whose motion faithfully gives us time. It is all very reminiscent of the Proto Indo European culture's Sky father (Sun) and his consort (moon) who came together to give birth to twin sons (later Cain and Abel), one of whom kills the other and creates the world in the process. The daughter was Dawn (later Eve), and she is accounted for in the proto-Rosicrucian Philosophy of Jacob Boehme in his work "Aurora". The working towards a new dawn of man is the philosophical idea. The light of knowledge (Plato's divine luminosity) is to illuminate the 1000 year period ahead. That was in stark contrast to the idea that the End times were being foretold by the Novas of 1600 and 1604. The period around 1600 is one where there was much expectation of the eschaton in Protestant Europe. A similar craze hit North America in the years prior to 1843 with Millerism. It led to the "Great Disappointment". Someone's arithmetic did not pan out, as is often the case with the foretelling of the future. The idea, or expectation, of End Times is still found in the world's population today. Stories like this do not fade very easily. One can potentially attribute that to the human desire to attain that promised "great treasure" worth more than any sum of gold. The key to that treasure vault was, and is still said to be, in unconditional acceptance. You are supposed to get in line and work constructively as brothers in the Masonic ideal. Primitive attempts to "know" these recurring things were in the domain of astrology. I happens that our religions have forefathers who were astronomical cults. When we work back the stories we start to discover how much importance the cycle and the herald (a time traveler or prophet) had. Time always comes and gives us the answer because time was expected to come full circle, as attested by the visible part of the heavens. This was a widely held belief. The idea has lost a lot of steam, though... The two towers is an idea/motif from the Kabbalah, as is the central column (your spinal column of 33 vertebrae). The popularized Masonic stories are later 18th century adaptations of legends found in Hebrew texts. The character Hiram Abiff is a likely early adaptation of the the story of the Egyptian man-God Imhotep (the first great polymath/healer) who was the original stone builder of Egypt, builder of the Temple for the Pharaoh Djoser and architect of the first pyramid at Saqqara. Imhotep would later get Latinized by aligning him to Hermes (Trismegistus). The Egyptian spelling of that name was "hrm" (no vowels). He became Hiram which is phonetically similar. We can detect the influence of older stories in the crafting of the Masonic origin legends. Imhotep became a God by virtue of this actions which were informed by a knowledge that had reached him. So says the story. The curious marriage of Protestantism and Judaism in England, on the heels of a very long period of oppression (375+ years), is something that came out of the monumental rift between Catholics and Protestants. The English Church really had no standing, but it quickly adopted the position that it was in line with the Hebrew teachings which were older (Henry VIII consulted rabbis and sought ways to justify his actions), and therefore truer (a prima theologia), than the corrupted teachings which emanated from the Rome ca. 400 AD. Henry started promoting the idea that the English were the descendants of one of the 10 lost tribes. Eventually the Temple was finally allowed to return to London in 1656. Many important spies of Elizabethan England were Jews who had ties to Spain. We can detect in Shakespeare and in Marlowe a plea for the Englishman to see the Jew as his fellow man. The history of this period is the foundation of modern Zionism. This is one of the things we are meant to discover in examining all the symbolism we are presented with. The King James Bible is an example of what important Jewish editors contributed to the English Church in Bacon's time. The Bible was "De-Hellenized" by that editing (moved away from Roman names). That so many thing seem to point to Hebrew Psalms should not surprise us. The Psalms themselves were things that had been written to contain veiled references to other things by Acrostic and other forms of gematria. Anyway, it is much more than men having fun equating words to word values. It's about shaping a culture with the idea of an older one. The English were made to be seen as part of God's chosen people. Freemasonry is an initiation into the transformative processes of the Kabbalah. It all starts with one fundamental belief--that there is a supreme being. No one can go forward in that without the acceptance of that idea.
