Jump to content

First Folio


Kate
 Share

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Hi

Has anyone ever noticed this? Not the TWO - many have seen that, but the ends of the sentences? I’m sure after 400 years someone has! There’s got to be some sort of code in the fact that we have double letters at the end  in this pattern and it’s signed by two initials, instead of Ben Jonson’s name.

B J is Boaz and Jachin the two pillars whether written with the J or the I of the time.

AEA0AEE9-0689-4615-B930-8DA86A721CE1.jpeg.743785f89184c15ed83fcc60cb0641f1.jpeg

To (the reader), as well as Two down the side.

I was looking at this because TWO in the dedication and the mention of the Incomparable Paire (ie two brothers so Mercury and Gemini duality) in the second one, plus 2 being the simple cipher of B for Bacon at the front of the first play The Tempest , the word Master above the B, all leading to the F Bacon on page 2 (which as many have spotted before is also opposite the word two) all points to the hidden and revealed authors; Bacon who wrote it and Shakespeare who fronted it for him.

Also I noticed the only indented word on the page is downe effectively telling us to read down from line 32 which is the number associated with ‘the one before 33 and going beyond” -see Peter Dawkin’s explanation.

I’m sure many know all this so forgive me, I’m writing it out for anyone who clicks and didn’t know.

What I don’t know is about the doubling in ut, fe, it, se, ke

Thanks 
Kate

 

EB13D0B2-83B6-43BF-B320-47A3A29E7344.jpeg

 

Edited by Kate
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to note, the last two letters of the 7th and 8th lines are "se" (surpasse and brasse).

The last letters "tetee" add up to 53 Simple cipher, with double (TWO) of each we see tteetteeee is 144 Reverse cipher (SIR FRANCIS BACON).

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

T A A A A A A A A A A A T
157     www.Light-of-Truth.com     287
<-- 1 8 8 1 1
O 1 1 8 8 1 -->

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Kate, the last two letters 'ut' of the first and second line have a numerical value of 39 in simple cipher: 39 is F. Bacon. It is perhaps also worth noting that the last 3 lines (I am not sure if Yann has already pointed this out) incorporates an anagram:

                                                                                                     All, that vvas euer vvrit in brasse. 

                                                                                                  But, since he cannot, Reader, looke

                                                                                                     Not on his Picture, but his Booke. 

                                                                                                      BACON.

 

                                                                                                                       SIMPLE CIPHER

  

                                                                            A   B   C   D    E   F    G    H   I-J   K    L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U-V     W   X   Y   Z                                  

                                                                            1    2    3    4    5   6    7   8     9    10  11  12  13 14 15  16   17 18  19    20     21  22  23 24  

 

Frank and Parker Woodward in Secret Shakespearean Seals Revelations of Rosicrucian Arcana (Nottingham: H. Jenkins, 1916), opposite p. 88 provide the facsimile below in which they highlight a sum total of 287 letters which represents FRA ROSICROSSE  (Brother of the Rosy Cross) in Kay Cipher communicating the concealed cryptographic message that Francis Bacon, Brother of the Rosy Cross, is the secret author of the 1623 Shakespeare First Folio.  

 

                                                                                                                       KAY CIPHER

                                                                            A   B   C    D    E   F    G   H    I-J   K     L   M   N   O    P   Q   R   S   T   U-V   W   X     Y    Z

                                                                          27  28  29  30  31 32  33 34   35  10   11  12   13  14  15  16 17  18  19   20   21  22  23  24

                                                                         

                                                                                                        F   R    A    R   O    S     I     C   R   O    S   S   E

                                                                                                      32  17   27  17  14  18  35  29   17  14  18  18  31 = 287

287.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Thank you! So page 287 should be of interest? Anything found there?

Kate

PS Funny how one can read something a million times and not see a detail that suddenly jumps out - what’s with the ‘hit his face’ instead of hid? The only reason is to make the end of the sentences match.

Edited by Kate
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I see an Apollo there but I am concentrating on my twos, so I go and have a look at page 222 and discover an anomaly in the way the 22 is written. Then down the page at the only stage direction is Bacon. It can be read in two ways, shown here

 

11011519_Page222.png.2329d4ddf159ab1ca5e1e310dc80c9fa.png

or

1902317537_Page222a.png.666e6b1c215d55efb5846a09183a26ac.png

 

If we count down 22 lines it is St Bacon but as I have never heard him called that - even though he is St Alban, I don't know if that is worth mentioning.

 

Kate

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Kate said:

Thank you! So page 287 should be of interest? Anything found there?

Hi Kate,

2022-05-30.png.0e89255a017b0ee00ec91f2ffcf712c8.png

https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/facsimile/book/SLNSW_F1/573/?zoom=1090

https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/facsimile/book/SLNSW_F1/795/?zoom=1090

https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/facsimile/book/SLNSW_F1/573/?zoom=1090

 

The "Sir France is bee con" on page 287 of Tragedies is well known.

However, if I remember what was found , I do not remember when nor by who. My Apologies ! A Phoenix, your help would be very welcome 🙂 !

