Jump to content

The Bacon Blindness & Ignorance of Shakespeare Authorship Commentators


A Phoenix

Recommended Posts

Thanking you A.P. for Spear-Shaking  at another snake in the grass.

Nothing truer than truth when a relative to Eddie de Vere, Charles Beauclerk, Earl of Burford, can only obfuscate the Baconian position with ignorance while conveniently pushing for the nepotism of his family tree. And what a freaky tale that tree beholds.

An Amazon reader review of "Shakespeare's Lost Kingdom : The  True History of Shakespeare and Elizabeth" stated it best :

"At a time when Edward de Vere needs carefully composed support, Lost Kingdom is an entertaining and annoying concoction of scholarship and flimflam."

The flimflam may be referring to the evidence free conjecture that  Oxford is Elizabeth's son from an affair she had  around the age of 16 and  besides being Elizabeth's illegitimate son, her lover and father of a joint child, the Earl of Southampton. Personally I can't tell if  this is the 'annoying concoction' or the 'flimflam?'  Somebody please pass the salt and help me out here !

Well I guess that 'carefully composed' support flies  out the proverbial yonder window  quicker than you can say Nothing truer than truth. The irony remains that this cult is still bound to a man named Looney. That's all folks.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

MICHAEL BLANDING

NORTH BY SHAKESPEARE A ROGUE SCHOLARS QUEST FOR THE TRUTH BEHIND THE BARDS WORK

In the last few years the self-taught scholar Dennis McCarthy has received an enormous amount of publicity through his work recently republished in paperback with the dubious title Thomas North: The Original Author of Shakespeare's Plays which ‘has garnered worldwide attention (including coverage in The New York Times, The Guardian, Time Magazine, Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe MagazineU.S. News, etc).’. The central contention of his celebrated book is that Thomas North (1535-1603), the supposed translator of Plutarchs Lives, wrote more than thirty plays largely for the Earl of Leicester’s acting company, which were later adapted and reworked by William Shakespeare (i.e., William Shakspere of Stratford) in the 1590s and early 1600s.

In addition to all the world-wide publicity McCarthy has also received the accolade of a supporting full-length work by the acclaimed and prize-winning author and journalist Michael Blanding in a book also bearing a somewhat misleading and disingenuous title North by Shakespeare: A Rogue Scholars Quest for the Truth Behind the Bards Works winner (under a slightly different title) of the 2021 International Book Award in Narrative Non-Fiction.

On its side sleeve we are informed that its author Blanding:

presents the twinning narratives of renegade scholar Dennis McCarthy, called “the Steve Job of the Shakespeare community,” and Sir Thomas North, an Elizabethan courtier whom McCarthy believes to be the undiscovered source for Shakespeare’s plays. For the last fifteen years, McCarthy has obsessively pursued the true origin of Shakespeare’s works. Using plagiarism software, he has found direct links between Hamlet, Macbeth, Romeo and Juliet, and other plays and North’s published and unpublished writings-as well as Shakespearean plotlines seemingly lifted straight from North’s colourful life.

Unlike those who believe someone else secretly wrote Shakespeare’s works, McCarthy proposes a wholly original explanation: Shakespeare wrote the plays, but he adapted them from sources written by North decades before. Many of them, he believes, were penned on behalf of North’s patron Robert Dudley in his efforts to woo Queen Elizabeth.

For the purposes of facilitating the fundamentally flawed twinning narratives of his progenitor Dennis McCarthy and his own good self, Blanding in briefly and superficially addressing the long-held conviction that Bacon wrote the Shakespeare works, inadvertently and embarrassingly exposed his own limitations.

Blanding commences the story of how he says the first doubts about the authorship started in the mid-1800s via the writings of Delia Bacon.1 This should have immediately alerted and alarmed any reasonably well-informed Shakespeare authorship scholar. The doubts about the authorship of the Shakespeare poems and plays began almost immediately after the publication of Venus and Adonis (1593) and The Rape of Lucrece (1594), perhaps most notably by writer and satirist Joseph Hall, (later Bishop of Norwich) and the poet and playwright John Martson, who through a series of satiric works published from 1597 to 1599 identify Bacon as the secret author of the Shakespeare poems.2 As Blanding tells it, when Delia Bacon died the baton was taken up in The Great Cryptogram (1888) by Ignatius Donnelly, a work debunked by the Friedmans.3 His two-volume work was followed by ‘a stampede of other writers sleuthing out increasingly more fantastical messages hidden in the plays’.4 Now adopting a more sarcastic and disparaging tone he tells how the American Dr Orville Ward Owen created a machine with two reels over which he stretched the text of Shakespeare. Using the word cipher system referred to by Bacon in The Advancement of Learning and De Augmentis Scientiarum it revealed a ‘sordid tale’ that Bacon was the concealed son of Queen Elizabeth and Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester and the heir to the throne, but the Elizabeth was strangled to death by Sir Robert Cecil before she could reveal the truth.5 Blanding then undercuts and misrepresents the endeavours of William Stone Booth who identified anagrammatic and acrostic signatures spelling out the name of Francis Bacon and then came along Mark Twain who in 1909 published Is Shakespeare Dead? ‘peppered with Twain’s trademark sarcasm.’6 Self-satisfied with his truncated deprecating two page history of Baconian scholarship which for some inexplicable reason went no further than 1909 he mistakenly states that ‘by now, Francis Bacon was already falling out of favor as a Ghost writer for Shakespeare.’7 By way of a grandstanding conclusion for the purposes of summarily dismissing Bacon, Blanding hands down what he believes are three decisive facts and reasons why Bacon could never and did not write the Shakespeare poems and plays, which I here quote in full:

Despite his obvious talents, he had never been to Italy, wrote with a ponderous prose style, and was insanely busy with all his other duties.8

His triple lock cruelly revealed that Blanding was clearly unfamiliar with Bacon’s life and writings and knew even less about the mountainous and irrefutable evidence that Bacon is Shakespeare. As a starting point, he might have done well to familiarise himself with Spedding’s standard fourteen volume edition of The Life and Writings of Francis Bacon, and to arrive at a better informed understanding of his authorship of the Shakespeare works, the scores of Baconian full-length works and hundreds of articles written to that effect.

1] Bacon never went to Italy.