  9. You do understand that for Dee, who was a Kabbalist, the Truth is not something you go and willfully try and produce, right? The Truth, with a capital T, is something that one must accept. It is why all the secrets in the Universe (and all those which are referred to in the Shakespeare works' little puzzles that revolve around ideas about God) hope for "reception". And what reception entails is that you stop searching and face up to the secret esoteric knowledge that has been passed down faithfully to each subsequent open generation by individuals who have accepted to not question it. The reason they do is because they accept that someone a long time ago had something revealed to him when he was not looking for answers. At that time it allegedly found him through nature as a revelatory experience. These things were faithfully catalogued and classified, and that is what ultimately has probably inspired Bacon to suggest the same for his Temple based scientific approach to the study of the natural sciences. My point, in case it cannot be detected, is that to start off with that simplest of suggestions and demand that it be accepted unconditionally (acceptance must be unconditionally accepted) is one of the most powerful forms of magic that can exist. It has the power of self reference that the irrational numbers who capture infinity have. "You cannot belong if you do not accept" becomes the mimetic sledgehammer which doesn't ever have to be wielded. This is so powerful a tool that many faiths (especially the Christian and the Islamic) use it to pin everything down on. Faith alone is the key to the treasure vault. The idea is appropriated from places where it has shown its worth. Factions that have adopted it have survived. In the hands of people who attach the "Good" to it, it has been a way to keep themselves in check at the deepest levels. If we, today, say that there is a truth with a minor T that we want to arrive to by laborious intent then we are not operating purely by acceptance of suggestions. We would be more than open to not accepting anything that Pott or others have said as soon as we can detect some serious logical problems. We would instead think of ourselves as people on some principled search using methods that are limited in some cases (a purely scientific approach) or unlimited in others (what is possible and feels appropriate to us). Whether or not Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare is an important question is debatable. The answer seems to be yes and no. That is the nuanced opinion that would account for all the attempts at creating acceptance that I can detect. All are right, or all are wrong, because all use the same flawed approach. We are not time travelers. Incidentally , this is what I intuitively feel is the desired meaning of T T. Only the time traveler would be able to know. The ability to forecast is the ability to be in the future and report on it. Same with past events. The stars are treated as time travelers with the ability to inform us. The answer we most often find for the Shakespearean authorship question in the world is actually the one which requires no searching at all. The largest faction is the one that simply accepts that Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare. This, for good or bad, is using the most powerful of magic--something gets effortlessly accepted unconditionally. This isn't something that can easily be overturned. What else could be said that would appeal to such an effortless commitment? This may madden us, but the task at hand is to cast a more perfect spell (good luck). There really is only science that offers hope to counter that. And this is the significant rub. Science demands skepticism to the n th degree. It is not enough to say: I see what I think is evidence and then look to others to see if that is gaining traction. The Truth would have to function outside of anyone's opinion. There would be no room for bad syllogism or subjective takes on facts. What we see is not science. It is mainly highly informed speculations. These are trying to work themselves into a position where acceptance can be hoped for. I understand why. There's no getting to the Truth with anything that looks like a scientific approach. The way to gain what is wanted is to outdo the ease with which another suggestion has been accepted. And so on, and so on, until the end of time. Effort to create acceptance in others is grooming, and this is something that always has a very negative connotation, unfortunately. One thing that humans seem to be unwilling to accept is that they are being groomed from the minute they are in interaction with others. We like "young Will" are not the authors of our own lines. I have no problem having issues with Constance's efforts, but that only really says that I am unwilling to accept her conclusions for reasons that satisfy me. It would be he same if it were anyone else saying it, to be fair. There's nothing about Constance the individual that makes her unworthy of being accepted. Bacon has some degree of involvement in all this, but I would suggest (and hope it is not accepted) that this has something to do with with the existence of groups of men who, firstly, described themselves as being acceptors of things which were delivered by the Jewish tradition. Some would argue that this is actually Vedic "knowledge", but this is not the place to discuss that. So in many ways, I feel Bacon had that first drink of Kool-aid, and he is on a path of spreading some profound Ancient ideas which demand they not be blurted out openly, but instead be slowly put to people who are being formed. It is more than enough to foster curiosity and have men digging. Do not dig in the dust, though, because that will be a curse if you want to accept the Shakespearean epitaph. I also suspect there have been monumental initial efforts (which go back to the early 17th century) to put people onto a wrong trail. I think it is important that such a wrong trail exist to mask the covert nature of the initiation to the mystery. If the effort to spread the ideas was overt that would have been against the spirit of the teachings. Only open vessels ready for reception are required for the symbolism to work its magic. The road that goes to proving things is a road that leads to nowhere in the Kabbalistic sense. It was believed that no man had the ability to navigate that road. I see why that is said. We get tripped up by our own biases all the time. We will err on the side what we want to believe. Anyway it is truly "deep" stuff. I don't usually care who is pontificating about what the truth is. For any to exist requires acceptance. In my world there is only the fun that comes from dabbling in what cannot possibly inform me. There's a lot of fun to be had. Mental gymnastics are satisfying. Shakespeare is not as important as Bacon. Shakespeare is a vehicle. Who Bacon's parents were is even less important if you think you are merely a child of God. To pursue those things is not going to lead you to what was operating on Francis' end. His highly principled ideas are coming from elsewhere. He even tells you who has influenced him.
