Baconian Acrostics, Anagrams, Monograms, & Secret Signatures, in the Shakespeare Poems & Plays

[Light-of-Truth]

But release me from my bands
With the helpe of your good hands:
Gentle breath of yours, my Sailes
Must fill, or else my proiect failes,

[Allisnum2er]

13 minutes ago, Light-of-Truth said:

But release me from my bands
With the helpe of your good hands:
Gentle breath of yours, my Sailes
Must fill, or else my proiect failes,

Gorgeous !🤩❤️

Regarding the final message :

I AM Master Prospero, MASTer FRANCIS BACon, an honest old Counsellor,

Notice the the first letter I is the I (EYE =33) of IRIS the Goddess of Childbirth 😉 

https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Elizabeth_I_Rainbow_Portrait.jpg

EDIT :

P.S : I did not have the Rainbow Portrait in mind when I wrote in my previous post that yesterday evening my eyes and my ears were bleeding ! 😄

[Allisnum2er]

 

 

[A Phoenix]

B'Hive Wizard,

Wow, absolutely love this Yann! Only you could find this one out - perfect in its simplicity and very poignant as well with your analysis and links to Bacon's fall. The charges were politically motivated and he was James' scapegoat - only natural he would want to record his honesty for posterity and where better to record it than in his Shakespeare First Folio. And how fitting you should find it.

Amazing work Yann!♥️

 

 

 

[Eric Roberts]

11 hours ago, Allisnum2er said:

 

 

Hi Yann. Thank you for the beautiful and instructive video. Exquisitely made and cogently argued. Magnifique!

 

[Allisnum2er]

My heartfelt thanks A Phoenix and Eric for your messages. 🙏❤️

This is what I had in mind when, two days ago, I underlined the word "honest" in my slide.

But I had a feeling of underachieveness. For me, the beauty and the scope of this "simple" message left by Bacon for posterity deserved more that just two slides.

Yesterday, after my daywork I had a fixated idea, and all my time was dedicated to the making of this video, being unable to stop before completing it. The night was short but for a good reason ! 😄

Thank you again !

 

[Allisnum2er]

Here is a link to  "The Lives of the Lord Chancellors and Keepers of the Great Seal of England" (1818)

https://books.google.fr/books?id=8GMoAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA404&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

The Life of Lord Bacon begins on page 282 😉 

[Light-of-Truth]

Hey Yann (Allisnum2er), the video is awesome and your discovery even reaches higher!  So much I'd like to share and kick around, just a kind of crazy week for me and only two days into it...

I'm trying to be here when I can. Maybe later I can participate, but I have to be up soooo early tomorrow. UGH

 

[Kate]

19 hours ago, Allisnum2er said:

 

 

Boom 💥 Brilliant work, Yann! 

[Allisnum2er]

1 hour ago, Light-of-Truth said:

Hey Yann (Allisnum2er), the video is awesome and your discovery even reaches higher!  So much I'd like to share and kick around, just a kind of crazy week for me and only two days into it...

I'm trying to be here when I can. Maybe later I can participate, but I have to be up soooo early tomorrow. UGH

 

My heartfelt thanks too Rob !🙏❤️ And there is no hurry, even if now I am looking forward discovering your thoughts on the subject.😊 For the rest of your week ... Courage, hang in there !

[Allisnum2er]

1 hour ago, Kate said:

Boom 💥 Brilliant work, Yann! 

Many thanks Kate ! ❤️ I am glad you like it ! 😊

[Light-of-Truth]

4 hours ago, Allisnum2er said:

My heartfelt thanks too Rob !🙏❤️ And there is no hurry, even if now I am looking forward discovering your thoughts on the subject.😊 For the rest of your week ... Courage, hang in there !

Thanks for the courage! I'll take as much as comes to me! LOL

Real quick, the "G" did not pass you by without your notice. You've contributed to the "G" discussions here on the B'Hive before.

G is 7 Simple and 33 Kaye ciphers.

G is also 157 in the A row of the table pasted below:

The G row is one of my favorite rows, see 7, 33, 111, and 345. 345 I never cared about until being here with others who taught me some very cool 345 stuff!

I also like the F row, the row about Time in my mind; 58, 84, 110, 136, 162, 188, so on.

