Jump to content

The Smoking Gun of the True Authorship of the Shakespeare Works - Francis Bacon and his Unique Copy of the 1587 edition of Holinshed’s Chronicles with Marginal Annotations in his own hand alongside passages used for his Shakespeare Plays


A Phoenix

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, A Phoenix said:

Hi Kate,

Very intriguing - here's our photo of it from the book, this should be a bit easier to see.

Hol.jpg

 

Any suggestions as to the significance of the thrice repeated symbol of the two interpenetrating hearts (cf. Star of David) with eight circles or hearts enclosed within the borders formed by a continuous line?

ScreenShot2024-01-03at8_00_22am.png.438df072b9af93cf6623acf44d3c1de7.pngScreenShot2024-01-03at8_01_17am.png.180dcb9c2b6e62cf98074ef4a05f74a2.pngScreenShot2024-01-03at8_02_19am.png.bdd46ac420f2f0b76820aa73c6e8d393.png

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

As for any talk of a smoking gun here, it's more of a smoldering ember for the Bacon as Shakespeare case. There is no logic that correctly get us from knowing Shakespeare did not author ANY of the plays to having Bacon be the author of the entire works. If anything, more fuel to the suggestion that this was the work of many people who may have been in a circle around Bacon is being added. This is something that many people have suspected.  The fellow from Stratford-Upon-Avon was simply not up to it as an intellectual. The fact that his children were illiterate gives us some sense of how much he valued the acquisition of knowledge in his own household.

The "smoldering ember" of the Bacon as "Shakespeare" has not gone out even after 400 years. Think about how many people have poured dirty laundry water on Bacon's life and have peed on his legacy and yet it still has not stopped burning with some Light shining out of some darkness of ignorance and lies.

You nail the fact that Willy's kids were illiterate. That guy was not "Shakespeare", even Strats know it.

Were there a few people involved in "Shakespeare"? Of course. Even if Bacon wrote and edited every single word, there were a ton of people involved. I'm open to the idea of him having some help.

Sonnet 33 to me is Elizabeth's gift to her son Bacon. Sonnet 126 to me is Dee's contribution sealed with 157 and 287. I've not looked for others. What if Anthony wrote one!!

CJ, it appears that Bacon may have been the center of a circle for who or what "Shakespeare" was. For us on the SirBacon.org B'Hive, we are on the page that "Bacon was Shakespeare". That does not have to be one person creating, writing, editing, printing, and publishing the works al alone. Not to mention the engravers.

But when it all boils and reduces down, Bacon was Shakespeare and all his friends knew it. You don't have an argument that Bacon could not have been Shakespeare, you just say it does not matter. For you it does not. For me it does.

A. Phoenix is producing a huge volume of work collected and put together. You can sit on your comfy chair and complain, but it is solid quality no matter how rigid you try to be.

🙂

 

 

  • Wow! 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

5 hours ago, Kate said:

By the way, the author of this blog is Keith Browning if anyone knows who he is? It was written in 2012 and last updated in 2016. He’d be a valuable member here

We never know who hangs out around here. 😉

  • Like 3
  • 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

1 hour ago, Kate said:

IMG_1015.jpeg.b55bfbd1f787634113dbd575e460053d.jpeg

 

We need Rob to work on it. You can see there are words that only come to light when you use certain exposures. I’ve underlined one in red it’s small writing behind the ‘scroll’ - but really I’m no further forward. Sorry.

To me the only Bacon style handwriting I see is this (below). The double small "f's" were used to be an upper case F in that style, if I am correct. Then an "s"? I forget! That giant loop at the bottom is definite letter we do not recognize today. LOL

That is not a crude Francis Bacon, is it? But why would the "c" have such a mark going up so high? Did they do that with a  "c'? Looks like a "d" to me, but I am lost on that beautiful Bacon script.

image.png.72be7f37d84b2a90b04a24144fda007e.png

 

  • Like 1
  • 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

47 minutes ago, Eric Roberts said:

Any suggestions as to the significance of the thrice repeated symbol of the two interpenetrating hearts (cf. Star of David) with eight circles or hearts enclosed within the borders formed by a continuous line?