Regarding the page 222 , the complete message in acrostic is Fast Bacon and by the past I have also already read something about it and about the peculiar 222.

However, I have never read anything about the ST BACON (ALBAN) , 22 lines down . I love it ! ❤️😀 Well Spot ! 

And if you are interested in, here is my take on number 222, with the connection between the page 222 of Comedies and Ben Jonson's Poem " Lord Bacon Birth-Day" 🙂

https://sirbacon.org/all-is-num2er/   Lord Bacon Birth-Day 222

 

 

Edited by Allisnum2er
  • Like 1
  • Wow! 2

image.png.b8c74f56d5551c745119c268cf9d3db8.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Oh, am I on a roll or what?

I looked at page 303 because the zero is null, so 33, cipher for Bacon and it contains the same emblem  (if that is the word?) that is on page 100, which is cipher for Francis Bacon.

(Again, I say the detail for anyone reading who doesn't know about 33 and 100).

The emblem picture is full of curlicues and needs looking at in very high definition as it appears to contain b's, but I won't bet my life on that. I have played a game of spot the difference and there are teeny tiny differences I'll show that later.

HOwever, looking over to the opposite unnumbered page to 100 is the same headpiece that I had spotted elsewhere that has two backwards facing coneys which is the symbol for Bacon (back coneys) and the grapes which number 14 on one side and 12 on the other.

When looking at this before Yann ( Allisnum2er) told me 12 + 14 = 26 the gematria of YHVH and the simple cipher of F BACO, and he also pointed out that 2  is B and 6 is F in the simple cipher alphabet. So we have FB encoded at the top and the page begins with a big F.

The same message is being written loud and clear and the clues seem to be in the twos and in the simple cipher for Francis Bacon as well as in pictorial emblems.

Take a look (All images from Folger.edu - red marks added by me)

1632265344_FolgerLibrary100.png.138c4085ab57b061a543b736da9e4e8d.png

 

 

1746595007_FirstFolio100and33.png.582df4e987271866332ef80f3b4ed932.png

 

647321267_FolgerLibrary100markedup.png.928eb1051db3dc225e5b43455528d79d.png

 

 

Edited by Kate
To add punctuation brackets
  • Like 2
  • Wow! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Allisnum2er said:

Hi Kate,

2022-05-30.png.0e89255a017b0ee00ec91f2ffcf712c8.png

https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/facsimile/book/SLNSW_F1/573/?zoom=1090

https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/facsimile/book/SLNSW_F1/795/?zoom=1090

https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/facsimile/book/SLNSW_F1/573/?zoom=1090

 

The "Sir France is bee con" on page 287 of Tragedies is well known.

However, if I remember what was found , I do not remember when nor by who. My Apologies ! A Phoenix, your help would be very welcome 🙂 !

Regarding the page 222 , the complete message in acrostic is Fast Bacon and by the past I have also already read something about it and about the peculiar 222.

However, I have never read anything about the ST BACON (ALBAN) , 22 lines down . I love it ! ❤️😀 Well Spot ! 

And if you are interested in, here is my take on number 222, with the connection between the page 222 of Comedies and Ben Jonson's Poem " Lord Bacon Birth-Day" 🙂

https://sirbacon.org/all-is-num2er/   Lord Bacon Birth-Day 222

 

 

Thanks Yann, our posts crossed. That's amazing. I'll read your link now

Kate

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Kate said:

Thanks Yann, our posts crossed. That's amazing. I'll read your link now

Kate, I am on a roll with you ! 😀

The fact is that since yesterday I am working on the last part of "The last Portrait", a part revealing the origin of this emblem picture. 😉 

There's more to come, very soon ! 

  • Like 3

image.png.b8c74f56d5551c745119c268cf9d3db8.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Yann, I am familiar with the anagram but off the top of my head I can't recall who first identified it-though I suspect it was William Stone Booth.  There is another anagram of F. BEACON in Timon of Athens:

                                                                                                For each true word, a blister, and each false

                                                                                                Be as a Cantherizing to the root to'th Tongue,

                                                                                                Consuming it with speaking.   

                                                   [Shakespeares Comedies Histories & Tragedies (London: prirnted by Isaac Jaggard and Edward Blount, 1623, p. 96)]

                                                   [William Stone Booth, Subtle Shining Secrecies (Boston: Walter H. Baker Company, 1925), p. 241]

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way! That's nuts. Alexander Waugh and tons of others post their videos about de Vere. What was the reason given. You should appeal.

Re this, it's suddenly all falling into place. I don't know who has ever spotted any of these things before so forgive me if it's well known but ...

Twos.jpeg.573e626d493f358bbf0461b56e1c2e26.jpeg

 

The letters may well add up to something in some cipher but the obvious thing is 222

To

Two

and sets of two letters

222 -  Fra Baconi in Kay cipher

Kate

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Ah ha! Brilliant. Thank you!