For four hundred years orthodox Bacon biographers have continued to insist that Bacon only travelled abroad to France for three years from 1576 to 1579 and nowhere else. The main reason this lie/falsehood has been maintained to the present day is because of the secrecy surrounding his life and in particular his authorship of the Shakespeare works. Especially regarding whether Bacon ever travelled to Italy because self-evidently the author of the Shakespeare works had a profound fascination with the country, its history, its language and its people. Twelve or thirteen of the Shakespeare plays are set or partly located in Italy: The Two Gentlemen of Verona, The Taming of the Shrew, Titus Andronicus, Romeo and Juliet, A Midsummer Nights Dream, The Merchant of Venice, Much Ado About Nothing, Julius Caesar, Othello, Alls Well That Ends Well, Coriolanus, The Winters Tale, and The Tempest. His mother Lady Anne Cooke Bacon was an Italophile, lover all things Italian and fluent in the Italian language from which she translated the sermons of the Sienese preacher Bernardino Ochino.9 His mother passed on her love of Italy and taught Bacon the Italian language which he put to good effect in reading the many Italian sources for his Shakespeare plays. He also travelled to the country for which he so clearly had such a love and an all-consuming passion. How do we know this? Because we are told so by his first biographer Pierre Amboise who given the intimacy of his account must have known Bacon (some have suggested that it was even written by Bacon himself):

Bacon himself wished to acquire that knowledge which in former times made Ulysses so commendable, and earned for him the name of Wise; by the study of the manners of many different countries. I wish to state that he employed some years of his youth in travel in order to polish his mind and to mould his opinion by intercourse with all kinds of foreigners. France, Italy, and Spain, as the most civilised of the whole world, were those whither his desire for knowledge (curiosite) carried him.10

1. Michael Blanding, North by Shakespeare: A Rogue Scholars Quest for the Truth Behind the Bards Works (New York: Hachette Books, 2021), p. 134.

2. See W. Begley, Is It Shakespeare? The Great Question Of Elizabethan Literature. Answered In The Light Of New Revelations And Important Contemporary Evidence Hitherto Unnoticed (London: John Murray, 1903), pp. 1-31 and Basil E. Lawrence, Notes On the Authorship Of The Shakespeare Poems And Plays (London: Gay and Hancock, 1925), pp. 76-107.

3. Michael Blanding, North by Shakespeare: A Rogue Scholars Quest for the Truth Behind the Bards Works (New York: Hachette Books, 2021), pp. 134-35. See A. Phoenix, The Fraudulent Friedmans: The Bacon Ciphers in the Shakespeare Works (2022) for a detailed and thorough account of how the Friedmans secretly knew Bacon wrote the Shakespeare poems and plays and lied to the world about the presence of Baconian ciphers in the Shakespeare works.

4.  Michael Blanding, North by Shakespeare: A Rogue Scholars Quest for the Truth Behind the Bards Works (New York: Hachette Books, 2021), p. 135.

5. Ibid., p. 135.

6. Ibid., p. 135.

7. Ibid., p. 136.

8. Ibid., p. 136.

9. Anne Cooke, trans. Sermons of Barnandine Ochino of Sena, Godlye, frutefull, and very necessarye for all true Christians translated out of Italian into Englishe (London: R. Car for W. Reddell, 1548); Anne Cooke, trans. Fouretene sermons of Barnardine Ochyne, concernynge the predestinacion and eleccion of god: very expediente to the settynge forth of hys glory among hys creatures. Translated out of Italian in to oure natyue tounge by A. C. (London: John Day and William Seres 1550-1?); Anne Cooke, and Argentine, Richard, trans. Certayne Sermons of the ryghte famous and excellent clerk. B. Ochine (London: John Day 1551?);Anne Cooke, trans. Sermons of Bernardine Ochine (to the number of 25) Concerning the Predestination and Election of God Translated out of the Italian in to oure natyue tounge by  A. C. (London: John Day, 1570?)

10. Pierre Amboise, Histoire Natvrelle De Mre Francois Bacon, Baron de Verulam, Vicomtede sainct Alban, & Chancelier dAngleterre (A Paris, Chez Antoine De Sommaville & Andre Sovbron, affociez, au Palais dans la petite Salle, 1631), pp. 1-26; Granville C. Cunningham, trans., ‘A New Life Of Lord Bacon’, Baconiana, Vol. IV, No. 14 (Third Series), April, 1906, p. 74.

 

2] Bacon was insanely busy with all his other duties.

image.png.98d50fe01e413d0901e27752b035ee23.png

 3] Despite his obvious talents Bacon wrote with a ponderous prose style thus he was not Shakespeare

image.png.d9c7dbcdd76d4a2d0f70e5dba4eeccd9.png

image.png.f2c962472e1e30fb143f913462066fa9.png

image.png.e007b9f73b091410e017b12dd0754b7e.png

image.png.db0413f0392a5a827129df87689d2c42.png

image.png.b44ff1e026f18863ff8031a3f1a47383.png

image.png.838920c5cc8cc7989d81fd5796ddf01a.png

image.png.a15cc220a6ec1a0ca1890f486b482d2a.png

 

  • Like 2
  • Wow! 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember when Dennis McCarthy's book on North came out, because of it's novelty and publisher publicity  it had it's 15 minutes on the stage. But it's not sticking, no one talks about it. Little impact. But you knew there was something rotten in Denmark with his research. Now thanks to this  A.Phoenix posting we can see the obvious flaws in both McCarthy's and Blanding's books.

Excellent rebuttal with historical truth and Book Review A.P. Thank You. People like "Bland ing" are born to be mild as demonstrated by their pontificating based on  regurgitation of other people's inaccurate opinions revealing they have not read deeply on Bacon's life. Bacon was "insanely busy" is one of the many false narratives that is still passed on from generation to generation. We know that it wasn't until  Elizabeth passed and James  I came in  that Bacon around the age of 46 started to move up the winding stair of public life. In many ways we can be thankful that Elizabeth held Bacon back  as he was able to spend more time with his scriveners  generating plays.

Glad to see you use Pierre Amboise the first Bacon biographer (1631) as a source that mentions Bacon going to Italy. This reference and biography is continuously and conveniently overlooked by our overzealous adversaries because it doesn't fit into their false narrative.
Excellent use of quotes by other writers demonstrating Bacon's varied writing style and remarkable likeness to the works of Shakespeare.
We do know that the Earl of Leicester as a patron of the theater. Not enough has been said about his influence on his son Francis who must have been introduced and influenced by Leicester's family connections and the Sydneys and Wilton house where Bacon was exposed to their  vibrant and creative social gatherings.

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

3 hours ago, Lawrence Gerald said:

Bacon was "insanely busy" is one of the many false narratives that is still passed on from generation to generation. We know that it wasn't until  Elizabeth passed and James  I came in  that Bacon around the age of 46 started to move up the winding stair of public life. In many ways we can be thankful that Elizabeth held Bacon back  as he was able to spend more time with his scriveners  generating plays.

Bacon kept busy, there was a lot to do. He had a lot to say. And he left plenty for us to celebrate.