The 3 > 2 > 3 arrangement is rotated to me being used to modern playing cards. LOL

image.png.8ddfa876d248f81c2763dee343a381c1.png

But now I see two 8's and 11 hearts pointing left and right. LOL

<-- 1881 -->

 

  • 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

1 hour ago, Light-of-Truth said:

To me the only Bacon style handwriting I see is this (below). The double small "f's" were used to be an upper case F in that style, if I am correct. Then an "s"? I forget! That giant loop at the bottom is definite letter we do not recognize today. LOL

That is not a crude Francis Bacon, is it? But why would the "c" have such a mark going up so high? Did they do that with a  "c'? Looks like a "d" to me, but I am lost on that beautiful Bacon script.

image.png.72be7f37d84b2a90b04a24144fda007e.png

 

Me too.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Light-of-Truth said:

The "smoldering ember" of the Bacon as "Shakespeare" has not gone out even after 400 years. Think about how many people have poured dirty laundry water on Bacon's life and have peed on his legacy and yet it still has not stopped burning with some Light shining out of some darkness of ignorance and lies.

You nail the fact that Willy's kids were illiterate. That guy was not "Shakespeare", even Strats know it.

Were there a few people involved in "Shakespeare"? Of course. Even if Bacon wrote and edited every single word, there were a ton of people involved. I'm open to the idea of him having some help.

Sonnet 33 to me is Elizabeth's gift to her son Bacon. Sonnet 126 to me is Dee's contribution sealed with 157 and 287. I've not looked for others. What if Anthony wrote one!!

CJ, it appears that Bacon may have been the center of a circle for who or what "Shakespeare" was. For us on the SirBacon.org B'Hive, we are on the page that "Bacon was Shakespeare". That does not have to be one person creating, writing, editing, printing, and publishing the works al alone. Not to mention the engravers.

But when it all boils and reduces down, Bacon was Shakespeare and all his friends knew it. You don't have an argument that Bacon could not have been Shakespeare, you just say it does not matter. For you it does not. For me it does.

A. Phoenix is producing a huge volume of work collected and put together. You can sit on your comfy chair and complain, but it is solid quality no matter how rigid you try to be.

🙂

 

 

"A. Phoenix is producing a huge volume of work collected and put together. You can sit on your comfy chair and complain, but it is solid quality no matter how rigid you try to be."

Has he read and understood the text in detail before critiquing it?

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Eric Roberts said:

Has he read and understood the text in detail before critiquing it?

In my opinion, based on learning who CJ is, even if he had read and understood every word of A. Phoenix's work, it is not the content that bothers him, it is that we all passionately believe in it. Which we do, all of it. This is our passion. Our own personal ideas are quite varied, but we know who was Shakespeare. We are Baconians and happy to be a part of this.

For CJ and everyone else who may ever read the following statement. I'll try to be brief...

  1. Someone was Shakespeare, and it was not the guy from Avon. Even if it was a bunch of people doing whatever they did, there was a central person who was Worthy.
     
  2. We know that it took a highly coordinated and skilled team to produce Shakespeare and pretty much keep the secret. Maybe it was easier to keep a social or political secret back then. LOL
     
  3. Of anybody, especially anyone who was actually alive and being seen in public during these final years through 1623, Bacon is the primary candidate to be "Shakespeare." He's almost the only one left.
     
  4. And the ciphers, numbers, the hidden lessons and hints left in the Works by every best in their field artist put a candle flame on the Truth.

 

Yes, it may not be important to most of the people on Earth, but to a handful of us who care, it is so very incredibly  important. Bacon very well may have been Shakespeare and we are collecting evidence and presenting the results of our work. A. Phoenix has taken the lead and we are thankful that someone has the time, energy, and resources to produce so much well-researched and documented information about Bacon and his circles. 🙂

 

 

  • Like 2
  • 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

14 hours ago, A Phoenix said:

The Smoking Gun of the True Authorship of the Shakespeare Works - Francis Bacon and his Unique Copy of the 1587 edition of Holinshed’s Chronicles with Marginal Annotations in his own hand alongside passages used for his Shakespeare Plays 

Here's Dr Longworth de Chambrun thanking people who gave her expert advice including The Folger Shakespeare Library.