  10. Facts are things which can be used to produce bad syllogism. In fact, bad syllogism is the use of two factual statements to produce a conclusion that is not appropriate. If it was using a dishonest statement then it would simply be a lie. I do not think Constance was out to promote a lie. If her life's work boils down to the equivalent of what we see from those who quote from the Bible and infer all sorts of things about the past from their explorations in it then that ought to be understood. She was clearly groomed by Bacon enthusiasts. We are always dealing in facts. Words and symbols on paper are factual things. What we make of them is not strengthened by their nature as facts. "Constance was honest and laborious" tells us nothing about her ability to deal with the facts. The zealot who is quoting from the Bible and producing conclusion about the world from it is honest and laborious. He cannot fail at what he is doing. I do not feel this is a discussion that can be had without involving the ancient idea of casting spells. Every idea that is out there in the world is operating on us. Some of these ideas are so potently crafted that they can induce unconditional acceptance (which is magic) in others. I have a deep aversion to magic, but I understand it exits in that sense. We can come to accept just about anything unconditionally. I will do well to go to my grave believing in nothing and knowing that we have been working only to deduce things which we cannot know. I find it odd that Constance never suggested that Shakespeare was written by God. This would seem to be what Bacon was implying about the natural world. It can't possibly have been Bacon doing the writing if Bacon truly was operating out of the Platonic tradition. The whole thing reminds me of when Bob Dylan was once asked how he could have come to write the songs he did. He said that he had no clue and that he did not think he was responsible for it. Would it surprise you at all if Bacon would tell you to go ahead and accept that Shakespeare was written by Shakespeare. It's what was written that matters isn't? It is all regurgitating themes from the Greeks and other sources. Who could possibly claim it was his own work, and why are people so obsessed with it? It's a lot about he cult of personalities I fear.
  11. She was born into it. Her name is from the Latin motto Virtute et Constantia which is associated with the Knights of Malta. Constance was one of the virtues represented by the compass and square. He brother was named Francis. Her grandfather was the greatest architect and developer in Georgian England (James Haliburton, shortened to Burton). He was an Inigo Jones figure for that time. The entire family was well versed in the esoteric. James Burton is buried in a pyramid shaped tomb in England. His son was the well known Egyptologist James Burton. There's a reason why Constance was such a precocious pursuer of the ideas she had. She had been groomed to have them from early days. Her life appears to have been about trying to confirm held beliefs. This I would argue is not the same thing as studying something and making discoveries in a field. Everyone should be aware of this deeply rooted bias. When you seek to confirm things which you already accept the exercise is prone to succeeding. James Burton (property developer) - Wikipedia is a good read up for the entire London family. There are many literary and high society connections with this family. Studying the Burtons would be an excellent way to understand why it was that Constance came to have encountered some suggestions. Not a whole lot is known about her mother Jesse, but it is known that Thomas Chandler Haliburton stayed with the family when he visited London for an extended visit in the 1840s, just prior to his work which treats on the search for a treasure in Mahone Bay, Nova Scotia.
