|
the secret teachings of all ages
Bacon, Shakespeare, And
The Rosicrucians
CHAPTER xxxiiI
manly p. hall
THE present consideration of
the Bacon--Shakspere--Rosicrucian controversy is undertaken not for the
vain purpose of digging up dead men's bones but rather in the hope that
a critical analysis will aid in the rediscovery of that knowledge lost
to the world since the oracles were silenced. It was W. F. C. Wigston
who called the Bard of Avon "phantom Captain Shakespeare, the
Rosicrucian mask." This constitutes one of the most significant
statements relating to the Bacon-Shakspere controversy.
It is quite evident that
William Shakspere could not, unaided, have produced the immortal
writings bearing his name. He did not possess the necessary literary
culture, for the town of Stratford where he was reared contained no
school capable of imparting the higher forms of learning reflected in
the writings ascribed to him. His parents were illiterate, and in his
early life he evinced a total disregard for study. There are in
existence but six known examples of Shakspere's handwriting. All are
signatures, and three of them are in his will. The scrawling, uncertain
method of their execution stamps Shakspere as unfamiliar with the use of
a pen, and it is obvious either that he copied a signature prepared for
him or that his hand was guided while he wrote. No autograph manuscripts
of the "Shakespearian" plays or sonnets have been discovered, nor is
there even a tradition concerning them other than the fantastic and
impossible statement appearing in the foreword of the Great
Folio.
A well-stocked library would be
an essential part of the equipment of an author whose literary
productions demonstrate him to be familiar with the literature of all
ages, yet there is no record that Shakspere ever possessed a library,
nor does he make any mention of books in his will. Commenting on the
known illiteracy of Shakspere's daughter Judith, who at twenty-seven
could only make her mark, Ignatius Donnelly declares it to be
unbelievable that William Shakspere if he wrote the plays bearing his
name would have permitted his own daughter to reach womanhood and marry
without being able to read one line of the writings that made her father
wealthy and locally famous.
The query also has been raised,
"Where did William Shakspere secure his knowledge of modern French,
Italian, Spanish, and Danish, to say nothing of classical Latin and
Greek?" For, in spite of the rare discrimination with which Latin is
used by the author of the Shakespearian plays, Ben Jonson, who knew
Shakspere intimately, declared that the Stratford actor understood
"small Latin and less Greek"! Is it not also more than strange that no
record exists of William Shakspere's having ever played a leading rôle
in the famous dramas he is supposed to have written or in others
produced by the company of which he was a member? True, he may have
owned a small interest in the Globe Theatre or Blackfriars, but
apparently the height of his thespian achievements was the Ghost in
Hamlet!
In spite of his admitted
avarice, Shakspere seemingly made no effort during his lifetime to
control or secure remuneration from the plays bearing his name, many of
which were first published anonymously. As far as can be ascertained,
none of his heirs were involved in any manner whatsoever in the printing
of the First Folio after his death, nor did they benefit
financially therefrom. Had he been their author, Shakspere's manuscripts
and unpublished plays would certainly have constituted his most valued
possessions, yet his will--while making special disposition of his
second-best bed and his "broad silver gilt bowl" neither mentions nor
intimates that he possessed any literary productions
whatsoever.
While the Folios and Quartos
usually are signed "William Shakespeare," all the known autographs of
the Stratford actor read "William Shakspere." Does this change in
spelling contain any significance heretofore generally overlooked?
Furthermore, if the publishers of the First Shakespearian Folio
revered their fellow actor as much as their claims in that volume would
indicate, why did they, as if in ironical allusion to a hoax which they
were perpetrating, place an evident caricature of him on the title
page?
Certain absurdities also in
Shakspere's private life are irreconcilable. While supposedly at the
zenith of his literary career, he was actually engaged in buying malt,
presumably for a brewing business! Also picture the immortal
Shakspere--the reputed author of The Merchant of Venice--as a
moneylender! Yet among those against whom Shakspere brought action to
collect petty sums was a fellow townsman--one Philip Rogers--whom he
sued for an unpaid loan of two shillings, or about forty-eight cents! In
short, there is nothing known in the life of Shakspere that would
justify the literary excellence imputed to him.