I think below is a rare precamera photo of the first Strats devising their pleasant peasant story about that guy Willy Shax who nobody can remember:

image.png.bbf4175129ba991505e0fdb60e5e52bc.png

  • Like 3

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

8 hours ago, A Phoenix said:

How do we know this? Because we are told so by his first biographer Pierre Amboise who given the intimacy of his account must have known Bacon (some have suggested that it was even written by Bacon himself):

Bacon himself wished to acquire that knowledge which in former times made Ulysses so commendable, and earned for him the name of Wise; by the study of the manners of many different countries. I wish to state that he employed some years of his youth in travel in order to polish his mind and to mould his opinion by intercourse with all kinds of foreigners. France, Italy, and Spain, as the most civilised of the whole world, were those whither his desire for knowledge (curiosite) carried him.10

What a great statement about Bacon! Great footnote too! Here is a SirBacon.org page with text from Mather Walker containing a version of Pierre Amboise, Histoire Natvrelle De Mre Francois Bacon, Baron de Verulam.

https://sirbacon.org/amboiselife.htm

image.png.e54e5ed3f56f007b5ac326401ffa577a.png

Wonderful to read this:

The Advertisement au Lecteur then follows:

Address to the Reader.

This work of Mr. Bacon's, though posthumous, does not the less deserve to be recognized as legitimate, since it has the same advantages as those that have been brought to light whilst he was living. If the Author had had the desire to see it there, we should have seen this work in the press at the same time as his other books, but having designed that it should grow more, he had intended to defer the printing until the completion of all his works.

 

EDIT:

Adding a Peter Dawkins link: Francis Bacon "born in the purple"

https://www.fbrt.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Francis_Bacon_born_in_the_purple.pdf

The first biography of Francis Bacon (Discours sur la Vie de Mre. Francois Bacon, Chancelier d’Angleterre) was published in France in 1631, authored by Pierre Amboise, who had private access to some of Francis Bacon’s manuscripts.

  • Like 1
  • Wow! 2

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

Here is a link to Histoire Naturelle (1631):

https://books.google.fr/books?id=k7qIOnu-aGMC&printsec=frontcover&hl=fr&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

And here are some ideas regarding the Title page :

image.png.a13b5b5c2b9ee7425564886e20f922a9.png

https://archive.org/details/accedenceofarmor00legh/page/n183/mode/2up?q=wings

I like the fact that by taking in count the Emblem in the center, there are 33 "elements" ( 32 words and 1 emblem) above the line.

The Emblem (with a Crown) is the 17th "element" and the "Roy" (King) is the 40th ( 4T) and last  "element".

Here is the famous 1740, that Oxfordians like so much and that they use to say that Shakespeare was the 17th Earl of Oxford.

Here, it can be linked to Bacon.

BACON :

"Ce sage Roy de l''Ecriture"

"This wise King of Writing"

(Ode to Bacon by Mr Auvray , in Histoire Naturelle) 

  • Like 1
  • Wow! 2

image.png.b8c74f56d5551c745119c268cf9d3db8.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, A Phoenix said:

MICHAEL BLANDING

NORTH BY SHAKESPEARE A ROGUE SCHOLARS QUEST FOR THE TRUTH BEHIND THE BARDS WORK

In the last few years the self-taught scholar Dennis McCarthy has received an enormous amount of publicity through his work recently republished in paperback with the dubious title Thomas North: The Original Author of Shakespeare's Plays which ‘has garnered worldwide attention (including coverage in The New York Times, The Guardian, Time Magazine, Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe MagazineU.S. News, etc).’. The central contention of his celebrated book is that Thomas North (1535-1603), the supposed translator of Plutarchs Lives, wrote more than thirty plays largely for the Earl of Leicester’s acting company, which were later adapted and reworked by William Shakespeare (i.e., William Shakspere of Stratford) in the 1590s and early 1600s.

In addition to all the world-wide publicity McCarthy has also received the accolade of a supporting full-length work by the acclaimed and prize-winning author and journalist Michael Blanding in a book also bearing a somewhat misleading and disingenuous title North by Shakespeare: A Rogue Scholars Quest for the Truth Behind the Bards Works winner (under a slightly different title) of the 2021 International Book Award in Narrative Non-Fiction.

On its side sleeve we are informed that its author Blanding:

presents the twinning narratives of renegade scholar Dennis McCarthy, called “the Steve Job of the Shakespeare community,” and Sir Thomas North, an Elizabethan courtier whom McCarthy believes to be the undiscovered source for Shakespeare’s plays. For the last fifteen years, McCarthy has obsessively pursued the true origin of Shakespeare’s works. Using plagiarism software, he has found direct links between Hamlet, Macbeth, Romeo and Juliet, and other plays and North’s published and unpublished writings-as well as Shakespearean plotlines seemingly lifted straight from North’s colourful life.

Unlike those who believe someone else secretly wrote Shakespeare’s works, McCarthy proposes a wholly original explanation: Shakespeare wrote the plays, but he adapted them from sources written by North decades before. Many of them, he believes, were penned on behalf of North’s patron Robert Dudley in his efforts to woo Queen Elizabeth.

For the purposes of facilitating the fundamentally flawed twinning narratives of his progenitor Dennis McCarthy and his own good self, Blanding in briefly and superficially addressing the long-held conviction that Bacon wrote the Shakespeare works, inadvertently and embarrassingly exposed his own limitations.

Blanding commences the story of how he says the first doubts about the authorship started in the mid-1800s via the writings of Delia Bacon.1 This should have immediately alerted and alarmed any reasonably well-informed Shakespeare authorship scholar. The doubts about the authorship of the Shakespeare poems and plays began almost immediately after the publication of Venus and Adonis (1593) and The Rape of Lucrece (1594), perhaps most notably by writer and satirist Joseph Hall, (later Bishop of Norwich) and the poet and playwright John Martson, who through a series of satiric works published from 1597 to 1599 identify Bacon as the secret author of the Shakespeare poems.2 As Blanding tells it, when Delia Bacon died the baton was taken up in The Great Cryptogram (1888) by Ignatius Donnelly, a work debunked by the Friedmans.3 His two-volume work was followed by ‘a stampede of other writers sleuthing out increasingly more fantastical messages hidden in the plays’.4 Now adopting a more sarcastic and disparaging tone he tells how the American Dr Orville Ward Owen created a machine with two reels over which he stretched the text of Shakespeare. Using the word cipher system referred to by Bacon in The Advancement of Learning and De Augmentis Scientiarum it revealed a ‘sordid tale’ that Bacon was the concealed son of Queen Elizabeth and Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester and the heir to the throne, but the Elizabeth was strangled to death by Sir Robert Cecil before she could reveal the truth.5 Blanding then undercuts and misrepresents the endeavours of William Stone Booth who identified anagrammatic and acrostic signatures spelling out the name of Francis Bacon and then came along Mark Twain who in 1909 published Is Shakespeare Dead? ‘peppered with Twain’s trademark sarcasm.’6 Self-satisfied with his truncated deprecating two page history of Baconian scholarship which for some inexplicable reason went no further than 1909 he mistakenly states that ‘by now, Francis Bacon was already falling out of favor as a Ghost writer for Shakespeare.’7 By way of a grandstanding conclusion for the purposes of summarily dismissing Bacon, Blanding hands down what he believes are three decisive facts and reasons why Bacon could never and did not write the Shakespeare poems and plays, which I here quote in full:

