Discussion:
The Birth of Merlin: or, The Childe hath found his Father.
(too old to reply)
Jim F.
2016-08-01 04:52:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Merlin's prophecy for his mother tells readers how to identify her.

MERLIN.
leave this soyl, and Ile conduct you to a place retir'd, which I by art [1]
have rais'd, call'd _Merlins Bower_, there shall you dwell with solitary
sighs, with grones and passions your companions, to weep away [3]
this flesh you have offended with, and leave all bare unto your
aierial soul, and when you die, I will erect a Monument upon the [5]
verdant Plains of _Salisbury_, no King shall have so high a sepulchre,
with pendulous stones that I will hang by art, where neither Lime [7]
nor Morter shalbe us'd, a dark _Enigma_ to the memory, for none
shall have the power to number them, a place that I will hollow [9]
for your rest,
Where no Night-hag shall walk, nor Ware-wolf tread, [11]
Where _Merlins_ Mother shall be sepulcher'd.

Every line, even word, means something here, e.g., line five:
"I will erect a Monument upon the verdant Plains of _Salisbury_."

When we see "Monument" and the author is Shakespeare, we could connect
this line to the Shakespeare Monument in Holy Trinity Church.

"M.onument upon the verdant P.lains of S.alisbury" hints at M. P. S., and
Maronem, Pylivm, Socratem (M. P. S.) in Shakespeare's monument.

M.ary P.hilip S.idney is a one-way anagram of "Monument, the verdant Plains."
Salisbury puns on sally's-bury. Philip Sidney dies in a sally.
The word verdant provides the needed letter d and r, and tell us that he's
an inexperienced soldier.

Mary Philip Sidney (M. P. S.) in Shakespeare's monument is also mentioned here:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/cN_rEPFp6QM/DaMaejV9ltIJ
laraine
2016-08-03 03:23:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
Merlin's prophecy for his mother tells readers how to identify her.
MERLIN.
leave this soyl, and Ile conduct you to a place retir'd, which I by art [1]
have rais'd, call'd _Merlins Bower_, there shall you dwell with solitary
sighs, with grones and passions your companions, to weep away [3]
this flesh you have offended with, and leave all bare unto your
aierial soul, and when you die, I will erect a Monument upon the [5]
verdant Plains of _Salisbury_, no King shall have so high a sepulchre,
with pendulous stones that I will hang by art, where neither Lime [7]
nor Morter shalbe us'd, a dark _Enigma_ to the memory, for none
shall have the power to number them, a place that I will hollow [9]
for your rest,
Where no Night-hag shall walk, nor Ware-wolf tread, [11]
Where _Merlins_ Mother shall be sepulcher'd.
"I will erect a Monument upon the verdant Plains of _Salisbury_."
When we see "Monument" and the author is Shakespeare, we could connect
this line to the Shakespeare Monument in Holy Trinity Church.
"M.onument upon the verdant P.lains of S.alisbury" hints at M. P. S., and
Maronem, Pylivm, Socratem (M. P. S.) in Shakespeare's monument.
M.ary P.hilip S.idney is a one-way anagram of "Monument, the verdant Plains."
What is a one-way anagram?
There is no 'y' or 'h' in the 'Monument' phrase, so this is not a
regular anagram. And 't', u', and 'v',etc. aren't in the 'Mary' phrase.

And so now I read that Hamlet is an anagram of Amleth...

Well, this is fun anyway...

Munday, Shirley, Peele
moon, sun, planets
martyr, saint, priest

C.
Post by Jim F.
Salisbury puns on sally's-bury. Philip Sidney dies in a sally.
The word verdant provides the needed letter d and r, and tell us that he's
an inexperienced soldier.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/cN_rEPFp6QM/DaMaejV9ltIJ
Morten St. George
2016-08-03 19:58:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by laraine
What is a one-way anagram?
There is no 'y' or 'h' in the 'Monument' phrase, so this is not a
regular anagram. And 't', u', and 'v',etc. aren't in the 'Mary' phrase.
And so now I read that Hamlet is an anagram of Amleth...
Well, this is fun anyway...
Munday, Shirley, Peele
moon, sun, planets
martyr, saint, priest
In the First Folio, we find a long list of actors beginning with William Shakespeare at the top. From the fourth name down, we note that Phillips ends with an "s", Kempt ends with a "t", Poope ends with an "e", Bryan ends with an "an", Condell ends with an "l", Slye ends with an "e", and Cowly ends with a "y". So, there you have it: the real Shakespeare was William Stanley!

There are thousands of word and letter games that you can play with Shakespeare's vast canon, but none of it is likely to convince the critics, and surely most of it is just pure coincidence. It makes little sense to employ anagram encoding because such techniques can be easily deciphered by undeserving readers.

This is not to say that the authors made no effort to secretly convey information of importance. But they did so in a way that cannot be decoded. They merely provided clues and required the reader to think. The logic is as follows: If the reader was smart enough to figure it out, then he or she deserved to know their secrets.
g***@btinternet.com
2016-08-04 00:40:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, 3 August 2016 20:58:43 UTC+1, Morten St. George wrote:
Lunatic working out snipped
Post by Morten St. George
There are thousands of word and letter games that you can play with Shakespeare's vast canon, but none of it is likely to convince the critics, and surely most of it is just pure coincidence. It makes little sense to employ anagram encoding because such techniques can be easily deciphered by undeserving readers.
Since the first folio would have cost an arm and a leg to buy. Who exactly would be the "undeserving readers"?
Post by Morten St. George
This is not to say that the authors made no effort to secretly convey information of importance. But they did so in a way that cannot be decoded.
If it can't be decoded, no amount of clues will able someone to decode it.

They merely provided clues and required the reader to think. The logic is as follows: If the reader was smart enough to figure it out, then he or she deserved to know their secrets.

Well both you and Jim have no chance of working it out! As you're both as thick as two planks of wood!!!
Morten St. George
2016-08-04 05:53:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by g***@btinternet.com
Since the first folio would have cost an arm and a leg to buy. Who exactly would be the "undeserving readers"?
Undeserving readers would be wicked people incapable of entertaining a higher thought in their head. Deserving readers would be people of the future capable of using the communicated knowledge for the common benefit of humankind.
Post by g***@btinternet.com
If it can't be decoded, no amount of clues will able someone to decode it.
If it employs none of the standard techniques of encoding, it certainly cannot be decoded. Other methods of communication were utilized.
Post by g***@btinternet.com
Well both you and Jim have no chance of working it out! As you're both as thick as two planks of wood!!!
No comment.
Jim F.
2016-08-04 02:56:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by laraine
Post by Jim F.
Merlin's prophecy for his mother tells readers how to identify her.
MERLIN.
leave this soyl, and Ile conduct you to a place retir'd, which I by art [1]
have rais'd, call'd _Merlins Bower_, there shall you dwell with solitary
sighs, with grones and passions your companions, to weep away [3]
this flesh you have offended with, and leave all bare unto your
aierial soul, and when you die, I will erect a Monument upon the [5]
verdant Plains of _Salisbury_, no King shall have so high a sepulchre,
with pendulous stones that I will hang by art, where neither Lime [7]
nor Morter shalbe us'd, a dark _Enigma_ to the memory, for none
shall have the power to number them, a place that I will hollow [9]
for your rest,
Where no Night-hag shall walk, nor Ware-wolf tread, [11]
Where _Merlins_ Mother shall be sepulcher'd.
"I will erect a Monument upon the verdant Plains of _Salisbury_."
When we see "Monument" and the author is Shakespeare, we could connect
this line to the Shakespeare Monument in Holy Trinity Church.
"M.onument upon the verdant P.lains of S.alisbury" hints at M. P. S., and
Maronem, Pylivm, Socratem (M. P. S.) in Shakespeare's monument.
M.ary P.hilip S.idney is a one-way anagram of "Monument, the verdant Plains."
What is a one-way anagram?
There is no 'y' or 'h' in the 'Monument' phrase, so this is not a
regular anagram. And 't', u', and 'v',etc. aren't in the 'Mary' phrase.
And so now I read that Hamlet is an anagram of Amleth...
Well, this is fun anyway...
Munday, Shirley, Peele
moon, sun, planets
martyr, saint, priest
C.
Post by Jim F.
Salisbury puns on sally's-bury. Philip Sidney dies in a sally.
The word verdant provides the needed letter d and r, and tell us that he's
an inexperienced soldier.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/cN_rEPFp6QM/DaMaejV9ltIJ
What is a one-way anagram?
Perfect anagram (same letters, same length):
Michael Drayton's "_Meridianis_ sits within a maze"
that seals Mary Sidney in Meridianis.

Both-way anagram (same letters, different length):
Salisbury to sally's-bury.

One-way anagram (source's letters greater than the target's):
source: "Philisides, the shepheard good and true."
target: Philip Sidney, who considers himself the shepherd.
Philip Sidney created the name Philisides for himself.
Post by laraine
There is no 'y' or 'h' in the 'Monument' phrase, so this is not a
regular anagram. And 't', u', and 'v',etc. aren't in the 'Mary' phrase.
source: "Monument upon the verdant Plains of Salisbury."
target: Mary Philip Sidney, in "M_n_men_ _p_n _he _erdan_ P_ains."
The monument is for the two.
Post by laraine
And so now I read that Hamlet is an anagram of Amleth...
A hint to solve the play via anagram.
Post by laraine
Well, this is fun anyway...
Munday, Shirley, Peele
moon, sun, planets
martyr, saint, priest
You're doing a random backward reasoning that diverges.
You need one sentence with capitalized M. P. S., and it
must contain all letters needed to spell Mary Philip Sidney,
and should be meaningful for the two. The above conditions
should be converge to one line as in "Monument upon the
verdant Plains of Salisbury."

Backward reasoning fixes the target and selects only words
that supports the target. Forward reasoning considers all
the realted to reach a conclusion. To expound Shakespeare's
works based on W. Shakespeare as the author, or Edward de Vere,
or Mary Sidney, or any other, is backward reasoning.

To solve Artesia via "art" alone is a kind of backward reasoning.
To consider all things related to Artesia, including Ostorious,
Octa, gentlewoman with an artificial Crab, and how Artesia and
Saxons win and lose in the play, is forward reasoning.

Artesia isn't a devil. She completes her mission, begs not for
her life at the end. Artesia is a heroine from the Saxons' view.
Morten St. George
2016-08-04 15:18:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
Michael Drayton's "_Meridianis_ sits within a maze"
that seals Mary Sidney in Meridianis.
Salisbury to sally's-bury.
source: "Philisides, the shepheard good and true."
target: Philip Sidney, who considers himself the shepherd.
Philip Sidney created the name Philisides for himself.
Thanks, Jim, for that clarification. I already had a good idea about what you were doing but it was nice to see the official rules.

Years ago I discovered that anagrams were employed in Nostradamus so I have no reason to doubt that they would occasionally reemploy this technique in their Shakespearean writings. Examples from Nostradamus include "Rapis" for "Paris" and the frequently seen "Chryen" for "Henry". It seems to have been permitted to add, delete, or change a single letter.

Another noteworthy example from Nostradamus would be the use of "Achem" in the second prose introduction to refer to the mysterious "Americh" found in one of the prophecies. In his Comedy of Errors, Shakespeare asks "Where America, the Indies?" which would suggest that Nostradamus employed the letter "h" as a wild card to be changed to the letter of our choice.

Studies in Nostradamus' use of anagrams are available online and if you were to look at them I'm sure you would see a reflection of yourself. My final opinion of it all is that the frequently-used letters of the Latin alphabet are too few in number to allow a lot of confidence in the anagrams. In other words, coincidental match-ups are more likely than not.
marco
2016-08-06 03:01:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
Michael Drayton's "_Meridianis_ sits within a maze"
that seals Mary Sidney in Meridianis.
Salisbury to sally's-bury.
source: "Philisides, the shepheard good and true."
target: Philip Sidney, who considers himself the shepherd.
Philip Sidney created the name Philisides for himself.
Thanks, Jim, for that clarification. I already had a good idea about what you were doing but it was nice to see the official rules.
Years ago I discovered that anagrams were employed in Nostradamus so I have no reason to doubt that they would occasionally reemploy this technique in their Shakespearean writings. Examples from Nostradamus include "Rapis" for "Paris" and the frequently seen "Chryen" for "Henry". It seems to have been permitted to add, delete, or change a single letter.
Another noteworthy example from Nostradamus would be the use of "Achem" in the second prose introduction to refer to the mysterious "Americh" found in one of the prophecies. In his Comedy of Errors, Shakespeare asks "Where America, the Indies?" which would suggest that Nostradamus employed the letter "h" as a wild card to be changed to the letter of our choice.
Studies in Nostradamus' use of anagrams are available online and if you were to look at them I'm sure you would see a reflection of yourself. My final opinion of it all is that the frequently-used letters of the Latin alphabet are too few in number to allow a lot of confidence in the anagrams. In other words, coincidental match-ups are more likely than not.
.
Jim F.
2016-09-17 07:00:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Saturday, August 6, 2016 at 11:01:48 AM UTC+8, marco wrote:
...
.
marco, or Art N, or nordicskiv2, or James D Carroll, ...
I'll show you again the power of one-way anagram.

Merlin's spirit page, a Sparrowhawk, is a one-way anagram of
William Shakespeare (merliN sparrOwhawk). We can see the riddler's logic
from sparrOwhawk, that all letters are taken from Shakespeare except O.

Proximus the magician, Merlin's rival, summoned two spirits called
Armel and Plesgeth. If Sparrowhawk riddles Shakespeare, the two spirits
should mean something similar.

PROXIMUS. Armel, Plesgeth! [Enter Spirits.]
SPIRITS. Quid vis?
PROXIMUS. Attend me.

Armel-Plesgeth can spell Mar-prelate. This matches with Lamilia's Fable.
William Shakespeare is a front man; Martin Mar-prelate a pseudonym.

The Birth of Merlin, a great play buried by scholars, tells the origin
and mission of Shakespeare.
A***@germanymail.com
2016-09-17 18:38:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
...
.
marco, or Art N, or nordicskiv2, or James D Carroll, ...
I'll show you again the power of one-way anagram.
Merlin's spirit page, a Sparrowhawk, is a one-way anagram of
William Shakespeare (merliN sparrOwhawk). We can see the riddler's logic
from sparrOwhawk, that all letters are taken from Shakespeare except O.
Proximus the magician, Merlin's rival, summoned two spirits called
Armel and Plesgeth. If Sparrowhawk riddles Shakespeare, the two spirits
should mean something similar.
PROXIMUS. Armel, Plesgeth! [Enter Spirits.]
SPIRITS. Quid vis?
PROXIMUS. Attend me.
Armel-Plesgeth can spell Mar-prelate. This matches with Lamilia's Fable.
William Shakespeare is a front man; Martin Mar-prelate a pseudonym.
The Birth of Merlin, a great play buried by scholars, tells the origin
and mission of Shakespeare.
Art N
Morten St. George
2016-09-17 23:53:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
The Birth of Merlin, a great play buried by scholars, tells the origin
and mission of Shakespeare.
Years ago I became interested in a small subset of the Nostradamus prophecies, which, I later discovered, were attributed to Merlin during medieval times. After years of investigation, I came to a startling conclusion: an astrologer by the name of Nostradamus never existed!

That’s right. Michel Nostradamus, far and away the most famous astrologer who ever lived, never existed. Today, you can find biographical information about Nostradamus on, literally, a million websites. All nonsense. He never existed.

To give life to an astrologer called Nostradamus, they took the following actions: a) they wrote and backdated (some thirty to forty years) roughly two dozen publications, b) they forged a number of documents and testimonials, and c) they constructed a monument to Nostradamus inside the local church of an ordinary citizen called Michel de Nostredame. That’s pretty much it. Then the charlatans, known as Nostradamians, came along and filled in the details with fictional biographies and off it went.