The philosophic ideals
promulgated throughout the Shakespearian plays distinctly demonstrate
their author to have been thoroughly familiar with certain doctrines and
tenets peculiar to Rosicrucianism; in fact the profundity of the
Shakespearian productions stamps their creator as one of the illuminati
of the ages. Most of those seeking a solution for the Bacon-Shakspere
controversy have been intellectualists. Notwithstanding their scholarly
attainments, they have overlooked the important part played by
transcendentalism in the philosophic achievements of the ages. The
mysteries of superphysics are inexplicable to the materialist, whose
training does not equip him to estimate the extent of their
ramifications and complexities. Yet who but a Platonist, a Qabbalist, or
a Pythagorean could have written The Tempest, Macbeth,
Hamlet, or The Tragedy of Cymbeline? Who but one deeply
versed in Paracelsian lore could have conceived, A Midsummer Night's
Dream?
HEADPIECE SHOWING LIGHT AND SHADED
A's.
From Shakespeare's King
Richard The Second, Quarto of 1597.
The ornamental headpiece shown
above has long been considered a Baconian or Rosicrucian signature. The
light and the dark A's appear in several volumes published by
emissaries of the Rosicrucians. If the above figure be compared with
that from the Alciati Emblemata on the following pages, the
cryptic use of the two A's will be further demonstrated.
THE TITLE PAGE OF BURTON'S ANATOMY OF
MELANCHOLY.
From Burton's Anatomy of
Melancholy.
Baconian experts declare
Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy to be in reality Francis Bacon's
scrapbook in which he gathered strange and rare bits of knowledge during
the many years of eventful life. This title page has long been supposed
to contain a cryptic message. The key to this cipher is the pointing
figure of the maniac in the lower right-hand corner of the design.
According to Mrs. Elizabeth Wells Gallup, the celestial globe at which
the maniac is pointing is a cryptic symbol of Sir Francis Bacon. The
planetary signs which appear in the clouds opposite the marginal figures
4, 5;, 6, and 7 signify the planetary configurations, which produce the
forms of mania depicted. The seated man, with his head resting upon his
hand. is declared by Baconian enthusiasts to represent Sir Francis
Bacon.
Father of modern science,
remodeler of modern law, editor of the
modem Bible, patron of modem democracy, and one of the founders of
modern Freemasonry, Sir Francis Bacon was a man of many aims and
purposes. He was a Rosicrucian, some have intimated the
Rosicrucian. If not actually the Illustrious Father C.R.C. referred to
in the Rosicrucian manifestoes, he was certainly a high initiate of the
Rosicrucian Order, and it is his activities in connection with this
secret body that are of prime importance to students of symbolism,
philosophy, and literature.
Scores of volumes have been
written to establish Sir Francis Bacon as the real author of the plays
and sonnets popularly ascribed to William Shakspere. An impartial
consideration of these documents cannot but convince the open-minded of
the verisimilitude of the Baconian theory. In fact those enthusiasts who
for years have struggled to identify Sir Francis Bacon as the true "Bard
of Avon" might long since have won their case had they emphasized its
most important angle, namely, that Sir Francis Bacon, the Rosicrucian
initiate, wrote into the Shakespearian plays the secret teachings of the
Fraternity of R.C. and the true rituals of the Freemasonic Order, of
which order it may yet be discovered that he was the actual founder. A
sentimental world, however, dislikes to give up a traditional hero,
either to solve a controversy or to right a wrong. Nevertheless, if it
can be proved that by raveling out the riddle there can be discovered
information of practical value to mankind, then the best minds of the
world will cooperate in the enterprise. The Bacon-Shakspere controversy,
as its most able advocates realize, involves the most profound aspects
of science, religion, and ethics; he who solves its mystery may yet find
therein the key to the supposedly lost wisdom of antiquity.
It was in recognition of
Bacon's intellectual accomplishments that King James turned over to him
the translators' manuscripts of what is now known as the King James
Bible for the presumable purpose of checking, editing, and revising
them. The documents remained in his hands for nearly a year, but no
information is to be had concerning what occurred in that time.