Despite his obvious talents, he had never been to Italy, wrote with a ponderous prose style, and was insanely busy with all his other duties.8

His triple lock cruelly revealed that Blanding was clearly unfamiliar with Bacon’s life and writings and knew even less about the mountainous and irrefutable evidence that Bacon is Shakespeare. As a starting point, he might have done well to familiarise himself with Spedding’s standard fourteen volume edition of The Life and Writings of Francis Bacon, and to arrive at a better informed understanding of his authorship of the Shakespeare works, the scores of Baconian full-length works and hundreds of articles written to that effect.

1] Bacon never went to Italy.

For four hundred years orthodox Bacon biographers have continued to insist that Bacon only travelled abroad to France for three years from 1576 to 1579 and nowhere else. The main reason this lie/falsehood has been maintained to the present day is because of the secrecy surrounding his life and in particular his authorship of the Shakespeare works. Especially regarding whether Bacon ever travelled to Italy because self-evidently the author of the Shakespeare works had a profound fascination with the country, its history, its language and its people. Twelve or thirteen of the Shakespeare plays are set or partly located in Italy: The Two Gentlemen of Verona, The Taming of the Shrew, Titus Andronicus, Romeo and Juliet, A Midsummer Nights Dream, The Merchant of Venice, Much Ado About Nothing, Julius Caesar, Othello, Alls Well That Ends Well, Coriolanus, The Winters Tale, and The Tempest. His mother Lady Anne Cooke Bacon was an Italophile, lover all things Italian and fluent in the Italian language from which she translated the sermons of the Sienese preacher Bernardino Ochino.9 His mother passed on her love of Italy and taught Bacon the Italian language which he put to good effect in reading the many Italian sources for his Shakespeare plays. He also travelled to the country for which he so clearly had such a love and an all-consuming passion. How do we know this? Because we are told so by his first biographer Pierre Amboise who given the intimacy of his account must have known Bacon (some have suggested that it was even written by Bacon himself):

Bacon himself wished to acquire that knowledge which in former times made Ulysses so commendable, and earned for him the name of Wise; by the study of the manners of many different countries. I wish to state that he employed some years of his youth in travel in order to polish his mind and to mould his opinion by intercourse with all kinds of foreigners. France, Italy, and Spain, as the most civilised of the whole world, were those whither his desire for knowledge (curiosite) carried him.10

1. Michael Blanding, North by Shakespeare: A Rogue Scholars Quest for the Truth Behind the Bards Works (New York: Hachette Books, 2021), p. 134.

2. See W. Begley, Is It Shakespeare? The Great Question Of Elizabethan Literature. Answered In The Light Of New Revelations And Important Contemporary Evidence Hitherto Unnoticed (London: John Murray, 1903), pp. 1-31 and Basil E. Lawrence, Notes On the Authorship Of The Shakespeare Poems And Plays (London: Gay and Hancock, 1925), pp. 76-107.

3. Michael Blanding, North by Shakespeare: A Rogue Scholars Quest for the Truth Behind the Bards Works (New York: Hachette Books, 2021), pp. 134-35. See A. Phoenix, The Fraudulent Friedmans: The Bacon Ciphers in the Shakespeare Works (2022) for a detailed and thorough account of how the Friedmans secretly knew Bacon wrote the Shakespeare poems and plays and lied to the world about the presence of Baconian ciphers in the Shakespeare works.

4.  Michael Blanding, North by Shakespeare: A Rogue Scholars Quest for the Truth Behind the Bards Works (New York: Hachette Books, 2021), p. 135.

5. Ibid., p. 135.

6. Ibid., p. 135.

7. Ibid., p. 136.

8. Ibid., p. 136.

9. Anne Cooke, trans. Sermons of Barnandine Ochino of Sena, Godlye, frutefull, and very necessarye for all true Christians translated out of Italian into Englishe (London: R. Car for W. Reddell, 1548); Anne Cooke, trans. Fouretene sermons of Barnardine Ochyne, concernynge the predestinacion and eleccion of god: very expediente to the settynge forth of hys glory among hys creatures. Translated out of Italian in to oure natyue tounge by A. C. (London: John Day and William Seres 1550-1?); Anne Cooke, and Argentine, Richard, trans. Certayne Sermons of the ryghte famous and excellent clerk. B. Ochine (London: John Day 1551?);Anne Cooke, trans. Sermons of Bernardine Ochine (to the number of 25) Concerning the Predestination and Election of God Translated out of the Italian in to oure natyue tounge by  A. C. (London: John Day, 1570?)

10. Pierre Amboise, Histoire Natvrelle De Mre Francois Bacon, Baron de Verulam, Vicomtede sainct Alban, & Chancelier dAngleterre (A Paris, Chez Antoine De Sommaville & Andre Sovbron, affociez, au Palais dans la petite Salle, 1631), pp. 1-26; Granville C. Cunningham, trans., ‘A New Life Of Lord Bacon’, Baconiana, Vol. IV, No. 14 (Third Series), April, 1906, p. 74.

 

2] Bacon was insanely busy with all his other duties.

image.png.98d50fe01e413d0901e27752b035ee23.png

 3] Despite his obvious talents Bacon wrote with a ponderous prose style thus he was not Shakespeare

image.png.d9c7dbcdd76d4a2d0f70e5dba4eeccd9.png

image.png.f2c962472e1e30fb143f913462066fa9.png

image.png.e007b9f73b091410e017b12dd0754b7e.png

image.png.db0413f0392a5a827129df87689d2c42.png

image.png.b44ff1e026f18863ff8031a3f1a47383.png

image.png.838920c5cc8cc7989d81fd5796ddf01a.png

image.png.a15cc220a6ec1a0ca1890f486b482d2a.png

 

Wowwwweee! Now that's what I call a rebuttal. Thank you A.P. for being a never-ending source of Bacon-Shakespeare knowledge. So much to digest, explore, respond to.

