Disclaimer: It should be clearly understood that Baconiana is a medium for the discussion of subjects connected with the Objects of the Society, but the Council does not necessarily endorse opinions expressed by contributors or correspondents.
The Online Journal of the Francis Bacon Society
Volume 1 | Number 7
Edited by Michael Taylor
By Michael Taylor
Welcome to the new edition of Baconiana. 2019 is an interesting year, because it is 133 years since the FBS was formed. We should pay special attention when the number 33 crosses our paths, as you will read in this edition.
FBS is always interested in your contributions – please feel free to send any submissions to the editor, at email@example.com.
A “new” Editor
To fully understand the genius that was Sir Francis Bacon - this has been a life goal of mine, since teenage years. I’m 49 now, live in the middle of the Canterbury plains in New Zealand, work as an IT project/programme manager, but have always considered the search for truth to be the most important part of life.
And it is important to live this, not just as an intellectual exercise in un-earthing the historical truth, but in refining one’s understanding of ones-self and the world around us, and better contributing to society as a result, regardless of the vehicle you use to do this. One would think this is a simple matter, because is not what we perceive, reality?
Actually, no. And Bacon also believed our senses deceive us. He bluntly stated this when describing the Four Idols that enslave people then, and enslave people now.
Bacon and Plato
That puts Bacon squarely in the Plato camp because Plato believed the same thing, so it is not surprising that Bacon was referred to after his death, as the Third Plato.
What do Plato and Bacon have in common? Amongst other things, they both concluded that we do not perceive ourselves as we really are, and we do not perceive the world/universe as it really is. As Bacon described in the Four Idols:
“For it is a false assertion that the sense of man is the measure of things. On the contrary, all perceptions as well of the sense as of the mind are according to the measure of the individual and not according to the measure of the universe.” The Four Idols, Novum Organum
A key question to ask in response is – how did he know that our senses deceive us – that which is really there? Did he conclude this based on personal experience, on evidence he experienced? If so, how did he “step outside of himself”, in order to reach this conclusion?
And thinking of yourself, how do you end up concluding this to be true for yourself? How do you get around your own senses, to observe what is really there? How can anyone do this?
Bacon saw this issue as such a major problem, he wrote in the Four Idols:
“But by far the greatest hindrance and aberration of the human understanding proceeds from the dullness, incompetency, and deceptions of the senses.”
The Grand Deceptions
I observe in everyday life and at work, everywhere I go, and in virtually everyone I talk to, evidence that the deceptions (Idols) alive and well, the idols Francis Bacon described over four hundred years ago. Bacon describes the Idols in four areas:
- the Tribe (ourselves and our thinking)
- the Cave (our environment)
- the Marketplace (words and phrases – language)
- the Theatre (Systems of philosophy, religion and science)
He expounded the fact that most of us draw erroneous conclusions based on either no observation, or too little information and observation. We generalise, summarise, misunderstand commonly used words; have labels for things that don’t exist, and mis-label things that do exist.
Most people accept without reservation that which is handed down to us by authority figures and from our general environment – parents, teachers, universities, theological figures, great philosophers, and the mass media “narrative”.
We become consumed in political, economic, scientific, religious or philosophical systems, and arguments to support or oppose them, frequently in a two-value logic way. By that I mean, arguments tend to conclude one of only two positions - you are either right or wrong, left or right, an economic interventionist or a libertarian, a believer in God or an atheist, a Darwinian or a Creationist… ad nauseum.
The world is considerably less black and white than that, and so are people.
Bacon summarized his time, his era in such a way. How much have we progressed since then?
Practical steps to Live Bacon’s Dream
Critical thinking and retaining an open mind is therefore vital, even when we think we “have the truth”. But don’t be surprised if evidence is forthcoming in the future that sweeps that “generally accepted truth” away.
If erroneous thinking exists to the level that Bacon describes it in the Four Idols, it is a stunning, all-encompassing problem for all people, and all nations, across all areas of human endeavor, operating at all times, under all conditions (in war and peace). How do we combat this?
It is imperative we constantly challenge our own thinking and conclusions, and therefore our perception of reality. It is imperative we challenge all that we unconsciously accepted from “authorities”, and reach our own conclusions. And if there is not enough evidence to be sure, you simply put off drawing a conclusion. It is highly likely that many “conclusions” reached in the 20th century, even through scientific observation, are not final conclusions. They are merely interim conclusions which are based on too little data. Therefore it is imperative we practice induction 101 on our own lives.
Aside from this, entering into debate with people to challenge their un-examined pre-conceptions and assumptions, is also a fundamental way to live the philosophy of Francis Bacon.
Why is doing this so important? Francis made it very clear how important:
“If we have any love for natural truths, any aversion to darkness, any desire of purifying the understanding, we must destroy these idols, which have led experience captive, and childishly triumphed over the works of God.” - Introduction to Sylva Sylvarum, emphasis added
This is the reason why I focus on challenging and casting aside these idols, both within myself and with others. Obviously, the Bacon-Shakespeare controversy is an example of a small band of people in recent centuries trying to “slay an idol” – the deception hiding the true author of the plays. It is but one example of a historical un-truth that needs to be swept away. I’ve lost count of the extraordinary discussions I’ve had of the years, all based around general “slaying” of deceptions and self-deceptions. It is highly rewarding approach to life.
As some Shakespearian food for thought about the Idols, Oliver Lector’s 1905 book Letters from the Dead to the Dead suggests the following alignment between the Idols and certain plays, where the plays seem to revolve around describing those Idols:
- Idols of the Tribe – Macbeth
- Idols of the Cave – King Lear
- Idols of the Marketplace – Hamlet
- Idols of the Theatre - Othello
We would be interested in hearing any thoughts about such an alignment.
We publish a wonderful poem in this Baconiana from Gary Cordice, which challenges you to ask – who calls you to this ongoing, centuries-long task? I completely understand Gary’s sentiment – this is not just an intellectual exercise. This is not just a historical puzzle to be unravelled. There is far more at stake than a battle for an authorship crown. This is an ongoing treasure hunt, exactly as Francis Bacon intended.
For me, it opened up a whole new voyage of discovery, yet was so familiar it did not feel new to me at all. It actually seemed to be a continuation of a centuries old labour, and what was so strange was that nothing I heard or read about the Bacon-Shake-speare-St Germain mystery, surprised me in the slightest.
Idols of the Marketplace - A Cause and Effect Chain
By Michael Taylor
Novum Organum hides a great secret, one that is hidden in plain sight. This is not about ciphers however. The section on the Four Idols contains in a few short pages, the sum total of humanity’s key categories of mis-understandings, assumptions and erroneous conclusions, driven by both ourselves and our environmental influences.
Often mis-understandings arise from not sequencing cause and effect correctly, and this is never more evident than in the realm of the Idol of the Marketplace:
“There are also Idols formed by the intercourse and association of men with each other, which I call Idols of the Market Place, on account of the commerce and consort of men there. For it is by discourse that men associate, and words are imposed according to the apprehension of the vulgar. And therefore the ill and unfit choice of words wonderfully obstructs the understanding.”