Regarding this work, William T. Smedley writes: " It will eventually be
proved that the whole scheme of the Authorised Version of the Bible was
Francis Bacon's." (See The Mystery of Francis Bacon.) The first
edition of the King James Bible contains a cryptic Baconian headpiece.
Did Bacon cryptographically conceal in the Authorized Bible that which
he dared not literally reveal in the text--the secret Rosicrucian key to
mystic and Masonic Christianity?
Sir Francis Bacon
unquestionably possessed the range of general and philosophical
knowledge necessary to write the Shakespearian plays and sonnets, for it
is usually conceded that he was a composer, lawyer, and linguist. His
chaplain, Doctor William Rawley, and Ben Jonson both attest his
philosophic and poetic accomplishments. The former pays Bacon this
remarkable tribute: "I have been enduced to think that if there were a
beame of knowledge derived from God upon any man in these modern times,
it was upon him. For though he was a great reader of books; yet he had
not his knowledge from books but from some grounds and notions from
within himself. " (See Introduction to the
Resuscitado.)
Sir Francis Bacon, being not
only an able barrister but also a polished courtier, also possessed that
intimate knowledge of parliamentary law and the etiquette of the royal
court revealed in the Shakespearian plays which could scarcely have been
acquired by a man in the humble station of the Stratford actor. Lord
Verulam furthermore visited many of the foreign countries forming the
background for the plays and was therefore in a position to create the
authentic local atmosphere contained therein, but there is no record of
William Shakspere's ever having traveled outside of England.
The magnificent library amassed
by Sir Francis Bacon contained the very volumes necessary to supply the
quotations and anecdotes incorporated into the Shakespearian plays. Many
of the plays, in fact, were taken from plots in earlier writings of
which there was no English translation at that time. Because of his
scholastic acquirements, Lord Verulam could have read the original
books; it is most unlikely that William Shakspere could have done
so.
Abundant cryptographic proof
exists that Bacon was concerned in the production of the Shakespearian
plays. Sir Francis Bacon's cipher number was 33. In the First Part of
King Henry the Fourth, the word "Francis" appears 33 times upon one
page. To attain this end, obviously awkward sentences were required, as:
"Anon Francis? No Francis, but tomorrow Francis: or Francis, on
Thursday: or indeed Francis when thou wilt. But Francis."
Throughout the Shakespearian
Folios and Quartos occur scores of acrostic signatures.
The simplest form of the acrostic is that whereby a name--in these
instances Bacon's--was hidden in the first few letters of lines. In
The Tempest, Act I, Scene 2, appears a striking example of the
Baconian acrostic:
"Begun to tell me what I am,
but stopt
And left me to a bootelesse Inquisition,
Concluding,
stay: not yet.
The first letters of the first
and second lines together with the first three letters of the third line
form the word BACon. Similar acrostics appear frequently in
Bacon's acknowledged writings.
The tenor of the Shakespearian
dramas politically is in harmony with the recognized viewpoints of Sir
Francis Bacon, whose enemies are frequently caricatured in the plays.
Likewise their religious, philosophic, and educational undercurrents all
reflect his personal opinions. Not only do these marked similarities of
style and terminology exist in Bacon's writings and the Shakespearian
plays, but there are also certain historical and philosophical
inaccuracies common to both, such as identical misquotations from
Aristotle.
"Evidently realizing that
futurity would unveil his full genius, Lord Verulam in his will
bequeathed his soul to God above by the oblations of his Savior, his
body to be buried obscurely, his name and memory to men's charitable
speeches, to foreign nations, to succeeding ages, and to his own
countrymen after some time had elapsed. That portion appearing in
italics Bacon deleted from his will, apparently fearing that he had said
too much.
A BACONIAN SIGNATURE.
From Alciati
Emblemata.