Yann, "THE FIRST & THE LAST", you are and always been the "ALPHA OMEGA" guy around here. 😉

I have to say this:

<--1881-->

🙂

 

 

[RoyalCraftiness]

Is there a discovered formalism for rearranging the names which you are manipulating in the 20 (TT) lines given, or is it just a demonstration of how one can produce an imperfect acrostic suggestion? I don't see how one could be led to this unless one was trying from the onset to produce the name Francis Bacon. Ask yourself how exactly one is supposed to see this if one isn't first in the possession of the name which is in the solution. What are some of the other names you noticed were producible? 

Prospero has not typically been associated with Bacon. People have had their preferences about him.  Is this a refutation of all other interpretations? 

Assuming this was in play, why would Bacon be yanking our chains with scientifically undiscoverable stuff like this when he is very literally telling using his most serious voice to not get into the business of using these sorts of syllogisms as our methods?

Can there really be a thousand hidden puzzles in a thousand places that seek only the right kind of eyes to see them with?  It seems like it would have been a colossal waste of a life to put this in place in so many iterations. If Bacon did do something like this on a grand scale we can potentially think of him as a very juvenile game player more than anything. And I see no reason why a playful imp could not suggest anything under the Sun to get people all in a tizzy to confuse them. That would include falsehoods or gags. 

What would come and recue us and finally inform us in a demonstrable way? If one hides a suggestion among a million other suggestions that are there only by chance (take all the Edward DeVere stuff as an example of this) how do we know that we are not also seeing one there by chance? How could Bacon have passed on knowledge by doing this? We simply are not well equipped enough to know if we are seeing intended things or what they mean. What am I missing?

The proof cannot be found in the elegance of what one teases out. There are some very elegant and false things we can begin to show using letter and number games. I am once again reminded of the infamous "The Bible Code" that came to the forefront after Oprah Winfrey popularized it in her book club. It worked wonderfully, except that it was not anything special when scrutinized statistically. It was able to produce examples of prophecy only when one knew exactly what one was looking for. Another thing to look into to is the Library of Babel project. In it all that is possible to write with letter symbols can be found. You can find statements about the truth, but you can also find statements which are not about the truth. How do we differentiate? Do we wait to recognize what we want to signal in order to claim that some magical hand is at play. In that case we know it is only statistics pushed to its limits which allows for everything. 

 

 

[Allisnum2er]

1 hour ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

Is there a discovered formalism for rearranging the names which you are manipulating in the 20 (TT) lines given, or is it just a demonstration of how one can produce an imperfect acrostic suggestion? I don't see how one could be led to this unless one was trying from the onset to produce the name Francis Bacon. Ask yourself how exactly one is supposed to see this if one isn't first in the possession of the name which is in the solution. What are some of the other names you noticed were producible? 

Hi CJ,

Ignatius Donelly in his book "The Great Cryptogram", published in 1888, teaches us that the word "Bacon" appears on both page 53 of COMEDIES and HISTORIES and on page 54 of HISTORIES.

https://archive.org/details/greatcryptogramf00donnrich/page/524/mode/2up

In 2015, Petter Amundsen in his Book "The Seven Steps to Mercy: with Shakespeare's Key to the Oak Island Templum" shares amongst aother things, his take on page 53 of Histories revealing one "I AM" in the center of a circle crossing Bacon, Bootes and Waine.

He explains that ,for him, "I am" is a reference to God and to Exodus 3:14 :

"And God said unto Moses, I Am That I Am: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel,

I Am hath sent me unto you."

For me, this is also a refence to Christ, the Son of the Virgin.

"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last."

Revelation 22:13 King James Bible

Last year, I shared my take on "I am" explaining that for me it was not by chance if Bacon choose to hide this message on this page ( And yes indeed, I accept Petter Admunsen's "suggestion" !)

I find interesting that I AM = 22 simple cipher and I AM = 13 short cipher

 Rev. 22:13 "I AM ALPHA AND OMEGA"

Back to THE TEMPET ...

The link between Bootes - Waine and Bote -swaine in THE TEMPEST is already known.

It is also aknowledged that THE TEMPEST, the first play of the First Folio, is the last play written by Shakespeare.