Bacon describes the power of words and phrases in driving mis-understanding. The sequence Bacon identifies is:
- Talker’s thoughts (cause)
- Words spoken
- Understanding of the words and phrases by the listener (effect)
The corruption is at both ends of the cause and effect chain. At the start of the chain, the talker may completely mis-understand the words he or she is using, and simply passes on those mis-understandings to others. The recipient of those words then passes onto others, similar (or worse) mis-understandings through the same medium – language.
And thus, minute by minute, across the world for centuries, mis-understandings have been and are communicated and passed on from generation to generation.
Today, technology massively increases the reach of those who knowingly or unknowingly spread mis-understandings. That’s the negative view of technology – but technology has the opposite potential to help spread truth to offset mis-understandings. It is therefore imperative we use language better so we can increase understanding. But first one has to know what the mis-understandings are – by no means a small task.
Bacon described two classes of this idol – names of things that do not exist, and faulty or mis-leading names/definitions for things that do exist.
He also described the issue of definition being itself a problem:
“Yet even definitions cannot cure this evil in dealing with natural and material things, since the definitions themselves consist of words, and those words beget others.”
Bacon wrote of mis-labelling: “…they are names of things which exist, but yet confused and ill-defined, and hastily and irregularly derived from realities.”
Bacon believed this class of mis-labelling to be a significant problem: “…which springs out of a faulty and unskillful abstraction, is intricate and deeply rooted.”
What would be a representative sample be from today’s world, a top four set of words that falsely label something, and whose meaning have been deliberately corrupted and used?
The wit would answer that Shakespeare’s plays falsely labels the author, but aside from a core mission of the Francis Bacon Society, my top five are set out below. I chose these because of the actual damage mis-use of these words has done to society over the centuries - even today.
The problem with these words, and how they are interpreted, is that they were (and are) hijacked by demagogues to set one people against another and one nation against another, in an endless see-saw of “we are right and they are wrong”, two valued logic monologues. Demagogues seek to drive out of their narratives the key aspect of intelligence - which is differentiation. They seek to devolve the narrative down to two points on a scale – right or wrong – Aristotelian two valued logic.
This is how demagogues have corrupted words, and have therefore wrought havoc on humanity.
|Word||Corrupted Definition and follow-on assumptions||Effect|
|God|| ||A human representative claims to “represent” God on Earth, and therefore can compel his subjects to do anything in the name of “God”.|
|Freedom|| ||A governmental authority can change the rules about what is acceptable freedom at any time, because freedom is derived from that Governmental rule.|
|Race|| ||A leader of the race declares another race to be inferior, or an “enemy” – and declares them to be a threat that must be wiped out.|
|Nation|| ||The leader of the nation mobilises for war to face the “common threat”. |
The leader, knowing their culture and values are superior, mobilises for war to impose their culture and values on others.
The solution to this systemic, fundamental, millennia-old problem is relatively simple, but at the same time, never ending. You have to deal with both the demagogues who seek to hijack language for all types of gain, as well as the laziness of people who do not challenge the language being used around them, and simply pass on mis-understandings to the next generation.
The simplest answer is that changing the way you use language starts with you:
- ensure you properly understand the language you are using.
- Be more specific and selective in your use of language, avoiding the use of absolutes, sweeping generalizations and assumptions.
- Challenge poor use of language used by others.
This is what Bacon taught us, that is incredibly relevant today.
Note: The quotes from Novum Organum are from “The New Organon.” Book 1. Trans. James Spedding, Robert Leslie Ellis, and Douglas Denon Heath. The Works of Francis Bacon. Vol. 8. Boston: Taggard and Thompson, 1863
For Alexander Pope, Francis Bacon was the Humblest of Mankind
By Susan McIlroy
Pope had two masters, heroes: Bacon and Dryden. Pope’s use of the word mean has been almost universally accepted as indicating his low opinion of Bacon’s moral character and has as a result, done incalculable injury to Bacon’s reputation. However, Pope’s use of the same word applied to himself and to the great poet Dryden, has not resulted in any vilification. How strange. Pope complained of his critics: ‘That when I aim at praise, they say I bite’.
Pope describes Bacon in his Essay on Man:
If parts allure thee, think how Bacon shin’d,
The wisest, brightest, meanest of mankind
Pope describes Dryden:
Ill fated Dryden! Who unmoved can see
Th’ extremes of wit and meanness join’d in thee?
Pope describes himself in his Essay on Criticism:
Hail Bards triumphant! Born in happier days;
Immortal heirs of universal praise!
O may some spark of your celestial fire,
The last, the meanest of your sons inspire!
Pope describes himself in his Universal Prayer:
Mean though I am, not wholly so,
Since quicken’d by thy breath:
Oh lead me wheresoe’er I go
Thro’ this day’s life or death
The simple truth is the word ‘mean’ had a totally different sense then, to that which it commonly has now. The word described humility, humbleness, modesty, characteristics entirely applicable to Francis Bacon. Long before Dr Johnson, Nathanial Bailey’s Etymological English Dictionary of 1726 states the word mean is given as the equivalent for pitiful.
Antoine Gavin writing in 1691 uses these words: Our Saviour Jesus Christ who appeared so mean and humble a condition. The old connotation of the word sometimes occurs now - in the familiar Christmas Carol, Jesus is born in a stable mean and bare. I don’t suppose anyone would take this to infer the stable was vicious and miserly!
H.Kendra Barker’s view in Baconiana, is that Pope was expressing a compassionate view of Bacon’s pitiful and unhappy state, a life of struggle and ultimate betrayal. He gives a contemporary example:
…when Spence tells us that Cowley’s death was occasioned by a mean accident, we should not be justified in assuming that in order to save his cab-fare he walked home and got run over! No, Spence puts us right there, the facts being that Cowley had been to see a neighbour who made him too welcome (alas!) and that on his return he had to lie out in the fields all night, from which he caught a fever and died. In vino mores!
Mrs Henry Pott, founder of FBS, writing for her second Society: The Ladies Guild of Francis St. Alban, describes the malicious and ignorant who ridicule and smash what they perceive to be the opposition, reviving the slanderous abuse of Francis Bacon rather than wanting to find out the truth. As always her research is meticulous:
There are in Shakespeare about 720 uses of the word ‘ mean’ and its correlatives. Of these words about 241 verbs and 40 adverbs, 291 nouns and 48 adjectives have been counted. Here are a few of her 51 examples:
I’ll put myself in poor and mean attire.
As You like It
She is too mean
To have her name repeated.
All her deserving
Is a reserved honesty.
All’s Well That Ends Well
The maid that milks
And does the meanest chares.
Anthony and Cleopatra
Oh that the gods would
Change me to the meanest bird
That flies in purer air.
A sight most pitiful in the meanest wretch.
There’s none of you so mean and base
That hath not noble lustre in your eyes.
True Hope is swift, and flies with swallow’s wings;
Kings it makes Gods, and meaner creatures Kings.
Mrs Pott writes: In which of these passages can the most acidulated critic expound the word mean as used in the sense of stingy, grudging, hard-fisted, or any other term expressive of the selfish screw. Clearly Shakespeare holds out no little finger of support to the notion that the words mean or meanly bore any sense of the stingy or money loving.