A couple of decades later, they decided to repeat the experiment, this time by creating a playwright called William Shakespeare. They accomplished this by a) writing and backdating some two and a half dozen publications, b) forging a number of documents and testimonials, and c) constructing a monument to Shakespeare inside the local church of an ordinary citizen called William Shakspere. And then the charlatans, known as Stratfordians, came along and filled in the details, writing one fictional biography after another, all based around the fake documents and publications.

It’s hard for us today to understand how ignorant people were back in a age when there was no television, no radio, no computers, no internet, and no newspapers. Anyone encountering one of those backdated publications would have no reason or means to challenge its authenticity. Today, upon finding a thirty-year old book published by a known publisher, we could affirm that it was genuine by checking federal copyright records, unless, of course, if the CIA, like the Jacobean secret service, had altered those records.

The Nostradamus conspiracy and the Shakespeare conspiracy were not two separate and distinct conspiracies. They were both the effect of a single cause: Merlin. Nostradamus masked Merlin, and Shakespeare provided the means to unmask him.

Long live the Rose Cross!
Jim F.
2016-09-18 08:02:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, September 18, 2016 at 7:53:23 AM UTC+8, Morten St. George wrote:
...
Morten,
Do you agree that one-way anagram exists in Shakespeare's works?
marco
2016-09-18 17:02:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
...
Morten,
Do you agree that one-way anagram exists in Shakespeare's works?
.
Morten St. George
2016-09-18 18:39:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
Morten,
Do you agree that one-way anagram exists in Shakespeare's works?
Jim,

I can see that you have spent a lot of time searching for one-way anagrams, and I’m sure you are very adept at finding and understanding them. But it is much more difficult for the rest of us.

I too play word games and no one can understand me at all. I concentrate my efforts on Merlin’s prophecies, which constitute 39 of the 942 prophecies attributed to Nostradamus.

One great mystery of those prophecies is why Merlin uses the spelling "bruine" in prophecy V-35 but then changes to "bruyne" in prophecy VI-37. For sure, the "i" and "y" were interchangeable but all the early publications are consistent with those spelling variations. I searched for an explanation in Shakespeare (who indeed sometimes provides clarifications on matters like this) and found none. But I think I found something in an external source:

"In Witnesse whereof I the said John Florio to this my Last Will & Testament (written every sillable with myne owne hand, and with long and mature delibercon digested, contayning foure sheets of paper, the First of eight and Iwenty lynes the second of nyne & Iwenty the third of nine & Iwenty and the Fourth of six lines,"

As you can see, at the end "nyne" changes to "nine" and "lynes" changes to "lines". That’s nothing unusual except that here the author says he is writing every syllable with diligence. The final line lengths "nine & Iwenty" and "six" add up to thirty-five, as in V-35 where we find "bruine". So, from there, how do we get to "bruyne" in VI-37?

Note that the author misspells the three Twenty as "Iwenty". "I" was the Roman numeral for 1, so these I’s add up to three, drawing our attention to the word "third" which is written with a small "t" unlike Fourth with a capital F. The best guess is that the author wants us to count the ordinals in this segment as numbers.

the First (1) of eight (8) and Iwenty (20) lynes the second (2) of nyne (9) & Iwenty (20) the third (3) of nine (9) & Iwenty (20) and the Fourth (4) of six (6) lines

By my calculations, all these numbers add up to 102. And now we see that 535 (V-35 "bruine") plus 102 adds up to 637 (VI-37 "bruyne"), and so Merlin’s spelling variations are confirmed. One can now surmise that Merlin changed to "bruyne" because he wanted to play some type of word game where the difference between an "i" and a "y" is of critical importance.

Here are the last two lines of VI-37:

Innocent faict mort on accusera,
Nocent caché, taillis à la bruyne.

Innocent of the deed (when) dead he shall be accused,
The guilty one hidden, "taillis" to the "bruyne".

The "taillis à la bruyne" translates as brush country [a type of terrain] to the rainy weather, but with a "hidden" signal in there, we want to stick with the French.

In V-92 (535 plus 8 and 20 plus 9 and 20) Merlin resorts to numbers and gaps to geometrically create (within four lines of text) a Latin cross. So let’s try the cross idea here too:

T A I L L I S
B R U Y N E

B A I N E S

Taillis is the longer word, seven letters, which gives us three for the left side of the horizontal bar and three for the right side; we pick our letters, one down, two up, two down, one up. And finally we must imagine four letters to complete the vertical bar of our Latin cross.

So that’s it. Merlin has given us a clue as to the identity of the guilty one: LYxxxx BAINES.

As you can see, my approach to word games is sheer madness, so I sure hope you don’t feel bad that some of us find it difficult to follow your anagrams.
A***@germanymail.com
2016-09-18 20:10:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
Morten,
Do you agree that one-way anagram exists in Shakespeare's works?
Jim,
I can see that you have spent a lot of time searching for one-way anagrams, and I’m sure you are very adept at finding and understanding them. But it is much more difficult for the rest of us.
I too play word games and no one can understand me at all. I concentrate my efforts on Merlin’s prophecies, which constitute 39 of the 942 prophecies attributed to Nostradamus.
"In Witnesse whereof I the said John Florio to this my Last Will & Testament (written every sillable with myne owne hand, and with long and mature delibercon digested, contayning foure sheets of paper, the First of eight and Iwenty lynes the second of nyne & Iwenty the third of nine & Iwenty and the Fourth of six lines,"
As you can see, at the end "nyne" changes to "nine" and "lynes" changes to "lines". That’s nothing unusual except that here the author says he is writing every syllable with diligence. The final line lengths "nine & Iwenty" and "six" add up to thirty-five, as in V-35 where we find "bruine". So, from there, how do we get to "bruyne" in VI-37?
Note that the author misspells the three Twenty as "Iwenty". "I" was the Roman numeral for 1, so these I’s add up to three, drawing our attention to the word "third" which is written with a small "t" unlike Fourth with a capital F. The best guess is that the author wants us to count the ordinals in this segment as numbers.
the First (1) of eight (8) and Iwenty (20) lynes the second (2) of nyne (9) & Iwenty (20) the third (3) of nine (9) & Iwenty (20) and the Fourth (4) of six (6) lines
By my calculations, all these numbers add up to 102. And now we see that 535 (V-35 "bruine") plus 102 adds up to 637 (VI-37 "bruyne"), and so Merlin’s spelling variations are confirmed. One can now surmise that Merlin changed to "bruyne" because he wanted to play some type of word game where the difference between an "i" and a "y" is of critical importance.
Innocent faict mort on accusera,
Nocent caché, taillis à la bruyne.
Innocent of the deed (when) dead he shall be accused,
The guilty one hidden, "taillis" to the "bruyne".
The "taillis à la bruyne" translates as brush country [a type of terrain] to the rainy weather, but with a "hidden" signal in there, we want to stick with the French.
T A I L L I S
B R U Y N E
B A I N E S
Taillis is the longer word, seven letters, which gives us three for the left side of the horizontal bar and three for the right side; we pick our letters, one down, two up, two down, one up. And finally we must imagine four letters to complete the vertical bar of our Latin cross.
So that’s it. Merlin has given us a clue as to the identity of the guilty one: LYxxxx BAINES.
As you can see, my approach to word games is sheer madness, so I sure hope you don’t feel bad that some of us find it difficult to follow your anagrams.
Art n
g***@btinternet.com
2016-09-18 20:37:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
B A I N E S
So that’s it. Merlin has given us a clue as to the identity of the guilty one: LYxxxx BAINES.
"Baines" is an old Norse name, very common here in Yorkshire. It means "bones"
Post by Morten St. George
As you can see, my approach to word games is sheer madness,
Your approach to everything is sheer madness!!

One bit I don't understand as it's possibly the ramblings of a madman. Is this line:
"I concentrate my efforts on Merlin’s prophecies, which constitute 39 of the 942 prophecies attributed to Nostradamus."

Only 39? So who or what did the rest? Plus how do you know that the rest are not Merlin?
Probably wish that I hadn't asked that!!!
v***@gmail.com
2016-09-18 21:15:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by g***@btinternet.com
Post by Morten St. George
B A I N E S
So that’s it. Merlin has given us a clue as to the identity of the guilty one: LYxxxx BAINES.
"Baines" is an old Norse name, very common here in Yorkshire. It means "bones"
Post by Morten St. George
As you can see, my approach to word games is sheer madness,
Your approach to everything is sheer madness!!
"I concentrate my efforts on Merlin’s prophecies, which constitute 39 of the 942 prophecies attributed to Nostradamus."
Only 39? So who or what did the rest? Plus how do you know that the rest are not Merlin?
Probably wish that I hadn't asked that!!!
I might add, what use have prophesies ever been to anyone? And [laugh] why doesn't Merlin speak it straight out? Unless of course it could be any tall white man wearing a leather belt, etc. What is revealed?

And spare me the ART NEUNDORFER response, which is, if you have a computer, spend 20 years decoding these messages, 7 times a day, it means ... unghh?

Merlin is of course a TYPE not a person, even though some people are of a type. The insanity of religioious belief and other beliefs is when the metaphor is mistook for concrete reality.

Phil Innes
Morten St. George
2016-09-19 04:53:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
I might add, what use have prophesies ever been to anyone? And [laugh] why doesn't Merlin speak it straight out? Unless of course it could be any tall white man wearing a leather belt, etc. What is revealed?
I can see that you don’t know much about prophecies, not even how to spell the word. And I don’t know where all your ramblings come from. Jim F. merely asked me for my opinion on his anagrams, and to explain to him the precariousness of word games, I illustrated with an example of my own. That’s all. No prophetic claims were made.

By Mortenian theory, Merlin was the inspiration for the Nostradamus project, the Marlowe project, and the Shakespeare project. Today, no one believes that Merlin knew what he was talking about, but it looks like Shakespeare gave him some credence:

«But this we will confess publicly by these presents, to the honour of God, that what secret soever we have learned out of the Book M, although before our eyes we behold the image and pattern of all the world, yet are there not shewn unto us our misfortunes, nor hour of death, the which is known only to God Himself.»

The M, of course, refers to Merlin.
g***@btinternet.com
2016-09-19 12:19:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by v***@gmail.com
I might add, what use have prophesies ever been to anyone? And [laugh] why doesn't Merlin speak it straight out? Unless of course it could be any tall white man wearing a leather belt, etc. What is revealed?
I can see that you don’t know much about prophecies, not even how to spell the word. And I don’t know where all your ramblings come from. Jim F. merely asked me for my opinion on his anagrams, and to explain to him the precariousness of word games, I illustrated with an example of my own. That’s all. No prophetic claims were made.
«But this we will confess publicly by these presents, to the honour of God, that what secret soever we have learned out of the Book M, although before our eyes we behold the image and pattern of all the world, yet are there not shewn unto us our misfortunes, nor hour of death, the which is known only to God Himself.»
The M, of course, refers to Merlin.
I thought you said this is the Shakespeare forum?
Then you go on about the Rosicrucian movement and a book not credited to anyone. Plus quote it wrong!!

"The M, could refer to Merlin"
Don't you mean?
Morten St. George
2016-09-19 14:00:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by g***@btinternet.com
"The M, could refer to Merlin"
Don't you mean?
Some years ago, before I had ever heard of Merlin, I thought it likely that it referred to the M. in the Les Propheties de M. Michel Nostradamus, which conceals the surviving prophecies of Merlin. Elsewhere the Fama tries to clarify the meaning of one of Merlin’s more mysterious words, making it evident that the M. really stands for Merlin.

Merlin can be openly identified in other writings of Shakespeare.

King Lear:

This prophecy Merlin shall make, for I live before his time.

Henry IV, Part 1:

Of the dreamer Merlin and his prophecies,

Edward III:

Besides, there goes a Prophesy abroad,
Published by one that was a Friar once,
Whose Oracles have many times proved true;

And, of course, as I extensively illustrate in my essay, Shakespeare refers to Merlin’s prophecies in his Sonnets, in his two major poems, and in all thirty-six of the plays that were compiled into his First Folio.

What do you Stratfordians have to say about that?
g***@btinternet.com
2016-09-19 14:46:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by g***@btinternet.com
"The M, could refer to Merlin"
Don't you mean?
Some years ago, before I had ever heard of Merlin, I thought it likely that it referred to the M. in the Les Propheties de M. Michel Nostradamus, which conceals the surviving prophecies of Merlin. Elsewhere the Fama tries to clarify the meaning of one of Merlin’s more mysterious words, making it evident that the M. really stands for Merlin.
There is no evidence that Fama was written by an Englishman. In fact it came out in Germany so it was more likely a German that wrote it. A quick websearch reveals the book of M was more likely the Book of Mormon. Having looked at the Fama on the website of the Rosicrucian Archive, it's a very religious publication, so the books (it mentions several all with the first letter) are likely to be religious in nature and so the Mormon would fit better than Merlin.
Post by Morten St. George
Merlin can be openly identified in other writings of Shakespeare.
This prophecy Merlin shall make, for I live before his time.
Of the dreamer Merlin and his prophecies,
Besides, there goes a Prophesy abroad,
Published by one that was a Friar once,
Whose Oracles have many times proved true;
And, of course, as I extensively illustrate in my essay, Shakespeare refers to Merlin’s prophecies in his Sonnets, in his two major poems, and in all thirty-six of the plays that were compiled into his First Folio.
What do you Stratfordians have to say about that?
It rather depends on the context of who is saying what. The King Arthur legend was very popular with Henry VIII. And the fact that you quote King Lear first is highly significant. Since there is little doubt in my mind that King Lear was a parody of Henry VIII. As I said before Shakespeare gets most of the information about Queen Elizabeth's life direct from the Queen. And she would have known what her father said. Hence the words of Lear(Henry) might have been what came out of his own mouth. You will find that a lot in the Shakespeare plays. Once you know who the real characters are then you can spot the words they spoke in real life.
For example if I wrote a play about a woman who was obsessed with Merlin, and people forging documents, to protect a man called Billy Tonely, who she was in love with, but was real villain intent on killing the president. You would know who that woman was straight away. But 400 years later, would anyone else know?

I said before I am not a Stratfordian!
They don't except the sonnets were partially written by Queen Elizabeth. But like you, I know things that they are too blind to see. Unfortunately your eyes though they might see, see the wrong things!

I should point out they lived in a world of supposition, so the last play you mentioned could be any number of persons who predicted things.
Morten St. George
2016-09-19 15:04:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by g***@btinternet.com
There is no evidence that Fama was written by an Englishman. In fact it came out in Germany so it was more likely a German that wrote it.
By Mortenian theory, one of the Shakespearean coauthors was an Englishman who grew up in Germany and who wrote two anonymous classics in the German language: Faustbuch (1587) and Fama Fraternitatis (1614).
g***@btinternet.com
2016-09-19 18:33:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by g***@btinternet.com
There is no evidence that Fama was written by an Englishman. In fact it came out in Germany so it was more likely a German that wrote it.
By Mortenian theory, one of the Shakespearean coauthors was an Englishman who grew up in Germany and who wrote two anonymous classics in the German language: Faustbuch (1587) and Fama Fraternitatis (1614).
Mortenian Theory is it now? Which I think means that NOBODY else believes a word of it.

Having looked at Fama Fraternitatis I can defiantly say that whoever wrote that was completely unfamiliar with any Shakespeare play. And guess what you can not contradict that Mutton, because you have NEVER read the Shakespeare plays, so don't know if what I am saying is the truth, or if I am lying!!!

What's this co-authors thing. It's not Stanley then, decided he's a bit thick to write the plays on his own Mutton?
Why don't you have a word with King Arthur NutCAse, he has so many of the writers involved, most of which hated one-another's guts, that he fills this site up everyday with how they did it and then has them appearing in every publication since. He probably find Merlin for you in the OxFord English dictionary. And not under M!
Morten St. George
2016-09-20 02:04:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by g***@btinternet.com
What's this co-authors thing. It's not Stanley then, decided he's a bit thick to write the plays on his own Mutton?
Graham, I’m getting tired of having to repeat myself. I’ve been saying all along that there were two authors.