Using your link, Yann, to internetshakespeare as opposed to the Folger copies, I see the last page of Cymbeline is numbered 993 instead of 399. I know I’ve read about this somewhere before, maybe on B’Hive (?) but what is the explanation for this? Does it appear in the earlier editions ie Folio 1 or 2 etc., too?

https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/facsimile/book/SLNSW_F1/907/index.html%3Fzoom=850.html

F6B98613-3754-484A-B095-90B1DDF04EC3.png.63ecaf75fd86efb04f97321a08e0fa88.png
 

Browsing the Folger site they have links to some of the editions they hold (I think it says they own 82 of the suspected 750 printed and the couple of hundred known to exist with other collectors - I presume this is First Folios and not Second, Third etc). They have Folio 33 and the website has a link to read it but it just brings up blank pages for me 🤔

It seems like a no-brainier to me that someone, somewhere holds a copy that has certain marginalia  or other material added in the back or front, which probably points even more obviously to Bacon, and these editions will only mysteriously surface when ‘the time is right’.

So my main question is, the Ben Johnson ‘To the Reader’ is on page 2 of this edition but is it on page 2 of the early ones (Folio 1,2,3 from 1623)?

As the number 2 is not actually printed on the page it seems important to know. 
 

Thanks

Edited by Kate
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

                FRANCIS BACON AND THE S0-CALLED FALSE FOLIO PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY WILLIAM JAGGARD AND THOMAS PAVIER IN 1619.

                                                                                                                   [PART I]

Towards the end of 1618 or in early 1619 William Jaggard began printing ten Shakespearean plays for his friend the publisher Thomas Pavier. He owned the rights to some previously printed Shakespeare plays Henry V, 2 Henry VI, 3 Henry IV and Titus Andronicus but apparently he had made no attempt to reprint any of them until entering into his secret agreement with William Jaggard.

The ten plays were published in nine quartos beginning with 2 Henry VI and 3 Henry VI issued in a single quarto as The Whole Contention betweene the two Famous Houses, Lancaster and Yorke ‘Printed at London, for T. P.’,1 followed by Pericles ‘Printed for T. P. 1619’,2 printed with continuous signatures. These two quartos were followed by A Yorkshire Tragedie ascribed on its title page to ‘W. Shakespeare’ and ‘(Printed for T. P. 1619)’.3 The play had previously been entered on the Stationers’ Register by Pavier as ‘A booke Called A Yorkshire Tragedy Written by Wylliam Shakespere’,and soon after printed by R. B. for Pavier later the same year. Above the first page of the 1608 quarto stands Bacon’s AA Headpiece.5 It was later published in the Shakespeare Third Folio. Its authorship is disputed and it usually designated as part of what is described as the Shakespeare Apocrypha. The 1619 quarto of The Merry Wives of Windsor printed for Pavier (originally printed by Thomas Creede for Arthur Johnson in 1602) carries the false imprint ‘(Printed for Arthur Johnson, 1619)’ on its title page.6 Not only did some of the Pavier Quartos bear false imprints a number of them are also falsely dated. The first quarto of The Merchant of Venice was printed in 1600 by James Roberts for Thomas Heyes,7 and with a similar looking title page the 1619 Pavier/Jaggard edition colophon reads ‘(Printed by J. Roberts, 1600)’. Above the first page of the 1619 Pavier/Jaggard edition appears a woodcut with Tudor arms in its centre. Over the Tudor arms rests a crown with a female and male either side reaching up for it and to the far left and right are depicted two children, which serves as a cryptographic ideogram, representing Queen Elizabeth and her secret husband Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester and their two royal children Francis Tudor Bacon and Robert Tudor Devereux, second Earl of Essex.

Two of the other title pages of the Pavier/Jaggard quartos are also falsely dated 1600. The play Sir John Oldcastle was first entered on the Stationers’ Register on 11 August 1600 by Pavier as ‘The first parte of the history of the life of Sir John Oldcastell lord Cobham’,8 and shortly after set forth anonymously as The first part Of the true and honorable historie, of the life of Sir John Old-castle, the good Lord Cobham printed by Valentine Simmes for Pavier to be sold at his shop at the sign of the Cat and Parrots.9 The similarly looking 1619 falsely dated Pavier/Jaggard edition carries an attribution to William Shakespeare with the false imprint ‘printed for T. P. 1600’.10 The Shakespeare comedy A Midsummer Nights Dream was first entered on the Stationers’ Register on 8 October 1600 by Thomas Fisher,11 and printed for Fisher later the same year to be sold at his shop at the sign of the White Horse in Fleet Street.12 The similar looking title page of the Pavier/Jaggard falsely dated edition is differentiated by the information in the colophon ‘(Printed by Iames Roberts, 1600)’.13 Following the publication of the first quarto of Henry V in 1600, on 14 August of the same year, its copyright was transferred to Pavier, and a second quarto printed by Thomas Creede for Pavier appeared in 1602. The colophon in the falsely dated 1619 Pavier/Jaggard quarto reads ‘Printed for T. P. 1608)’.14 The first quarto of King Lear was printed for Nathaniel Butter in 1608,15 and the falsely dated 1619 Pavier/Jaggard edition reads ‘(Printed for Nathaniel Butter, 1608)’. As with the falsely dated 1619 Jaggard printed edition of The Merchant of Venice across the top of the first page of this King Lear edition appears a woodcut with Tudor arms in its centre apparently representing Queen Elizabeth and her secret husband Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester and their two concealed royal children Francis Tudor Bacon and Robert Tudor Devereux, second Earl of Essex.16 Similarly, the royal Tudor arms appears in a woodcut between two cupids on the title pages of the 1606 and 1612 [Part 1& 2] John Jaggard editions of Bacon’s Essays,17with a Tudor rose appearing in a woodcut over the dedication page to the 1613 edition of Bacon’s Essays printed by William Jaggard for John Jaggard.18