Chambrun Folger.jpg

ch.jpg

Trailer video link: https://youtu.be/7ylDy8tFiRY

Full video link: https://youtu.be/RPMwkcxLjXo

Paper: https://www.academia.edu/112668316/Francis_Bacon_and_his_Unique_Copy_of_the_1587_edition_of_Holinshed_s_Chronicles_with_Marginal_Annotations_in_his_own_hand_alongside_passages_used_for_his_Shakespeare_Plays_The_Smoking_Gun_of_the_True_Authorship_of_the_Shakespeare_Works

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Light-of-Truth said:

In my opinion, based on learning who CJ is, even if he had read and understood every word of A. Phoenix's work, it is not the content that bothers him, it is that we all passionately believe in it. Which we do, all of it. This is our passion. Our own personal ideas are quite varied, but we know who was Shakespeare. We are Baconians and happy to be a part of this.

For CJ and everyone else who may ever read the following statement. I'll try to be brief...

  1. Someone was Shakespeare, and it was not the guy from Avon. Even if it was a bunch of people doing whatever they did, there was a central person who was Worthy.
     
  2. We know that it took a highly coordinated and skilled team to produce Shakespeare and pretty much keep the secret. Maybe it was easier to keep a social or political secret back then. LOL
     
  3. Of anybody, especially anyone who was actually alive and being seen in public during these final years through 1623, Bacon is the primary candidate to be "Shakespeare." He's almost the only one left.
     
  4. And the ciphers, numbers, the hidden lessons and hints left in the Works by every best in their field artist put a candle flame on the Truth.

 

Yes, it may not be important to most of the people on Earth, but to a handful of us who care, it is so very incredibly  important. Bacon very well may have been Shakespeare and we are collecting evidence and presenting the results of our work. A. Phoenix has taken the lead and we are thankful that someone has the time, energy, and resources to produce so much well-researched and documented information about Bacon and his circles. 🙂

 

 

Excellent points!

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

The Smoking Gun of the True Authorship of the Shakespeare Works - Francis Bacon and his Unique Copy of the 1587 edition of Holinshed’s Chronicles with Marginal Annotations in his own hand alongside passages used for his Shakespeare Plays

 

7.png

Trailer video link: https://youtu.be/7ylDy8tFiRY

Full video link: https://youtu.be/RPMwkcxLjXo

Paper: https://www.academia.edu/112668316/Francis_Bacon_and_his_Unique_Copy_of_the_1587_edition_of_Holinshed_s_Chronicles_with_Marginal_Annotations_in_his_own_hand_alongside_passages_used_for_his_Shakespeare_Plays_The_Smoking_Gun_of_the_True_Authorship_of_the_Shakespeare_Works

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Smoking Gun of the True Authorship of the Shakespeare Works - Francis Bacon and his Unique Copy of the 1587 edition of Holinshed’s Chronicles with Marginal Annotations in his own hand alongside passages used for his Shakespeare Plays

 

8.png

Trailer video link: https://youtu.be/7ylDy8tFiRY

Full video link: https://youtu.be/RPMwkcxLjXo

Paper: https://www.academia.edu/112668316/Francis_Bacon_and_his_Unique_Copy_of_the_1587_edition_of_Holinshed_s_Chronicles_with_Marginal_Annotations_in_his_own_hand_alongside_passages_used_for_his_Shakespeare_Plays_The_Smoking_Gun_of_the_True_Authorship_of_the_Shakespeare_Works

  • Like 3
  • Wow! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Smoking Gun of the True Authorship of the Shakespeare Works - Francis Bacon and his Unique Copy of the 1587 edition of Holinshed’s Chronicles with Marginal Annotations in his own hand alongside passages used for his Shakespeare Plays

9.png

Trailer video link: https://youtu.be/7ylDy8tFiRY

Full video link: https://youtu.be/RPMwkcxLjXo

Paper: https://www.academia.edu/112668316/Francis_Bacon_and_his_Unique_Copy_of_the_1587_edition_of_Holinshed_s_Chronicles_with_Marginal_Annotations_in_his_own_hand_alongside_passages_used_for_his_Shakespeare_Plays_The_Smoking_Gun_of_the_True_Authorship_of_the_Shakespeare_Works

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

17 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

The "smoldering ember" of the Bacon as "Shakespeare" has not gone out even after 400 years. Think about how many people have poured dirty laundry water on Bacon's life and have peed on his legacy and yet it still has not stopped burning with some Light shining out of some darkness of ignorance and lies.