3 days ago, as I was watching the video of an Oxfordian about the Last Monologue of THE TEMPEST, I noticed on the right column, "I AM" in acrostic.

https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/facsimile/book/SLNSW_F1/37/index.html%3fzoom=1275.html

And I noticed that right under C,I,N,R could potentially be a part of the name "FRANCIS".

Then I found the missing F,A and S, and little by little, the whole message.

And what you call an imperfect acrostic suggestion is for me, a marvellous acrostic left by Master Bacon !

And yes, believe me or not, I wondered if the name of one or another of the main candidates to Shakespeare's Authorship could be also found in acrostic and the answer is  ... NO !!!

I AM EDWARD DE VERE (I AM EARL OF OXFORD) ... NO !
I AM CHRISTOPHER MARLOWE ... NO !
I AM JOHN FLORIO ... NO !
I AM ELIZABETH TUDOR ... NO !
I AM WILLIAM STANLEY (I AM EARL OF DERBY) ... NO !
I AM THOMAS NORTH ... NO !
I AM HENRY NEVILLE ... NO !

Interestingly enough, if there are twenty lines , there are twenty-one names.

"Adrian and Francisco ,Lords" is the only line with 2 names !

21 is the gematria of Eyeh the Hebrew for ...  I AM !

Eyeh Asher Eyeh  - I AM THAT I AM

And if we add the last concealed name of MASTER FRANCIS BACON it gives us a total of 22 names.

22 (T.T.)= I AM (Simple cipher)

 

I AM "BOOTES -WAINE"

(Notice that the B of BACon is the B of Boate-Swaine)

 

[A Phoenix]

FRANCIS BACON & THE TEMPEST

The Tempest is his most Baconian. The play mounts in theatrical dress Bacon’s arguments for the advancement of useful knowledge. The characterizations of the play are virtually all reflected in Bacon’s theorem that true learning “doth make the minds of men gentle, generous, maniable, and pliant to government; whereas ignorance makes them churlish, thwart, and mutinous”. Even more Baconian is the play’s emphatic conclusion that the best knowledge is not won by those who become “transported /And rapt in secret studies” (1.2.76-7). Rather, the best knowledge gives us power to understand the “infinite doings of the world” more perfectly and then to shape a more perfect world.

[Gary R. Schmidgall, Shakespeare and the Courtly Aesthetic (University of California Press, 1981), pp. 247-48]

[Allisnum2er]

18 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

Thanks for the courage! I'll take as much as comes to me! LOL

Real quick, the "G" did not pass you by without your notice. You've contributed to the "G" discussions here on the B'Hive before.

G is 7 Simple and 33 Kaye ciphers.

G is also 157 in the A row of the table pasted below:

The G row is one of my favorite rows, see 7, 33, 111, and 345. 345 I never cared about until being here with others who taught me some very cool 345 stuff!

I also like the F row, the row about Time in my mind; 58, 84, 110, 136, 162, 188, so on.

Yann, "THE FIRST & THE LAST", you are and always been the "ALPHA OMEGA" guy around here. 😉

I have to say this:

<--1881-->

🙂

 

 

Hi Rob,

Thank you for taking time to share your thoughts with us !❤️

I remember that your A row is pure GOLD (888) 😊 and I love your G row too.

Indeed, the G is of first importance. In the video I tried to go straight to the point and to focus on the main message in acrostic.

Talking about the Alpha and Omega, I wonder if this G on the LAST page of the LAST play written by "Shakespeare" and published for the first time in 1623, can be linked with the G on the FIRST page of Shakespeare' s Sonnets (1609).

And here are some other suggestions 😊

If I am right, two lines remains at the same place in the process.

FRANCIS, A JESTER.

Moreover,

IRIS = 53 = SOW/SWAN/POET (Simple cipher)

Interestingly, the 33rd word form IRIS is the word "SON".

The 33rd word from "SON" is "Gonzalo" (an honest old Councellor). 😉 

 

 

[Light-of-Truth]

6 hours ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

Is there a discovered formalism for rearranging the names which you are manipulating in the 20 (TT) lines given, or is it just a demonstration of how one can produce an imperfect acrostic suggestion?