The curious volume from which
this figure is taken was published in Paris in r618. The attention of
the Baconian student is immediately attracted by the form of the hog in
the foreground. Bacon often used this animal as a play upon his own
name, especially because the name Bacon was derived from he word
beech and the nut of this tree was used to fatten hogs. The two pillars
in the background have considerable Masonic interest. The two A's nearly
in the center of the picture--one light and one shaded--are alone almost
conclusive proof of Baconian influence. The most convincing evidence,
however, is the fact that 17 is the numerical equivalent of the letters
of the Latin farm of Bacon's name (F. Baco) and there are 17 letters in
the three words appearing in the illustration.
FRANCIS BACON, BARON VERULAM,
VISCOUNT ST. ALBANS.
From Bacon's Advancement of
Learning.
Lord Bacon was born in 1561 and
history records his death in 1626. There are records in existence,
however, which would indicate the probability that his funeral was a
mock funeral and that, leaving England, he lived for many years under
another name in Germany, there faithfully serving the secret society to
the promulgation of whose doctrines he had consecrate his life. Little
doubt seems to exist in the minds of impartial investigators that Lord
Bacon was the legitimate son of Queen Elizabeth and the Earl of
Leicester.
That Sir Francis Bacon's
subterfuge was known to a limited few during his lifetime is quite
evident. Accordingly, stray hints regarding the true author of the
Shakespearian plays may be found in many seventeenth century volumes. On
page 33 (Bacon's cipher number) of the 1609 edition of Robert Cawdry's
Treasurie or Storehouse of Similes appears the
following significant allusion: "Like as men would laugh at a poore man,
if having precious garments lent him to act and play the part of some
honourable personage upon a stage, when the play were at an ende he
should keepe them as his owne, and bragge up and downe in
them."
Repeated references to the word
hog and the presence of cryptographic statements on page 33 of
various contemporary writings demonstrate that the keys to Bacon's
ciphers were his own name, words playing upon it, or its numerical
equivalent. Notable examples are the famous statement of Mistress
Quickly in The Merry Wives of Windsor: "Hang-hog is latten for
Bacon, I warrant you"; the title pages of The Countess of Pembroke's
Arcadia and Edmund Spenser's Faerie Queene; and the emblems
appearing in the works of Alciatus and Wither. Furthermore, the word
honorificabilitudinitatibus appearing in the fifth act of Love's
Labour's Lost is a Rosicrucian signature, as its numerical equivalent
(287) indicates.
Again, on the title page of the
first edition of Sir Francis Bacon's New Atlantis, Father Time is
depicted bringing a female figure out of the darkness of a cave. Around
the device is a Latin inscription: "In time the secret truth shall be
revealed." The catchwords and printer's devices appearing in volumes
published especially during the first half of the seventeenth century
were designed, arranged, and in some cases mutilated according to a
definite plan.
It is evident also that the
mispaginations in the Shakespearian Folios and other volumes are
keys to Baconian ciphers, for re-editions--often from new type and by
different printers--contain the same mistakes. For example, the
First and Second Folios of Shakespeare are printed from
entirely different type and by different printers nine years apart, but
in both editions page 153 of the Comedies is numbered 151, and
pages 249 and 250 are numbered 250 and 251 respectively. Also in the
1640 edition of Bacon's The Advancement and Proficience of
Learning, pages 353 and 354 are numbered 351 and 352 respectively,
and in the 1641 edition of Du Bartas' Divine Weeks pages 346 to
350 inclusive are entirely missing, while page 450 is numbered 442. The
frequency with which pages ending in numbers 50, 51, 52,53, and 54 are
involved will he noted.
The requirements of Lord
Verulam's biliteral cipher are fully met in scores of volumes printed
between 1590 and 1650 and in some printed at other times. An examination
of the verses by L. Digges, dedicated to the memory of the deceased
"Authour Maister W. Shakespeare," reveals the use of two fonts of type
for both capital and small letters, the differences being most marked in
the capital T's, N's, and A's, (Seethe First
Folio.) The cipher has been deleted from subsequent
editions.
The presence of hidden material
in the text is often indicated by needless involvement of words. On the
sixteenth unnumbered page of the 1641 edition of Du Bartas' Divine
Weeks is a boar surmounting a pyramidal text. The text is
meaningless jargon, evidently inserted for cryptographic reasons and
marked with Bacon's signature--the hog. The year following publication
of the First Folio of Shakespeare's plays in 1623, there was
printed in "Lunæburg" a remarkable volume on cryptography, avowedly by
Gustavus Selenus. It is considered extremely probable that this volume
constitutes the cryptographic key to the Great Shakespearian
Folio.