You nail the fact that Willy's kids were illiterate. That guy was not "Shakespeare", even Strats know it.

Were there a few people involved in "Shakespeare"? Of course. Even if Bacon wrote and edited every single word, there were a ton of people involved. I'm open to the idea of him having some help.

Sonnet 33 to me is Elizabeth's gift to her son Bacon. Sonnet 126 to me is Dee's contribution sealed with 157 and 287. I've not looked for others. What if Anthony wrote one!!

CJ, it appears that Bacon may have been the center of a circle for who or what "Shakespeare" was. For us on the SirBacon.org B'Hive, we are on the page that "Bacon was Shakespeare". That does not have to be one person creating, writing, editing, printing, and publishing the works al alone. Not to mention the engravers.

But when it all boils and reduces down, Bacon was Shakespeare and all his friends knew it. You don't have an argument that Bacon could not have been Shakespeare, you just say it does not matter. For you it does not. For me it does.

A. Phoenix is producing a huge volume of work collected and put together. You can sit on your comfy chair and complain, but it is solid quality no matter how rigid you try to be.

🙂

 

 

In the grand scheme of things it does not matter to have the truth be known, because the truth does not matter to most. Lies are more often preferred.  It would be better if a lie continued to be believed than to give license to rewrite history as we'd like to have it (picking an choosing what we prefer) by rallying public opinion in order to have new beliefs and narratives that would not work as well as the stage play that was created to do what was intended. Are you doubting Bacon's wisdom all of a sudden?

I've pointed it our before, but no one here is making any effort to show that Christianity (or Anglicanism) is all a pile of lies and that someone cleverly "wrote" it and passed it on to do social engineering with it.  It is more important for Christians, or Anglicans, that the lies not be challenged, because they see value in the presentation of the allegory as it was given, and because it would be a shameful admission of dishonesty. Same dynamic with Shakespeare. The truth would change the way people interact with the story. Lot's of people suspect that Shakespeare did not write Shakespeare AND don't want the context to be altered to show it was a bunch of ideologues pushing their preferred worldview on the populace they looked down upon as subjects in need of edification.

You're not going to succeed at replacing the suggestion of a man sacrificed like a Passover lamb to atone for your sins (the ancient Jewish celebration of the blood sacrifice applied to the Christian story) by showing there was an elite with intelligent men within Roman society that used existing stories to achieve something in the area of the control of men's thinking (allegedly for all's benefit).  It's too important to too many offshoots of Christianity that this not "come out". Same with Bacon.  He's elite blue blood, bred like an Arabian horse with pedigree, educated to the nth degree and the head a cabal of religiously biased social influencers (if he is that). He would have needed to orchestrate what he did in order that it not be suspected as being top-down issued propaganda. That means that you'd be working against his best efforts to conceal it (again, if that's what happened).

I could not care less what people who are paid/hired or who maintain Trusts to advance certain views produce. Their biases come fully advertised, and that is for them to overcome. Show me instead what the fiercest critics would have to say. I would not swallow the apologetics of anyone trying to defend the Christian narratives. But I do read what the  critics have to say with an eye on also criticizing them. Quite often enough, two opposing factions are both wrong. I also do see the advantages of controlling people with stories. Beliefs that are cherished are maintained that way.

None of this works for you if Bacon isn't also a victim of some conspiracy to bury him in history.  What is now alleged does not show he is a victim of anything. Maybe that's why there's the invention of the Tudor heir story...Whatever. The whole thing reminds me very much of those who pour over the Bible looking for passages to try and make their points. Codes, gematria, secret messages, revelations, prophecies, gut feelings, emotional testimony...it's the stuff of fantasy writers and PR specialists.