CJ, likely we all agree anagrams and acrostics are not now nor ever will be accepted as any proof of anything. That said, anagrams and acrostics have been in use for many centuries, at least. Seems strange that anyone would suggest Bacon never dabbled in the pure fun of anagrams and acrostics when his peers were. Apparently it was very popular in the Elizabethan times. Ben Jonson is one of the most well-known acrostic instructor. Coincidence he was in Bacon's presence as the First Folio was finalized.

The TempesT is permeated with Bacon's ideas and life. That Yann studied the same lines of Shakespeare that I have for many years and he had the uniquely brilliant vision to use the lines with the names as an anagram to build a powerful statement demonstrated as an acrostic impresses me greatly. Even if from some far away depth of his expansive and vast mind, it is really powerful.

You have earned a badge of taking the hard cold non-mystical view of Bacon around here. We know you have an education and a wealth of esoteric knowledge. I'd say you are a Master of that field. So with all that knowledge and experience in your brain, do you believe that Bacon was not interested in leaving ciphers about his life? Whether or not you believe Bacon wrote Shakespeare is not important.

Ciphers are fun to find and leave. In fact, can be a ton of fun. Hopefully Bacon had a lot of fun in his life, he deserved it.

3 hours ago, Allisnum2er said:

And what you call an imperfect acrostic suggestion is for me, a marvellous acrostic left by Master Bacon !

I applaud Yann's discovery. I've spent years looking at this list of names, finding a pebble or two. And now we have something really good, no matter how "real" or not it might be for the closed minds of some.

6 hours ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

How could Bacon have passed on knowledge by doing this? We simply are not well equipped enough to know if we are seeing intended things or what they mean. What am I missing?

Context always matters. The TempesT has plenty of context relating to Bacon. It is the last play written and the first in the Folio. The last lines of the first play in the Folio is supports the idea. If, even in the tiniest remote chance in your mind that Bacon did leave this, then Yann found it and is the first.

What are you missing? The only thing I can think of is some joy, or pleasure to have fun and play. It is good to separate and recognize what one can maybe prove with what can be entertainment and good for one's life. But one's passions often lead to what is real.

So would Bacon never, ever, leave a cipher for someone to stumble on hundreds of years after he died? 🙂

[Light-of-Truth]

37 minutes ago, Allisnum2er said:

Talking about the Alpha and Omega, I wonder...

I wonder about this page:

😉

 

[A Phoenix]

                                                         FRANCIS BACON AND THE TEMPEST.

Many scholars (orthodox and Baconian) advocate that The Tempest is the most Baconian play in the Shakespeare canon and is a great favourite with theatre-goers in the United States of America.

We are blessed that the play has attracted the critical attention of a number of heavy-weight Baconian scholars. See below:

Edwin Bormann, The Shakespeare-Secret (London: Th. Wohlleben, 1895), pp. 9-22.

N. B. Cockburn, The Bacon Shakespeare Question The Baconian theory made sane (Guildford and Kings Lynn: Biddle Limited, 1998), pp. 241-50, 460-5.

Peter Dawkins, The Wisdom of Shakespeare in The Tempest (I. C. Media Productions, 2000).

Barry, R. Clarke, The Shakespeare Puzzle A Non-Esoteric Baconian Theory (Barry R. Clarke, 2009), pp. 69-88.

Barry R. Clarke, ‘The Virginia Company and The Tempest’, Journal of Drama Studies, 5 (2011), pp. 13-27.

Barry R. Clarke, ‘A linguistic analysis of Francis Bacon’s Contribution to three Shakespeare plays: The Comedy of Errors, Love’s Labour’s Lost, and The Tempest’, PhD, Brunel University, 2013), pp. 211-242.

Barry R. Clarke, ‘The Virginia Company’s role in The Tempest’, in The Whirlwind of Passion New Critical Perspectives on William Shakespeare, ed., Petar Penda (Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2016), pp. 71-93.

Barry R. Clarke, Francis Bacon’s Contribution to Shakespeare A New Attribution Method (New York and London: Routledge, 2019), pp. 169-191, 276-82.

Mather Walker, Plus Ultra Francis Bacon’s Secret Design in his “Shakespeare” First Folio (https://sirbacon.org/archives/PLUS%20ULTRA%20-%20w4%20w%20ToC.pdf).