Mrs Pott concludes: Was Pope one of the Invisible Brotherhood, helping at the same time to conceal and reveal? In the Life of Pope there are particulars which accord remarkably with others of the youthful years of Bacon; the divergencies in these biographical records are equally remarkable. The epitaph written by Pope for his own tomb is ambiguous: No more; but help to purchase experience by your Penny of Observation.
James Spedding, Bacon’s biographer, sums up Bacon’s chief characteristics: Retiring, nervous, sensitive, unconventional, modest.
Pope described Bacon: the greatest Genius that England (or perhaps any country) ever produced.
STUNNING EVIDENCE from SHAKESPEARE’S FIRST FOLIO DEDICATION
The First Folio Dedication above contains these words:
It was no fault to approch their Gods, by what meanes they could: And the most, though MEANEST, of things are made more precious, when they are dedicated to Temples. In that name therefore, we most HUMBLY consecrate to your H.H. these remains of your servant Shakespeare; that what delight is in them….
The word meanest here is clearly used to describe the works of Shakespeare. Who now would dare to utter such calumny – it would be tantamount to heresy. Only an idiot would claim the word, used 400 years ago, had the same meaning then, as it does now - except that is, the illogical detractors of Francis Bacon.
Roger Bacon and his Times: A Comparison with Francis Bacon by H Candler
Taken from Baconiana October 1902, No. 40. – with comments by the editor.
“We have already seen how both Bacons condemned the scholastic philosophies(1) and rejected stheir methods;
how they pointed out the causes of errors, the one with his four Offendicula (2), the other with his four Idola;
how they elevated observation and experiment to a supreme position for the discovery of truth;
how the former (Roger Bacon) by his practical modes of working and reason, the second in express words introduced the inductive method as that which should add to the old stuff and edifice of acquired knowledge new material to work on, and new annexes to a complete building of truth;
how they cast away knowledge, falsely so-called, and held to that which should profit.
We may add that both expressly take as their province – omne scibile; all that can be known.
…We will here add some of Francis’ pregnant remarks with regards to productive methods of philosophy:
Homo naturea minister et interpres. Man must obey and find out the secrets of nature. We do not, as we so fondly declare, master nature. We learn and get mastery only through obedience.
Scientia et potentia humana in idem coincidunt. Knowledge is power.”
(1) Scholasticism is not so much a philosophy or a theology as a method of learning, as it places a strong emphasis on dialectical reasoning to extend knowledge by inference and to resolve contradictions. Scholastic thought is also known for rigorous conceptual analysis and the careful drawing of distinctions. In the classroom and in writing, it often takes the form of explicit disputation; a topic drawn from the tradition is broached in the form of a question, opponents' responses are given, a counterproposal is argued and opponents' arguments rebutted. [definition from Wikipedia]
(2) The phrase below from Roger Bacon’s Opus Maius (1267) is commonly translated:
“Four very significant stumbling-blocks in the way of grasping the truth, which hinder every man (sic) however learned, and scarcely allow anyone to win a clear title to wisdom, namely: the example of weak and unworthy authority, longstanding custom, the feeling of the ignorant crowd, and the hiding of our own ignorance while making a display of our apparent knowledge.”
“Quatuor vero sunt maxima comprehendendæ veritatis offendicula, quæ omnem quemcumque sapientem impediunt, et vix aliquem permittunt ad verum titulum sapientiæ pervenire: videlicet fragilis et indignæ auctoritatis exemplum, consuetudinis diuturnitas, vulgi sensus imperiti, et propriæ ignorantiæ occultatio cum ostentatione sapientiæ apparentis.”
The 33 Signpost of Sir Francis Bacon
By Malcolm Grant Hutton
Art and Science; Sir Francis was master of both and as we see so often in the Plays and Sonnets he wrote, he not only married the two but also made them sparkle so brightly for everyone fortunate enough to have an inquisitive and enquiring mind.
So many run of the mill daily occurrences pass by unnoticed, yet part of the Genius that made Francis so different and so keenly aware of all that went on around him was what many now call ‘The Magical Number’ of Thirty-Three.
We may never know whether he was shown it so frequently that he had to recognise it as something spiritual and or an integral factor that holds our Universal Mind together as a collective consciousness or he picked it out through his conviction that numerology was in some way creating life and order out of an otherwise chaotic scattering of galaxies and stars.
What we do know is that I became so important to him that he worked it into his Plays in such a way that no reader of the 1623 folio could possibly miss the repetition of his name ‘Francis’ in that one scene of Henry IV, Part One, Scene II, Act IV and in so doing are drawn to count how many times it was printed on the one page.
With such a great mind that lives on forever both for the living of today and tomorrow but also for all those who have been fortunate enough either to read the plays or enjoy seeing them enacted, perhaps it is he who continues to use ‘33’ to attract our attention.
When I first became aware of the ‘33’ sign it was still the early days of the Internet and a search for some answer only came up with the hundreds of thousands of people who were being drawn to ’11.11’, Uri Geller being one of them and he still puts out a page about it.
At this point I should explain how it was that I was drawn to it and really made to focus my whole attention to the figures I was being made to watch. Many times it had to be the very second when ‘33’ appeared on a digital display and such was the magnetism at play I couldn’t however hard I tried avert my gaze from those figures until at long length it clicked over to ‘34’. Others caught up with ‘33’ have told me that they have the same experience and feeling some strong energy holding their eyes in that one direction, towards a digital clock. Here I should add that with other sightings, such as car registrations parked alongside or opposite they bay I am in, or when standing behind two or more cars with ‘33’ in the registration then that force is not endured.
Fortunately I began recording the event in December 1997 otherwise I would have forgotten the time when I lay in bed, having just awoken during the night and was determined not to turn my head to see what time it was. Then was it a thought or a lowly spoken voice. I question now because two decades later I heard very loudly and shouting the voice of my just deceased wife whose funeral had only been some 6 days earlier. At that time I was suddenly awake upon which everything went silent and the room totally dark. However previously the voice or thought that woke me said very clearly, ‘Look at the Clock’. I knew before I looked what I would see and so did.
On another occasion when I had woken during the night I was absolutely resolved and unwavering in my firmness not to look at the time. I think I must have resisted for a good quarter of an hour, before Ede turned in her sleep and I received a kick which did break my strong-mindedness and had me giving in to see the inevitable ‘33’. In such cases I have to ask the Universe what time could have been on the small screen had I looked at the first instance of coming out of a deep sleep?
The same question comes to mind whenever I walk through our home not glancing at clocks and time displays I pass, but when eventually I do turn to gaze at a clock, perhaps several moments later, then it is inevitably the one display that has a time ending with ‘33’. What may have stopped me looking at the other clocks and possibly a different time? Most of our time-pieces vary one from the other, some by a big difference due to lack of constant adjustment and this makes it all the more puzzling when seeing only the one that has that crucial number of minutes.
In the many years that I have discussed this phenomena with friends and others randomly there have been some who also see ‘33’ or ’11.11’, but a surprising number have told me all about their ‘obsessions’ with other double numbers that keep on showing to them. They aren’t always double numbers for one lady told me that her friend’s husband thought he was going cuckoo because for him the time was always 17 minutes past the hour, but was then relieved after learning that the same thing was happening to many others. It was a very long time before someone else in a different continent told me that they were seeing ‘17’ all the time. There appears to be a reason which I’ll get to further on.