Many signs point to the following scenario: John Florio did the research for the tragedies and comedies; he devised the characters and prepared an outline of the plot. William Stanley then wrote the plays following Florio’s outline. Simple.

I sometimes use the word "Shakespeare" to refer to either one of the authors or to the two of them collectively. Assuming I’m right on this two author thing, which one of the two do you think we should call Shakespeare?
g***@btinternet.com
2016-09-20 17:52:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by g***@btinternet.com
What's this co-authors thing. It's not Stanley then, decided he's a bit thick to write the plays on his own Mutton?
Graham, I’m getting tired of having to repeat myself. I’ve been saying all along that there were two authors.
Many signs point to the following scenario: John Florio did the research for the tragedies and comedies; he devised the characters and prepared an outline of the plot. William Stanley then wrote the plays following Florio’s outline. Simple.
I sometimes use the word "Shakespeare" to refer to either one of the authors or to the two of them collectively. Assuming I’m right on this two author thing, which one of the two do you think we should call Shakespeare?
So I was spot on, you do think he's thick and can't do the research himself!
And Florio is too thick to write a play.

Interesting that, since you haven't read the plays, do you consider Florio to be the one in love with Queen Elizabeth, or do you consider Stanley in love with Queen Elizabeth? Bearing in mind she wouldn't have anything to do with known married men and sent them packing if they were.
How else are they to get details of the events in Elizabeth's life, that can be clearly seen if you have read Shakespeare's plays?
Morten St. George
2016-09-20 19:02:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by g***@btinternet.com
So I was spot on, you do think he's thick and can't do the research himself!
I suspect that Stanley, unlike Florio, was weak in his ability to read medieval Italian literature which provided source material for quite a few plays. Florio would have also been able to read things like Der Busant, a Middle High German poem believed to be the source of A Midsummer Night’s Dream.
Post by g***@btinternet.com
And Florio is too thick to write a play.
Florio’s predominate native tongue was almost certainly German and hence he is unlikely to have had (nor does he demonstrate in the little he wrote in English) the enormous flare for the English language which is reflected in the plays.
Post by g***@btinternet.com
How else are they to get details of the events in Elizabeth's life, that can be clearly seen if you have read Shakespeare's plays?
Unlike Shakspere, neither Stanley nor Florio were strangers to the Royal Court.
g***@btinternet.com
2016-09-20 19:49:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
I suspect that Stanley, unlike Florio, was weak in his ability to read medieval Italian literature which provided source material for quite a few plays. Florio would have also been able to read things like Der Busant, a Middle High German poem believed to be the source of A Midsummer Night’s Dream.
By one person from recent times!
"According to John Twyning, the play's plot of four lovers undergoing a trial in the woods was intended as a "riff" on Der Busant"
Highly unlikely that a 15th Century poem German poem would still be popular or thought about in England.
Pure coincidence could also account for it. Midsummer Night's Dream was first performed in 1586. Most of it is about taking the piss out of other acting companies. Probably Oxford or some others.
Post by Morten St. George
Post by g***@btinternet.com
And Florio is too thick to write a play.
Florio’s predominate native tongue was almost certainly German and hence he is unlikely to have had (nor does he demonstrate in the little he wrote in English) the enormous flare for the English language which is reflected in the plays.
How would you know you haven't read them!
Post by Morten St. George
Post by g***@btinternet.com
How else are they to get details of the events in Elizabeth's life, that can be clearly seen if you have read Shakespeare's plays?
Unlike Shakspere, neither Stanley nor Florio were strangers to the Royal Court.
Shakespeare and Marlowe are there in a painting of Robert Dudley dancing with Queen Elizabeth. He should crop up in the court records, but he doesn't due to the fact that Elizabeth censored them in 1588.

But you failed to answer the which one of them was in love with Queen Elizabeth? For whoever wrote the plays and sonnets was in love with Queen Elizabeth.
Morten St. George
2016-09-20 21:23:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by g***@btinternet.com
But you failed to answer the which one of them was in love with Queen Elizabeth? For whoever wrote the plays and sonnets was in love with Queen Elizabeth.
Authorship of the Sonnets is not called into question. Per Mortenian theory, Stanley wrote the Sonnets as a tribute to Florio’s parents, Guilford Dudley and Queen Jane. See my "Guildford Dudley: The Fair Youth?" thread for more information.
g***@btinternet.com
2016-09-20 23:24:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by g***@btinternet.com
But you failed to answer the which one of them was in love with Queen Elizabeth? For whoever wrote the plays and sonnets was in love with Queen Elizabeth.
Authorship of the Sonnets is not called into question. Per Mortenian theory, Stanley wrote the Sonnets as a tribute to Florio’s parents, Guilford Dudley and Queen Jane. See my "Guildford Dudley: The Fair Youth?" thread for more information.
Again you fail to answer the question.

The sonnets are poems between the young and older Shakespeare and Queen Elizabeth. Shakespeare is the fair youth.
Queen Jane and Dudley are not Florio's parents and there is no evidence AT ALL that Jane got pregnant, so that's impossible.
Morten St. George
2016-09-19 04:41:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by g***@btinternet.com
Only 39? So who or what did the rest? Plus how do you know that the rest are not Merlin?
Probably wish that I hadn't asked that!!!
Graham, answers to all your questions can be found on one or another of my three websites. This here is a Shakespeare forum.
Jim F.
2016-09-19 13:16:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Monday, September 19, 2016 at 2:39:38 AM UTC+8, Morten St. George wrote:
...
Post by Morten St. George
As you can see, my approach to word games is sheer madness, so I sure hope you don’t feel bad that some of us find it difficult to follow your anagrams.
Morten,

Do you agree that
Merlin Sparrowhawk to William Shakespeare, and
Armel Plesgeth to Mar-prelate,
are two simple one-way anagrams?
Morten St. George
2016-09-19 14:13:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
Morten,
Do you agree that
Merlin Sparrowhawk to William Shakespeare, and
Armel Plesgeth to Mar-prelate,
are two simple one-way anagrams?
Jim, I have no problem following the mechanics of these anagrams, but to convince me that this is what the author intended you have to tie it to a specific objective, such as,

a) to identify or explain one of Merlin’s prophecies, or

b) to identify members of their secret society.

All the word games that I have so far encountered apply to one or the other of those objectives.
Jim F.
2016-09-21 01:52:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
Morten,
Do you agree that
Merlin Sparrowhawk to William Shakespeare, and
Armel Plesgeth to Mar-prelate,
are two simple one-way anagrams?
Jim, I have no problem following the mechanics of these anagrams, but to convince me that this is what the author intended you have to tie it to a specific objective, such as,
a) to identify or explain one of Merlin’s prophecies, or
b) to identify members of their secret society.
All the word games that I have so far encountered apply to one or the other of those objectives.
Morten,

You "have no problem following the mechanics of these anagrams" is enough,
for I solve all characters in _The Birth of Merlin_ via "the mechanics,"
that can't be just a coincidence, right?

However, the true difficulty in Shakespeare isn't anagrams but hidden riddles.
Try one in _Merlin_:
Why the gentlewoman comes with a jewel, an artificial crab, to Uter?
Not just for seducing Uter. Shakespeare is better than that.

[Enter Waiting Gentlewoman with a Jewel.]
GENTLEWOMAN. The noble Prince, I take it sir?
PRINCE UTER. You speak me what I should be, Lady.
GENTLEWOMAN. Know by that name sir, Queen _Artesia_ greets you.
PRINCE UTER. Alas good vertue, how is she mistaken!
GENTLEWOMAN. Commanding her affection in this Jewel, sir.
PRINCE UTER.
She binds my service to her: ha! a Jewel 'tis a fair one trust me,
and methinks it much resembles something I have seen with her.
GENTLEWOMAN. It is an artificial crab, Sir.
PRINCE UTER. A creature that goes backward.
GENTLEWOMAN. True, from the way it looks.
PRINCE UTER. There is no moral in it aludes to her self?
A***@germanymail.com
2016-09-21 19:39:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
Morten,
Do you agree that
Merlin Sparrowhawk to William Shakespeare, and
Armel Plesgeth to Mar-prelate,
are two simple one-way anagrams?
Jim, I have no problem following the mechanics of these anagrams, but to convince me that this is what the author intended you have to tie it to a specific objective, such as,
a) to identify or explain one of Merlin’s prophecies, or
b) to identify members of their secret society.
All the word games that I have so far encountered apply to one or the other of those objectives.
Morten,
You "have no problem following the mechanics of these anagrams" is enough,
for I solve all characters in _The Birth of Merlin_ via "the mechanics,"
that can't be just a coincidence, right?
However, the true difficulty in Shakespeare isn't anagrams but hidden riddles.
Why the gentlewoman comes with a jewel, an artificial crab, to Uter?
Not just for seducing Uter. Shakespeare is better than that.
[Enter Waiting Gentlewoman with a Jewel.]
GENTLEWOMAN. The noble Prince, I take it sir?
PRINCE UTER. You speak me what I should be, Lady.
GENTLEWOMAN. Know by that name sir, Queen _Artesia_ greets you.
PRINCE UTER. Alas good vertue, how is she mistaken!
GENTLEWOMAN. Commanding her affection in this Jewel, sir.
PRINCE UTER.
She binds my service to her: ha! a Jewel 'tis a fair one trust me,
and methinks it much resembles something I have seen with her.
GENTLEWOMAN. It is an artificial crab, Sir.
PRINCE UTER. A creature that goes backward.
GENTLEWOMAN. True, from the way it looks.
PRINCE UTER. There is no moral in it aludes to her self?
Art N
Morten St. George
2016-09-22 03:45:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
Morten,
Do you agree that
Merlin Sparrowhawk to William Shakespeare, and
Armel Plesgeth to Mar-prelate,
are two simple one-way anagrams?
Jim, I have no problem following the mechanics of these anagrams, but to convince me that this is what the author intended you have to tie it to a specific objective, such as,
a) to identify or explain one of Merlin’s prophecies, or
b) to identify members of their secret society.
All the word games that I have so far encountered apply to one or the other of those objectives.
Morten,
You "have no problem following the mechanics of these anagrams" is enough,
for I solve all characters in _The Birth of Merlin_ via "the mechanics,"
that can't be just a coincidence, right?
However, the true difficulty in Shakespeare isn't anagrams but hidden riddles.
Why the gentlewoman comes with a jewel, an artificial crab, to Uter?
Not just for seducing Uter. Shakespeare is better than that.
[Enter Waiting Gentlewoman with a Jewel.]
GENTLEWOMAN. The noble Prince, I take it sir?
PRINCE UTER. You speak me what I should be, Lady.
GENTLEWOMAN. Know by that name sir, Queen _Artesia_ greets you.
PRINCE UTER. Alas good vertue, how is she mistaken!
GENTLEWOMAN. Commanding her affection in this Jewel, sir.
PRINCE UTER.
She binds my service to her: ha! a Jewel 'tis a fair one trust me,
and methinks it much resembles something I have seen with her.
GENTLEWOMAN. It is an artificial crab, Sir.
PRINCE UTER. A creature that goes backward.
GENTLEWOMAN. True, from the way it looks.
PRINCE UTER. There is no moral in it aludes to her self?
It's nice to know that there's someone besides me interested in the Merlin play. I've known for a couple of years that Merlin's prophecies strongly influenced the Shakespearean plays and when I found a play called The Birth of Merlin on a list of apocrypha, I went to check it out.

According to Wikipedia, there is unambiguous evidence that The Birth of Merlin was written in 1622. That leaves, perhaps, just enough time to get it included in the First Folio, but it's not there.

Laraine made an interesting comment a couple of months ago:

« I've heard that some think that Timon of Athens almost didn't make it into the First Folio, but ended up taking the place of Troilus and Cressida there.»

It is speculated that Troilus (a play of 29 pages or 30 with Prologue) originally occupied the 31 blank pages that precede Julius Caesar (which begins on page 109 with the other plays occupying 77 pages in total), but for reasons unknown, it was deleted and replaced by Timon of Athens (a play of 21 pages or 22 pages with Actors). But then they changed their mind about Troilus and stuck it in the front of the Tragedies section unnumbered. Needless to say, all this makes little sense.

I see that Dominick typeset The Birth of Merlin on to 31.5 pages, two columns per page, similar to the First Folio in font and layout, but with roughly seven more lines per column and a dozen fewer characters per complete row, which could work out precisely to the missing 31 pages due to lots of short rows. I would not rule out the possibility that the Merlin play was originally planned for inclusion in the First Folio but then a problem arose; for example, perhaps they couldn't suppress Wikipedia's evidence that it was written in 1622.

In his Last Will and Testament, John Florio writes:

«Moreover I entreat my deare wife that if at my death my servant Artur [space left] shall chance to be with mee … »

The "[space left]" was written in by Clara Longworth in her transcription of Florio's will, published in 1921.

QUESTON:
What Englishman called Artur had no last name?

ANSWER:
King Arthur

«All future times shall still record this story,
Of Merlin's learned worth and Arthur's glory.»

QUESTION:
Why is Artur spelled without the letter "h" in the middle?

ANSWER:
You pick up the "h" from Meres' Jo(h)son or from Carew's Shakesp(h)eare.

Wikipedia notes that Florio "had three children, Joane Florio, baptised in Oxford in 1585; Edward, in 1588 and Elizabeth, in 1589." Two of them apparently died young and, in Florio's will, we see that the surviving daughter has magically changed her name: "I give and bequeath unto my daughter Aurelia ..."

QUESTION:
What masculine name does Aurelia remind you of?

ANSWER:
Aurelius

QUESTION:
Who was the leading character of The Birth of Merlin, the first named in the Drammatis Personae?

ANSWER:
Aurelius, King of Brittain

You're right, Jim F., The Birth of Merlin really is a Shakespearean play.
g***@btinternet.com
2016-09-22 15:54:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
It's nice to know that there's someone besides me interested in the Merlin play. I've known for a couple of years that Merlin's prophecies strongly influenced the Shakespearean plays and when I found a play called The Birth of Merlin on a list of apocrypha, I went to check it out.
According to Wikipedia, there is unambiguous evidence that The Birth of Merlin was written in 1622. That leaves, perhaps, just enough time to get it included in the First Folio, but it's not there.
« I've heard that some think that Timon of Athens almost didn't make it into the First Folio, but ended up taking the place of Troilus and Cressida there.»
It is speculated that Troilus (a play of 29 pages or 30 with Prologue) originally occupied the 31 blank pages that precede Julius Caesar (which begins on page 109 with the other plays occupying 77 pages in total), but for reasons unknown, it was deleted and replaced by Timon of Athens (a play of 21 pages or 22 pages with Actors). But then they changed their mind about Troilus and stuck it in the front of the Tragedies section unnumbered. Needless to say, all this makes little sense.
I see that Dominick typeset The Birth of Merlin on to 31.5 pages, two columns per page, similar to the First Folio in font and layout, but with roughly seven more lines per column and a dozen fewer characters per complete row, which could work out precisely to the missing 31 pages due to lots of short rows. I would not rule out the possibility that the Merlin play was originally planned for inclusion in the First Folio but then a problem arose; for example, perhaps they couldn't suppress Wikipedia's evidence that it was written in 1622.
«Moreover I entreat my deare wife that if at my death my servant Artur [space left] shall chance to be with mee … »
The "[space left]" was written in by Clara Longworth in her transcription of Florio's will, published in 1921.
What Englishman called Artur had no last name?
King Arthur
Wasn't it Arthur Pendragon?
Post by Morten St. George
«All future times shall still record this story,
Of Merlin's learned worth and Arthur's glory.»
Why is Artur spelled without the letter "h" in the middle?
You pick up the "h" from Meres' Jo(h)son or from Carew's Shakesp(h)eare.
Wikipedia notes that Florio "had three children, Joane Florio, baptised in Oxford in 1585; Edward, in 1588 and Elizabeth, in 1589." Two of them apparently died young and, in Florio's will, we see that the surviving daughter has magically changed her name: "I give and bequeath unto my daughter Aurelia ..."
What masculine name does Aurelia remind you of?
Aurelius
Who was the leading character of The Birth of Merlin, the first named in the Drammatis Personae?
Aurelius, King of Brittain
You're right, Jim F., The Birth of Merlin really is a Shakespearean play.
Yes it takes the piss out of Christopher Merlin (Marlowe) and Jim F found that Marlowe took the part of Merlin. For him to do that in was written before 1593.