  12. The suggestion in this thread seems to be to arm yourself with anything and everything you can to make a suggestion that can be useful to forward a preexisting idea. What seems to be happening, and I see a lot of it, is that people are collecting a very long lists of number to word/expression equivalencies them are generating from many translational schemes to then cite them as soon as they see an opportunity, irrespective of where it is found or the fact that there is no rhyme or reason to it being there. The game cannot be to think certain key words or expressions are being given and to find how to get them from treating any text or illustration. This is a belief that one knows exactly what should be found. You will find exactly what you are looking for with that approach. Every time you do find an example it will appear to confirm all others. On the road to getting a suggestion accepted it is the sort of trick that appears to produce the desired acceptance in the suggestible. When acceptance is produced that then becomes the external confirmation that the exercise has value. This sort of thing was treated very well in a purely statistical critique that was published at the time "The Bible Code" was all the rage after Oprah had recommended it. There's simply no end to what can be suggested if one wants to look hard enough and incorporate many schemes. This is especially true of word numbering/counting schemes. The end result, of course, was to want to prove that there is such thing as prophecy and magic. That was not proof even it created acceptance of the suggestion. Magic in ancient times, and still today, revolves around the creation of unconditional acceptance. It can be to produce it with your eyes, your senses or your mind. All methods of suggestion are acceptable. I don't know if any of you do cryptograms/cryptoquotes. Anyone who does them knows that you need at least a certain number of words having a certain amount of repetition within them for it to be useful. If only a word was given, there would be many thousands of substitution patterns that could produce a meaning. Well, the same is true in reverse. If you arm yourself with hundreds of ciphering schemes you can take a text which has no cipher within it, dissect it to exactly the right length until a very small sample makes something one likes appear over and over. When your parsing is done at the level of a few words its a matter statistical certainty that you will have success. What there isn't to be found anywhere here is a warning about getting overly enthusiastic with this sort of thing. When something of little to no value is done over and over, someone who does understand the overuse of it will comes to it and they will immediately see that the entire argument is a flimsy house of cards. Add that will offend all who have accepted that it ought to have been possible because it worked within a group of likeminded people to a high degree of satisfaction. Bacon was not a fan of bad syllogism. Why would he had used it so profusely to try and induce belief? Is it because he understood the true nature or magic?
  13. It's nice to see the words, but I am very intrigued by the time on the timepiece. It looks like one line across to the 7 minute position. This is may be in reference to the 30 degrees here minus the axial tilt of the planet (30-23.5degrees). The words to the left are similar in meaning to the Mundus Intellectuallis that is on the Sylva Sylvarum globe. The other words have a meaning of wedding, union and proof or something to that effect. I'll read the article later, I promise. Suggests the coming together of thing such as cycles as a proof, perhaps. It is a proof it would likely have to involve Euclid.
  14. The Bacon portrait of him sitting is one of the first I considered years ago when I was looking at the composition of these things. It has very similar things that I have shown are being used in the Droeshout portrait. There's a circle centered on the tip of the finger near the quill end that goes through Bacon's eye and the suggestion of an arc in the material. There's another circle centered on the medallion he's wearing which goes through the arc of buttons, through his mouth and the tip of his thumb on the book. There's a third centered on his wrist at the cuff which goes through the buttons, the tip of the nose and the center of the timepiece. I drew the horizontal and the vertical. From the finial to the center of the large circle is a 30 degree angle. Two of the circles intersect with that line. I see this as a possible suggestion of interesting great circles that intersect the galactic plane (milky way). The image also established Bacon as being in the Platonic tradition. Not the thrice great Hermes, but the Thrice great Plato. This why we keep getting stories of mythical islands which "sink". Rembrandt, let's not forget, was heavy on portraying disguised heretical themes. The Storm of the Sea of Galilea is thought to be a reference to the tumult that occurred in the Renaissance which was starting to upset the entrenched Christian Church of Rome with the esoteric revival of Ficino, Bruno and other who would be hugely influential to Rosicrucianism in Germany.
  15. It's a navigational aid to get to where the book(s) is/are sold. It is therefore a natural thing to consider the alternate navigational interpretation of it as a terrestrial aid. In the works where we see it published I question why they would not have simply said: it's next door to the Mytre Tavern in London. Why send you one place and then have you go to the other if knowledge of the end location is still required? It's a bit of a nonsensical instruction, but it may be done to raise your suspicion. Two loctions are need to specify a Great Circle. Something I realized just last night is that if you draw a great circle which approximates the galactic plane (the milky way) and you anchor the line by using the right ascension values for the stars on that plane you get a line which goes right through Newfoundland and through the island called Grand Turk in the Caribbean. Depending on what great circle you consider the Great Turk interpretation can be the Great Turk who was based in Newfoundland in Conception Bay or the island of Grand Turk. Both will work as a suggestion. The Great circle that gets you to the Mahone Bay Ground Point is the one using Alexandria/Heliopolis and Cuper's Cove colony. Delta region and den of the Great Turk...