I have often wondered how ‘33’ came to Sir Francis and was leaning more to his having got to it through numerology of his name. However looking back through the many different means in which I’ve been prodded to take notice I can now see that there was no need for digital displays to plant this mystical and supernatural repetitive occurrence into his way of thinking. The advent of plays being recorded on film along with televised dramas has added more ways to transmit and repeat noticeable figures, but we shouldn’t overlook the ways and means that ‘33’ must have appeared in his day. Once noticed it opens a floodgate allowing many more instances to pour in virtually daily, in fact two cases in the one TV drama ‘Jack Irish’ which I watched at lunchtime today.
Accordingly I’ll now go over just a few instances of ‘33’ and other double figures that have appeared in the most conspicuous circumstances, so much so that I had to keep a record of what was happening.
Now and again I have had 11.11 pop up. I have seen other repeating double numbers from time to time though these are much rarer. One case is worth mentioning because of the circumstances. I did get a run of ‘55’ and for a while I thought it might be taking over except the usual ‘33’ kept on coming at the same time. That may have been the reason I was shown the Roman letter ‘V’ in a dream and this was followed soon afterwards by a second ‘V’. Whilst still in dreamland I thought to myself, which one does anyway when dreaming, ‘Aha they can’t put that on a clock.’ I was wrong for moments later I was fully awake and looked at the time. It was 4.55am.
Now that I had been drawn into the World of Roman numerals it wasn’t long before I was given more. This time it was in the early afternoon and having decided to give the computer a rest, I looked at the time, and got 1.33pm. I left my study and decided to see what might be on television. Now I have never been interested in American Football and I don’t think I had ever watched such a game on the box either before and definitely never since that day. Yet, for some reason I can’t explain I decided to give it a go. One thing I also find curious when looking back is that I have noticed Grand Final games being numbered in any football code, so when this American Grand Final came up numbered XXXIII I was somewhat stunned. Was this the reason that I had somehow been influenced to turn off the computer and take a look at a football game that had never drawn my interest at any other time?
There are many ways in which Sir Francis could have been drawn to and locked on to ‘33’. He may have flicked open books at random, as I tend to do when picking up a book I have already read and seeing what subject or part of the story may be there for me to think about once more. Again there is another cause behind this inclination, as I have found that answers to my questions are given when I let my hands decide which pages of a book should be parted for me to read. For example there was a day when my late wife Edith and I were undecided whether to sell our plot of land up at Tin Can Bay in Queensland. Ede hesitated for a moment and then after some thought said, ‘take a look in the Bible’. I could only chuckle and retort that it wouldn’t work for something like that. ‘Go on’, she said, then something like, ‘see what you get’. By that time we were both laughing a little but then utterly taken aback when I did as she suggested and opened that book, reading out the lines of Leviticus 25:23 ‘Your land must not be sold on a permanent basis as you do not own it, it belongs to god…’
Whatever we both thought at that time I know much better now. This had to be coming from my father. We did sell and it was the wrong thing to do at that time as the value rose steeply in the next few years. Later on I discovered that this procedure works just as well with the full Works of Shakespeare and I imagine that it would with any other tome of great length.
My point here though is that Sir Francis quite probably had noticed that whichever book he picked up and opened randomly it would always go to page 33. Card games would have been most popular in his day. He may have spent long hours handling cards either gaming with friends or just relaxing on his own as he gave much thought to his writing and at the same time almost mindlessly skimming through a pack and finding the Three of Hearts followed by say the Three of Diamonds, time after time after time.
The big question which he had to have asked as well is, “What Does it Mean”. If we do a simple search on the net, there are many thoughts and ideas, one being that it is a ‘wake-up’ call and others claiming that our Angel guides are contacting us. I discovered much earlier when I was writing my novel that I was getting help from some outside source. Even before that I found that I sometimes knew the answer to a cryptic crossword before finding the page of the newspaper that had the puzzles. One case being a word that at that time I was sure I had never come across before, namely, ‘Syllogism’. Writing my story which is pure fiction in the tale but is linked to known people and events, I rarely knew what was coming next when retiring for the night. I could hardly wait to wake up the following morning and find out what where it was all going and so continue to write without much hesitation. It just flowed.
Could this have been the same for Sir Francis and his alter ego Shake-Speare? I haven’t the slightest doubt that he received the same inspiration and had it all down pat in his mind before putting pen to paper. I myself am certain that we are being fed new ideas and inventions during our hours of rest because I was shown that this was so on two occasions.
In my story I had to have a main character, hero if you like, with his friends whom we can think of as ‘the good guys’, and so there had to be those who were opposed to them and looked at as ‘the baddies’. One of these I decided to characterise as being also a fool and who better for the part than ‘The Hodja’, a name well known to people of Turkey as he is their ‘Baron Von Munchausen’, with all the same or similar silly tales. When I began the chapter that was to make his appearance look silly besides his actions, I opened it with this quotation:-
A Hole In One
“His jacket was red and his breeches were blue,
And there was a hole where the tail came through.
Samuel Taylor Coleridge
Then when I had him stalking Hero and friends and following them to the Golf Course at Luxor in Egypt, I had him stopped by the Club House authorities and told that he had to be dressed suitably for the course and so they fitted him out with a red jacket and thin white check, blue breeches with thin white pinstripe and for good measure I added a Green Bonnet.
At this point I thought for a while and decided that the Green Bonnet was going too far so changed it to a tweed hat. Having written up that part of the chapter, it was time for a lunch snack and I retired to the lounge to restore the inner man. Making myself comfortable on the couch I decided to take a look at the Weekend Review in the Australian, and having pulled out that supplement I looked for the Book Reviews.
That newspaper had lain unopened since buying the Weekend Australian earlier in the day. So I was quite shocked to see my character right there before me as the front page of that week’s Spectator Magazine.
I went straight back to my keyboard and changed the tweed hat back to a Green Bonnet.
It was only days before I was given more evidence. I had written up a scene describing how my leading character was accompanying a camel train up one side of a mountainous Wadi in Upper Egypt. In my imagination I could see the scene almost as if it was on the monitor screen right in front of me. This time it took a little longer, and was the following evening when watching a drama series set in Ethiopia, I suddenly felt that I had been transported right into my own imagination for their on the television was the very same picture that I had thought up and written the day before.
Nearly everyone picks up such incredible coincidences. At times a phone call is made and the person who answer tells that they were just going to ‘phone you, or you are thinking of a song, a name or a word and the very next second it is heard aloud coming from your radio or TV set.
Numbers have been around for a very long time. I can even spot a ‘33’ in the Marriage Scarab of King Solomon who was the Pharaoh Ymn Htp III, at the time of his wedding to Gilukhepa. The number shown is really ‘317’, the number of ladies waiting upon the new Queen. In the Bible, in 1 Kings 11:3 the number is slightly wrong and so is the description of Gilukhepa’s maidens as in that account they are reduced to 300 and called ‘concubines’. Nevertheless most other figures in 1 Kings are very accurate with some measurements being a match within two to three centimetres of Ymn Htp III’s Hall of Columns at Malqata, Luxor for example.