I will put this to Mutton.. John Florio saw that play sometime before 1589 and named his new daughter (probably a forth child infant mortality being very high then) after the lead character in the play performed by the Shakespeare company. Which he took no part in writing.
Morten St. George
2016-09-22 17:57:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by g***@btinternet.com
Wasn't it Arthur Pendragon?
No, it wasn’t. That’s a term invented by evil Stratfordians who feel that everybody should have a last name. "Arthur Pendragon" is nowhere to be found in any English book published during Shakspere’s lifetime or earlier. See Early English Books Online, highly recommended by Laraine.

Additionally, you can’t even find "Arthur Pendragon" in Wikipedia’s article on King Arthur and definitely not in the writings of Geoffrey of Monmouth.

Moreover, "Pendragon" was Uther’s epithet, not his last name. You Stratfordians are hopeless.
g***@btinternet.com
2016-09-22 19:55:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by g***@btinternet.com
Wasn't it Arthur Pendragon?
No, it wasn’t. That’s a term invented by evil Stratfordians who feel that everybody should have a last name. "Arthur Pendragon" is nowhere to be found in any English book published during Shakspere’s lifetime or earlier. See Early English Books Online, highly recommended by Laraine.
Additionally, you can’t even find "Arthur Pendragon" in Wikipedia’s article on King Arthur and definitely not in the writings of Geoffrey of Monmouth.
Moreover, "Pendragon" was Uther’s epithet, not his last name. You Stratfordians are hopeless.
Hold on a minute Stratfordians (who I am not one) did not event anything to do with King Arthur. King Arthur is actually a legend, which means he probably didn't exist at all!
Arthur Pendragon was in the Disney movie!
I'm not debating the rights or wrongs of a fictional character with you. The fact is that he is called Arthur Pendragon now, if only because he was called that in the Disney movie.
laraine
2016-09-24 01:21:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
See Early English Books Online, highly recommended by Laraine.
I should say that I recently discovered that this database
is not yet complete. They are still building it, last I heard.
It can still be useful for many searches, of course.

C.
Jim F.
2016-09-23 03:39:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 11:45:32 AM UTC+8, Morten St. George wrote:
...
Post by Morten St. George
It's nice to know that there's someone besides me interested in the Merlin play. I've known for a couple of years that Merlin's prophecies strongly influenced the Shakespearean plays and when I found a play called The Birth of Merlin on a list of apocrypha, I went to check it out.
...

Morten,

How about the jewel and crab thing?

A hint. Touchstone has the power of stone-touch as Midas's Touch.
Stone can mean a precious stone and something hard to solve.
Stone is a perfect anagram of sonet, an obsolete form of sonnet,
used quite often in Shakespeare's time.
Touch, "to meddle or interfere with however slightly" (OED 12a).

(Content should be the key for authorship, not just a name on cover.)
Morten St. George
2016-09-24 02:50:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
...
Post by Morten St. George
It's nice to know that there's someone besides me interested in the Merlin play. I've known for a couple of years that Merlin's prophecies strongly influenced the Shakespearean plays and when I found a play called The Birth of Merlin on a list of apocrypha, I went to check it out.
...
Morten,
How about the jewel and crab thing?
A hint. Touchstone has the power of stone-touch as Midas's Touch.
Stone can mean a precious stone and something hard to solve.
Stone is a perfect anagram of sonet, an obsolete form of sonnet,
used quite often in Shakespeare's time.
Touch, "to meddle or interfere with however slightly" (OED 12a).
(Content should be the key for authorship, not just a name on cover.)
Jim,

I have my own authorship identification technique: for any sequence of twenty-five words, I want to find three or four rarer nouns or verbs that match up with one of Merlin’s prophecies. So far, only the plays of Marlowe and Shakespeare meet this criteria, that is, these plays share a common author.

The Birth of Merlin:
GENTLEWOMAN. Commanding her affection in this Jewel, sir.
PRINCE UTER. She binds my service to her: ha! a Jewel 'tis a fair one trust me, and methinks it much resembles something I have seen with her.
GENTLEWOMAN. It is an artificial crab, Sir.
PRINCE UTER. A creature that goes backward.

Shakespeare:
All which, sir, though I most powerfully and potently believe, yet I hold it not honesty to have it thus set down; for you yourself, sir, should be old as I am if, like a crab, you could go backward.

Shakespeare:
The deer was, as you know, sanguis, in blood; ripe as the pomewater, who now hangeth like a jewel in the ear of caelo, the sky, the welkin, the heaven; and anon falleth like a crab on the face of terra, the soil, the land, the earth.

That last citation, matching on both "jewel" and "crab", comes from one of Shakespeare’s "about Marlowe" plays. The Touchstone play, of course, is another "about Marlowe" play.

The Birth of Merlin backtracks to Marlowe in many ways. Question: Is this because Marlowe was a contributing author or because Shakespeare wanted to tell Marlowe’s story?
g***@btinternet.com
2016-09-24 13:41:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
All which, sir, though I most powerfully and potently believe, yet I hold it not honesty to have it thus set down; for you yourself, sir, should be old as I am if, like a crab, you could go backward.
Actually Mutton, that is what the young Elizabeth said to William Cecil when she first encountered him.
Post by Morten St. George
The Birth of Merlin backtracks to Marlowe in many ways. Question: Is this because Marlowe was a contributing author or because Shakespeare wanted to tell Marlowe’s story?
No it's because Marlowe was in it. And yes Marlowe wrote the bits that sound like him. Just like he does when playing Mercutio and says a plague on both your houses (of god).
Morten St. George
2016-09-27 05:41:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
How about the jewel and crab thing?
Do you agree that it backtracks to Marlowe?

When I first encountered The Birth of Merlin, I suspected that it could have been their first play because I already knew that Merlin’s prophecies were the central inspiration for the Marlowe project and then the Shakespeare project.

Then I read that Wikipedia had evidence that the play was written in 1622, so I suspected that, instead of being their first play, it was their last.

But really, there is no reason to have a lot of confidence in Wikipedia who may have been deceived on this matter. The Birth of Merlin might have been their first play, in which case Marlowe could have been the author, with later revisions by Shakespeare and perhaps even some additional material drawn from Rowley.

As you know, I do not view Marlowe as the author of the Shakespearean canon. Only 1H6 matches up with Merlin in frequency similar to other plays attributed to Marlowe. I could be wrong, but I view the "holy hermit" and other signals as definitively placing Marlowe in the South Seas.
Jim F.
2016-09-27 08:56:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
How about the jewel and crab thing?
Do you agree that it backtracks to Marlowe?
When I first encountered The Birth of Merlin, I suspected that it could have been their first play because I already knew that Merlin’s prophecies were the central inspiration for the Marlowe project and then the Shakespeare project.
Then I read that Wikipedia had evidence that the play was written in 1622, so I suspected that, instead of being their first play, it was their last.
But really, there is no reason to have a lot of confidence in Wikipedia who may have been deceived on this matter. The Birth of Merlin might have been their first play, in which case Marlowe could have been the author, with later revisions by Shakespeare and perhaps even some additional material drawn from Rowley.
As you know, I do not view Marlowe as the author of the Shakespearean canon. Only 1H6 matches up with Merlin in frequency similar to other plays attributed to Marlowe. I could be wrong, but I view the "holy hermit" and other signals as definitively placing Marlowe in the South Seas.
Shakespeare's works were done by several poets, one over another.
Word-matching or stylometry won't work here. The only way to find
authorship is to read the whole play and get the meaning. We don't
trust that "William Shakespeare" on _Merlin_'s cover, right?

Jewel Crab brings some messages from Artesia. It's a complex riddle
with several levels, one over another. The end will show the true
intention of the play. It begins with Golden Apple.

Crab has the definition of wild apple.
Jewel Crab alludes to golden apple.
Uter and Artesia, wife of Aurelius, can map to
Paris and Helen, wife of Menelaus.

Golden apple and Midas's Touch are both from Greek myth.
Touchstone is a perfect anagram of stone-touch.
Artesia is a perfect anagram of art-saie; saie is an
obsolete form of say, which can mean assay, tribulation,
affliction, or what a person says. The hint hides in
"Art_ificial crab" and how Donobert calls her when
Artesia first enters the stage.

[Flourish Cornets. Enter Artesia with the Saxon Lords.]
DONOBERT. What's here, a woman Orator?

The gentlewoman's identity is important, for she has brought
up Artesia.
Morten St. George
2016-09-28 04:24:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
We don't
trust that "William Shakespeare" on _Merlin_'s cover, right?
My cover (1662) reads "William Shakespear ," with a blank space between the "r" and the ",". I think we pick up the final "e", and the true author, from Marlow(e). After all, don’t we find Marlowe’s DRAGON (his authorship emblem) inside?
Jim F.
2016-09-28 05:52:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
We don't
trust that "William Shakespeare" on _Merlin_'s cover, right?
My cover (1662) reads "William Shakespear ," with a blank space between the "r" and the ",". I think we pick up the final "e", and the true author, from Marlow(e). After all, don’t we find Marlowe’s DRAGON (his authorship emblem) inside?
You're right. I should use "William Shakespear" for preciseness,
or just William Shakespeare. Morten, The Play's the thing.
Jim F.
2016-11-22 03:22:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Shakespeare plays on words and provides hints to ascertain the plays.
Following is a very difficult dialogue in _The Birth of Merlin_.
Note the repetition of "lost" and "Gloster":

DONOBERT.
Sincerely _Gloster_, I have told you all: My Daughters are
both vow'd to Single Life, and this day gone unto the Nunnery,
though I begot them to another end, and fairly promis'd them in
Marriage, one to Earl _Cador_, t'other to your son, my worthy
* friend, the Earl of _Gloster_. Those lost, I am lost: they are lost,
* all's lost. Answer me this then, Ist a sin to marry?

HERMIT.
Oh no, my Lord.

DONOBERT.
* Go to then, Ile go no further with you, I perswade you
* to no ill, perswade you then that I perswade you well.

"Gloster" contains "lost" as G_lost_er.
Here Donobert talks about his two lost daughters.
Donobert is a perfect anagram of donor-bet.
He lost the bet as Gloster was around him all the time.
Morten St. George
2016-11-22 05:59:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
Following is a very difficult dialogue in _The Birth of Merlin_.
DONOBERT.
Sincerely _Gloster_, I have told you all: My Daughters are
both vow'd to Single Life, and this day gone unto the Nunnery,
though I begot them to another end, and fairly promis'd them in
Marriage, one to Earl _Cador_, t'other to your son, my worthy
* friend, the Earl of _Gloster_. Those lost, I am lost: they are lost,
* all's lost. Answer me this then, Ist a sin to marry?
HERMIT.
Oh no, my Lord.
DONOBERT.
* Go to then, Ile go no further with you, I perswade you
* to no ill, perswade you then that I perswade you well.
If I’m not mistaken, this is not the only instance of "daughter" problems in Shakespearean plays.

For a while I debated with myself whether The Birth of Merlin was the last or the first of the Shakespearean plays granted that the Merlin theme had to make it one or the other. But strong links to Marlowe, that we discussed in prior posts, clearly puts it at the beginning. Thus, The Birth of Merlin was the first play to be written and the last to be published.

You cite "Ist a sin to marry?", a question in classic Marlovian style. On marriage, he writes:

FAUSTUS. ...
For I am wanton and lascivious,
And cannot live without a wife.

MEPHIST. How! a wife!
I prithee, Faustus, talk not of a wife.

FAUSTUS. Nay, sweet Mephistophilis, fetch me one, for I will have one.

MEPHIST. Well, thou wilt have one? Sit there till I come: I'll fetch thee a wife in the devil's name.
[Exit.]

Re-enter MEPHISTOPHILIS with a DEVIL drest like a WOMAN, with fire-works.

MEPHIST. Tell me, Faustus, how dost thou like thy wife?

FAUSTUS. A plague on her for a hot whore!

MEPHIST. Tut, Faustus,
Marriage is but a ceremonial toy;
If thou lovest me, think no more of it.

Is this the first instance of cross-gender impersonations?

Note the interjection of "fire-works". The Birth of Merlin (BM) gives us "Blazing star appears". BM has "Loud musick" and Fautus (F) "Music sounds". BM has "Flourish cornets" and F goes with "Sound a Sonnet" where sonnets are notes played on a trumpet or cornet. Both plays give us "Thunder and lighting".

So, Jim, what do you think? The same author? I think BM and F would make a fascinating stylometric study.
A***@germanymail.com
2016-11-23 21:05:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
Following is a very difficult dialogue in _The Birth of Merlin_.
DONOBERT.
Sincerely _Gloster_, I have told you all: My Daughters are
both vow'd to Single Life, and this day gone unto the Nunnery,
though I begot them to another end, and fairly promis'd them in
Marriage, one to Earl _Cador_, t'other to your son, my worthy
* friend, the Earl of _Gloster_. Those lost, I am lost: they are lost,
* all's lost. Answer me this then, Ist a sin to marry?
HERMIT.
Oh no, my Lord.
DONOBERT.
* Go to then, Ile go no further with you, I perswade you
* to no ill, perswade you then that I perswade you well.
If I’m not mistaken, this is not the only instance of "daughter" problems in Shakespearean plays.
For a while I debated with myself whether The Birth of Merlin was the last or the first of the Shakespearean plays granted that the Merlin theme had to make it one or the other. But strong links to Marlowe, that we discussed in prior posts, clearly puts it at the beginning. Thus, The Birth of Merlin was the first play to be written and the last to be published.
FAUSTUS. ...
For I am wanton and lascivious,
And cannot live without a wife.
MEPHIST. How! a wife!
I prithee, Faustus, talk not of a wife.
FAUSTUS. Nay, sweet Mephistophilis, fetch me one, for I will have one.
MEPHIST. Well, thou wilt have one? Sit there till I come: I'll fetch thee a wife in the devil's name.
[Exit.]
Re-enter MEPHISTOPHILIS with a DEVIL drest like a WOMAN, with fire-works.
MEPHIST. Tell me, Faustus, how dost thou like thy wife?
FAUSTUS. A plague on her for a hot whore!
MEPHIST. Tut, Faustus,
Marriage is but a ceremonial toy;
If thou lovest me, think no more of it.
Is this the first instance of cross-gender impersonations?
Note the interjection of "fire-works". The Birth of Merlin (BM) gives us "Blazing star appears". BM has "Loud musick" and Fautus (F) "Music sounds". BM has "Flourish cornets" and F goes with "Sound a Sonnet" where sonnets are notes played on a trumpet or cornet. Both plays give us "Thunder and lighting".
So, Jim, what do you think? The same author? I think BM and F would make a fascinating stylometric study.
Art N
Jim F.
2016-11-28 09:28:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Morten,

Your assumption is respected, but it contributes nothing in reading.
My assumption of one-way anagram being used in Shakespeare can solve
difficult lines, and that makes Shakespeare greater.

_The Birth of Merlin_ is great due to riddles and anagrams, not who
wrote it. Here's a good sample: who can be the Devil, Merlin's father?