  16. This is the symbolism of the precessionary cults of Alexandria. The Ichthys is the symbol of the prophet for the age of Pisces. In that astronomical cult the overlapping circles where thought of as the intersection of two important celestial cycles. One of them involved precession and the other what we would call the ecliptic cycle which gives our years. It is true that much of this symbolism was ripped off by the Christian Church who also buried its original meaning and gave a reinterpretation of it, but are we to think that Bacon is exposing the hidden connection? I love the idea, and we have seen that in the Droeshout portrait there are the word suggestions above the portrait where we can extract many ones meaning God. Mithras is included. This, as a Reformist way to undermine the "corrupted" teachings of the Church of Rome, makes enormous sense to the early scientific minds. It isn't something you could not easily say, though, without serious repercussions. It hints that we are dealing with men who are moving back towards a natural interpretation of the God.concept.
  17. Speaking of the Merry Wives, there's an entire dialogue in act 4 scene 1 where they poke fun of William's less that spectacular education. There's a question young William is asked about the definition of a lapis which is given as a stone. A lapis is a also reference to lapis lazuli whose color is deep sapphire blue. Line 48 just near it is the one where we are told that Hang-hog is Latin for Bacon. HH, quite coincidently, are the initials on the cover of the "The Hunting of the Snark".
  18. Maybe. Pi, the letter, is from the Phoenician Pe whose symbol was the mirror image of a C. It's Greek value was 80. We've seen lots of 40 and 80. Phi had the value of 500. That's not quite 505, but 4 times the difference is 20. You can place the extra 20 in the vault .The resulting ratio of total simple cipher values of the square divided by the perimeter value of the magic square is 2020/1220= 1.65 as compared to 1.62. Not quite Phi, but close. Put 48 in the vault and you have a real good approximation of Phi. You can achieve that by putting four 3:4:5 triangles in the vault. Their perimeter would be 6x8=48. The opportunity is there to use pi and Phi. Bacon as pi is fine with me. It would make him be the person signing Kate's mystery letter mentioned the other day. As I've said, TT is the symbol of pi when the tops are touching.
  19. Pi is in the sky! I saw Eternity the other night, Like a great ring of pure and endless light, All calm, as it was bright, And round beneath it, Time in hours, days, years, Driv'n by the spheres Like a vast shadow moved; in which the world And all her train were hurled... Henry Vaughn, "The World"
  20. The most overt meaning is that 4 Taus come together (in right-left and top-down symmetry) to give the emblem of the Triple Tau. The T=19 in simple cipher, but it is 300 in Greek gematria. That 300 is the sum of all letters in the 24 letter Tudor simple cipher, allowing a powerful syllogism. This can be thought of as 24 placeholders in a 5x5 magic square. I'll repost this because it got deleted. This is a larger square that has the property of being Ezekiel's description of the plan for the Temple. The inner square is symbolic of the central altar. The overall suggestion may also be that of the impenetrable inner vault. The 10x10 magic square has a magic constant that is given by the equation MC=1/2(n) (n^2 +1), for n=10 the MC=505 Each side of the 4Tau block is 505 units of length. The perimeter around the square is given by partial lengths 505, 1010 (T T), 1515 and 2020 (40, 4T). 10x10 is thus an ideal symbol for FB. 33+67=100=Cygnus and all that comes with it as far as physical lines intersecting on a globe. On the highest level what this suggests is in an fact a solution for 4T which involves 4T in the answer. This sort of self reference is the property of infinite fractions that describe irrational numbers like Phi and Pi. These numbers are unknowable. They cannot be grasped in their fullness. They are the perfect symbol for the infinite nature of the Monad=God. A map to the treasure has been said by many to be the KJV. There are many levels of symbolism with TT. TT touching is pi. Francis and his brother used the alias pi and Phi. You now have a better sense why.