Gervinus was new to me so I looked up the reference you gave. What a fine writer, except that he can't see the wood for the trees. It's actually quite funny how he nails so many parallels between the Shakespeare plays and Francis Bacon's writings, yet can't bring himself to make the obvious leap - that they are one and the same person.

In the final paragraph of the section on Bacon and Shakespeare, he brings in Aristotle's maxim that "virtue lies in the just medium between two extremes" without mentioning the Bacon family motto. I haven't read any of his meditations on the plays, but I suspect they are more interesting than many other attempts to penetrate the mind of SFB.

ScreenShot2023-11-19at9_09_58pm.png.105cb26463105a35615cd019a2554546.png

ScreenShot2023-11-19at9_09_36pm.png.097ecbed92c7b1e6aa92facd02b5799a.png

https://archive.org/details/shakespearecomme00gervuoft/page/884/mode/2up?view=theater (Vol. 2)

https://archive.org/details/shakespearecomme02gerv/page/n3/mode/2up (Vol. 1)

A long, thoughtful, critical review of "North by Shakespeare": https://shakespeareoxfordfellowship.org/blanding-north-hyde-review/

This quote says it all for me:

McCarthy says of Thomas North, “He is Hamlet as much as J. D. Salinger is Holden Caulfield” 

Edited by Eric Roberts
  • Like 1
  • Wow! 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Eric,

Thank you.

What if Gervinus and other modern scholars were/are secret members of Lord Bacon's Rosicrucian Brotherhood masquerading in public as orthodox Shakespeare scholars, who in private knew or know the Truth about his secret life and writings, including his authorship of the Shakespeare works, but are sworn to strict secrecy not to reveal it, until the invisible directors of the RC Brotherhood decide to finally reveal it to the world?   

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

3 minutes ago, A Phoenix said:

Hi Eric,

Thank you.

What if Gervinus and other modern scholars were/are secret members of Lord Bacon's Rosicrucian Brotherhood masquerading in public as orthodox Shakespeare scholars, who in private knew or know the Truth about his secret life and writings, including his authorship of the Shakespeare works, but are sworn to strict secrecy not to reveal it, until the invisible directors of the RC Brotherhood decide to finally reveal it to the world?   

Hi A Phoenix. That is a very interesting conjecture. If it is as you suggest, conditions on Earth are unlikely to improve in our lifetimes. If not now, when is the ideal moment?

We could all do with some mind-altering revelations to shake us out of our belligerent selfishness (as a species, I mean). I liked Gervinus's epithet for Bacon: "renovator".

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Eric,

We all know here on B'Hive that Lord Bacon left numerous contemporaneous clues to posterity about his secret life and writings (historical evidence, manuscripts, documents, textual clues and hints, frontispieces, headpieces, tail-pieces, anagrams, acrostics, ciphers, and other cryptic devices, etc) and down the centuries there has also been some so-called discoveries or disclosures (methods of delivery), for example the so-called Northumberland Manuscript originally containing his two Shakespeare plays Richard II and Richard III, and the Promus (private note-book) the source of hundreds of resemblances, correspondences and parallels found throughout the Shakespeare canon, and so on, all pointing to revelation by slow degree.  As if working towards some kind of divine plan or timetable for a full disclosure. We know from Lord Bacon and his Rosicrucian Brotherhood that he/they originally planned in some far off distant future to reveal to the world the Truth, as stated around the emblem on the title page of the New Atlantis (or, The Land of the Rosicrucians😞

                                                                                                   IN THE END THE HIDDEN TRUTH WILL BE REVEALED. 

The question is when.

 

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

  • 2 months later...

THE IGNORANCE AND DELUSIONS OF ALEXANDER WAUGH

POST BY LAWRENCE GERALD UNDERNEATH THE VIDEO ‘Ben Jonson’s Discoveries Discovered!’ BY ALEXANDER WAUGH

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O60uYDKTqJ0&lc=UgyXRMj-S8rylzmz9R54AaABAg.A-ALiCz6u6SA-khxlGYki-

In the months following Francis Bacon’s death his trusted Rosicrucian Brother Dr William Rawley gathered together and quietly issued a commemorative work in his honour entitled Memoriae honoratissimi Domini Francisci, Baronis de Verulamio, vice-comitis Sancti Albani sacrum. This rare and still virtually unknown work contains thirty-two Latin verses in praise of Bacon, which his orthodox editors and biographers have simply glossed over, ignored, or suppressed, that portray Bacon as a secret supreme poet and dramatist, the writer of comedies and tragedies, under the pseudonym of Shakespeare. Secret Bacon-Shakespeare Links - Bacon Verses, Shakespeare First Folio & The Stratford Monument

REPLY TO LAWRENCE GERALD BY ALEXANDER WAUGH:

The document you cite is not ‘virtually unknown’. Pretty well every researching authorship skeptic is aware of it; nor does it ‘portray Bacon as a secret supreme poet and dramatist, the writer of comedies and tragedies, under the pseudonym Shakespeare’ as you claim. That is a wild stretch. If you do not take my word for it you should at least read Baconian scholar, N. B. Cockburn’s, exhaustive study entitled ‘The Bacon Shakespeare Question: The Baconian Theory made Sane’ in which he dismisses your claims as ‘a topic on which the Baconians, mistakenly, set great store’, taking each reference in turn and demonstrating clearly why his Baconian confreres are wrong (see pp. 713-716). The monotonous-voiced YouTube link you posted proves nothing. She was the one who refused my application to become a life member of the Francis Bacon Society. Her standard of scholarship is even feebler than that of Stanley Wells.

REPLY TO ALEXANDER WAUGH:

As stated, the Memoriae is virtually unknown. For reasons that should be obvious it is rarely referred to or discussed by orthodox Shakespeare scholars and is also unfamiliar to Shakespeare Authorship Doubters. Regarding your comments ‘pretty well every researching authorship skeptic is aware of it’: firstly, could you please provide evidence to support your statement; secondly, if by this you mean virtually every Oxfordians, et al, is aware of it or has heard of the title of the work, I assume that being aware of a work or having heard of its title passes for serious scholarship in Oxfordian circles. Or thirdly, could you please provide a list of say half-a-dozen Oxfordians who have thoroughly examined and critically evaluated the Memoriae, in fact, might you even direct me to one full-length book, or even a single detailed academic paper by any Oxfordian on the subject. 