For a Rosicrucian interpretation of the play:

Frances A Yates, Shakespeare’s Last Plays: A New Approach (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1975), pp. 92ff.

[Eric Roberts]

42 minutes ago, A Phoenix said:

                                                         FRANCIS BACON AND THE TEMPEST.

Many scholars (orthodox and Baconian) advocate that The Tempest is the most Baconian play in the Shakespeare canon and is a great favourite with theatre-goers in the United States of America.

We are blessed that the play has attracted the critical attention of a number of heavy-weight Baconian scholars. See below:

Edwin Bormann, The Shakespeare-Secret (London: Th. Wohlleben, 1850), pp. 9-22.

N. B. Cockburn, The Bacon Shakespeare Question The Baconian theory made sane (Guildford and Kings Lynn: Biddle Limited, 1998), pp. 241-50, 460-5.

Peter Dawkins, The Wisdom of Shakespeare in The Tempest (I. C. Media Productions, 2000).

Barry, R. Clarke, The Shakespeare Puzzle A Non-Esoteric Baconian Theory (Barry R. Clarke, 2009), pp. 69-88.

Barry R. Clarke, ‘The Virginia Company and The Tempest’, Journal of Drama Studies, 5 (2011), pp. 13-27.

Barry R. Clarke, ‘A linguistic analysis of Francis Bacon’s Contribution to three Shakespeare plays: The Comedy of Errors, Love’s Labour’s Lost, and The Tempest’, PhD, Brunel University, 2013), pp. 211-242.

Barry R. Clarke, ‘The Virginia Company’s role in The Tempest’, in The Whirlwind of Passion New Critical Perspectives on William Shakespeare, ed., Petar Penda (Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2016), pp. 71-93.

Barry R. Clarke, Francis Bacon’s Contribution to Shakespeare A New Attribution Method (New York and London: Routledge, 2019), pp. 169-191, 276-82.

Mather Walker, Plus Ultra Francis Bacon’s Secret Design in his “Shakespeare” First Folio (https://sirbacon.org/archives/PLUS%20ULTRA%20-%20w4%20w%20ToC.pdf).

For a Rosicrucian interpretation of the play:

Frances A Yates, Shakespeare’s Last Plays: A New Approach (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1975), pp. 92ff.

Thanks for this helpful bibliography!

[A Phoenix]

                                                               FRANCIS BACON AND THE TEMPEST.

'In calling The Tempest a dramatization of the Instauratio Magna, I do not merely mean the work published by Bacon in 1620, but in that general title I include the whole prosework of Bacon, from Partus Temporis Maximus (1585), to the New Atlantis and Sylva Sylvarum, both of them published after Sir Francis' death.'

[Professor Gustavus Holzer, Shakespeare's Tempest In Baconian Light (Heidelberg 1904 Carl Winter's Universitatsbuchhandlung), p. vi]

[RoyalCraftiness]

On 5/24/2023 at 6:00 PM, Light-of-Truth said:

CJ, likely we all agree anagrams and acrostics are not now nor ever will be accepted as any proof of anything. That said, anagrams and acrostics have been in use for many centuries, at least. Seems strange that anyone would suggest Bacon never dabbled in the pure fun of anagrams and acrostics when his peers were. Apparently it was very popular in the Elizabethan times. Ben Jonson is one of the most well-known acrostic instructor. Coincidence he was in Bacon's presence as the First Folio was finalized.

The TempesT is permeated with Bacon's ideas and life. That Yann studied the same lines of Shakespeare that I have for many years and he had the uniquely brilliant vision to use the lines with the names as an anagram to build a powerful statement demonstrated as an acrostic impresses me greatly. Even if from some far away depth of his expansive and vast mind, it is really powerful.

You have earned a badge of taking the hard cold non-mystical view of Bacon around here. We know you have an education and a wealth of esoteric knowledge. I'd say you are a Master of that field. So with all that knowledge and experience in your brain, do you believe that Bacon was not interested in leaving ciphers about his life? Whether or not you believe Bacon wrote Shakespeare is not important.

Ciphers are fun to find and leave. In fact, can be a ton of fun. Hopefully Bacon had a lot of fun in his life, he deserved it.