  21. His twin in life was his brother Anthony. St Anthony's ideological twin was St Paul (a major subject matter of esoteric painting in the early 17th century). Both were famously the wearers of the Tau cross (they get associated with that symbol). This is the likely origin of the Two Tau idea which serves as a template. Those who wear the Tau are said to carry the mark that will prove their worthiness. What Anthony passed on to St Paul was the cloak bearing the Tau (a key to a treasure vault, so to speak). The other Two Taus are two other brothers, St James and Jesus (I I). The passing of the mystery of the Tau is one that worked its way into the proto-Freemasonic masque. Anthony and Francis also went by the aliases Pi and Phi and that we can probably attribute purely to their fundamental importance in geometry. A whole lot of things T T seems to have been signaled out to put the emphasis on T T. Thales' Theorem is one I think is prominent.
  22. There's a complex at Saqqara that is built with a perimeter that has features which represent astronomical observations. It's rectangular to represent the Northern hemisphere. The pyramid was built to represent the top half of an octahedron. The cross section of the octahedron is a square. The 2-D square is being projected into a 3-D shape which captures the idea of a world above and the world below. The four are generally representing the four cardinal points. The square is being projected to a point whose apex symbolized the view of the Gods. In spiritual terms the pyramid was a machine to perform alchemical projection (to send your soul into the stars). In projection you went from the lower realm to the higher one. The immutable North star at the time of the construction of the pyramid was Thuben. It is one of 5 such well defined North pole stars which come out of the precession cycle. The 5 and the 8 are geometrical linked by the fact the pentagon corners project to the octagon's corners. 5 and 8 are also consecutive Fibonacci number. That means their ratio approximates Phi. 40 was a known eclipse cycle in eclipse months, and the human gestation period was 40 weeks. The relations are emphasized by celestial cycles involving 5x8. In the case of the Great pyramid the pyramid may be a special kind where there's an equivalent mathematical exercise in "squaring the triangle", that is to say producing a triangular face which will be of the same area as the square of side equal to the pyramid height. If the half-side of the square is one unit in length the pyramid height will be the square root of Phi. The triangular side face will be Phi in height. You'll encounter many very deceptive presentations which claim that the Egyptians carefully encoded mathematical constants in many measures of the Great pyramid, like Phi and pi. These are there because of the properties of pyramids which square the triangle (or come very close to doing so). Squaring a circle is impossible but it was a pursuit of later alchemists. The impossibility of it became the symbol of the Philosopher's stone, and that also encompasses the idea of an impenetrable secret enclosed deep in a vault. A great deal of argument has occurred over the years about the actual base angle of the pyramid side. If it is 51.82 degrees then the pyramid was ideal. Some claim it is, some claim it isn't (51.625 degrees).
  23. William Alexander had next to zero interest in colonization. That's a major point I would stress. Alexander and his son were out to make a buck with the fur trade and they lost their shirts in NS, leaving many dead along the way. The scheme in Acadia only started in 1625, and it was very poorly backed, so too late to have any overlap with Bacon. They had horrible relations with the natives which caused them to try and find allies with some traitorous French factions. By 1632 they were ordered out, because the French had regained Acadia in a treaty, and the Alexanders were broke. William Alexander died in abject poverty in 1644. He had been caught up in the schemes of selling Baronies that made King James a lot of money. What grants Alexander had received were said to be in return for having worked to edit the King James Bible. There is no one whose contribution to the settling of NS that has been more overblown and exaggerated than William Alexander's. Be very careful which books you go to when you get your information. If they are at all Oak island related I suggest looking somewhere else. There's a reason not much is said or found about Alexander in NS. He did well to have kept himself alive for the short time he was there. There are people who will tell you the Scots were a great early colonizing force. It's a matter of Scottish pride that some think these things. I say this as the grandson of a Scottish immigrant to Nova Scotia. The Scots were very minor players--a footnote really. Nova Scotia, the name, seems to suggest otherwise. A great and noble scheme : the tragic story of the expulsion of the French Acadians from their American Homeland : Faragher, John Mack, 1945- : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive Do a search for William Alexander to find him mentioned. it starts around page 39. BTW, this is one of the better books written on the early story of NS. It's written by a respected American historian as opposed to anyone peddling Scottish theories going back to Sinclair and/or to Alexander. I give it my highest recommendation.
  24. I suppose if you are using a 26 position counting scheme you are bound to get a visual from the pattern it produces. 26 is 2:1 to 52. This reminds me of modulo operations in math.
  25. I'm digesting that right now, lol. Reply is coming.
×
×
  • Create New...