You suggest that I/we read Baconian scholar, N. B. Cockburn’s, exhaustive study entitled The Bacon Shakespeare Question: The Baconian Theory made Sane ‘in which he dismisses your claims as “a topic on which the Baconians, mistakenly, set great store”, taking each reference in turn and demonstrating clearly why his Baconian confreres are wrong (see pp. 713-716).’ Firstly, I am very familiar with N. B. Cockburn’s excellent work, but I have no doubt that Cockburn (or any other serious scholar) would not describe his three page discussion as exhaustive, not least because no work is, or ever can be exhaustive. There is a significant amount of material included in the 277-page work on the Memoriae by A. Phoenix published in 2024 not known to Cockburn in a work published twenty-six years earlier in 1998. In light of the new material with the benefit of the full scholarly apparatus supporting it, I think the fair, open-minded and judicious scholar we all know and admire N. B. Cockburn to have been, would most likely have taken time to revisit the Memoriae and after critically evaluating all the evidence and information with the additional benefit of four English translations, which would have probably led him to revise and amend his opinion.     

You refer to the monotonous-voiced YouTube link ‘which proves nothing’ by this I take it you mean the 26-minute video posted on YouTube. This unfortunately reveals another regrettable aspect that passes for Oxfordian scholarship. You show no evidence of having read the 277-page groundbreaking work by A. Phoenix, The Secret Links Between the Rosicrucian-Freemasonic Memoriae (1626) Containing Thirty-Two Verses Dedicated To Francis Bacon Our Shakespeare, The First Folio of the Shakespeare Works (1623), and the Stratford Monument published on 22 January 2024.  It seems that Oxfordians possess powers that elude Baconians and all other serious scholars, whereby not even having read a work, you somehow by some kind of divine or magical prowess, know what it contains and similarly without being aware of all the relevant, historical research, evidence, and facts, are able to ignore and dismiss it.  

If you had read the above full-length work with an open and impartial mindset you would be aware that the 32 verses in the Memoriae do collectively portray Bacon as a supreme poet and dramatist, the writer of comedies and tragedies, under the pseudonym Shakespeare. But here lies the rub. You are simply faced with two choices. You either accept the unmistakable import of the Memoriae revealing and confirming that Bacon is the secret author of the Shakespeare works and the enormous implications which flow from it; or, choose to ignore, misrepresent or dismiss, a contemporary 1626 work which at a single devastating stroke demolishes your whole lifetime work pursuing the Oxfordian delusion, the Oxfordian equivalent of Turkeys voting for Christmas.   

Bizarrely, you state in reference to the ‘monotonous-voiced YouTube link’ that ‘She was the one who refused my application to become a life member of the Francis Bacon Society.’ Here your grasp of basic facts, misidentification, and chronology is beyond embarrassing, and to be honest, is frankly shocking. The ‘she’ who refused your application in 2020 is a completely different ‘she’ to the narrator of the 2024 video!    

Waugh concludes with: ‘Her standard of scholarship is even feebler than that of Stanley Wells’.

This statement reveals the full extent of the ignorance of Alexander Waugh and the Oxfordian movement, more or less as a whole, of which he is seen as a leading light, who I have no doubt is not aware of, and has certainly not read, the large body of works produced by A. Phoenix. 

In a little over three years this output includes 4 heavily researched and referenced full-length books, 32 heavily researched and referenced academic papers, amounting to several thousand pages, fifty-six videos, and more than 3,400 posts on B’Hive.    

https://aphoenix1.academia.edu/research

https://www.youtube.com/@baconisshakespeare/videos

https://sirbacon.org/bacon-forum/

  • Like 2
  • Wow! 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/14/2024 at 1:59 PM, Lawrence Gerald said:

Tremendous AP. Thank You! The pugnacious bull in the china shop will have his rejoinder soon.

I posted a comment at the youtube page, and I saw it up, but the next time I looked, it was not there, so had apparently been taken down. What I said was that even the most fair-minded and judicious people can have blind spots, and that the real significance of N. B. Cockburn's 740-page book, The Bacon Shakespeare Question: The Baconian Question Made Sane, was that he tried to cover the whole scope of the case for Bacon's authorship of Shakespeare--what he considered the chief points, as the case existed in 1998, in one book. I might add that, being a barrister, he probably gravitated more towards arguments that could be proven with concrete facts, as in a court of law, rather than towards opinion-based evidence. Even if he didn't say so explicitly, that could be one reason he put the Manes Verulumiani in an appendix.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/15/2024 at 3:49 AM, A Phoenix said:

THE IGNORANCE AND DELUSIONS OF ALEXANDER WAUGH

POST BY LAWRENCE GERALD UNDERNEATH THE VIDEO ‘Ben Jonson’s Discoveries Discovered!’ BY ALEXANDER WAUGH

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O60uYDKTqJ0&lc=UgyXRMj-S8rylzmz9R54AaABAg.A-ALiCz6u6SA-khxlGYki-

In the months following Francis Bacon’s death his trusted Rosicrucian Brother Dr William Rawley gathered together and quietly issued a commemorative work in his honour entitled Memoriae honoratissimi Domini Francisci, Baronis de Verulamio, vice-comitis Sancti Albani sacrum. This rare and still virtually unknown work contains thirty-two Latin verses in praise of Bacon, which his orthodox editors and biographers have simply glossed over, ignored, or suppressed, that portray Bacon as a secret supreme poet and dramatist, the writer of comedies and tragedies, under the pseudonym of Shakespeare. Secret Bacon-Shakespeare Links - Bacon Verses, Shakespeare First Folio & The Stratford Monument

REPLY TO LAWRENCE GERALD BY ALEXANDER WAUGH:

The document you cite is not ‘virtually unknown’. Pretty well every researching authorship skeptic is aware of it; nor does it ‘portray Bacon as a secret supreme poet and dramatist, the writer of comedies and tragedies, under the pseudonym Shakespeare’ as you claim. That is a wild stretch. If you do not take my word for it you should at least read Baconian scholar, N. B. Cockburn’s, exhaustive study entitled ‘The Bacon Shakespeare Question: The Baconian Theory made Sane’ in which he dismisses your claims as ‘a topic on which the Baconians, mistakenly, set great store’, taking each reference in turn and demonstrating clearly why his Baconian confreres are wrong (see pp. 713-716). The monotonous-voiced YouTube link you posted proves nothing. She was the one who refused my application to become a life member of the Francis Bacon Society. Her standard of scholarship is even feebler than that of Stanley Wells.

REPLY TO ALEXANDER WAUGH:

As stated, the Memoriae is virtually unknown. For reasons that should be obvious it is rarely referred to or discussed by orthodox Shakespeare scholars and is also unfamiliar to Shakespeare Authorship Doubters. Regarding your comments ‘pretty well every researching authorship skeptic is aware of it’: firstly, could you please provide evidence to support your statement; secondly, if by this you mean virtually every Oxfordians, et al, is aware of it or has heard of the title of the work, I assume that being aware of a work or having heard of its title passes for serious scholarship in Oxfordian circles. Or thirdly, could you please provide a list of say half-a-dozen Oxfordians who have thoroughly examined and critically evaluated the Memoriae, in fact, might you even direct me to one full-length book, or even a single detailed academic paper by any Oxfordian on the subject. 