 

    1. William Shakespeare,The Whole Contention betweene the two Famous Houses,

       Lancaster and Yorke. With the Tragicall ends of the good Duke Humfrey,

       Richard Duke of Yorke, and King Henrie the sixt. Diuided into two Parts: And

       newly corrected and enlarged. Written by William Shake-speare, Gent (Printed at

       London, for T. P.).

   2. William Shakespeare, The Late, And much admired Play, Called, Pericles,

       Prince of Tyre. With the true Relation of the whole History, aduentures, and

       fortunes of the saide Prince. Written by W. Shakespeare (Printed for T. P. 1619).

   3. William Shakespeare, A Yorkshire Tragedie. Not so New, as Lamentable and

       True. Written by W. Shakespeare (Printed for T. P. 1619).

   4. E. K. Chambers, William Shakespeare A Study of Facts And Problems (Oxford

       Clarendon Press, 1930), I, p. 535.

   5. William Shakespeare, A Yorkshire Tragedy. Not so New as Lamentable and true

       Acted by his Maiesties Players at the Globe. Written by W. Shakspeare (London:

       printed by R. B. for Thomas Pauier and are to be sold at his shop on Cornhill,

       neere to the exchange, 1608), A2r

   6. William Shakespeare, A Most Pleasant and excellent conceited Comedy, of Sir

       Iohn Falstaffe, and the merry Wives of Windsor. With the swaggering vaine of

       ancient Pistoll, and Corporall Nym. Written by W. Shakespeare (Printed for

       Arthur Johnson, 1619).

    7. William Shakespeare, The most excellent Historie of the Merchant of Venice.

       With the extreame crueltie of Shylocke the Iewe towards the sayd Merchant, in

       cutting a iust pound of his flesh: and the obtayning of Portia by the choyse of

       three chests. As it hath beene diuers times acted by the Lord Chamberlaine his

       Seruants. Written by William Shakespeare (London: Printed by James Roberts

       for Thomas Heyes, and are to be sold in Paules Church-yard, at the signe of the

       Green Dragon, 1600).

  8. William Shakespeare, The excellent History of the Merchant of Venice. With the

      extreme cruelty of Shylocke the Iew towards the saide Merchant, in cutting a

      iust pound of his flesh. And the obtaining of Portia by the choyse of three

      caskets. Written by William Shakespeare (Printed by J. Roberts, 1600), A2r.

  9. E. K. Chambers, William Shakespeare A Study Of Facts And Problems (Oxford

      Clarendon Press, 1930), I, p. 533.

10. Anon., The first part Of the true and honorable historie, of the life of Sir John

     Old-castle, the good Lord Cobham. As it hath been lately acted by the right

     honorable the Earle of Notingham Lord High Admirall of England his seruants

     (London: printed by Valentine Simmes for Thomas Pavier, and are to be sold at

     his shop at the signe of the Catte and Parrots neere the Exchange, 1600).  

11. The first part Of the true & honorable history, of the Life of Sir John Old-castle,  

      the good Lord Cobham. As it hath been lately acted by the Right

      honorable the Earle of Notingham Lord High Admirall of England, his Seruants

      (London printed for T.P. 1600).

12. E. K. Chambers, William Shakespeare A Study Of Facts And Problems (Oxford

      Clarendon Press, 1930), I, p. 356.

13. William Shakespeare, A Midsommer nights dreame. As it hath beene sundry

      times publickely acted, by the Right honourable, the Lord Chamberlaine his

      seruants. Writen by William Shakespeare (London: printed for Thomas Fisher,

      and are to be soulde at his shoppe at the Signe of the White Hart, in Fleetestreete,

      1600).

14. William Shakespeare, A Midsommer nights dreame. As it hath beene sundry

      times publickely acted, by the Right honourable, the Lord Chamberlaine his

      seruants. Written by William Shakespeare (Printed by Iames Roberts, 1600).

15. William Shakespeare, The Chronicle History of Henry the fift, with his battell

      fought at AginCourt in France. Together with ancient Pistoll. As it hath bene

      sundry times playd by the Right Honourable the Lord Chamberlaine his Seruants

      (Printed for T. P. 1608).

16. William Shakespeare, M. William Shak-speare: His True Chronicle Historie of

      the life and death of King Lear and his three Daughters. With the vnfortunate

      life of Edgar, sonne and heire to the Earle of Gloster, and his sullen and

      assumed humour of Tom of Bedlam: As it was played before the Kings Maiestie

      at Whitehall upon S. Stephens night in Christmas Hollidayes. By his Maiesties

      seruants playing vsually at the Gloabe on the Bancke-side (London: printed for

      Nathaniel Butter, and are to be sold at his shop in Pauls Church-yard at the signe

      of the Pide Bull neere St. Austins Gate, 1608).