Now that you've been given some evidence that there was a sort of Anglican conspiracy at play what are your feelings about this? These people are pushing that version of a lie for the advancement of mankind, presumably. Should we get on the case to expose the historical duplicitousness of Bacon's efforts or should we accept that part of the story should be untouched, because it works better to conserve something that has been achieved if it is not challenged.

If there was a great scheme then you are potentially not being fully appreciative about what it was trying to do.

Regarding the teaching of one's children, I would like to point that Constantine the Great had the misfortune of allowing his to be educated by a man called Lactantius. Lactantius was such a powerful zealot that he managed to reach even the Emperor with nonsense. In a time when it was widely understood (far and wide) that the world was sphere-like he managed to convince the wrong people that it was all a lie on the grounds that it could not be the case because people would be falling off the planet in the Southern hemisphere (!). And, so it became to be. Not only did his quite rare brand of Christianity find an ear, but also stupidity came to replace empirical knowledge until the rediscovery of the much older realizations. 

The truth is always going to hinge on what we can show. Efforts to convince along some other line (i.e. by using divine revelation) should immediately be challenged. I apologize to the amateur astrologers in the crowd.

It's a can of worms. What it has produced is plenty of people who have educated themselves by reading the Shakespearean works while thinking them to be the product of a young entrepreneurial country boy like them. This is an important part of the presentation, because a work ethic is very much what the Protestants were selling.

The odds are not stacked in William Shakespeare's favor in the authorship question that some raise, but what sort of unravelling of lies are you interested in? Where will you stop, and why would you stop? Will you not rest until Bacon has been shown to be a fool for his beliefs in nonsense? On this I feel you might say: "no, we must not go there. Better to allow everyone's freedom to believe lies". Does this not apply to the Shakespeare story?

Pushed to the limit the exercise is about showing how Machiavellian humans can be, but we know this. There is no goodness in humans. There is only what is good by each of of them and the building of factions around that.

 

Edited by RoyalCraftiness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

In the grand scheme of things it does not matter to have the truth be known, because the truth does not matter to most. Lies are more often preferred...

My point is that the truth does matter to a few of us. The Stratfordian lie persists. The Oxfordian lie has been taking root. I cannot accept that we should just "roll with the lie" because it is most accepted. It is horrible to let it be.

In the "grand scheme of things" it may not matter as far as popularity. But I do believe it matters as far as our direction as a society or culture.

2 hours ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

... Are you doubting Bacon's wisdom all of a sudden?

No, not at all. Seems you are twisting your own thoughts?

Bacon teaches we should pursue the Truth, but I have also spent years trying to fully understand his "Of Truth".

As far as the religious paranoia you have about us starting a cult or a new religious movement, I have said before that I believe we have most of the known world religions represented in our B'Hive membership regardless of who posts. Bacon was in protestant England 400 years ago, Spain was catholic. Back then taking over the world was a greedy financial goal (gold, tobacco, beaver furs, etc.), but also a weird religious goal. I suppose that is how they justified everything they did.

Maybe I am too naive to understand (very possible), but to me who wrote or who was Shakespeare is not a religious pursuit for me. Bacon was about science which makes him an atheist, right? Yet he may have been living a total lie writing in secret and being the rightful heir to the British Crown. He was required to be protestant in public in front of Elizabeth and James, or his head might be chopped off in the town square. To me every religion is based on "faith" and lacks any real substance. (No offense to all my religious friends.)