I applaud Yann's discovery. I've spent years looking at this list of names, finding a pebble or two. And now we have something really good, no matter how "real" or not it might be for the closed minds of some.

Context always matters. The TempesT has plenty of context relating to Bacon. It is the last play written and the first in the Folio. The last lines of the first play in the Folio is supports the idea. If, even in the tiniest remote chance in your mind that Bacon did leave this, then Yann found it and is the first.

What are you missing? The only thing I can think of is some joy, or pleasure to have fun and play. It is good to separate and recognize what one can maybe prove with what can be entertainment and good for one's life. But one's passions often lead to what is real.

So would Bacon never, ever, leave a cipher for someone to stumble on hundreds of years after he died? 🙂

It is not enough to say that this was certainly going on to allow one the latitude to do it now and claim it was done then in order to say what we want it to say.  Keep in mind that this is being used to say things that have appeal here, as opposed to things that don't.  A series of statements that starts with: "gematria and acrostics were commonly used in the past by some" can very easily be followed by many other benign statements that form the basis for very bad syllogism or "leap of faith" in the end. Ten perfectly good statements can be used to make a bad conclusion. This is the stuff of trial lawyers.

I don't disagree that something appears to have been produced with intent, but we know nothing about the interpretation of it if all we are recognizing are ideas which equal numbers or ides that come out of patterns we generate which tickle us.

Using the sum of what we surmise to incrementally create an alternate identity for a man is pushing one's luck. It's stepping into the demonstrably indemonstrable (we lack DNA evidence, and that absence allows for many suggestions).  Possibilities cannot be the main navigation tool one uses on the grounds there is no other map/chart to look at. This is how one might go about writing for "Curse Of Oak Island". It has the possibility to guide you anywhere. You can even help yourself to Bacon and all that has been suggested about him in doing that. 

Deciphering can't possibly work everywhere we look, saying exactly what we want it to say. It will fail Ed. DeVere proponents an well as Bacon proponents. There are million examples of how the very same things which some equate to one specific idea will vary from one interpreter to the next.

What is tragic is that this is being used to define an identity which supplants what little we do know. It is equally tragic that I would come here and have one crafted for me. I wish to be reasonable and cautious in what I would suggest. I dislike that I am characterized with possessing anything resembling knowledge of anything. I'm just as effectively duped as any other by my own intellect. I needed to be trained too.  When I say that one must be tricked into believing something, that applies to me. I'm constantly kicking myself in the pants reminding myself to not trust my lying eyes and to not fly off on some tangent.

It just means we are limited to mapping the possibilities which we could also embellish with probabilities of dubious value. We can suggest things, but it should never be in order to create a belief in someone else. When we are helping others to grow the map of what is possible then that is doing some honest work that my ultimately lead to nowhere.

The danger is that anyone of us has the potential to win an argument, and that this ought to matter. There is little informational value in opinion held for the sake of holding an opinion, but there is a widespread view that merely holding an opinion is the utmost expression of freedom. How does one govern with that? One must presumably allow opinion, then try and shape it and watch as the world divides itself into factions who have rallied themselves together. This is Machiavelli's thesis. Those with the powerful recruitment methods, be they good or bad, will dominate. All that matters is winning. The winner can make his truth. On many levels this is abhorrent to me. I would rather we be all in the business of deconstructing fictions and leaving manipulators powerless.

Occasionally, I'll torture myself and watch Youtube videos of people making bold claims out of countless possibilities. What do people lack to not realize they are not in possession of knowledge when they only feel good about something at that given time? Why must they act like they know things and try and appeal to others?

How does one know how to read between the lines or see the pattern that is riding on levels of pattern?

Much of what I see here used as methods has some degree (limited) historical basis, but it is unclear if its use by Bacon would mean what is suggested and further built upon today. The method is not the suggestion which comes from it after all.  One could detect something that one correctly interprets and still not know what's going on.  There is nothing to stop anyone from crafting tales, as in the case of Freemasonry. If anything that shows us it was actually done willfully. We might not know what the intention would be in doing that. 