You suggest that I/we read Baconian scholar, N. B. Cockburn’s, exhaustive study entitled The Bacon Shakespeare Question: The Baconian Theory made Sane ‘in which he dismisses your claims as “a topic on which the Baconians, mistakenly, set great store”, taking each reference in turn and demonstrating clearly why his Baconian confreres are wrong (see pp. 713-716).’ Firstly, I am very familiar with N. B. Cockburn’s excellent work, but I have no doubt that Cockburn (or any other serious scholar) would not describe his three page discussion as exhaustive, not least because no work is, or ever can be exhaustive. There is a significant amount of material included in the 277-page work on the Memoriae by A. Phoenix published in 2024 not known to Cockburn in a work published twenty-six years earlier in 1998. In light of the new material with the benefit of the full scholarly apparatus supporting it, I think the fair, open-minded and judicious scholar we all know and admire N. B. Cockburn to have been, would most likely have taken time to revisit the Memoriae and after critically evaluating all the evidence and information with the additional benefit of four English translations, which would have probably led him to revise and amend his opinion.     

You refer to the monotonous-voiced YouTube link ‘which proves nothing’ by this I take it you mean the 26-minute video posted on YouTube. This unfortunately reveals another regrettable aspect that passes for Oxfordian scholarship. You show no evidence of having read the 277-page groundbreaking work by A. Phoenix, The Secret Links Between the Rosicrucian-Freemasonic Memoriae (1626) Containing Thirty-Two Verses Dedicated To Francis Bacon Our Shakespeare, The First Folio of the Shakespeare Works (1623), and the Stratford Monument published on 22 January 2024.  It seems that Oxfordians possess powers that elude Baconians and all other serious scholars, whereby not even having read a work, you somehow by some kind of divine or magical prowess, know what it contains and similarly without being aware of all the relevant, historical research, evidence, and facts, are able to ignore and dismiss it.  

If you had read the above full-length work with an open and impartial mindset you would be aware that the 32 verses in the Memoriae do collectively portray Bacon as a supreme poet and dramatist, the writer of comedies and tragedies, under the pseudonym Shakespeare. But here lies the rub. You are simply faced with two choices. You either accept the unmistakable import of the Memorie revealing and confirming that Bacon is the secret author of the Shakespeare works and the enormous implications which flow from it; or, choose to ignore, misrepresent or dismiss, a contemporary 1626 work which at a single devastating stroke demolishes your whole lifetime work pursuing the Oxfordian delusion, the Oxfordian equivalent of Turkeys voting for Christmas.   

Bizarrely, you state in reference to the ‘monotonous-voiced YouTube link’ that ‘She was the one who refused my application to become a life member of the Francis Bacon Society.’ Here your grasp of basic facts, misidentification, and chronology is beyond embarrassing, and to be honest, is frankly shocking. The ‘she’ who refused your application in 2020 is a completely different ‘she’ to the narrator of the 2024 video!    

Waugh concludes with: ‘Her standard of scholarship is even feebler than that of Stanley Wells’.

This statement reveals the full extent of the ignorance of Alexander Waugh and the Oxfordian movement, more or less as a whole, of which he is seen as a leading light, who I have no doubt is not aware of, and has certainly not read, the large body of works produced by A. Phoenix. 

In a little over three years this output includes 4 heavily researched and referenced full-length books, 32 heavily researched and referenced academic papers, amounting to several thousand pages, fifty-six videos, and more than 3,400 posts on B’Hive.    

https://aphoenix1.academia.edu/research

https://www.youtube.com/@baconisshakespeare/videos

https://sirbacon.org/bacon-forum/

 

To Lawrence

 

It would be remiss of us to let your riposte, your broadside, your lethal blow to that bastion of Oxfordian baloney, Alexander Waugh, to pass without comment.

You blew him out of the water. Remind me to never go bowling with you. Your strike ratio is out of my league. Seriously on behalf of all of us, very well done!

As of yesterday, no reply from Waughsie was forthcoming. 

 

P.S. I had to look up the meaning of the phrase "like turkeys voting for Christmas" as I'd not heard it before. Once I got your gist, I considered photoshopping waugh's head onto a turkey's body, but then I realised it would be an insult to turkeys everywhere.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Eric Roberts
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/14/2024 at 5:49 PM, A Phoenix said:

THE IGNORANCE AND DELUSIONS OF ALEXANDER WAUGH

POST BY LAWRENCE GERALD UNDERNEATH THE VIDEO ‘Ben Jonson’s Discoveries Discovered!’ BY ALEXANDER WAUGH

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O60uYDKTqJ0&lc=UgyXRMj-S8rylzmz9R54AaABAg.A-ALiCz6u6SA-khxlGYki-

In the months following Francis Bacon’s death his trusted Rosicrucian Brother Dr William Rawley gathered together and quietly issued a commemorative work in his honour entitled Memoriae honoratissimi Domini Francisci, Baronis de Verulamio, vice-comitis Sancti Albani sacrum. This rare and still virtually unknown work contains thirty-two Latin verses in praise of Bacon, which his orthodox editors and biographers have simply glossed over, ignored, or suppressed, that portray Bacon as a secret supreme poet and dramatist, the writer of comedies and tragedies, under the pseudonym of Shakespeare. Secret Bacon-Shakespeare Links - Bacon Verses, Shakespeare First Folio & The Stratford Monument

REPLY TO LAWRENCE GERALD BY ALEXANDER WAUGH:

The document you cite is not ‘virtually unknown’. Pretty well every researching authorship skeptic is aware of it; nor does it ‘portray Bacon as a secret supreme poet and dramatist, the writer of comedies and tragedies, under the pseudonym Shakespeare’ as you claim. That is a wild stretch. If you do not take my word for it you should at least read Baconian scholar, N. B. Cockburn’s, exhaustive study entitled ‘The Bacon Shakespeare Question: The Baconian Theory made Sane’ in which he dismisses your claims as ‘a topic on which the Baconians, mistakenly, set great store’, taking each reference in turn and demonstrating clearly why his Baconian confreres are wrong (see pp. 713-716). The monotonous-voiced YouTube link you posted proves nothing. She was the one who refused my application to become a life member of the Francis Bacon Society. Her standard of scholarship is even feebler than that of Stanley Wells.