DEVIL.
Ile blast thee slave to death,
and on this rock stick thee an eternal Monument.

MERLIN.
Ha, ha, thy powers too weak, what art thou devil,
but an inferior lustful _Incubus_,
taking advantage of the wanton flesh,
where with thou dost beguile the ignorant?
put off the form of thy humanity,
and cral upon thy speckled belly, serpent,
or Ile unclasp the jaws of _Achoron_,
and fix thee ever in the local fire.
Morten St. George
2016-11-28 17:03:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
_The Birth of Merlin_ is great due to riddles and anagrams, not who
wrote it. Here's a good sample: who can be the Devil, Merlin's father?
DEVIL.
Ile blast thee slave to death,
and on this rock stick thee an eternal Monument.
MERLIN.
Ha, ha, thy powers too weak, what art thou devil,
but an inferior lustful _Incubus_,
taking advantage of the wanton flesh,
where with thou dost beguile the ignorant?
put off the form of thy humanity,
and cral upon thy speckled belly, serpent,
or Ile unclasp the jaws of _Achoron_,
and fix thee ever in the local fire.
Jim, if you are looking for meaning, I suggest you study Marlowe:

FAUSTUS. Now, by the kingdoms of infernal rule,
Of Styx, of Acheron, and the fiery lake
Of ever-burning Phlegethon, I swear
That I do long to see the monuments
And situation of bright-splendent Rome:
Come, therefore, let's away.

Note a reference to monuments in both. And here’s another Acheron from Marlowe:

Sint mihi dii Acherontis propitii! Valeat numen triplex Jehovoe! Ignei, aerii, aquatani spiritus, salvete! Orientis princeps Belzebub, inferni ardentis monarcha, et Demogorgon, propitiamus vos, ut appareat et surgat Mephistophilis DRAGON, quod tumeraris: per Jehovam, Gehennam, et consecratam aquam quam nunc spargo, signumque crucis quod nunc facio, et per vota nostra, ipse nunc surgat nobis dicatus Mephistophilis!

If you look around, you’ll even find "DRAGON" in The Birth of Merlin.
A***@germanymail.com
2016-11-28 20:09:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
_The Birth of Merlin_ is great due to riddles and anagrams, not who
wrote it. Here's a good sample: who can be the Devil, Merlin's father?
DEVIL.
Ile blast thee slave to death,
and on this rock stick thee an eternal Monument.
MERLIN.
Ha, ha, thy powers too weak, what art thou devil,
but an inferior lustful _Incubus_,
taking advantage of the wanton flesh,
where with thou dost beguile the ignorant?
put off the form of thy humanity,
and cral upon thy speckled belly, serpent,
or Ile unclasp the jaws of _Achoron_,
and fix thee ever in the local fire.
FAUSTUS. Now, by the kingdoms of infernal rule,
Of Styx, of Acheron, and the fiery lake
Of ever-burning Phlegethon, I swear
That I do long to see the monuments
Come, therefore, let's away.
Sint mihi dii Acherontis propitii! Valeat numen triplex Jehovoe! Ignei, aerii, aquatani spiritus, salvete! Orientis princeps Belzebub, inferni ardentis monarcha, et Demogorgon, propitiamus vos, ut appareat et surgat Mephistophilis DRAGON, quod tumeraris: per Jehovam, Gehennam, et consecratam aquam quam nunc spargo, signumque crucis quod nunc facio, et per vota nostra, ipse nunc surgat nobis dicatus Mephistophilis!
If you look around, you’ll even find "DRAGON" in The Birth of Merlin.
Art N
Jim F.
2016-11-29 01:53:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
_The Birth of Merlin_ is great due to riddles and anagrams, not who
wrote it. Here's a good sample: who can be the Devil, Merlin's father?
DEVIL.
Ile blast thee slave to death,
and on this rock stick thee an eternal Monument.
MERLIN.
Ha, ha, thy powers too weak, what art thou devil,
but an inferior lustful _Incubus_,
taking advantage of the wanton flesh,
where with thou dost beguile the ignorant?
put off the form of thy humanity,
and cral upon thy speckled belly, serpent,
or Ile unclasp the jaws of _Achoron_,
and fix thee ever in the local fire.
FAUSTUS. Now, by the kingdoms of infernal rule,
Of Styx, of Acheron, and the fiery lake
Of ever-burning Phlegethon, I swear
That I do long to see the monuments
Come, therefore, let's away.
Sint mihi dii Acherontis propitii! Valeat numen triplex Jehovoe! Ignei, aerii, aquatani spiritus, salvete! Orientis princeps Belzebub, inferni ardentis monarcha, et Demogorgon, propitiamus vos, ut appareat et surgat Mephistophilis DRAGON, quod tumeraris: per Jehovam, Gehennam, et consecratam aquam quam nunc spargo, signumque crucis quod nunc facio, et per vota nostra, ipse nunc surgat nobis dicatus Mephistophilis!
If you look around, you’ll even find "DRAGON" in The Birth of Merlin.
Morten,

What you do is word-matching, which helps nothing in reading.
The Devil in _Merlin_ is a complex riddle. You must know Bible well.

And Ioshua said, In as much as thou hast troubled vs,
the Lord shall trouble thee this day:
and all Israel threwe stones at him, and burned them with fire,
and stoned them with stones. (JOS 7:25)

And they cast vpon him a great heape of stones vnto this day:
and so the Lord turned from his fierce wrath:
therefore hee called the name of that place,
The *valley of Achor*, vnto this day. (JOS 7:26)

Jaw has the definition of "the narrow mouth or entrance into a
valley, gulf, or sea" (OED jaw n.1 3). _Achoron_ is a perfect anagram of
on-Achor.

The "jaws of Achoron" hints at "valley of Achor"; it then leads to
Achan, who was buried in a great heap of stones for he troubled his people.
Achoron isn't a bad spelling of Acheron but a play of riddle and anagram.

The Devil in _Merlin_ is enclosed in a rock for he troubles some people.
Merlin calls him "serpent" for he cheats a woman (a hint to Bible too).

Who can be the Devil, Merlin's father?
marco
2016-11-29 02:54:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
_The Birth of Merlin_ is great due to riddles and anagrams, not who
wrote it. Here's a good sample: who can be the Devil, Merlin's father?
DEVIL.
Ile blast thee slave to death,
and on this rock stick thee an eternal Monument.
MERLIN.
Ha, ha, thy powers too weak, what art thou devil,
but an inferior lustful _Incubus_,
taking advantage of the wanton flesh,
where with thou dost beguile the ignorant?
put off the form of thy humanity,
and cral upon thy speckled belly, serpent,
or Ile unclasp the jaws of _Achoron_,
and fix thee ever in the local fire.
FAUSTUS. Now, by the kingdoms of infernal rule,
Of Styx, of Acheron, and the fiery lake
Of ever-burning Phlegethon, I swear
That I do long to see the monuments
Come, therefore, let's away.
Sint mihi dii Acherontis propitii! Valeat numen triplex Jehovoe! Ignei, aerii, aquatani spiritus, salvete! Orientis princeps Belzebub, inferni ardentis monarcha, et Demogorgon, propitiamus vos, ut appareat et surgat Mephistophilis DRAGON, quod tumeraris: per Jehovam, Gehennam, et consecratam aquam quam nunc spargo, signumque crucis quod nunc facio, et per vota nostra, ipse nunc surgat nobis dicatus Mephistophilis!
If you look around, you’ll even find "DRAGON" in The Birth of Merlin.
Morten,
What you do is word-matching, which helps nothing in reading.
The Devil in _Merlin_ is a complex riddle. You must know Bible well.
And Ioshua said, In as much as thou hast troubled vs,
and all Israel threwe stones at him, and burned them with fire,
and stoned them with stones. (JOS 7:25)
therefore hee called the name of that place,
The *valley of Achor*, vnto this day. (JOS 7:26)
Jaw has the definition of "the narrow mouth or entrance into a
valley, gulf, or sea" (OED jaw n.1 3). _Achoron_ is a perfect anagram of
on-Achor.
The "jaws of Achoron" hints at "valley of Achor"; it then leads to
Achan, who was buried in a great heap of stones for he troubled his people.
Achoron isn't a bad spelling of Acheron but a play of riddle and anagram.
The Devil in _Merlin_ is enclosed in a rock for he troubles some people.
Merlin calls him "serpent" for he cheats a woman (a hint to Bible too).
Who can be the Devil, Merlin's father?
.
Morten St. George
2016-11-29 20:24:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
Jaw has the definition of "the narrow mouth or entrance into a
valley, gulf, or sea" (OED jaw n.1 3). _Achoron_ is a perfect anagram of
on-Achor.
The "jaws of Achoron" hints at "valley of Achor"; it then leads to
Achan, who was buried in a great heap of stones for he troubled his people.
Shakespeare gives us "jaws of death" and "jaws of danger".
Post by Jim F.
Achoron isn't a bad spelling of Acheron but a play of riddle and anagram.
Acheron appears numerous times in Marlowe and Shakespeare in devil-related context.
Post by Jim F.
Who can be the Devil, Merlin's father?
Everyone knows that by legend the Devil was Merlin's father. What's your point?
marco
2016-11-30 01:57:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
Jaw has the definition of "the narrow mouth or entrance into a
valley, gulf, or sea" (OED jaw n.1 3). _Achoron_ is a perfect anagram of
on-Achor.
The "jaws of Achoron" hints at "valley of Achor"; it then leads to
Achan, who was buried in a great heap of stones for he troubled his people.
Shakespeare gives us "jaws of death" and "jaws of danger".
Post by Jim F.
Achoron isn't a bad spelling of Acheron but a play of riddle and anagram.
Acheron appears numerous times in Marlowe and Shakespeare in devil-related context.
Post by Jim F.
Who can be the Devil, Merlin's father?
Everyone knows that by legend the Devil was Merlin's father. What's your point?
.
Jim F.
2016-12-01 01:35:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 at 4:24:54 AM UTC+8, Morten St. George wrote:
. . .
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
Who can be the Devil, Merlin's father?
Everyone knows that by legend the Devil was Merlin's father. What's your point?
_The Birth of Merlin_ is well-organized in mapping characters with people
in Shakespeare's time; 27 of them can be identified logically.
If the Hermit projects Christopher Marlowe, who can be the Devil?
Morten St. George
2016-12-01 18:05:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
_The Birth of Merlin_ is well-organized in mapping characters with people
in Shakespeare's time; 27 of them can be identified logically.
If the Hermit projects Christopher Marlowe, who can be the Devil?
I believe I never claimed that the hermit projects Marlowe, only that the holy hermit links this play to other sources that provide information about Marlowe.

On the devil, I see no reason to suppose that he represents anyone other than himself adopting human form. In Faustus, Faust sells his soul to the devil in exchange for knowledge. In Genesis, the devil is the one in charge of the tree of knowledge. Hence, from the very beginning true prophecy, reflecting true knowledge of the future, became associated with the devil.

Merlin was invented in the Late Middle Ages as a means of escape: the rebellion of the son of the devil pulls us away from the field of evil and puts us into the camp of the good, yet retaining the diabolical ability to know the future. The Birth of Merlin then puts the medieval myths into a theatrical context.

Those medieval myths imply it was believed that Merlin’s prophecies were genuine. As I have demonstrated in my writings, the plays of Marlowe and Shakespeare include secret coding that enable the extraction of thirty-nine of Merlin’s prophecies from the more than nine hundred prophecies attributed to Nostradamus. Did the devil write those thirty-nine prophecies? That’s essentially the same as asking: Did those prophecies come true?

In brief, The Birth of Merlin informs us of the underlying inspiration for the Nostradamus, Marlowe, and Shakespeare projects. That’s why I say it’s likely to be either the first or the last play they ever wrote.
Jim F.
2016-12-02 01:58:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 2:05:25 AM UTC+8, Morten St. George wrote:
. . .
Post by Morten St. George
I believe I never claimed that the hermit projects Marlowe, only that the holy hermit links this play to other sources that provide information about Marlowe.
Morten,

You were "agreed" the hermit projects Marlowe in:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/b8DbaPhfQl8/UJzgEbMnBgAJ
On Monday, June 27, 2016 at 2:11:28 PM UTC+8, Morten St. George wrote:
. . .
Post by Morten St. George
The whole proving is quite long. At the end, "Anselme the Hermit,
after Bishop of Winchester" projects Christopher Marlowe.
Agreed.
My logic is simple. One-way anagram exists in Shakespeare.
If you deny or ignore this, you can't solve many difficult lines.
If you agree, the authorship will come to Wilton House poets,
Mary Sidney, Christopher Marlowe, Ben Jonson, etc.
Most importantly, it makes Shakespeare's works greater.
Morten St. George
2016-12-02 10:51:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/b8DbaPhfQl8/UJzgEbMnBgAJ
. . .
Post by Morten St. George
The whole proving is quite long. At the end, "Anselme the Hermit,
after Bishop of Winchester" projects Christopher Marlowe.
Agreed.
Yes, I remember that. But rather than a "mapping" of characters, I was probably thinking that Saint Anselme became Bishop of Canterbury (Marlowe’s home town) "after" events at Winchester, thereby reinforcing the holy hermit as a link to information about Marlowe in another source.

I’m sure there’s a lot of hidden meaning in The Birth of Merlin and it’s doubtless worth pursuing. But rather than confining yourself to internal anagrams, I suggest you also try searching for additional information in the other plays. For example, to clarify the meaning of the phrase "the jaws of Achoron" (perhaps an anagram but surely an alternative spelling of Acheron), you should try reading all the dialogues in which "jaws of" and "Acheron" appear in the plays of Marlowe and Shakespeare. In one instance or another, you might learn something or find something surprising.

Indeed, one thing I’ve discovered is that many of the plays are not independent entities as here and there the authors find ingenious ways to link them to each other. By linking elements from several plays, the authors are able to provide information about themselves and their secret society completely unnoticed by the Stratfordians. Merlin followed the same procedure: his prophecies link to each other and are often incomprehensible when studied in isolation.
Post by Jim F.
My logic is simple. One-way anagram exists in Shakespeare.
If you deny or ignore this, you can't solve many difficult lines.
If you agree, the authorship will come to Wilton House poets,
Mary Sidney, Christopher Marlowe, Ben Jonson, etc.
Most importantly, it makes Shakespeare's works greater.
I’m all in favor of merging together the plays of Marlowe and Shakespeare and calling it "The Merlin Project".
Jim F.
2016-12-06 03:06:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 6:51:45 PM UTC+8, Morten St. George wrote:
...
Post by Morten St. George
But rather than confining yourself to internal anagrams,
...

Morten,

If I "confine" to anagram and can solve many difficult lines in Shakespeare
that others can't, it means the method is correct. Isn't it?

Besides that, you need some intelligence to read Shakespeare, e.g.,
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/M0VtETkjqsM
Morten St. George
2016-12-06 20:20:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
If I "confine" to anagram and can solve many difficult lines in Shakespeare
that others can't, it means the method is correct. Isn't it?
It would be correct only if the anagrams were originally created or perceived as such by Shakespeare himself, but I honestly cannot comment on that. With my limited intelligence, I have made few attempts to try to follow your anagram analysis, though I agree with you that the hermit concerns Marlowe.

As I shall here illustrate, I pursue a different type of logic. BM:

"Is answer of our message yet return'd from that religious man, the holy hermit, sent by the Earl of Chester to confirm us in that miraculous act?"

In Shakespearean prose, we find our holy hermit on board a ship that sailed from Peru. Nova Atlantis translation:

"I remember, I have read in one of your European books, of a holy hermit among you, that desired to see the spirit of fornication, and there appeared to him a little foul ugly Ethiope;"

BM reinforces the fornication and Ethiopean themes:

"Hence, thou black horror! is thy lustful fire kindled agen? Not thy loud throated thunder nor thy adulterate infernal Musick shall e're bewitch me more: oh, too too much is past already."