Peculiar symbolical head- and
tail-pieces also mark the presence of cryptograms. While such ornaments
are found in many early printed books, certain emblems are peculiar to
volumes containing Baconian Rosicrucian ciphers. The light and dark
shaded A is an interesting example. Bearing in mind the frequent
recurrence in Baconian symbolism of the light and dark shaded A
and the hog, the following statement by Bacon in his Interpretation
of Nature is highly significant: "If the sow with her snout should
happen to imprint the letter A upon the ground, wouldst thou therefore
imagine that she could write out a whole tragedy as one
letter?"
The Rosicrucians and other
secret societies of the seventeenth century used watermarks as mediums
for the conveyance of cryptographic references, and books presumably
containing Baconian ciphers are usually printed upon paper bearing
Rosicrucian or Masonic watermarks; often there are several symbols in
one book, such as the Rose Cross, urns, bunches of grapes, and
others.
At hand is a document which may
prove a remarkable key to a cipher beginning in The Tragedy of
Cymbeline. So far as known it has never been published and is
applicable only to the 1623 Folio of the Shakespearian plays. The
cipher is a line-and-word count involving punctuation, especially the
long and short exclamation points and the straight and slanting
interrogation points. This code was discovered by Henry William Bearse
in 1900, and after it has been thoroughly checked its exact nature will
be made public.
No reasonable doubt remains
that the Masonic Order is the direct outgrowth of the secret societies
of the Middle Ages, nor can it be denied that Freemasonry is permeated
by the symbolism and mysticism of the ancient and mediæval worlds. Sir
Francis Bacon knew the true secret of Masonic origin and there is reason
to suspect that he concealed this knowledge in cipher and cryptogram.
Bacon is not to be regarded solely as a man but rather as the focal
point between an invisible institution and a world which was never able
to distinguish between the messenger and the message which he
promulgated. This secret society, having rediscovered the lost wisdom of
the ages and fearing that the knowledge might be lost again, perpetuated
it in two ways: (1) by an organization (Freemasonry) to the initiates of which it
revealed its wisdom in the form of symbols; (2) by embodying its arcana
in the literature of the day by means of cunningly contrived ciphers and
enigmas.
A CRYPTIC HEADPIECE.
From Ralegh's History of the
World.
Many documents influenced by
Baconian philosophy--or intended m conceal Baconian or Rosicrucian
cryptograms--use certain conventional designs at the beginning and end
of chapters, which reveal to the initiated the presence of concealed
information. The above ornamental has long been accepted as of the
presence of Baconian influence and is to be found only in a certain
number of rare volumes, all of which contain Baconian cryptograms. These
cipher messages were placed in the books either by Bacon himself or by
contemporaneous and subsequent authors belonging to the same secret
society which Bacon served with his remarkable knowledge of ciphers and
enigmas. Variants of this headpiece adorn the Great Shakespearian Folio
(1623); Bacon's Novum Organum (1620); the St. James Bible (1611);
Spencer's Faerie Queene (1611); and Sir Walter Ralegh's History of the
World (1614) (See American Baconiana.)
THE DROESHOUT PORTRAIT OF
SHAKESPEARE.
From Shakespeare's Great
Folio of 1623.