CJ, I don't know if you are Catholic, Jewish, Pagan, Islamic, Protestant, or any other religion, if any at all. I am pretty sure you are not a member of the Native American Church with Peyote as your sacrament. But you do seem a little too concerned about the B'Hive's global spiritual influence as opposed to the question of Bacon being Shakespeare. LOL

Maybe, since we suggest Bacon was born to a Virgin, that you fear we will create a new religion. Maybe it will be called Baconism, and Bacon will be our savior. And ultimately, we will take over the world and steal all the Gold and Tobacco. 😉

 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 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

9 hours ago, A Phoenix said:

The Smoking Gun of the True Authorship of the Shakespeare Works - Francis Bacon and his Unique Copy of the 1587 edition of Holinshed’s Chronicles with Marginal Annotations in his own hand alongside passages used for his Shakespeare Plays

 

8.png

Trailer video link: https://youtu.be/7ylDy8tFiRY

Full video link: https://youtu.be/RPMwkcxLjXo

Paper: https://www.academia.edu/112668316/Francis_Bacon_and_his_Unique_Copy_of_the_1587_edition_of_Holinshed_s_Chronicles_with_Marginal_Annotations_in_his_own_hand_alongside_passages_used_for_his_Shakespeare_Plays_The_Smoking_Gun_of_the_True_Authorship_of_the_Shakespeare_Works

So far I have only had time to read the synopsis, but what a great synopsis it is! Why have we never heard of this before? Thank you A. Phoenix. I will read your paper as soon as I have the time.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

Maybe that's why there's the invention of the Tudor heir story...Whatever.

History suggests the "Tudor heir" invention began a few weeks or days before Bacon's birthday and has never gone away. The first mention is documented in a letter from late December about a month before Bacon was born in January that is available online in more than one place, if I remember correctly. It was international gossip based on insider talk and public rumors.

Whatever... 😉

A few lines from Sonnet 33 that I believe Elizabeth wrote to her son:

Euen so my Sunne one early morne did shine,
With all triumphant splendor on my brow,
But out alack,he was but one houre mine,
The region cloude hath mask'd him from me now.

  • Thanks 2
  • Wow! 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

1 hour ago, Light-of-Truth said:

History suggests the "Tudor heir" invention began a few weeks or days before Bacon's birthday and has never gone away. The first mention is documented in a letter from late December about a month before Bacon was born in January that is available online in more than one place, if I remember correctly. It was international gossip based on insider talk and public rumors.

Whatever... 😉

A few lines from Sonnet 33 that I believe Elizabeth wrote to her son:

Euen so my Sunne one early morne did shine,
With all triumphant splendor on my brow,
But out alack,he was but one houre mine,
The region cloude hath mask'd him from me now.

Hi Light-of-Truth

On another level, these lines could refer to a transformative mystical experience of which, "alack", only a memory remains.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Eric Roberts said:

Hi Light-of-Truth

On another level, these lines could refer to a transformative mystical experience of which, "alack", only a memory remains.

Elizabeth says to Bacon in Sonnet 33 which is sealed by her Simple, Reverse, Short, and Kaye cipher signatures, he was her son for only an hour. And "alack" he must hide behind his "maske" (Shakespeare) for now on which possibly she and Dee conceived of for Bacon to use. The numbers work and apparently Dee liked to dabble in this number stuff.

Yea, I hear ya. But when I read Sonnet 33 I do not hear Elizabeth describing a personal mystical experience, she is making the only public acknowledgement of her son Francis Bacon who was Shakespeare that she ever made. That's why it is Sonnet 33. Line 33 about Bacon's mother, "For where is she so faire whose vn-eard wombe".

🙂

 

 

  • 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

59 minutes ago, Light-of-Truth said:

Elizabeth says to Bacon in Sonnet 33 which is sealed by her Simple, Reverse, Short, and Kaye cipher signatures, he was her son for only an hour. And "alack" he must hide behind his "maske" (Shakespeare) for now on which possibly she and Dee conceived of for Bacon to use. The numbers work and apparently Dee liked to dabble in this number stuff.

Yea, I hear ya. But when I read Sonnet 33 I do not hear Elizabeth describing a personal mystical experience, she is making the only public acknowledgement of her son Francis Bacon who was Shakespeare that she ever made. That's why it is Sonnet 33. Line 33 about Bacon's mother, "For where is she so faire whose vn-eard wombe".

🙂

 

 

Hi Rob,

You are the sonnets expert and your interpretation makes sense for sure, but I can't help hearing Bacon's "voice" speaking these four lines, lamenting the loss of a direct but temporary experience of being illuminated by his "Sunne".