This then is that part of the scarab that has the number:-
With Egyptian hieroglyphs we always read towards the way a figure, animal, or bird is facing, so here we read from right to left towards the glyph of the seated person. The ‘Comma’ like figure represents ‘One Hundred’ and we have three of them, then over on the left the vertical strokes are units of ‘One’ giving us Seven of them and so ‘317’. But if we look at it quickly we might just focus on the three hundreds and the lower group of three – thus ‘33’. Yes that is stretching it a bit but my main point is that here we have a number inscribed about 3,400 years ago.
The Number ‘33’ is only one part of a probable sequence of events that caught the attention and curiosity of Sir Francis from a young age. Today not everyone is aware of a constant number repetition and if they do then they rarely think of it as being something important. Coincidences are something else. These do make us sit up and wonder for a while. The young playwright did take notice and he did work fate and synchronism into his Plays in such wonderful ways. We tend to marvel at those we read about yet eventually forget those that pop up in our own lives. This is such a shame because they nearly always have some meaning behind them and can occasionally be portent of something we are about to experience. At other times they are merely telling us that we are being noticed.
As fascinating as they are I’ll simply give one recent example that occurred about two or three months ago. I had for some months been studying the Giza Pyramids and the Sphinx and was writing an email to someone who was also embedded into the same project. I brought up the fact that the Nile in ancient times flowed by the Giza plateau much closer than it does today. I was going to open my email with the usual, ‘Hello’ or ‘Hi’ and then something began to nag me to be different that day. I had the feeling that I should type ‘Hey’ and then that had to be followed by ‘there’. As I mused about this for a while I began to remember the old song by Rosemary Clooney, ‘Hey there, you with the stars in your eyes’. At that moment I just had to look for a YouTube of it and listen while I continued. With Rosemary singing away in my headphones I continued with my message. But I lingered now and then to get the words right and the way I wanted them. With those delays, Rosemary’s voice came to an end. There was a silent pause and then I nearly fell off my chair as Jo Stafford’s voice replaced her with ‘See the Pyramids Along the Nile’. I hadn’t even noticed the other YouTubes at the side which automatically follow on.
This makes me wonder. Did Sir Francis write in some seclusion so that he wouldn’t be disturbed, or like so many of us enjoy it while he was writing? Who isn’t now thinking of his lines, “If Music be the Food of Love, play on, Give me surfeit of it”? Perhaps he tuned his words with the aid of a musician playing gently upon the strings of a Lute in some far corner of the room where thoughts and fanciful dreams were woven into the delightful wonders of his stage?
I ask but one thing of those who do us the mutual courtesy of listening to all of this. Never more let any coincidence or striking figure pass you by. From this day on whenever such a sign crops up, write it down in a special note book. I feel sure that this will be noticed and whether it be Sir Francis or some other friendly soul, they will realise that they are being ‘heard’ and will ‘send’ many more such messages. Well that is what I have learned. Picture a gathering of people gossiping in groups and barely noticing you pass by. One may turn and politely address you, but if you don’t respond, they will let it go and turn back to their own small group. That is what is happening when they try to attract our attention. Take notice and there will be more. Then let the Society know so that everyone can compare notes.
There is one thing more that could explain the ‘33’ or ’11.11’ phenomena. One evening when dropping off to sleep I did so with the strong question why do some see ‘33’ repeating and others the less frequent ’11.11’? As I began to come to in the early hours the following morning, I was given the thought, ‘Think Binary’. It didn’t take me long to get it. Decimal ‘3’ is in Binary ‘11’, thus ‘33’ might be expressed as ’11.11’. I then realised that this is the language of the computer which only recognises a positive charge or negative. That fitted in with the many times that ‘33’ popped up only after I had completed a long task such as a lengthy drive or having finished a --- pause to notice time right now --- 11.11. OK I’ll just add that soon afterwards I wondered about the two people reporting to me that they were seeing ‘17’. I received the same thought, ‘Think Binary’ and yes decimal ‘7’ is ‘111’, again very positive.
Francis Bacon/Belario: Incorporated by Reference
By Christina G. Waldman
In my recent book, Francis Bacon’s Hidden Hand in Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice, A Study of Law, Rhetoric, And Authorship (New York:Algora, 2018),1 I set out to explore the identity of "Bellario" in Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice.
Bellario is the aged jurist (legal expert), presumably an Italian. He is knowledgeable in civilian law, that based on Roman emperor Justinian’s Code. He guides Portia's courtroom performance in the case of Shylock v. Antonio by furnishing her with important “notes and garments.” He is not actually a character who “appears” on stage. Rather, he operates behind the scenes to move the plot. While he is only referred to (hence, the title of this piece), we may conjure up an image of him in our minds, as if he were “real.” Is he "real," within the fiction of the play, or is he a fiction within a fiction? Is he “akin” to a legal fiction?
I don't think anyone else has ever looked at Bellario this closely; at least, so far as I have found. I first learned of him through Mark Edwin Andrews' Law versus Equity in Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice, a Legalization of Act IV, Scene I (Boulder: University of Colorado, 1965).
Andrews’ book is significant to Baconians for his assertion that Francis Bacon “was” Bellario. He came to this conclusion through two findings: one, that the playwright “displayed surprising knowledge of English jurisprudence and the English legal system,” and two, “that the system, in its attempt to straighten out the conflict between the common law and the principles of equity, was influenced by the bard’s knowledge” (J. K. Emery, editor, preface, Andrews, Law versus Equity, p. ix).
Thus, it seems important to know something of Andrews’ book and the quality of his scholarship. Although he was a law student at the time he wrote it, his book was commended by two United States Supreme Court Justices, Stone and Routledge, as well as several legal and Shakespeare scholars. Andrews went on to serve as a law instructor, an industrialist, and Assistant Secretary to the Navy under United States President Truman.
Andrews’ book is in two parts. The first part (pp. 3-16) contains his own paraphrased dramatization of the famous courtroom scene, set out next to “Shakespeare’s immortal poetry.” The second part (pp. 17-73) contains Andrews’ annotated footnotes with his in-depth
explanations. In them, Andrews explains the law and legal history as it correlates to the play. He defines the many legal terms of art which the playwright used with such precision.
It was the visual impact of Andrews’ presentation in his Part One that convinced me long ago, that, whoever Shakespeare was, he had to have been a lawyer. It was only thirty-five years later, when I was able to purchase the book over the internet, that the full force of the “Bacon is Bellario” argument hit me.
In his own dramatization in Part One, Andrews made Francis Bacon "Bellario," an amicus curiae (advisor to the court). Demonstrating proper legal procedure, Bellario's letter informs the Duke that he is unable to “appear” (i.e., make a court appearance, a legal phrase) in the Duke's court, due to illness. He asks the Duke to admit Portia (taking the name of her servant, Balthazar) in his stead. Thus, we learn that Bellario was “from Padua;” he was Portia’s “cousin;” he was old, and he was an expert in civilian law. These are all clues as to Bellario’s identity. But, it may be a bit more complicated than merely that “Bacon is Bellario.” There are layers upon layers in this play. Still, it is a starting point. We can follow the hints (a word there is reason to believe Bacon coined) in the play to learn more.