17. William Shakespeare, M. William Shake-speare, His True Chronicle History of

      the life and death of King Lear,  and his three Daughters. With the vnfortunate

      life of Edgar, sonne and heire to the Earle of Glocester, and his sullen and

      assumed humour of Tom of Bedlam: As it was plaied before the Kings Maiestie

      at White-hall, upon S. Stephens night, in Christmas Hollidaies. By his Maiesties

      Seruants, playing vsually at the Globe on the Bancke-side (Printed for Nathaniel

      Butter, 1608), A2r.

18. Francis Bacon, Essaies. Religious Meditations. Places of perswasion and

     diswassion. Scene and allowed (London: printed for Iohn Iaggard, dwelling in

      Fleere streete at the hand and Starre neere Temple barre, 1606), title page (STC

      1139; Gibson, no. 4); Francis Bacon, Essaies. Religious Meditations. Places of

      perswasion and diswassion. Scene and allowed (London: printed for Iohn

      Iaggard, dwelling in Fleere-streete at the Hand and Starre neere Temple barre,

      1612), title page, (STC 1139.5; Gibson, no. 5); Francis Bacon, Essaies. Religious

      Meditations. Places of perswasion and diswassion. Scene and allowed (London:

      printed for Iohn Iaggard, dwelling in Fleere-streete at the Hand and Starre neere

      Temple barre, 1612), title page (STC 1141.5; Gibson, no. 7).  

 

 

 

Pavier Merchant.jpg

Pavier King Lear.jpg

  • Wow! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Kate said:

I see the last page of Cymbeline is numbered 993 instead of 399. I know I’ve read about this somewhere before, maybe on B’Hive (?) but what is the explanation for this? Does it appear in the earlier editions ie Folio 1 or 2 etc., too?

Good Evening Kate,

You will find an explanation of the number 993 in one of Alan Green's Podcast, a great Podcast with Peter Dawkins as a special Guest :  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcNnsDoPsM8 (at 49:00) 🙂 

I would add that 993 is the isopsephy (Greek numerical value) of Ἀφροδίτη (APHRODITE)

https://www.musicalgematria.org/number/planets.php

 

  • Like 2

image.png.b8c74f56d5551c745119c268cf9d3db8.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

                              THE AUTHORIAL REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS MADE BY FRANCIS BACON TO THE SO-CALLED FALSE FOLIO

                                                               PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY WILLIAM JAGGARD AND THOMAS PAVIER.

                                                                                                                  [PART 2]

These quartos with their false imprints and dates deceived Shakespeare scholars for nearly three hundred years before W. W. Greg and A. W. Pollard first discovered in the early part of the twentieth century based upon extensive bibliographical evidence that they were in fact all printed by William Jaggard for Thomas Pavier in 1619.1 Since then virtually all Shakespeare scholars still believe a letter from the Lord Chamberlain William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke prompted the Court of the Stationers’ Company to issue an order to prevent the publication of any plays by the King’s Men without their consent was directed at Pavier which forced him to forge at least some of their imprints. More recently this prevailing assumption was swept aside by Professor Massai in her important ground-breaking work Shakespeare and the Rise of the Editor (Cambridge University Press, 2007). She believed that the actors did not oppose Pavier’s publishing venture and nor did he attempt to deceive the King’s Men or his fellow stationers. His change of mind, after the first three quartos The Whole Contention (2 and 3 Henry VI) and Pericles were issued from the Jaggard press, which resulted in the false imprints, was prompted by an attractive business proposal rather than by the Court order of May 1619, and, in fact, the Pavier Quartos represented a daring marketing strategy involving William and Isaac Jaggard, which led to the publication of the First Folio in 1623.2

Under the important sub-heading ‘Textual Variations in the Pavier Quartos’ Professor Massai states that twentieth century editors of the plays republished by Pavier in 1619 agree ‘they were extensively, and in some cases, carefully edited’, but as she tellingly points outs, ‘editors generally focus on the play they are editing and pay little attention to the Pavier Quartos as a specific group of texts.’3 In this long sub-section Professor Massai presents a brilliant and detailed as well as a minutely annotated analysis of the Pavier Quartos highlighting the astonishing and extensive revisions and amendments in the texts which (even though she does not herself state or bring it to the attention of her learned readers) wields a crippling and fatal blow to an illusion that has beguiled the schoolmen and virtually the rest of the world for the last four centuries:

With the exception of 3 Henry VI, the Pavier Quartos pay special attention to speech prefixes, ranging from The Merry Wives of Windsor and A Midsummer Nights Dream, which add and emend one speech prefix respectively, to Henry V, A Yorkshire Tragedy and Pericles, which add and emend seven, ten and fifteen speech prefixes each....