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Eric Roberts said:

Hi Rob,

You are the sonnets expert and your interpretation makes sense for sure, but I can't help hearing Bacon's "voice" speaking these four lines, lamenting the loss of a direct but temporary experience of being illuminated by his "Sunne".

Interesting, but what of the first four lines of Sonnet 33, were these Bacon's, or Elizabeth's?

FVll many a glorious morning haue I seene,
Flatter the mountaine tops with soueraine eie,
Kissing with golden face the meddowes greene;
Guilding pale streames with heauenly alcumy:

 

Side note: Kate Cassidy made the amazing discovery that the first word of Sonnet 33 represents 67. F = 6, VII is 7 to make 67. So we have 67 which is FRANCIS Simple cipher to begin Sonnet 33 which is the Simple cipher of BACON.

Thank you, Kate!!!

Maybe more revealing to our dialog are the first lines of Sonnet 34 when Bacon responds to his mother's confession:

VVHy didst thou promise such a beautious day,
And make me trauaile forth without my cloake,
To let bace cloudes ore-take me in my way,
Hiding thy brau'ry in their rotten smoke.

 

I totally hear Bacon's voice now. Sonnet 33 was mother to son, Sonnet 34 is son to mother. And here we go, 33 + 34 is 67. 😉

 

  • 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

18 minutes ago, Eric Roberts said:

...but I can't help hearing Bacon's "voice" speaking these four lines, lamenting the loss of a direct but temporary experience of being illuminated by his "Sunne".

Sonnet 33 is where we should first look to know who Bacon was, if he wrote the Sonnets.

You have piqued my curiosity, and it appears you have studied this Sonnet. What, or who, was Bacon's "Sunne"? I'd love to know your interpretation of this Sonnet. If you have time to share. 🙂

 

 

  • 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

The Smoking Gun of the True Authorship of the Shakespeare Works - Francis Bacon and his Unique Copy of the 1587 edition of Holinshed’s Chronicles with Marginal Annotations in his own hand alongside passages used for his Shakespeare Plays

10.png

Trailer video link: https://youtu.be/7ylDy8tFiRY

Full video link: https://youtu.be/RPMwkcxLjXo

Paper: https://www.academia.edu/112668316/Francis_Bacon_and_his_Unique_Copy_of_the_1587_edition_of_Holinshed_s_Chronicles_with_Marginal_Annotations_in_his_own_hand_alongside_passages_used_for_his_Shakespeare_Plays_The_Smoking_Gun_of_the_True_Authorship_of_the_Shakespeare_Works

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Smoking Gun of the True Authorship of the Shakespeare Works - Francis Bacon and his Unique Copy of the 1587 edition of Holinshed’s Chronicles with Marginal Annotations in his own hand alongside passages used for his Shakespeare Plays

11.png

Trailer video link: https://youtu.be/7ylDy8tFiRY

Full video link: https://youtu.be/RPMwkcxLjXo

Paper: https://www.academia.edu/112668316/Francis_Bacon_and_his_Unique_Copy_of_the_1587_edition_of_Holinshed_s_Chronicles_with_Marginal_Annotations_in_his_own_hand_alongside_passages_used_for_his_Shakespeare_Plays_The_Smoking_Gun_of_the_True_Authorship_of_the_Shakespeare_Works

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Smoking Gun of the True Authorship of the Shakespeare Works - Francis Bacon and his Unique Copy of the 1587 edition of Holinshed’s Chronicles with Marginal Annotations in his own hand alongside passages used for his Shakespeare Plays

12.png

Trailer video link: https://youtu.be/7ylDy8tFiRY

Full video link: https://youtu.be/RPMwkcxLjXo

Paper: https://www.academia.edu/112668316/Francis_Bacon_and_his_Unique_Copy_of_the_1587_edition_of_Holinshed_s_Chronicles_with_Marginal_Annotations_in_his_own_hand_alongside_passages_used_for_his_Shakespeare_Plays_The_Smoking_Gun_of_the_True_Authorship_of_the_Shakespeare_Works

  • Like 5
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...