The Ethiope also points us to Shakespeare’s AYLI:

"Such Ethiope words, blacker in their effect"

Someone in AYLI is unambiguously identified with Marlowe:

"When a man's verses cannot be understood, nor a man's good wit seconded with the forward child understanding, it strikes a man more dead than a great reckoning in a little room."

AYLI identifies the character Orlando as Marlowe:

"Nay, then, God buy you, an you talk in blank verse."

AYLI also associates Orlando with Hercules:

"Now, Hercules be thy speed, young man!"

In another Shakespearean play, a character called Moth is also associated with Hercules and is therefore another portrayal of Marlowe. LLL:

"Enter HOLOFERNES, for JUDAS; and MOTH, for HERCULES"

Moth has a master’s degree ("Master Moth"), yet is servant to a Spanish soldier who "hath seen the world." This brings us around full circle as now we begin to get an inkling of an idea on how Marlowe might have managed to get on board a ship that sailed from Peru.

Doubtless, my correlations are as confusing to you as your anagrams are to me, so let’s leave at that.
Jim F.
2016-12-07 01:54:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
If I "confine" to anagram and can solve many difficult lines in Shakespeare
that others can't, it means the method is correct. Isn't it?
It would be correct only if the anagrams were originally created or perceived as such by Shakespeare himself, but I honestly cannot comment on that. With my limited intelligence, I have made few attempts to try to follow your anagram analysis, though I agree with you that the hermit concerns Marlowe.
"Is answer of our message yet return'd from that religious man, the holy hermit, sent by the Earl of Chester to confirm us in that miraculous act?"
"I remember, I have read in one of your European books, of a holy hermit among you, that desired to see the spirit of fornication, and there appeared to him a little foul ugly Ethiope;"
"Hence, thou black horror! is thy lustful fire kindled agen? Not thy loud throated thunder nor thy adulterate infernal Musick shall e're bewitch me more: oh, too too much is past already."
"Such Ethiope words, blacker in their effect"
"When a man's verses cannot be understood, nor a man's good wit seconded with the forward child understanding, it strikes a man more dead than a great reckoning in a little room."
"Nay, then, God buy you, an you talk in blank verse."
"Now, Hercules be thy speed, young man!"
"Enter HOLOFERNES, for JUDAS; and MOTH, for HERCULES"
Moth has a master’s degree ("Master Moth"), yet is servant to a Spanish soldier who "hath seen the world." This brings us around full circle as now we begin to get an inkling of an idea on how Marlowe might have managed to get on board a ship that sailed from Peru.
Doubtless, my correlations are as confusing to you as your anagrams are to me, so let’s leave at that.
Morten,

I can read your "correlations" well.
They are diverging and worthless in reading Shakespeare.
Morten St. George
2016-12-07 17:29:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
I can read your "correlations" well.
They are diverging and worthless in reading Shakespeare.
Before you become so critical of others, you should try turning to the history books to see if anything they say can be substantiated. If you had done this, you would know that a Spanish fleet commander from Peru lived in London from 1584 until late 1585 and that there are no eyewitnesses to his whereabouts until 1589. Don’t you think that this Spaniard, with his vast knowledge of Spanish warships and naval strategy, could be useful to a country that was about to be attacked by a Spanish armada? Wouldn’t it make sense for the English Privy Council to pull a bright young man out of university to serve as that guy’s page?

In 1592, the Spaniard, now an admiral in the Spanish navy, was buried in an unmarked grave, and in 1593 his page was buried in an unmarked grave. Peruvian naval historians provide an extraordinary account of a ship commanded by "admiral" Lope de Vega (last name of a famous playwright in Spain, no first name given, no independent historical record of his existence) and two unnamed captains, that joined up with a colonization fleet in 1595.

So, you see, Shakespearean authorship was not an isolated secret; it connects with other great secrets of that epoch.

Like Merlin, Shakespeare had no need to utilize anagrams or classical encoding techniques in order to convey secret information to future generations. With nearly everyone lacking in mental powers of association, nothing more was required than to convey that information in a fragmented fashion.
g***@btinternet.com
2016-12-08 01:16:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
I can read your "correlations" well.
They are diverging and worthless in reading Shakespeare.
Before you become so critical of others, you should try turning to the history books to see if anything they say can be substantiated. If you had done this, you would know that a Spanish fleet commander from Peru lived in London from 1584 until late 1585 and that there are no eyewitnesses to his whereabouts until 1589. Don’t you think that this Spaniard, with his vast knowledge of Spanish warships and naval strategy, could be useful to a country that was about to be attacked by a Spanish armada? Wouldn’t it make sense for the English Privy Council to pull a bright young man out of university to serve as that guy’s page?
True but you forget one thing. The English did not know there would be a Spanish Armada in 1584. Like many people you have the idea that the Elizabethan secret service was like the modern one. Well it was in a way, but in how STUPID some of the people were in it!!!
In fact the Armada launch was delayed by the English for several years, but they didn't know at the time. And it wasn't done with the intention of delaying it either. It was delayed due to the fact Elizabeth was helping the Dutch fight Spain. The great spymaster thing is rubbish. And he was dealing with a dumb blond. For example when Mary Stuart's letters were being intercepted. They got a letter back which to Walsingham proved Mary was plotting with Babington to kill the Queen. It had to be translated from the code and the original sent on. So Walsingham showed the translation to the dumb blond Queen and SHE wanted the names of the men (six). To get that, the letter needed to be sent on with a postscript (supposedly from Mary) asking the names of the 6 men, adding to the original letter. This was done and of course Babbington who hated doing the letters. Passed it on to another man to translate the coded letter. He of course spotted the additions and knew they were on to them. Babbington needed a passport to go to France. So he turns up at Walsingham's office only to find the head of the service is out to lunch (YES MINISTER TIME). So they let this dangerous bloke go.
In fact the Babbington plot was NEVER a fake thing, it was the real deal. On sometime between the 9 to the 10 August 1586, at least one man shot at the Queen. It was probably John Ballard a former servant to Elizabeth. He missed! On the 11 August Mary Stuart is finally arrested.
The Civil service incompetence allowed these men to be missing for ten days. Security was tightened up and one official pulled Cecil up looking for them. When Cecil asked what these men looked like that he was looking for. The man said he will have a beard!!!
Post by Morten St. George
So, you see, Shakespearean authorship was not an isolated secret; it connects with other great secrets of that epoch.
As you can see the real world doesn't always go along with nice theories. It consists of people who make mistakes, are not that clever in what they do. And deal with irrational human beings. Who have very different minds and don't behave like computers. You get clever people who forget to allow for the year 2000 when programing computers. And even back then they had people like that.
Morten St. George
2016-12-08 15:41:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by g***@btinternet.com
True but you forget one thing. The English did not know there would be a Spanish Armada in 1584.
Sir, I say no such thing but I do insinuate that the English were aware it was coming by late 1585: the invade-England pope took office in April 1585 and an undeclared war promptly began. Regardless, by 1584, English ships, led by Sir Francis Drake, had already been fighting Spanish ships for many years. Moreover, I do believe that our Spaniard, Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa, informed Thomas Cavendish of the timing and location of gold shipments in exchange for a rescue mission in the Straits of Magellan.
g***@btinternet.com
2016-12-08 17:38:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by g***@btinternet.com
True but you forget one thing. The English did not know there would be a Spanish Armada in 1584.
Sir, I say no such thing but I do insinuate that the English were aware it was coming by late 1585: the invade-England pope took office in April 1585 and an undeclared war promptly began. Regardless, by 1584, English ships, led by Sir Francis Drake, had already been fighting Spanish ships for many years. Moreover, I do believe that our Spaniard, Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa, informed Thomas Cavendish of the timing and location of gold shipments in exchange for a rescue mission in the Straits of Magellan.
That's not true either. Philip of Spain was pissed off when Elizabeth insulted him when he proposed marriage to her. She told him that Philip would only come for the wedding and then go back to Spain, like what he had done with Mary. "Besides" she said "I'm a heretic".
From that point out there would have been no peace with Philip of Spain. Even in 1572 when the Duke of Norfolk was executed, part of the plan was to land the Spanish ships in Harwich.
English ships were not the Royal Navy. Drake was a privateer. He raided Spanish ships for their gold and treasure. Even Hollywood picked up on that in the 1930's film Sea Hawks. Elizabeth never sanctioned any attacks on Spanish Ships. She detested wars and fighting. Many of these men were doing things for their own glory. But she did not complain if the brought the treasure to the Royal purse. They complained about they never got any recognition. If fact the current Queen Elizabeth this New Year will give out more honours then Elizabeth did in her entire reign. Even after the Armada the English fleet and crew were abandoned. No medals or knighthoods. Most of the sailors died of sickness.
This might sound cruel, but to maintain armed forces is expensive. And the government couldn't raise tax. For the simply reason it was impossible to collect. And unlike modern governments they made cuts on military expenditure.
Morten St. George
2016-12-09 01:39:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by g***@btinternet.com
Elizabeth never sanctioned any attacks on Spanish Ships. She detested wars and fighting.
Sir Walter Raleigh wrote:

"If the late Queen would have believed her men of war as she did her scribes, we had, in her time, beaten that great empire to pieces, and made their kings kings of figs and oranges as in old times. But Her Majesty did all by halves, and by petty invasions taught the Spaniard how to defend himself, and to see his own weakness, which, till our attempts taught him, was hardly known to himself. Four thousand men would have taken from him all the ports of his Indies; I mean all his ports by which his treasure doth or can pass. He is more hated in that part of the world by the sons of the conquered than are the English by the Irish."

So, Graham, what do you think? Was Shakespeare one of the queen’s "scribes", that is, one of the guys who convinced her to pursue the path of peace?

By historical accounts, in 1585 or 1586 depending on the account, Elizabeth enticed Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa (alleged by me to be Marlowe’s mentor and Shakespeare’s friend) into carrying informal proposals for peace directly to King Philip of Spain, but Sarmiento was sidetracked in route back to Spain, so Philip never got her peace proposals and proceeded with his Armada.
g***@btinternet.com
2016-12-09 11:34:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by g***@btinternet.com
Elizabeth never sanctioned any attacks on Spanish Ships. She detested wars and fighting.
"If the late Queen would have believed her men of war as she did her scribes, we had, in her time, beaten that great empire to pieces, and made their kings kings of figs and oranges as in old times. But Her Majesty did all by halves, and by petty invasions taught the Spaniard how to defend himself, and to see his own weakness, which, till our attempts taught him, was hardly known to himself. Four thousand men would have taken from him all the ports of his Indies; I mean all his ports by which his treasure doth or can pass. He is more hated in that part of the world by the sons of the conquered than are the English by the Irish."
So, Graham, what do you think? Was Shakespeare one of the queen’s "scribes", that is, one of the guys who convinced her to pursue the path of peace?
The scribes he talks about were not writers of poetry or verse, but writers of political things. Raleigh would have been more direct if it was poets that were urging peace. It seems unlikely that Shakespeare would have urged peace. Especially if you look at the History plays. And if you take into account the early versions of the plays, which Stratfordians says Will copied, they are far from neutral on the subject of war with Spain. I don't think that Will copied them at all. They are his plays. And therefore he would have been arguing with the Queen to take action.
Post by Morten St. George
By historical accounts, in 1585 or 1586 depending on the account, Elizabeth enticed Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa (alleged by me to be Marlowe’s mentor and Shakespeare’s friend) into carrying informal proposals for peace directly to King Philip of Spain, but Sarmiento was sidetracked in route back to Spain, so Philip never got her peace proposals and proceeded with his Armada.
Marlowe was no spy. He spent his time acting with Shakespeare on the stage. He Should have been at University at Cambridge. But he was a cobblers son and you can imagine what the sons of aristocrats at Cambridge thought of that. Elizabeth had given him the opportunity and he hung around with the low life, playing and being involved in the writing of plays. By 1586 he was playing the bad guys in the plays of Shakespeare. You can spot him easily. A bad guy who's poetry flows out of him like sickly treacle.
Morten St. George
2016-12-13 04:05:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by g***@btinternet.com
The scribes he talks about were not writers of poetry or verse, but writers of political things. Raleigh would have been more direct if it was poets that were urging peace. It seems unlikely that Shakespeare would have urged peace.
I disagree on that. Throughout history the majority of great literary geniuses have been more in favor of peace than in favor of war. Only a civilized society gives rise to the highest culture.

I very much doubt that Elizabeth would have paid any heed at all to the court clerks who were recording political events. Raleigh had to be referring to civilized aristocrats who liked to write as opposed to those aristocrats who liked to fight.

Per Oxfordian and Mortenian theory, the real Shakespeare was an aristocrat. This is self-evident from his writings: he displays enormous knowledge of the inner workings of royal courts and of royal pastimes; his vast vocabulary suggests a high degree of education (young aristocrats would attend one of the two universities); he reveals considerable knowledge of the law (young aristocrats would also typically attended one of the Inns of Court), and he expresses familiarity with foreign places and cultures (mainly aristocrats had the money to travel abroad extensively).

Remaining at court after Elizabeth’s death, Shakespeare would have been instrumental in pushing King James to make peace with Spain. Ironically, however, Shakespeare’s Germanic writings helped inspire the Thirty Years War that devastated much of Europe.
g***@btinternet.com
2016-12-14 02:29:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by g***@btinternet.com
The scribes he talks about were not writers of poetry or verse, but writers of political things. Raleigh would have been more direct if it was poets that were urging peace. It seems unlikely that Shakespeare would have urged peace.
I disagree on that. Throughout history the majority of great literary geniuses have been more in favor of peace than in favor of war. Only a civilized society gives rise to the highest culture.
Ghandi when asked what he thought of British civilisation, answered I'm all in favour of it happening. Winston Churchill used the film Henry V to drum up support for the war effort. Maybe what you say is true. But the Shakespeare plays from the 1580's do not mince words. They are anti-Catholic and patriotic about war with Spain. The later versions are watered down, due to the censors of James the 1st getting to work on them. Removing the religious tone. Trying looking at ALL the texts using a computer for the word "Jesus". You will find only a couple of references to it. But the original text would have littered with the word, simply on the grounds as a swore word.
Post by Morten St. George
I very much doubt that Elizabeth would have paid any heed at all to the court clerks who were recording political events. Raleigh had to be referring to civilized aristocrats who liked to write as opposed to those aristocrats who liked to fight.
You have the wrong meaning for the word scribe. They are not the those who wrote down the events. They are the high aristocrats, like William Cecil, the Queen's council. It was there job to advise the Queen. Elizabeth listened to them, but she made up her own mind and ignored what the said at times. Her father on the other hand listened to these men and rarely made his own decisions.
The council of the Queen were probably concerned with the cost of fighting the Spaniards. The English needed to build a fleet to match what Spain was doing. But the English economy was in a terrible state. If they had bankers they would be jumping off high buildings faster then those in the Wall Street Crash.
War in Ireland also put a burden on the English purse and taxation was impossible to collect.
Post by Morten St. George
Per Oxfordian and Mortenian theory, the real Shakespeare was an aristocrat. This is self-evident from his writings: he displays enormous knowledge of the inner workings of royal courts and of royal pastimes; his vast vocabulary suggests a high degree of education (young aristocrats would attend one of the two universities); he reveals considerable knowledge of the law (young aristocrats would also typically attended one of the Inns of Court), and he expresses familiarity with foreign places and cultures (mainly aristocrats had the money to travel abroad extensively).
I urge you to look up the Manor Estate Sheffield on the internet. And see the kind of place of place I was born and raised in. Then after you have, think where did I acquire my knowledge and put up arguments against University trained people such as yourself, coming from a place like that?

Aside from that....