Even more extensive are the changes to the stage directions. All Pavier Quartos except 2 Henry VI add missing entrances and exits. This type of intervention is far from systematic, as many necessary entrances and exits are left unmarked. Also sporadic but worth noting is the addition of directions when the stage action is not immediately obvious from the dialogue…

While new stage directions are added to clarify the stage action or the dialogue, other directions signalling stage business, which, while useful to actors, may seem unnecessary for readers, are often removed…

Some changes to the stage directions do represent necessary corrections….

Similarities in the rephrasing of stage directions in eight out ten plays suggest that the printer’s copies used to set the Pavier Quartos may have been annotated by a single hand. Some plays regularize syntax in long directions…

The literary quality of the light rephrasing undergone by some directions in the Pavier Quartos is also reflected in their layout and format, which make the page look less crammed…

The sustained attention paid to speech prefixes and stage directions in the Pavier Quartos often extend to the dialogue. Lines are rewritten to rectify factual mistakes, to introduce or record changes in the dramatic structure of the play, or to make sense of mangled passages in the source texts....

…there is another group of corrections which require familiarity with the fictive world of the play, and therefore, are more likely to have been introduced by an annotating reader rather than by a printing house agent….

Collectively, the corrections to the dialogue in the Pavier Quartos, along with the frequent intervention to correct or add missing speech prefixes, and the extensive rewriting, reformatting and correction of the stage directions, signal the intervention of an annotating reader. It also worth stressing that further changes in the Pavier Quartos have more to do with stylistic preferences than with the need to emend their source texts.4

Of course, for the alert and intelligent reader, the absolutely vital question is: just who is responsible for all the revisions and amendments in the Pavier Quartos? According to Massai ‘Establishing the identity of the annotator(s) who prepared the printer’s copy for the Pavier Quartos from internal evidence only is virtually impossible.’5 However, she continues, ‘some patterns in Pavier’s earlier output as a publisher suggest he is at least a likely candidate’, in support of which she provides some ‘suggestive parallels’ to the kind of editorial intervention seen in the Pavier Quartos in the form of plays that he had previously published.6 Yet Professor Massai provides no evidence whatsoever that the amendments were actually carried out by Pavier himself and in truth she could not even convince herself he was responsible for those carried out in the quartos that bear his name ‘Since Pavier is the only agent involved in both publishing ventures he should at least be regarded as a possible candidate for the role of annotator of the printer’s copy underlying his quarto editions of 1619.’7

The very suggestion Thomas Pavier may have been responsible for these full extensive revisions and amendments, is not only extremely unlikely, it is frankly inconceivable. Thomas Pavier was not a writer who possessed the necessary ‘stylistic sophistication’ displayed in the revisions and amendments to these quarto texts enabling to him rewrite lines and exercise stylistic preferences. He was not a poet or seasoned dramatist and nor did he have professional or practical experience of the theatre that would have equipped him with the necessary knowledge and skills to introduce appropriate speech prefixes and introduce knowing stage-directions to clarify stage action or dialogue, or where the stage action is not immediately obvious from the dialogue. Nor to introduce or record changes in its dramatic structure and make corrections that required familiarity with the fictive world of the play. It is as clear and obvious as the day is long that some, most, if not all, of these revisions and amendments are authorial, and here lies the rub. This was the insurmountable problem facing Professor Massai one she was undoubtedly aware of and why throughout the fourteen pages of her discussion there was one word that could not be uttered, the word author. Because in this context the difference between the word annotator and the word author is all the difference in the world, simply because William Shakspere of Stratford, the supposed author of the Shakespeare poems and plays, had been dead for the last three long years; an illusion now only believed by the schoolmen, the only all too easily deceived, and the lamentably deluded. 

 

 

     1. Alfred W. Pollard, Shakespeares Folios And Quartos A Study In The 

        Bibliography Of Shakespeare’s Plays 1594-1685 (Originally published in 1909:

        reprint New York: Cooper Square Publishers, Inc., 1970), ‘The Quartos of 1619’,

        pp. 81-104.

    2. Sonia Massai, Shakespeare And The Rise of The Editor (Cambridge University

        Press, 2007), pp. 106-21.

    3. Ibid., p. 121.

    4. Ibid., pp. 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 128, 130.

   5. Ibid., p. 132.

   6. Ibid., p. 133.

   7. Ibid., p. 134.

  • Like 2
  • Wow! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FRANCIS BACON AND THE LITTLE KNOWN POEM 'ON WORTHY MASTER SHAKESPEARE AND HIS POEMS' PREFIXED TO THE SECOND SHAKESPEARE FOLIO.

The second edition of the Shakespeare plays was printed by Thomas Cotes who took over the printing business of the printers of the First Folio William (d.1623) and Isaac Jaggard (d. 1627) on 29 June 1627 after acquiring the business and copyrights from his widow Dorothy Jaggard.