In Andrews' paraphrased version, Ellesmere presides over the court of chancery (In Merchant, played by the Duke), while Sir Edward Coke presides over the court of law (in Merchant, also played by the Duke). Andrews wonders why Shakespeare has all matters heard in the same courtroom, since, in Elizabethan times, matters of law and equity were heard in separate courtrooms. Andrews even wonders if this was an error (since, we all know, Shaxpere of Stratford was not known to have had legal training. Even his grammar school education is only assumed). I do not think it was an error at all, as I discuss in my book.
There were two reasons why Andrews made Bacon his Bellario. One was “Shakespeare’s” handling of legal terminology and demonstration of legal proficiency in Merchant. The other is because Bacon in real life played the same role that Bellario played in Merchant. That is, he headed the commission which advised King James (i.e., the Duke) in the 1616 case of Glanvill v. Courtney. There is, thus, an uncanny mirroring of real life events in the play. As Andrews tells us, Ellesmere had seen the play, for he commented on it. Bacon is not known to have commented on the play, and Coke was not a play-goer.
However, Andrews is clear to tell us that he is not a “Baconian.” Rather, he is an Orthodox Stratfordian. That is, he believed the actor from Stratford, William Shaxpere, a real person, was the same person as “William Shakespeare” who wrote the plays and sonnets we know by the name of Shakespeare–rather than the alternative, that “Shakespeare” was the name by which a body of works continues to be known, although it may be a cover-up for the works of one or several writers. There is a longstanding tradition of legal treatises being carried on with the name of their original editor on the cover, years after the original writer’s demise, by newer writers, who may or may not get a byline. New research has pointed out how closely the Shakespeare plays were tied with the Inns of Court. This is a fascinating area of research.
Having ruled out Bacon’s authorship, however, Andrews seems at a loss to logically explain Bacon’s “presence” within the play. One seer will recognize another, he suggests. Or, he posits,
the seeds in the mind of one genius may have taken root in the mind of the other. Perhaps he is asking us to read between the lines.
What seems to be a main theme in Merchant is that truth isn't always what it seems to be. Rather, it may be buried under layers, for the protection of that which is most precious. Andrews wasn’t necessarily right about everything, but his perceptions opened our eyes to something that had been missed, especially after many Anglo-American jurisdictions merged their systems of law and equity, beginning in the 19th century.
If Bacon’s hand is hidden in The Merchant of Venice, why did he hide it? There is room for speculation and plausible argument. It is hoped that readers will investigate, make their own discoveries, and come to their own conclusions.
Most people do not really know Francis Bacon as a person. I'm sure I didn't before I began researching. I didn’t even know that Bacon had written 14 volumes, collected and edited by James Spedding et al. in the Works of Francis Bacon. It’s probably a good thing, or I might have been totally intimidated. Where to start? I had read in Bacon’s Essays, his History of the Reign of King Henry the Seventh, and the opening of the Novum Organon–which mystified me.
Fortunately, I soon found Bacon’s Works online and searchable at HathiTrust.org. Open Source Shakespeare, www.opensourceShakespeare.org, was also very good for searching. The website, Francis Bacon’s New Advancement of Learning site, www.SirBacon.org, was indispensable, as was N. B. Cockburn’s The Bacon Shakespeare Connection, The Baconian Theory Made Sane (1998). Important were Peter Dawkins’ The Shakespeare Enigma and Shakespeare’s Wisdom in The Merchant of Venice and Barry R. Clarke’s several books and articles. Harvard law professor Daniel Coquillette’s book, Francis Bacon, the “first modern book to describe Bacon’s jurisprudence” (book jacket), and his articles on Bacon and the civilian lawyers were invaluable. Nieves Matthews’ Francis Bacon, The History of a Character Assassination is a must-read.
I don't know everything there is to know about Bacon, of course, but I am so glad to have made his better acquaintance. He is a writer infinitely worth knowing. Contrary to much that we have been told, it is his goodness, intelligence, and selflessness, his aspiration to be all he can be in the service of his fellow man that many, including myself, find so attractive.
It was through looking for Bellario that I came to glimpse just how relevant Bacon’s thought may be to us today. There are certainly parallels between the problems facing the world he lived in and ours, four hundred years later. If we have gone slightly off course, as a society, or in science, philosophy, education, or any discipline, can we take some tips from one of the greatest intellects and souls who ever lived and re-direct our course more fruitfully?
1 The book is fortunate to have a Foreword written by Simon Miles, an independent Baconian researcher. His talk on The Merchant of Venice before the Francis Bacon Society in March, 2015 inspired me to begin writing about Mark Edwin Andrews’ book, which led to Francis Bacon’s Hidden Hand. Many thanks are due to Susan McIlroy of the Francis Bacon Society for many emails of support and encouragement, and for the copy of N. B. Cockburn’s The Bacon Shakespeare Question. Lawrence Gerald of the www.SirBacon.org website suggested the project to begin with and furnished me with Maureen Ward-Gandy’s 1992 forensic handwriting comparison of Bacon’s writing with what Arthur Freeman called the “Tapster Manuscript,” a fragment of an “analog” scene from Henry IV (See appendix IV of my book), in which she did conclude that there was a high likelihood that the handwriting in that fragment was Bacon’s. Lawrence posted earlier versions of my Bellario essay at www.SirBacon.org. He was always ready to lend an ear, as was Simon, who, in addition, reviewed the manuscript, asked probing questions, and made suggestions as to further reading which helped to improve the manuscript. For further credits, please see the book’s acknowledgements page.
The Geographic Mysteries of Sir Francis Bacon, by Bradbury Cort Lindahl
Review by Michael Taylor
Published in 2016, Bradbury Cort Lindahl has authored a truly unique book that seeks to link key octagonal architecture from the “Old World”, to key sites in the “New World”, specifically the enigma that is Oak Island, the Masonic International Peace Garden (IPG) on the Canada-US border, and the octagonal powder magazine in Williamsburg Virginia, amongst others. Lindahl refers to these octagonal structures as establishing an “Axis Mundi”, or prime meridian from which positions on the globe can be measured, and more importantly for his narrative, lands claimed.
Two of these New World sites are well known to Baconians, because of the theoretical links between them and Sir Francis Bacon. Lindahl, in his 448page epic, uses a simple, objectively provable link between key Old-World octagonal architecture, and the sites in the “New World” – a simple navigational link that cannot be disproven. The link is the “great circle”, the shortest distance between points on a globe, and the route usually followed by airliners to ensure their routes are the shortest distance. Lindahl draws a line from the facings of key octagons in the Old World, directly to, or through key sites in the New World. Lindahl theorizes that the Old World towers were built in that orientation to be markers to points in the New World, and suggests that they were used to make “claims” in the New World, for instance the IPG (International Peace Garden) site may have been used to claim North America as early as the time of Charlemagne.
Using Google Earth, Lindahl maps via Great Circle Arcs (with the maps in his book), the key Old-World octagonal structures to sites in the new world. Some of the Old-World sites date back to Roman times. It seems that this method of “navigation” and perhaps claiming distant lands, has been in use by knowledgeable people for many centuries. But the arcs go further in linking directly Francis Bacon with both the knowledge of the arcs, and active use of them to site key locations in the New World, specifically Oak Island, Williamsburg Virginia and Jamestown Virginia.