You have fallen into the trap now of the lone writer syndrome. Shakespeare plays require the writer to be a jack of all trades, aristocratic, yet at the same time poor and middle class. It's the myth of the writer knocking the plays out in some room. Even portrayed as such in the film Shakespeare In Love or the negative one, Anonymous.

It's a load of bollocks from start to finish. The Shakespeare plays were knocked out in co-operative style using all sorts of different people. For example Marlowe writes his own lines in the plays of Shakespeare. He can be clearly seen playing bad guys and Romeo's friend in the play Romeo and Juliet. Actors are typecast to the extreme. If they can write, they write down their own words. Shakespeare is charge of course, but he doesn't tell them what to do. In fact most of the plays are knocked out by the actors as the perform it.
Their was NEVER any auditions for plays. Shakespeare used the people he got. If he had an ex Jewish merchant in the company then the part was written around him. With him doing his own lines. This is why they could turn out plays so quickly. One man couldn't do. It would be like getting one chap to write all the stories in today's edition of the Times newspaper. It's impossible.

Eventually this style of writing died out. For a start it meant that a single man could not get massively rich from the plays. Writers also have massive ego's. Which is what happened to the Shakespeare company. Marlowe wanted to do his own plays. He did not like the idea of having women on the stage either. And Shakespeare had three of them. Granted permission to act by the Queen herself.
The many voices inside Shakespeare plays are why today he's regarded as a genius. But he was only the leader of his team. Had he been writing the story of the Shakespeare company he would have made certain that was clear. But he didn't so those that thought he was great praised him, ignoring their own efforts.
A***@germanymail.com
2016-12-19 22:21:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by g***@btinternet.com
Post by Morten St. George
Post by g***@btinternet.com
The scribes he talks about were not writers of poetry or verse, but writers of political things. Raleigh would have been more direct if it was poets that were urging peace. It seems unlikely that Shakespeare would have urged peace.
I disagree on that. Throughout history the majority of great literary geniuses have been more in favor of peace than in favor of war. Only a civilized society gives rise to the highest culture.
Ghandi when asked what he thought of British civilisation, answered I'm all in favour of it happening. Winston Churchill used the film Henry V to drum up support for the war effort. Maybe what you say is true. But the Shakespeare plays from the 1580's do not mince words. They are anti-Catholic and patriotic about war with Spain. The later versions are watered down, due to the censors of James the 1st getting to work on them. Removing the religious tone. Trying looking at ALL the texts using a computer for the word "Jesus". You will find only a couple of references to it. But the original text would have littered with the word, simply on the grounds as a swore word.
Post by Morten St. George
I very much doubt that Elizabeth would have paid any heed at all to the court clerks who were recording political events. Raleigh had to be referring to civilized aristocrats who liked to write as opposed to those aristocrats who liked to fight.
You have the wrong meaning for the word scribe. They are not the those who wrote down the events. They are the high aristocrats, like William Cecil, the Queen's council. It was there job to advise the Queen. Elizabeth listened to them, but she made up her own mind and ignored what the said at times. Her father on the other hand listened to these men and rarely made his own decisions.
The council of the Queen were probably concerned with the cost of fighting the Spaniards. The English needed to build a fleet to match what Spain was doing. But the English economy was in a terrible state. If they had bankers they would be jumping off high buildings faster then those in the Wall Street Crash.
War in Ireland also put a burden on the English purse and taxation was impossible to collect.
Post by Morten St. George
Per Oxfordian and Mortenian theory, the real Shakespeare was an aristocrat. This is self-evident from his writings: he displays enormous knowledge of the inner workings of royal courts and of royal pastimes; his vast vocabulary suggests a high degree of education (young aristocrats would attend one of the two universities); he reveals considerable knowledge of the law (young aristocrats would also typically attended one of the Inns of Court), and he expresses familiarity with foreign places and cultures (mainly aristocrats had the money to travel abroad extensively).
I urge you to look up the Manor Estate Sheffield on the internet. And see the kind of place of place I was born and raised in. Then after you have, think where did I acquire my knowledge and put up arguments against University trained people such as yourself, coming from a place like that?
Aside from that....
You have fallen into the trap now of the lone writer syndrome. Shakespeare plays require the writer to be a jack of all trades, aristocratic, yet at the same time poor and middle class. It's the myth of the writer knocking the plays out in some room. Even portrayed as such in the film Shakespeare In Love or the negative one, Anonymous.
It's a load of bollocks from start to finish. The Shakespeare plays were knocked out in co-operative style using all sorts of different people. For example Marlowe writes his own lines in the plays of Shakespeare. He can be clearly seen playing bad guys and Romeo's friend in the play Romeo and Juliet. Actors are typecast to the extreme. If they can write, they write down their own words. Shakespeare is charge of course, but he doesn't tell them what to do. In fact most of the plays are knocked out by the actors as the perform it.
Their was NEVER any auditions for plays. Shakespeare used the people he got. If he had an ex Jewish merchant in the company then the part was written around him. With him doing his own lines. This is why they could turn out plays so quickly. One man couldn't do. It would be like getting one chap to write all the stories in today's edition of the Times newspaper. It's impossible.
Eventually this style of writing died out. For a start it meant that a single man could not get massively rich from the plays. Writers also have massive ego's. Which is what happened to the Shakespeare company. Marlowe wanted to do his own plays. He did not like the idea of having women on the stage either. And Shakespeare had three of them. Granted permission to act by the Queen herself.
The many voices inside Shakespeare plays are why today he's regarded as a genius. But he was only the leader of his team. Had he been writing the story of the Shakespeare company he would have made certain that was clear. But he didn't so those that thought he was great praised him, ignoring their own efforts.
Art N
Jim F.
2016-12-09 01:33:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
I can read your "correlations" well.
They are diverging and worthless in reading Shakespeare.
Before you become so critical of others, you should try turning to the history books to see if anything they say can be substantiated. If you had done this, you would know that a Spanish fleet commander from Peru lived in London from 1584 until late 1585 and that there are no eyewitnesses to his whereabouts until 1589. Don’t you think that this Spaniard, with his vast knowledge of Spanish warships and naval strategy, could be useful to a country that was about to be attacked by a Spanish armada? Wouldn’t it make sense for the English Privy Council to pull a bright young man out of university to serve as that guy’s page?
In 1592, the Spaniard, now an admiral in the Spanish navy, was buried in an unmarked grave, and in 1593 his page was buried in an unmarked grave. Peruvian naval historians provide an extraordinary account of a ship commanded by "admiral" Lope de Vega (last name of a famous playwright in Spain, no first name given, no independent historical record of his existence) and two unnamed captains, that joined up with a colonization fleet in 1595.
So, you see, Shakespearean authorship was not an isolated secret; it connects with other great secrets of that epoch.
Like Merlin, Shakespeare had no need to utilize anagrams or classical encoding techniques in order to convey secret information to future generations. With nearly everyone lacking in mental powers of association, nothing more was required than to convey that information in a fragmented fashion.
Morten,

Your assumption can't help the reading better, not even one line,
so it's worthless.

I can show many lines that only one-way anagram can solve, and
the result makes Shakespeare greater, including _The Birth of Merlin_.
Who is "Nicodemus Nothing"?
Morten St. George
2016-12-09 03:31:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
I can show many lines that only one-way anagram can solve, and
the result makes Shakespeare greater, including _The Birth of Merlin_.
Who is "Nicodemus Nothing"?
Jim, I think we already discussed this in another thread.

Nicodemus was famous for his gospel depicting the "harrowing of hell", so it seems appropriate to employ such a name in a Devil play. I view Sir Nicodemus as the Devil’s equivalent to Christ’s John the Baptist. His contact with the Clown and Joan immediately precedes the Devil’s contact with them.

As I recall, you believe that "Nothing" was added to Sir Nicodemus to get an anagram of Jesus Christ, which it does, but the play itself explains the "Nothing" as referring to lacking sperm and everything else, therefore unable to beget a child.

I haven’t read much of this play, nor the myths on which it is based, so I’m not sure if this is supposed to be the Devil’s equivalent of Mary’s Immaculate Conception or if the Devil did it while Joan was asleep. Either way, the storyline for The Birth of Merlin would be scandalous for Catholicism so it is hardly surprising that there was such a long delay in publishing it.

Recall that the Inquisition banned authors, not books, so that one bad play could get the entire canon banned. More than anything else, I believe this is the main reason the early controversial plays, like Faustus and Massacre at Paris, were passed off to Marlowe, conveniently deceased prior to any publication.

Finally, let me caution you that Shakespeare was by and large a secular author, so it could be a mistake to try to extract profound religious meaning from anything he wrote. It seems he got involved with this Devil thing only out of a need to explain the source of Merlin’s prophecies.
Morten St. George
2016-11-28 17:03:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
_The Birth of Merlin_ is great due to riddles and anagrams, not who
wrote it. Here's a good sample: who can be the Devil, Merlin's father?
DEVIL.
Ile blast thee slave to death,
and on this rock stick thee an eternal Monument.
MERLIN.
Ha, ha, thy powers too weak, what art thou devil,
but an inferior lustful _Incubus_,
taking advantage of the wanton flesh,
where with thou dost beguile the ignorant?
put off the form of thy humanity,
and cral upon thy speckled belly, serpent,
or Ile unclasp the jaws of _Achoron_,
and fix thee ever in the local fire.
Jim, if you are looking for meaning, I suggest you study Marlowe:

FAUSTUS. Now, by the kingdoms of infernal rule,
Of Styx, of Acheron, and the fiery lake
Of ever-burning Phlegethon, I swear
That I do long to see the monuments
And situation of bright-splendent Rome:
Come, therefore, let's away.

Note a reference to monuments in both. And here’s another Acheron from Marlowe:

Sint mihi dii Acherontis propitii! Valeat numen triplex Jehovoe! Ignei, aerii, aquatani spiritus, salvete! Orientis princeps Belzebub, inferni ardentis monarcha, et Demogorgon, propitiamus vos, ut appareat et surgat Mephistophilis DRAGON, quod tumeraris: per Jehovam, Gehennam, et consecratam aquam quam nunc spargo, signumque crucis quod nunc facio, et per vota nostra, ipse nunc surgat nobis dicatus Mephistophilis!

If you look around, you’ll even find "DRAGON" in The Birth of Merlin.
g***@btinternet.com
2016-09-18 00:26:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
But you haven't read the Shakespeare plays Mutton!!!!
So how the FUCK do you know what they are about!!!

Is there one other person who actually believes that Nostradamus never existed?

I bet when you die those on the other side tell you that YOU were Nostradamus in a previous life and that your predictions were nothing to do with Merlin or the Rose Cross!!!
Morten St. George
2016-09-18 03:52:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by g***@btinternet.com
But you haven't read the Shakespeare plays Mutton!!!!
So how the FUCK do you know what they are about!!!
Didn’t need to read them. I let the computer find Merlin.

But note that I stopped looking after finding a single match between each prophecy and one play or between each play and one prophecy. In other words, my 50-page essay illustrating the Shakespeare-Merlin connection is probably just the tip of an iceberg.
Post by g***@btinternet.com
Is there one other person who actually believes that Nostradamus never existed?
None that I know of, but I remain unfazed: I learned how to read cryptic writings, which gives me full confidence in my conclusions.
Post by g***@btinternet.com
I bet when you die those on the other side tell you that YOU were Nostradamus in a previous life and that your predictions were nothing to do with Merlin or the Rose Cross!!!
I think you are confusing me with yourself. Aren’t you the one who was Shakespeare in a previous life?
akadeepee
2016-12-21 21:30:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
Merlin's prophecy for his mother tells readers how to identify her.
MERLIN.
leave this soyl, and Ile conduct you to a place retir'd, which I by art [1]
have rais'd, call'd _Merlins Bower_, there shall you dwell with solitary
sighs, with grones and passions your companions, to weep away [3]
this flesh you have offended with, and leave all bare unto your
aierial soul, and when you die, I will erect a Monument upon the [5]
verdant Plains of _Salisbury_, no King shall have so high a sepulchre,
with pendulous stones that I will hang by art, where neither Lime [7]
nor Morter shalbe us'd, a dark _Enigma_ to the memory, for none
shall have the power to number them, a place that I will hollow [9]
for your rest,
Where no Night-hag shall walk, nor Ware-wolf tread, [11]
Where _Merlins_ Mother shall be sepulcher'd.
"I will erect a Monument upon the verdant Plains of _Salisbury_."
When we see "Monument" and the author is Shakespeare, we could connect
this line to the Shakespeare Monument in Holy Trinity Church.
"M.onument upon the verdant P.lains of S.alisbury" hints at M. P. S., and
Maronem, Pylivm, Socratem (M. P. S.) in Shakespeare's monument.
M.ary P.hilip S.idney is a one-way anagram of "Monument, the verdant Plains."
Salisbury puns on sally's-bury. Philip Sidney dies in a sally.
The word verdant provides the needed letter d and r, and tell us that he's
an inexperienced soldier.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/cN_rEPFp6QM/DaMaejV9ltIJ
A momument at Salisbury is Stonehendge
Jim F.
2016-12-22 01:47:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by akadeepee
Post by Jim F.
Merlin's prophecy for his mother tells readers how to identify her.
MERLIN.
leave this soyl, and Ile conduct you to a place retir'd, which I by art [1]
have rais'd, call'd _Merlins Bower_, there shall you dwell with solitary
sighs, with grones and passions your companions, to weep away [3]
this flesh you have offended with, and leave all bare unto your
aierial soul, and when you die, I will erect a Monument upon the [5]
verdant Plains of _Salisbury_, no King shall have so high a sepulchre,
with pendulous stones that I will hang by art, where neither Lime [7]
nor Morter shalbe us'd, a dark _Enigma_ to the memory, for none
shall have the power to number them, a place that I will hollow [9]
for your rest,
Where no Night-hag shall walk, nor Ware-wolf tread, [11]
Where _Merlins_ Mother shall be sepulcher'd.
"I will erect a Monument upon the verdant Plains of _Salisbury_."
When we see "Monument" and the author is Shakespeare, we could connect
this line to the Shakespeare Monument in Holy Trinity Church.
"M.onument upon the verdant P.lains of S.alisbury" hints at M. P. S., and
Maronem, Pylivm, Socratem (M. P. S.) in Shakespeare's monument.
M.ary P.hilip S.idney is a one-way anagram of "Monument, the verdant Plains."
Salisbury puns on sally's-bury. Philip Sidney dies in a sally.
The word verdant provides the needed letter d and r, and tell us that he's
an inexperienced soldier.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/cN_rEPFp6QM/DaMaejV9ltIJ
A momument at Salisbury is Stonehendge
Really? Can you fit your "Stonehendge" into the whole paragraph and
explain every word of it? Merlin's prophecy isn't that simple.
One dot can't get the whole picture. Connect the dots.
Morten St. George
2016-12-22 04:20:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by akadeepee
Post by Jim F.
MERLIN.
leave this soyl, and Ile conduct you to a place retir'd, which I by art [1]
have rais'd, call'd _Merlins Bower_, there shall you dwell with solitary
sighs, with grones and passions your companions, to weep away [3]
this flesh you have offended with, and leave all bare unto your
aierial soul, and when you die, I will erect a Monument upon the [5]
verdant Plains of _Salisbury_, no King shall have so high a sepulchre,
with pendulous stones that I will hang by art, where neither Lime [7]
nor Morter shalbe us'd, a dark _Enigma_ to the memory, for none
shall have the power to number them, a place that I will hollow [9]
for your rest,
Where no Night-hag shall walk, nor Ware-wolf tread, [11]
Where _Merlins_ Mother shall be sepulcher'd.
A momument at Salisbury is Stonehendge
In medieval legends, Merlin erected Stonehenge as a monument to honor his earthling mom, but that does not mean she was buried there. The passage makes it pretty obvious that he buried her on the Moon:

"leave this soyl, and Ile conduct you to a place retir’d"

The Moon is indeed a place not of earthly soil.