The preliminaries of the Second Folio reprints from the First Folio the dedication to William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke, Grand Master of England, and his brother Philip Herbert, Earl of Montgomery, the address in the names of Heminges and Condell, Ben Jonson’s verses, and the poems by Leonard Digges and Hugh Holland. To this it adds John Milton’s first published poem entitled ‘An Epitaph on the Admirable Poet W. Shakespeare’ and above it an unsigned poem ‘Vpon the Effigies of my worthy Friend, the Author Master William Shakespeare, and his Workes’. Furthermore the Second Folio contains another poem not found in the First Folio which for four hundred years has remained virtually unknown to the rest of the world entitled ‘On Worthy Master Shakespeare and his Poems’ signed ‘The friendly admirer of his Endowments. I.M.S.’ This is a very special poem: ‘The quality of the poem’ writes the Shakespeare scholar Oscar James Campbell ‘is of such high order as to suggest a poet of the first rank.’ He is certainly correct. The poem is written by the supreme master poet himself.  

The first thing to notice about this long poem is the Freemasonic language of its title ‘On Worthy Master Shakespeare’ indicating that the true Shakespeare is a member of the Freemasonry Brotherhood. In modern terms a worthy Freemason can find himself elevated to the position of Worshipful Master of the Lodge who wears a Masonic Hat (most portraits of Bacon show him wearing his Master’s Hat) to signify his rank and status. In Bacon’s case it was to signify to the initiated he was Grand Master of all Freemasons whose works, including his Shakespeare plays, are replete with Masonic frontispieces, dedications, addresses and symbols, all couched in Masonic language, who in one line from the poem ‘Creates and rules a world, and workes upon/Mankind by secret engines’. It will be noticed that the first line within the large capital A has 33 italic letters: 33 Bacon in simple cipher and that the first paragraph break comes after 39 lines: 39 F. Bacon in simple cipher. The anonymous poem is signed ‘The friendly admirer of his Endowments’ comprising 33 letters: 33 Bacon in simple cipher. This is followed with 3 cryptic initials ‘I. M. S.’. In the 24 letter Elizabethan alphabet (I and J and U and V are interchangeable. The letters I (9), M (12), S (18), have a numerical value of 39 F. Bacon in simple cipher: 

         A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I   K   L   M   N  O   P  Q   R   S   T  U  W  X  Y   Z

         1   2   3  4  5   6   7   8   9 10  11  12  13 14 15  16  17 18 19 20 21 22  23 24

 

                                                 B A C  O N                      

                                                 2  1  3 14 13=33

               

                                            F  B A C  O  N

                                            6   2  1  3 14 13=39 

 

 

 

1632 PAGE.png

  • Like 2
  • Wow! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

                  FRANCIS BACON [WHO FEIGNED HIS OWN DEATH IN 1626 WITH THE HELP OF HIS ROSICRUCIAN-FREEMASONRY BROTHERHOOD]

                                                    AND THE 1,679 REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO THE 1632 SECOND SHAKESPEARE FOLIO.

Unlike the Shakespeare First Folio which is the primary focus of orthodox scholars and those interested in the true authorship of the Shakespeare works which has been forensically scrutinised from almost every conceivable perspective, comparatively the Second Shakespeare Folio has attracted very little critical attention, and what attention it has received, little of it has entered into the mainstream of the Shakespearean canon. Following its publication in 1632 for the next three hundred years the vast majority of Shakespeare editors and scholars repeatedly misinformed their learned readership that it was merely a reprint of the First Folio. It was still possible for the distinguished and celebrated Henrietta C. Bartlett in her work Mr. William Shakespeare Original and Early Editions of his Quartos and Folios (Yale University Press) in 1922 to say of the Second Shakespeare Folio: ‘This is merely a reprint of the First Folio, 1623, and has no new readings which are of interest to the scholar.’Similarly Professor Sir Sidney Lee at the time widely regarded as the greatest living authority on Shakespeare in his Life of William Shakespeare (1925) states ‘The Second Folio was reprinted from the First; a few corrections were made in the text, but most of the changes were arbitrary and needless, and prove the editor’s incompetence,’2 which only served to expose and confirm his own ignorance and incompetence. Matters at the very least began to move in the right direction with Professor Pollard in his Shakespeare Folios And Quartos with the recognition ‘it was in 1632 that a start was made in re-editing the First Folio, and thus no survey of the history of Shakespeare’s text can be complete which does not take into account the work of these anonymous compositors and correctors.’3 The fullest and most detailed summary thus far came from Professor Allardyce Nicoll who believed that there were several correctors at work including the printer who may have been responsible for the syntactical changes that abound in the Second Folio. He also pointed out that metrical alterations run through much of the 1632 edition ‘several of them exceedingly felicitous’ with the syntactical and metrical changes made for the ‘purpose of elucidating the sense…and for the purpose of making clearer the actions of the characters on the stage.’ Many of the plays in the Folio he correctly observes ‘have been carefully worked over, and we note a tendency to pay particular attention to stage directions and to classical names and references.’ Besides the printer he concludes three separate men carefully examined the comedies one of whom he states ‘was a student of both Latin and Greek, a man moreover with a considerable sense of the fitness of things’, pointedly adding ‘this man, anonymous as he is, must be regarded as Shakespeare’s first editor.’4

It was however only when M.W. Black and M.A Shaaber in their truly monumental Shakespeares Seventeenth-Century Editors 1632-1685 (London: Oxford University Press, 1937) subjected the First and Second Folios to a detailed comparative analysis, did the true enormity of the differences between them finally begin to emerge into the light of day. According to Black and Shaaber there are 1,679 changes in the Second Shakespeare Folio in what was an attempt to clarify, correct and improve the text:

They are fairly evenly distributed among the categories of thought, action, etc. Alterations of grammar are most numerous (459) and changes pertaining to the action least (130). Changes affecting the thought, meter, and style are very nearly equal in number-374, 359 and 357 respectively....