There are no authentic
portraits of Shakspere in existence. The dissimilarities the Droeshout,
Chandos, Janssen, Hunt, Ashbourne, Soest, and Dunford portraits prove
conclusively that the artists were unaware of Shakspere's actual
features. An examination of the Droeshout portrait discloses several
peculiarities. Baconian enthusiasts are convinced that the face is only
a caricature, possibly the death mask of Francis Bacon. A comparison of
the Droeshout Shakspere with portraits and engravings of Francis Bacon
demonstrates the identity of the structure of the two faces, the
difference in expression being caused by lines of shading. Not also the
peculiar line running from the ear down to the chin. Does this line
subtly signify that the face itself a mask, ending at the ear? Notice
also that the head is not connected with the body, but is resting on the
collar. Most strange of all is the coat: one-half is on backwards. In
drawing the jacket, the artist has made the left arm correctly, but the
right arm has the back of the shoulder to the front. Frank Woodward has
noted that there are 157 letters on the title page. This is a
Rosicrucian signature of first importance. The date, 1623, Plus the two
letters "ON" from the word "LONDON," gives the cryptic signature of
Francis Bacon, by a simple numerical cipher. By merely exchanging the 26
letters of the alphabet for numbers, 1 became A, 6 becomes F, 2 becomes
B, and 3 becomes C, giving AFBC. To this is added the ON from LONDON,
resulting in AFBCON, which rearranged forms F. BACON.
Evidence points to the
existence of a group of wise and illustrious Fratres who assumed
the responsibility of publishing and preserving for future generations
the choicest of the secret books of the ancients, together with certain
other documents which they themselves had prepared. That future members
of their fraternity might not only identify these volumes bur also
immediately note the significant passages, words, chapters, or sections
therein, they created a symbolic alphabet of hieroglyphic designs. By
means of a certain key and order, the discerning few were thus enabled
to find that wisdom by which a man is "raised" to an illumined
life.
The tremendous import of the
Baconian mystery is daily becoming more apparent. Sir Francis Bacon was
a link in that great chain of minds which has perpetuated the secret
doctrine of antiquity from its beginning. This secret doctrine is
concealed in his cryptic writings. The search for this divine wisdom is
the only legitimate motive for the effort to decode his
cryptograms.
Masonic research might discover
much of value if it would turn its attention to certain volumes
published during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries which bear the
stamp and signet of that secret society whose members first established
modern Freemasonry but themselves remained as an intangible group
controlling and directing the activities of the outer body. The
unknown history and lost rituals of Freemasonry may be rediscovered in
the symbolism and cryptograms of the Middle Ages. Freemasonry is the
bright and glorious son of a mysterious and hidden father. It cannot
trace its parentage because that origin is obscured by the veil of the
superphysical and the mystical. The Great Folio of 1623 is a
veritable treasure house of Masonic lore and symbolism, and the time is
at hand when that Great Work should be accorded the consideration which
is its due.
Though Christianity shattered
the material organization of the pagan Mysteries, it could not destroy
the knowledge of supernatural power which the pagans possessed.
Therefore it is known that the Mysteries of Greece and Egypt were
secretly perpetuated through the early centuries of the church, and
later, by being clothed in the symbolism of Christianity, were accepted
as elements of that faith. Sir Francis Bacon was one of those who had
been entrusted with the perpetuation and dissemination of s the arcana
of the superphysical originally in the possession of the pagan
hierophants, and to attain that end either formulated the Fraternity of
R.C. or was admitted into an organization already existing under that
name and became one of its principal representatives.
For some reason not apparent to
the uninitiated there has been a continued and consistent effort to
prevent the unraveling of the Baconian skein. Whatever the power may be
which continually blocks the efforts of investigators, it is as
unremitting now as it was immediately following Bacon's death, and those
attempting to solve the enigma still feel the weight of its
resentment.
A misunderstanding world has
ever persecuted those who understood the secret workings of Nature,
seeking in every conceivable manner to exterminate the custodians of
this divine wisdom. Sir Francis Bacon's political prestige was finally
undermined and Sir Walter Ralegh met a shameful fate because their
transcendental knowledge was considered dangerous.
The forging of Shakspere's
handwriting; the foisting of fraudulent portraits and death masks upon a
gullible public; the fabrication of spurious biographies; the mutilation
of books and documents; the destruction or rendering illegible of
tablets and inscriptions containing cryptographic messages, have all
compounded the difficulties attendant upon the solution of the
Bacon-Shakspere-Rosicrucian riddle. The Ireland forgeries deceived
experts for years.