REPLY TO ALEXANDER WAUGH:

As stated, the Memoriae is virtually unknown. For reasons that should be obvious it is rarely referred to or discussed by orthodox Shakespeare scholars and is also unfamiliar to Shakespeare Authorship Doubters. Regarding your comments ‘pretty well every researching authorship skeptic is aware of it’: firstly, could you please provide evidence to support your statement; secondly, if by this you mean virtually every Oxfordians, et al, is aware of it or has heard of the title of the work, I assume that being aware of a work or having heard of its title passes for serious scholarship in Oxfordian circles. Or thirdly, could you please provide a list of say half-a-dozen Oxfordians who have thoroughly examined and critically evaluated the Memoriae, in fact, might you even direct me to one full-length book, or even a single detailed academic paper by any Oxfordian on the subject. 

You suggest that I/we read Baconian scholar, N. B. Cockburn’s, exhaustive study entitled The Bacon Shakespeare Question: The Baconian Theory made Sane ‘in which he dismisses your claims as “a topic on which the Baconians, mistakenly, set great store”, taking each reference in turn and demonstrating clearly why his Baconian confreres are wrong (see pp. 713-716).’ Firstly, I am very familiar with N. B. Cockburn’s excellent work, but I have no doubt that Cockburn (or any other serious scholar) would not describe his three page discussion as exhaustive, not least because no work is, or ever can be exhaustive. There is a significant amount of material included in the 277-page work on the Memoriae by A. Phoenix published in 2024 not known to Cockburn in a work published twenty-six years earlier in 1998. In light of the new material with the benefit of the full scholarly apparatus supporting it, I think the fair, open-minded and judicious scholar we all know and admire N. B. Cockburn to have been, would most likely have taken time to revisit the Memoriae and after critically evaluating all the evidence and information with the additional benefit of four English translations, which would have probably led him to revise and amend his opinion.     

You refer to the monotonous-voiced YouTube link ‘which proves nothing’ by this I take it you mean the 26-minute video posted on YouTube. This unfortunately reveals another regrettable aspect that passes for Oxfordian scholarship. You show no evidence of having read the 277-page groundbreaking work by A. Phoenix, The Secret Links Between the Rosicrucian-Freemasonic Memoriae (1626) Containing Thirty-Two Verses Dedicated To Francis Bacon Our Shakespeare, The First Folio of the Shakespeare Works (1623), and the Stratford Monument published on 22 January 2024.  It seems that Oxfordians possess powers that elude Baconians and all other serious scholars, whereby not even having read a work, you somehow by some kind of divine or magical prowess, know what it contains and similarly without being aware of all the relevant, historical research, evidence, and facts, are able to ignore and dismiss it.  

If you had read the above full-length work with an open and impartial mindset you would be aware that the 32 verses in the Memoriae do collectively portray Bacon as a supreme poet and dramatist, the writer of comedies and tragedies, under the pseudonym Shakespeare. But here lies the rub. You are simply faced with two choices. You either accept the unmistakable import of the Memoriae revealing and confirming that Bacon is the secret author of the Shakespeare works and the enormous implications which flow from it; or, choose to ignore, misrepresent or dismiss, a contemporary 1626 work which at a single devastating stroke demolishes your whole lifetime work pursuing the Oxfordian delusion, the Oxfordian equivalent of Turkeys voting for Christmas.   

Bizarrely, you state in reference to the ‘monotonous-voiced YouTube link’ that ‘She was the one who refused my application to become a life member of the Francis Bacon Society.’ Here your grasp of basic facts, misidentification, and chronology is beyond embarrassing, and to be honest, is frankly shocking. The ‘she’ who refused your application in 2020 is a completely different ‘she’ to the narrator of the 2024 video!    

Waugh concludes with: ‘Her standard of scholarship is even feebler than that of Stanley Wells’.

This statement reveals the full extent of the ignorance of Alexander Waugh and the Oxfordian movement, more or less as a whole, of which he is seen as a leading light, who I have no doubt is not aware of, and has certainly not read, the large body of works produced by A. Phoenix. 

In a little over three years this output includes 4 heavily researched and referenced full-length books, 32 heavily researched and referenced academic papers, amounting to several thousand pages, fifty-six videos, and more than 3,400 posts on B’Hive.    

https://aphoenix1.academia.edu/research

https://www.youtube.com/@baconisshakespeare/videos

https://sirbacon.org/bacon-forum/

So there's obviously this ongoing belief that has spread around that AP is one and the same person as narrates.  Again, for anyone reading from the outside, I can categorically confirm that they are a team, and AP is a man. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

 "For nothing is born without unity or without the point." amazon.com/dp/B0CLDKDPY8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Eric Roberts said:

 

To Lawrence

 

It would be remiss of us to let your riposte, your broadside, your lethal blow to that bastion of Oxfordian baloney, Alexander Waugh, to pass without comment.

You blew him out of the water. Remind me to never go bowling with you. Your strike ratio is out of my league. Seriously on behalf of all of us, very well done!

As of yesterday, no reply from Waughsie was forthcoming. 

 

P.S. I had to look up the meaning of the phrase "like turkeys voting for Christmas" as I'd not heard it before. Once I got your gist, I considered photoshopping waugh's head onto a turkey's body, but then I realised it would be an insult to turkeys everywhere.

 

 

 

 

 

Thank You Eric but credit should all be given to AP who I asked for support and he delivered the turkeys for christmas! Does this mean we can still go bowling sir?

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/16/2024 at 1:49 PM, Christie Waldman said:

I posted a comment at the youtube page, and I saw it up, but the next time I looked, it was not there, so had apparently been taken down. What I said was that even the most fair-minded and judicious people can have blind spots, and that the real significance of N. B. Cockburn's 740-page book, The Bacon Shakespeare Question: The Baconian Question Made Sane, was that he tried to cover the whole scope of the case for Bacon's authorship of Shakespeare--what he considered the chief points, as the case existed in 1998, in one book. I might add that, being a barrister, he probably gravitated more towards arguments that could be proven with concrete facts, as in a court of law, rather than towards opinion-based evidence. Even if he didn't say so explicitly, that could be one reason he put the Manes Verulumiani in an appendix.

Christie, if you do a Newest First on the Sort by logo your comment is still there.

Even "fair, open-minded and judicious scholars" may have blind spots. Reasonable minds can differ on matters of opinion. What British barrister N. B. Cockburn's book does in his 740-page book is try to set out fully the strongest points in the case for Bacon, as he saw them, 26 years ago. Cockburn considered only 4 of the 32 elegies in his appendix. I am surprised you were able to find a copy of Cockburn's book; it is so rare.  @alexanderwaugh7036 
  • Like 4
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
×
×
  • Create New...