…We have also collected here a number of passages in which the editor corrected inconsistencies of fact and circumstance by closely following the action of the play….  

...The changes pertaining to the action of the plays are nearly all indications of entrances and exits and reassignments of speeches….the most noteworthy accomplishment of the editor in this department is his care in marking a character’s entering or leaving the stage. Seventy-three entrances and exits are correctly added and one is correctly omitted…. 

…The changes affecting the meter are among the most remarkable features of the work of the editor…There are 360 of them in F2….

...There are a few passages in which he converted prose into verse. It may be noticed, too, that in some of the changes in our other categories care is taken not to spoil the rhythm in making the change. Occasionally for instance, when a change affecting the thought or the style robs the line of a syllable, the editor will insert a compensating syllable elsewhere in the line.

….The changes which we classify under the heading of style have to do chiefly with matters of taste and propriety, the choice and the form of words. The chief matters of taste concerned are the preference of one word or form to another and the order of the words...the editor of F2, who was not in the least deterred by the scruples which forbid modern editors to alter the text unless they think they are restoring what Shakespeare wrote, evidently had definite ideas about certain matters of usage which, in justice to him, must be called intelligible….

…The rectifications of the orthography of scraps of foreign languages in the plays and of proper names are also interesting and sometimes clever. The editor’s Latin was evidently good, good enough, at least, to recover quotations from Mantuan, Ovid, Virgil and Horace ..his Italian and French less good, though he made some partial corrections in these languages too.…5

The very suggestion that the enormous 1,679 amendments, revisions, corrections and improvements concerning the dramatic action, stage-craft, metre, verse, language and style in the Second Shakespeare Folio were executed by a combination of the printer, anonymous compositors and correctors or some unknown editor is simply absurd. Not only would these imagined individuals needed to have been classical scholars and linguists (Greek, Latin, French, and Italian-languages familiar to Bacon) they would have had to possess a necessary sophisticated comprehension of English grammar and syntax. They would also have needed to possess a practiced and superior literary skill to write and rewrite lines and exercise stylistic preferences. The printer, compositors, correctors, or the editor (or any combination thereof) would also have needed to have been seasoned poets and dramatists and have professional and practical experience of the theatre to equip them with the knowledge and skills to introduce the appropriate speech prefixes and various stage-directions. Perhaps most importantly, the revisions, corrections and improvements required the unnamed and unidentified individuals to inhabit the very structure and architecture of the plays as well as possess an intimate familiarity with their fictive world, the kind of course, known and understood by the author himself, Lord Bacon, the very person responsible for them. 

     1. Henrietta C. Bartlett, Mr. William Shakespeare Original And Early Editions Of

        His Quartos and Folios His Source Books And Those Containing Contemporary

        Notices (New Haven: Yale University Press; London: Oxford University Press,

        1922), p. 51.

    2. Sidney Lee, A Life of William Shakespeare Fourth Edition of the Revised

        Version (Rewritten And Enlarged (London: John Murray, 1925), p. 570.

    3. Alfred W. Pollard, Shakespeare Folios And Quartos A Study In The

        Bibliography Of Shakespeares Plays 1594-1685 (London: Methuen and

        Company, 1909), p. 158.

   4. Allardyce Nicoll ‘The Editors of Shakespeare from First Folio to Malone’, in H.

        H. Spielman, et al, with an introduction by Israel Gollancz, Studies in the First

        Folio (London: Humphrey Milford Oxford University Press, 1924), pp.164-6. 

        For a more detailed account of the above from which I benefited see Matthew W.

        Black and Mathias A. Shaaber, Shakespeares Seventeenth- Century Editors

        1632-1685 (New York: Modern Language Association of America and London:

        Oxford University Press, 1937), pp. 1-5.

    5. Matthew W. Black and Mathias A. Shaaber, Shakespeares Seventeenth-Century

        Editors 1632-1685 (New York: Modern Language Association of America and

        London: Oxford University Press, 1937), pp. 32, 36, 42-3, 44, 47, 48.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Wow! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was a truly comprehensive answer (set of answers), AP. You are a veritable mine of information. Thank you sincerely!

May I just return to this.  Putting aside your amazing insight a few posts back that it all adds to 287, using the entire lines, if F. Bacon is 39 in Simple Cipher, are there any words of other names to be read from the fe, it ,se and ke?

Basically Ben Jonson is telling us the name F. Bacon twice on a page that is replete with two's. Are the other double letters just, perhaps, to be disregarded (like the HB and IWAAN on the left) as they needed to be like that in order to alert to readers to the cipher, or are these doubled letters saying something?

(Yann's 2 should also be added)

K

1300824237_Twoswithcipher.jpg.4a964f85a7758d746a982b6cc8175ced.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...