A direct link to Bacon using the Great Circle Arc method, is actually defined in Peter Dawkins’s essays on Oak Island, published in early 2017, specifically – “The Mystery of Oak Island – Part 3: Swan Secrets”, available on FBRT’s website www.fbrt.org.uk.
Peter discovered in the 1970’s a line at 287 degrees directly from Bacon’s mount in Prae Wood in Gorhambury Estate, Bacon’s family home, directly through the ruins of the old Tudor Gorhambury House. The point of Bacon’s mount was the highest point of the Estate, and once had an open-sided dome temple to indicate its significance.
If this line oriented to 287 degrees, is followed across the Atlantic Ocean in a Great Circle Arc, it passes 1km north of Oak Island, and further south-west, directly through Jamestown, Virginia, the first colony settled by the Virginia Company. Measured from St Albans, the exact bearing to Jamestown is 286.35 degrees, and the bearting to Oak Island is 286.33 degrees.
As if to emphasize the importance of the 287degree heading, the line from St Albans Abbey in St Albans to St Michaels Church where Bacon is buried, is also 287 degrees. 287 also appears in the ciphers associated with Baconian lore, where using the Kay cipher, 287 = FRA ROSI CROSSE”. Fra signifies brother in Latin, and Francis in English – Francis Rosy (red) cross – the cross of Rosicrucianism.
Another link between the compass heading and another 287 sign-post in the world of ciphers, is that 287 is the Elizabethan Simple Cipher count for the longest word in the Shakespeare plays – honorificabilitudinitatibus. This word appears in Love’s Labour’s Lost, and has long been linked to Bacon by virtue of the fact that in Bacon’s papers in the British Library, he left a handwritten word pyramid of the letters of the word.
The Old-World Structures that Lindahl maps to the IPG, Oak Island the powder magazine in Williamsburg and other sites, are listed below – and who built them. If all these people are linked by virtue of their hidden knowledge of the use of Great Circle Arcs, then what is the common thread between them? I have included Peter Dawkins Great Circle Arc from Gorhambury to Oak Island and Jamestown, as an additional link.
|Old World Site||Old World Site Builder/Sponsor||Great Circle Arc to New World Site||New World Site Builder/Sponsor|
|Bacon’s Mount, Gorhambury (Arc oriented on the ruins of the old Bacon family Tudor Mansion)||Sir Francis Bacon||Oak Island||Unknown|
|Jamestown, Virginia||Virginia Company|
|Hexagonal Port of Portus, Italy||Emperor Trajan||Oak Island, hexagonal Fort Carroll, |
Baltimore, Naval observatory, Washington DC.
|Octagonal Daphne of Constantine, Constantinople, Turkey, also the hippodrome, and the Obelisk of Theodosius in Constantinople||Constantine the Great||Oak Island||Unknown|
|Octagonal Powder Magazine, Williamsburg. NOTE: Tracing a Great Circle arc from the NE facing of the powder magazine leads to the IPG’s Masonic compass building.||Alexander Spotswood (descendant of Robert the Bruce, first King of Scotland)|
|Octagonal Castel del Monte||Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor||Oak Island…||Unknown|
|and the International Peace Garden (IPG)||Lord & Lady Eaton (Canada) – related to the Stewart Royal line of Scotland/Ireland. On original Board of Directors|
|Octagonal Heidelberg Castle||Handed from Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor, to Louis I, Duke of Bavaria in 1214. |
Was also once the home of Prince Rupert of the Rhine – first Governor of the Hudson Bay Company, which owned the Hudson Bay watershed, including the area of the IPG. Rupert was the son of Frederick V and Elizabeth, the eldest daughter of James I of England (ie, a Stewart).
|Oak Island… (slightly south of)||Unknown|
|and the International Peace Garden (IPG)||Lord & Lady Eaton (Canada) – related to the Stewart Royal line of Scotland/Ireland. On original Board of Directors|
|Octagon of the Cassini Estate, North of Paris||Cassini Family||Oak Island…||Unknown|
|and the International Peace Garden (IPG)||Lord & Lady Eaton (Canada) – related to the Stewart Royal line of Scotland/Ireland. On original Board of Directors|
|The Peace Temple, Rome (also known as the Forum of Vespasian), and the octagonal Church of Santa Cosma e Damiano on the same site||Roman Emperor Vespasian||The International Peace Garden (IPG)|
|St Michael’s octagonal Tower, Monte ‘Sant Angelo, Italy||Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor||The International Peace Garden (IPG), the burial place of Frederick II (Palermo Cathedral, Sicily), and the Tower of the Winds, Athens.|
|Drayton House Octagon, England||Dayton family line descended from the de Veres and specifically Aubrey de Vere, right hand man of William the Conqueror. Aubrey is said to be descended directly from Charlemagne.||The International Peace Garden (IPG), the Georgia Guidestones, and the Obelisk of Theodosius in Constantinople, which in turn points to Oak Island and IPG.|
|Shepherds Monument, Shugborough Hall, England. Latin inscription “Et in Arcadia ego” on the monument translates to “I am also in Arcadia” or “Even in Arcadia, there am I.”||Thomas Anson, paid for by Admiral George Anson. Thomas was a member of the Royal Society, the Divan Society and the Hellfire Club.||The International Peace Garden (IPG). The monument also aligns to George Anson’s burial place to the SE.|
|Tower of the Winds, Shugborough Hall, England||Thomas Anson, paid for by Admiral George Anson. Thomas was a member of the Royal Society, the Divan Society and the Hellfire Club. The Anson family are said to have been Knights of St John.||Middle of Avebury stone circle, middle of Stonehenge, Hill of Tara (Lia Fail), Lincoln Cathedral, Willersley Castle, Ponferrada Fortress, the original Tower of the Winds in Athens, the Tower of the Winds at Mt Stewart Estate, the Tower of the Winds at West Wycombe Estate||Sir Francis Dashwood built the Tower of the Winds at his West Wycombe estate – he is related to the Eaton family who were on the original Board of Directors overseeing the creation of the IPG. Dashwood is also descended from the de Vere family.|
|Octagonal Aachen cathedral of Charlemagne||Charlemagne. Grandson of Charles Martel, who was likely a prior incarnation of Francis Bacon.||Oak Island||Unknown |
There are many other alignments and sites across America and Europe not included in the table for space reasons, that are detailed in Lindahl’s book. Some also align Old World points to other Old-World points (e.g. St Albans Cathedral’s south-east alignment with the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem), as well as other points in the New World. The octagons themselves contain intriguing hints as to their true purpose (for instance, pointing to analogues in Arcadia – Utopia, the domain of Pan).
A primary conclusion that can be drawn about Bacon’s “involvement” is that he is but one of a number of (mainly royal) figures throughout Western History that built “pointers” in the OId-World, to key points in the new, to claim them. They must have done so with fore-knowledge to ensure the orientation of their buildings accurately pointed to:
- The future IPG
- Oak Island
In the case of the IPG, the Great Circle Arcs from the Old-World cross or end very near to the octagonal sunken garden at the heart of the IPG.
The existence of the direct 287 degree linkage between Gorhambury and Oak Island and Jamestown, and the linkage between the octagonal royal buildings of the Old World to Oak Island and Williamsburg, conclusively prove Bacon’s extreme interest in the colonization of the New World, and in his access to hidden knowledge about navigation and computation of Great Circle arcs, that has probably been preserved through the centuries by Secret Societies, for the exclusive use of European royalty.