According to material
available, the supreme council of the Fraternity of R.C. was composed of
a certain number of individuals who had died what is known as the
"philosophic death." When the time came for an initiate to enter upon
his labors for the Order, he conveniently "died" under somewhat
mysterious circumstances. In reality he changed his name and place of
residence, and a box of rocks or a body secured for the purpose was
buried in his stead. It is believed that this happened in the case of
Sir Francis Bacon who, like all servants of the Mysteries, renounced all
personal credit and permitted others to be considered as the authors of
the documents which he wrote or inspired.
The cryptic writings of Francis
Bacon constitute one of the most powerful tangible elements in the
mysteries of transcendentalism and symbolic philosophy. Apparently many
years must yet pass before an uncomprehending world will appreciate the
transcending genius of that mysterious man who wrote the Novum
Organum, who sailed his little ship far out into the unexplored sea
of learning through the Pillars of Hercules, and whose ideals for a new
civilization are magnificently expressed in the Utopian dream of The
New Atlantis. Was Sir Francis Bacon a second Prometheus? Did his
great love for the people of the world and his pity for their ignorance
cause him to bring the divine fire from heaven concealed within the
contents of a printed page?
In all probability, the keys to
the Baconian riddle will be found in classical mythology. He who
understands the secret of the Seven-Rayed God will comprehend the method
employed by Bacon to accomplish his monumental labor. Aliases were
assumed by him in accordance with the attributes and order of the
members of the planetary system. One of the least known--but most
important--keys to the Baconian enigma is the Third, or 1637, Edition,
published in Paris, of Les Images ou Tableaux de platte peinture des
deux Philostrates sophistes grecs et les statues de Callistrate, by
Blaise de Vigenere. The title page of this volume--which, as the name of
the author when properly deciphered indicates, was written by or under
the direction of Bacon or his secret society--is one mass of important
Masonic or Rosicrucian symbols. On page 486 appears a plate entitled
"Hercules Furieux," showing a gigantic figure shaking a spear, the
ground before him strewn with curious emblems. In his curious work,
Das Bild des Speershüttlers die Lösung des Shakespeare-Rätsels,
Alfred Freund attempts to explain the Baconian symbolism in the
Philostrates. Bacon he reveals as the philosophical Hercules,
whom time will establish as the true "Spear-Shaker"
(Shakespeare).
TITLE PAGE OF THE FAMOUS FIRST EDITION OF SIR
WALTER RALEGH'S HISTORY OF THE WORLD.
From Ralegh's History of the
World.
What was the mysterious knowledge
which Sir Walter Ralegh possessed and which was declared to be
detrimental to the British government? Why was he executed when the
charges against him could not be proved? Was he a member of me of those
feared and hated secret societies which nearly overthrew political and
religious Europe during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries? Was Sir
Walter Ralegh an important factor in the
Bacon-Shakspere-Rosicrucian-Masonic enigma? By those seeking the keys to
this great controversy, he seems to have been almost entirely
overlooked. His contemporaries are unanimous in their praise of his
remarkable intellect, and he has long been considered me of Britain's
most brilliant sons.
Sir Walter Ralegh--soldier, courtier,
statesman, writer, poet, philosopher, and explorer--was a scintillating
figure at the court of Queen Elizabeth. Upon this same man, King
James--after the death of Elizabeth--heaped every indignity within his
power. The cowardly James, who shuddered at the mention of weapons and
cried like a child when he was crossed, was insanely jealous of the
brilliant courtier. Ralegh's enemies, Playing upon the king's weakness,
did not cease their relentless persecution until Ralegh had been hanged
and his decapitated, quartered, and disemboweled body lay at their
feet.
The title page reproduced above was
used by Ralegh's political foes as a powerful weapon against him. They
convinced James I that the face of the central figure upholding the
globe was a caricature of his own, and the enraged king ordered every
copy of the engraving destroyed. But a few copies escaped the royal
wrath; consequently the plate is extremely rare. The engraving is a mass
Rosicrucian and Masonic symbols, and the figures on the columns in all
probability conceal a cryptogram. More significant still is the fact
that the page facing this plate is a headpiece identical with that used
in the 1623 Folio of "Shakespeare" and also in Bacon's Novum
Organum.
back to top |