If Pierre Plantard could exploit the mystery tradition at Reine-le-Chateau to make himself come out as the living descendant of Jesus Christ it is just as possible that Bacon or his fandom could have forged an identity for himself/him.  Was Plantard mentally ill? No, apparently he was just a very clever guy who wanted to show playfully that the masses could easily be duped with esoteric machinations. It was a game for him, perhaps a "sick" one. He mentioned he wanted to trick people into realizing things about themselves. We can ask if it was mistake for many to not have detected Plantard's intent, but that has no answer. He made efforts to make sure it was put in front of many eyes, and he encouraged the interpretation by invoking clever puzzles to draw people in. Every trick in the book was used up to the point were the thing took a life of its own. Even the eventual demonstration of it being a manipulation has not sufficed to get people off of his suggestion. People have imply kept what they liked and gone from there.

We should deduce from this that whatever Bacon intended could have been anything he wanted. I'm not even sure Bacon ever made the suggestions we are reading about. It appears to always come from elsewhere (an established belief).

Ultimately, this can be pushed so far back into the uncertain that one could even suggest that Bacon did not know his own identity, that he may have suspected he was not who he was and that his own head had been filled with suggestions he may have unconditionally accepted. The ability to socially engineer identities was at a height in Tudor England too. No one is who they seem to be. Everyone is so puffed up and embellished that one comes out of it thinking there actually were magicians and divine Royals. The truth is far from us. I would never suggest we can know it from the interpretation of symbols.  Yet, we play.

[Allisnum2er]

I told you that interestingly, in this order revealing in acrostic "I AM MASTER FRANCIS BACON", the word "Son" was 33rd from IRIS (The goddess of Childbirth that can be linked to The Rainbow Portrait of Queen Elizabeth) and 33rd from Gonzalo who is the "honest old Councellor" of the Play.

I also told you that , for me, "I AM" was a reference to the Christ, the Son of the Virgin,

and a reference to Rev. 22:13

"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last."

This morning, I wondered if Bacon could have made a link with his Essays,

knowing that "Of Councell" was one of them.

Shakespeare's First Folio was printed in 1623 by William Jaggard.

I decided to take a look at Francis Bacon's Essays printed in 1613 by John Jaggard, Wiliiam's Brother.

https://archive.org/details/essaiesofsrfranc00baco/page/44/mode/2up

Talking about an "honest old Councellor", what a surprise on pages 33 ...

I smiled when I discovered the end of "Of Councell " that I had forgotten.

Then, I decided to take a look at the 3rd and last edition of his Essays, published in 1625 and to spot the differences.

One sentence has been added in "Of Great Place".

In "Of Councell", thanks to two slight modifications, in the reference to the Christ (his blessed Sonne, The Counsellor), "Counsellor" is the 100th word that is FRANCIS BACON simple cipher.

"For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder:
and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace"

Isaiah 9:6 (King James Bible)

(PRINCE OF PEACE = 111 simple cipher)

And as if by chance, the sentence talking about "Actors upon the Stage" that begins on line 170 in the 1613 edition, begins here on line 177 that is precisely the simple cipher of ... WILLIAM SHAKE-SPEARE !

And it is important to mention that "Of Councell" also talks about the birth of PALLAS, that is the SPEARE-SHAKER, Francis Bacon's muse.

 

 

[Light-of-Truth]

On 5/26/2023 at 12:25 PM, RoyalCraftiness said:

Yet, we play.

CJ, as I play during this crazy week with a lot of chaos, one thing has been in my face; Synchronicity.

Its been a week of family, work, health, finances, and more with stressful moments interwoven with total bliss. Stories to tell on many levels, etc.

At some point where I was even a little taken by the coincidences popping up I thought of you and your 100% sober cold as ice realistic description of what I was living through. "What would CJ say about this moment?"

You know, typing a word when you hear it, hearing a word as you read it, so on. And sometimes it seems to be amplified or multiplied. Chaos yet Order. How does that happen?

It is all Magic in my Brain? I convince myself about this reality, and then it works? Or the other way around?

When the Magic happens, how do you explain it while you live in it? CJ?

That's what I am thinking about right now.

 

 

 

 

[Light-of-Truth]

"Bookes will speake plaine, when Counsellours blanch. Therefore it is good to bee conurersant in them, specially the Books of such as themselves have beene Actors vpon the Stage"

Quote