Further questions arise of course – how is it possible structures, built hundreds (or thousands) of years apart all align to the same points? Who held the knowledge of the orientations to build the structures, and how was that knowledge passed on? Through secret societies – if so which ones?
What is the importance of these New World sites, versus any other point along these Great Circle Arcs? What does the existence of these arcs and sites along the arcs actually mean? This may be the greatest mystery to solve, and at present, it has not been fully solved. Lindahl objectively proves in his book that the arcs and therefore the links between the sites exist – and goes on to speculate as to why they may exist, based on the nature of the sites, and the sites’ links to key people in Western history. The details of the linkages between the people involved in building these sites is far too detailed for this review, but is outlined in staggering detail in Lindahl’s book.
But underlying Lindahl’s conclusion that the New World sites may have been markers for claiming and dividing North America between France and Britain, there are other mysteries waiting to be solved. To delve into some of the speculation, look no further than Lindahl’s amazing book, and the Oak Island essays of Peter Dawkins at www.fbrt.org.uk. It is a true treasure trail to be followed.
by Gary Cordice
I have been called,
To join that curious troop, that seeks to solve the mysteries, that yet provokes us.
I am no scholar,
Yet, and if that day comes when I am labelled such,
Let it be because I have burnt the midnight oil,
Risen even before the lark breaks into song,
Spent hours in thought to extract truth from gossip,
Scoured the oft thin trail for clues and by piecemeal, form enlightened sentences that receives the high minds approval, amongst the troop.
Why amongst the troop?
Perhaps because this venture is not for all, many are called but few respond.
Who is the troop? They that hunger.
This is a hunger that breeds delight in discovery, the troops belly rumbles until the manna is gathered and consumed,
And once having gathered strength, they continue into deeper curiosities.
I am such a one, and I have been called.
Who calls you?
Can you hear?
I, have been called.
The Female Voice in Shakespeare
Review by Jeffrey Morris of SAT Conference 2018 Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre
Experiencing the delivery of Shakespeare scholarship to a live audience was at first challenging for me. The opening presenter read from one of her academic papers, that must have been joy to the informed, however me it was a tough climb to first base camp on Everest. From then on, the presentations were illuminating, delivered with engaging verve. All the actors animated Shakespeare's texts with very entertaining flair.
Through the day the audience were drawn into a challenging forensic encounter with authorship candidates, making highly visible influential women in the Shakespeare's literary DNA, shifting our perceptions into iconoclastic territory.
The room was filled with an ensemble of: academics, actors, advocates, directors, and guardians of literary culture; fans and followers, friends of Bacon, Lady Pembroke and De Vere.
It was a day featuring intellectual rigour with passionate advocacies. I now understand why as proven, many women like Shakespeare, because as one scholar convincingly impressed upon us the author writes like a girl.
Founded on 6 November 1922 in Hackney, London, the original name for the SAT was the Shakespeare Fellowship. The name changed to The Shakespearean Authorship Society in 1959, and is now The Shakespearean Authorship Trust, a registered charity. The objective of the SAT is the advancement of learning with particular reference to the social, political, and literary history of England in the 16th and 17th centuries and the authorship of the literary works that appeared under the name of William Shakespeare. The aims, as set out in 1922, are:
- To seek, and if possible establish, the truth concerning the authorship of Shakespeare's plays and poems.
- To organise and encourage research, to promote the discussion of the authorship question and to provide means of publishing contributions to its solution.
- To maintain and add to a reference library of works relating to the subject.
By Susan Roberts
My path to becoming a Baconian began seven years ago, when, as a retiree I came to live in Tewantin, Queensland, Australia.
As a school girl, I had little or no interest in the works of Shakespeare. It was only when I retired from work and began attending courses run by U3A* in Canberra, Australia that my mind opened to the wisdom and beauty contained in SHAKESPEARE.
Finding in my place of retirement there was a U3A but no Shakespeare being taught, I asked if I could start up a group, be the facilitator, and hope that learned people would join and give of their expertise. This happened and I listened, learned and intervened when academic egos took to sparring. Always at the back of my mind questions increasingly popped up. How could a William of Stratford-upon-Avon, a small farming community, have produced the greatest writer of the English language, plus, as he had never left England, how had he acquired such intimate knowledge of the French court as portrayed in Loves Labours Lost. However, as my Reading Shakespeare Group now had several retired English Literature teachers, I, foolishly, accepted whatever they told me. It was also made clear that ONE SHOULD NOT QUESTION SHAKESPEARE AUTHORSHIP.
One of my favourite places to visit on the Sunshine Coast is a second-hand book shop, Berkelouw, in Eumundi, place of the famous Saturday Market. Whenever in Eumundi (never on Saturday) I always browsed the shelves for books on the Bard.
Perusing the Literature section, a book literally fell off the shelf next to me, and commanded my attention. Its title was BACON IS SHAKESPEARE by SIR EDWIN DURNING-LAWRENCE. As the price was only $15, I decided to purchase this small, red book with such an intriguing title.
I knew as I began to read ‘BACON IS SHAKESPEARE’ that I was being shown the answer to the Shakespeare authorship question. Truth swirled around my mind as chapter after chapter cleared out the debris of Stratfordian deception.
And that is how I became a Baconian.
My presentation to Noosa U3A: Is Sir Francis Bacon Shakespeare? - is a 4-part series now on YouTube.
*University of the Third Age.
Susan Roberts may be contacted via firstname.lastname@example.org
Walking Tours of London
If you’re looking for an excellent guide for a Tudor and Stuart City of London Walking Tour with an emphasis on Sir Francis Bacon, do contact palaeontologist and amateur historian Bob Jones (Robert Wynn Jones). Via his tour-booking address, email@example.com, he offers an well-researched, inexpensive (£16), tour of over 30 locations related to Bacon. He has an encyclopaedic knowledge of the pre-1666-Great Fire city, for he’s written a book on that topic: The Lost City of London (Amberley Publishing, First Edition, 2012; Second Edition, 2015).
An exceptional feature of Bob’s walking tour is his use of visual aids: like a well-trained teacher, he carries a pack of laminated images, maps, etchings, and photos to fill in the knowledge gaps of his clients.
I took Bob’s tour in mid-September 2018, and as he showed a friend and I around the sites, we told him about our (Baconian) perspectives on the Shakespeare materials, Bacon’s parentage, his influence on Western culture, and his spiritual involvements (Rosicrucian, Freemason). Some of the ideas were new to Bob; he listened with open-minded interest, and that evening he sent us photos of the Hilliard portraits that demonstrate the uncanny resemblance of Robert Dudley and Francis Bacon. In subsequent days he sent me maps and more images. He was truly committed to giving us more than our money’s worth.
One caution: Bob is a serious walker. His tours can last 4 - 6 hours, depending on how many rest and refreshment stops one makes. If that’s too much walking for you, consider asking him to tailor the tour to your energy level, and to occasionally take a bus at certain stretches.
Bob’s website is https://lostcityoflondon.co.uk/. It has an active blog, full of engaging historical and contemporary titbits. His forthcoming book is The Flower of Cities All.