"which I by art"

By black magic.

"there you shall dwell with solitary sighs"

The Moon is also solitary.

"no King shall have so high a sepulchre"

Not high above the ground, but high in the sky, and the Moon is certainly higher than any earthly sepulcher.

"a dark Enigma"

In the night sky.

"for none shall have the power to number them"

True; since no one else can get to the Moon, no one can count the stones.

"a place that I will hollow for your rest"

An allusion to lunar craters.

"Where no Night-hag shall walk"

For sure, no hag is walking on the Moon.

"nor Ware-wolf tread"

The werewolf unambiguously points us to the Moon for

"Where Merlins Mother shall be sepulcher'd."

The concept of a burial on the Moon would be outrageous in Shakespeare's day and even more so in medieval times. The explanation can be found in Merlin’s own words, recorded in Nostradamus IX-65:

Dedans le coin de Luna viendra rendre
Où sera prins, & mis en terre estrange.

Into the corner of Luna he (or she) shall come to render
Where he (or she) shall be taken, and placed in strange terrain.

My research has led me to believe that, after writing a mask to conceal Merlin’s prophecies, Shakespeare wrote the plays as guide for future generations to extract them.

Consequently, as amazing as it may seem, the underlying inspiration for the Shakespeare authorship conspiracy was Merlin, the fantastical wizard of King Arthur! Can it be surprising that my theories are having a hard time gaining recognition?
Jim F.
2016-12-22 06:05:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by akadeepee
Post by Jim F.
MERLIN.
leave this soyl, and Ile conduct you to a place retir'd, which I by art [1]
have rais'd, call'd _Merlins Bower_, there shall you dwell with solitary
sighs, with grones and passions your companions, to weep away [3]
this flesh you have offended with, and leave all bare unto your
aierial soul, and when you die, I will erect a Monument upon the [5]
verdant Plains of _Salisbury_, no King shall have so high a sepulchre,
with pendulous stones that I will hang by art, where neither Lime [7]
nor Morter shalbe us'd, a dark _Enigma_ to the memory, for none
shall have the power to number them, a place that I will hollow [9]
for your rest,
Where no Night-hag shall walk, nor Ware-wolf tread, [11]
Where _Merlins_ Mother shall be sepulcher'd.
A momument at Salisbury is Stonehendge
"leave this soyl, and Ile conduct you to a place retir’d"
The Moon is indeed a place not of earthly soil.
"which I by art"
By black magic.
"there you shall dwell with solitary sighs"
The Moon is also solitary.
"no King shall have so high a sepulchre"
Not high above the ground, but high in the sky, and the Moon is certainly higher than any earthly sepulcher.
"a dark Enigma"
In the night sky.
"for none shall have the power to number them"
True; since no one else can get to the Moon, no one can count the stones.
"a place that I will hollow for your rest"
An allusion to lunar craters.
"Where no Night-hag shall walk"
For sure, no hag is walking on the Moon.
"nor Ware-wolf tread"
The werewolf unambiguously points us to the Moon for
"Where Merlins Mother shall be sepulcher'd."
Dedans le coin de Luna viendra rendre
Où sera prins, & mis en terre estrange.
Into the corner of Luna he (or she) shall come to render
Where he (or she) shall be taken, and placed in strange terrain.
My research has led me to believe that, after writing a mask to conceal Merlin’s prophecies, Shakespeare wrote the plays as guide for future generations to extract them.
Consequently, as amazing as it may seem, the underlying inspiration for the Shakespeare authorship conspiracy was Merlin, the fantastical wizard of King Arthur! Can it be surprising that my theories are having a hard time gaining recognition?
Morten,

You must read well first.
Joan Goe-too't is retired to
"Merlin's Bower" and sepulchered in
"verdant Plains of Salisbury." You mix the two.
There are only two places in this paragraph.

Who is Joan Goe-too't in your mind?
Morten St. George
2016-12-22 12:12:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
You must read well first.
Joan Goe-too't is retired to
"Merlin's Bower" and sepulchered in
"verdant Plains of Salisbury." You mix the two.
There are only two places in this paragraph.
Jim,

It seems we have some disagreement on reading comprehension even ignoring efforts to confuse the reader.

"leave this soyl, and Ile conduct you to a place retir'd, which I by art have rais'd, call'd Merlins Bower, there shall you dwell with solitary sighs,"

Sounds to me that Merlin’s mom will be buried in a place called Merlins Bower, which is solitary (isolated) and not of this soil (not on this Earth). There appears to be no scholarly consensus on where Merlins Bower is located, so why not the Moon?

A deception technique, commonly employed by Merlin in his prophecies and occasionally by the Rosicrucians (including Shakespeare) in their writings, is known as fragmentation. In fragmentation, the author simultaneously relates two or more events, alternating back and forth between them. That is, every phrase (usually separated by comas or other punctuation) has independent existence, and it is left to a clever reader to link together the elements that belong together.

"and when you die, I will erect a Monument upon the verdant Plains of Salisbury,"

Stonehenge is the Monument, not the sepulcher.

"no King shall have so high a sepulchre,"

Here the author oscillates back to the burial in Merlins Bower. The Monument cannot be the sepulcher because the Plains of Salisbury are not high (not at the top of a mountain) nor are the stones of Stonehenge particularly high (the pyramids, for example, are much higher, but not higher than Merlins Bower on the Moon!).

"with pendulous stones that I will hang by art,"

And now he returns to talking about the Monument.

In his prophecies, Merlin would normally use fragmentation only in regard to events that are spatially or temporally connected, either to two or more events occurring in different places at the same time, or to events occurring in the same place at different times. For Shakespeare in this instance, the fragmentation is justified by two different things done "by art" (the connecting factor): the sepulcher and the Monument.
Jim F.
2016-12-22 14:31:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
You must read well first.
Joan Goe-too't is retired to
"Merlin's Bower" and sepulchered in
"verdant Plains of Salisbury." You mix the two.
There are only two places in this paragraph.
Jim,
It seems we have some disagreement on reading comprehension even ignoring efforts to confuse the reader.
"leave this soyl, and Ile conduct you to a place retir'd, which I by art have rais'd, call'd Merlins Bower, there shall you dwell with solitary sighs,"
Sounds to me that Merlin’s mom will be buried in a place called Merlins Bower, which is solitary (isolated) and not of this soil (not on this Earth). There appears to be no scholarly consensus on where Merlins Bower is located, so why not the Moon?
. . .

Morten,

So your Merlin's Bower is located in the Moon, and that implies
Merlin places his mother in the Moon while she is still alive.
I see your point.

Who is Joan Goe-too't, Merlin's mother, in your mind?
Morten St. George
2016-12-22 21:53:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
Who is Joan Goe-too't, Merlin's mother, in your mind?
A picture of Merlin’s mom was published in London in 1627. It might have been intended for a publication of The Birth of Merlin that never happened, and then got on to the cover of another book written by one of the play’s coauthors. I put an enlargement of that picture up on my website:

Loading Image...

As you can see, someone is about to "go to it". At the bottom, the "R&&S" is undoubtedly an abbreviation of "_R_OSAE CRUCI_S_". Indeed, the birth of Merlin stands at the heart and soul of that secret society.

In the Drammatis Personae of The Birth of Merlin, Joan is spelled "Jone", leaving us open to both "Joan" and "Jane", which names, I believe, are cognates with the same meaning.

It seems Geoffrey of Monmouth provides us with no name for Merlin’s mom, so the architect (not necessarily the writer) of The Birth of Merlin would be free to pick whatever name pleased him. I suspect he picked the name of his own mother: Jane.

I’m sure you have some very different ideas on this matter and I would very much like to know what they are.
Jim F.
2016-12-23 02:56:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
Who is Joan Goe-too't, Merlin's mother, in your mind?
A picture of Merlin’s mom was published in London in 1627. It might have been intended for a publication of The Birth of Merlin that never happened, and then got on to the cover of another book written by one of the play’s coauthors.
. . .

Morten,

What's the name of the "coauthor" and
What's the name of the "play" in
"one of the play’s coauthor" you mentioned here?
Morten St. George
2016-12-23 07:02:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
What's the name of the "coauthor" and
What's the name of the "play" in
"one of the play’s coauthor" you mentioned here?
Jim, Since the theme of this thread is the play called The Birth of Merlin, which I had just mentioned in my comment, I fail to see why you think I was suddenly talking about some other play. Coauthors should also be no mystery since two authors are named on the play’s title page: Shakespeare (the one I refer to) and Rowley. If you were referring to the drawing, it came with the first publication of The New Atlantis, an English translation (possibly done by Sir Francis Bacon) of the Latin Nova Atlantis and which is not a play.

As you may or not know, I am not a Stratfordian, so for me the term "Shakespeare" represents other people about whom I have abundantly posted during the preceding eight or nine months. Besides the plays of Marlowe and Shakespeare, other productions of the sect would include Les Propheties de Nostradamus, the Fama Fraternitatus, and Giovanna Graia as well as the aforementioned Nova Atlantis. All these works express insider knowledge of Merlin’s prophecies so there can be no doubt that they share at least partial authorship in common.

Shakespearean authorship, therefore, is only one part of a larger puzzle much of which extends beyond the frontiers of England. And behind it all stands Merlin. I think they believed that Merlin was genuinely the son of the Devil because of the unerring success of his prophecies. As Shakespeare phrased it in Edward III, his "Oracles have many times proved true."

This brings us to speculation on what they were trying to accomplish. I gather from what they wrote in the prose introductions to Nostradamus, that many of Merlin’s prophecies (those concerning the future forward from the 1580s) predicted a horrible finale for humankind. Perhaps they thought that by openly publishing the more favorable prophecies (thirty-nine of them) and destroying all the bad ones, they could upset the Devil’s plans and save humankind from self-annihilation. Somewhat of an altruistic motive, no?

I have written an essay that extensively illustrates how the plays of Marlowe and Shakespeare enable the identification of the thirty-nine prophecies of Merlin published under the mask of Nostradamus. The Marlovians and Stratfordians are fools for thinking that those plays were written by commoners trying to earn a living.
Jim F.
2016-12-24 02:54:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
What's the name of the "coauthor" and
What's the name of the "play" in
"one of the play’s coauthor" you mentioned here?
Jim, Since the theme of this thread is the play called The Birth of Merlin, which I had just mentioned in my comment, I fail to see why you think I was suddenly talking about some other play. Coauthors should also be no mystery since two authors are named on the play’s title page: Shakespeare (the one I refer to) and Rowley. . . .
Morten,

This means you can reason well your writing, but somehow you twist
Merlin's prophecy about his mother to fit your assumption.

Night-hag and Ware-wolf are paired here, which means they are related,
and the author should have a good reason to do that.

Where no Night-hag shall walk, nor Ware-wolf tread,
Where _Merlins_ Mother shall be sepulcher'd.

*Hag* has the definition of "a woman supposed to have dealings with Satan and
the infernal world; a witch; sometimes, an infernally wicked woman" (OED 2A).

*Ware* can be "applied jocularly to women" (OED n.3 4b, 1558).

*Wolf* can be "applied to a person, etc. that should be hunted down like a wolf" or
"as a type of a destructive or devouring agency, esp. hunger or famine" (OED).

*Werewolf* has the definition of "a person who was transformed or
was capable of transforming himself at times into a wolf" (OED).

*tread* has the definition of "to tread a person's steps,
to walk in the steps of, follow the example of" (OED 2b).

We should check every word's usage date (with OED), not just the word.
Trust the date when it's earlier.

Both Night-hag and Ware-wolf describe Jone Go-too't.
She is a woman deals with the Devil and "shall walk" in the darkness (night).
She can transform herself and shall "tread" as being hunted like a wolf.
She shall be no more a Night-hag or Ware-wolf after her _death_.

This is why I ask you the identity of Jone Go-too't. The best way is to
check all lines about her in the play to find the author's intention.
Morten St. George
2016-12-24 19:15:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
Night-hag and Ware-wolf are paired here, which means they are related,
and the author should have a good reason to do that.
Where no Night-hag shall walk, nor Ware-wolf tread,
Where _Merlins_ Mother shall be sepulcher'd.
Yes, Jim, Night-hag and Ware-wolf are related: both terms can be associated with the moon, thereby affirming that Merlins Bower is located on the Moon and that is where Merlin’s mom is buried.

Beaumont and Fletcher:

"Thou night-hag, gotten when the bright moon suffer’d"

The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Werewolves:

"The oldest lore states that a lycanthrope enters the werewolf state only on the night of a full moon."
Post by Jim F.
We should check every word's usage date (with OED), not just the word.
Trust the date when it's earlier.
I would also recommend that you search for those words in Early English Books Online to see if they were in common usage during Shakespeare’s day and to see how they were used. Let us know if you are able to find a single instance of the word "ware-wolf", "werewolf" or any other spelling variant thereof.

Consider the possibility that the author was familiar with the German Werwolf legend, transcribing the Wer as Ware on the basis of pronunciation and not deriving "Ware-wolf" from any earlier usage in English. Recall that Shakespeare seems to have been aware of the German Der Busant legend to write A Midsummer’s Night Dream, so we can hardly rule out knowledge of the Werwolf.
Post by Jim F.
Both Night-hag and Ware-wolf describe Jone Go-too't.
She is a woman deals with the Devil and "shall walk" in the darkness (night).
She can transform herself and shall "tread" as being hunted like a wolf.
She shall be no more a Night-hag or Ware-wolf after her _death_.
Your efforts to demonize Merlin’s mom cannot be justified in light of Merlin’s wish to build a Monument (Stonehenge) to honor her.
Post by Jim F.
This is why I ask you the identity of Jone Go-too't. The best way is to
check all lines about her in the play to find the author's intention.
The Birth of Merlin:

Joan. Hence thou black horror, is thy lustful fire kindled agen? not thy loud throated thunder, nor thy adulterate infernal Musick, shall e're bewitch me more, oh too too much is past already.
Devil. Why dost thou fly me? I come a Lover to thee, to imbrace, and gently twine thy body in mine arms.
Joan. Out thou Hell-hound.

Hardly sounds like Joan is being complicit with the Devil’s advances but it is instead the author’s intention to depict Joan as the innocent victim of the Devil’s lust.

Similarly, in the Rosicrucian drawing, Joan has an open hand raised, clearly signaling "STOP" to the Devil’s advance.

But before we go any further, let’s keep in mind that Merlin’s mom is a fictional personage. Only Merlin’s prophecies (of which a few dozen are still extant) are real and need to be explained.
Jim F.
2016-12-25 02:42:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, December 25, 2016 at 3:15:14 AM UTC+8, Morten St. George wrote:
. . .
Post by Morten St. George
But before we go any further, let’s keep in mind that Merlin’s mom is a fictional personage. Only Merlin’s prophecies (of which a few dozen are still extant) are real and need to be explained.
Morten,

You still believe Merlin places his mother in the Moon while she
is still alive?

If you believe Merlin's mother is "a fictional personage," then
Merlin is "a fictional personage" too, then everything you said
is fictional, and that makes your words worthless.
Morten St. George
2016-12-25 08:56:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
You still believe Merlin places his mother in the Moon while she
is still alive?
I have only stated that she was buried on the Moon.
Post by Jim F.
If you believe Merlin's mother is "a fictional personage," then
Merlin is "a fictional personage" too, then everything you said
is fictional, and that makes your words worthless.
I was under the impression that we were discussing the meaning of certain dialogue in a play, not factual history. Yes, Merlin, his Mom, and the Devil are all fictional personages.

Merlin’s prophecies, however, are not fiction, but here the word "Merlin" is only used to identify the specific prophecies in question and does not indicate authorship.

Speculations relevant to the authorship of Merlin’s prophecies can be found in the publications of Giordano Bruno including his De l'infinito universo e mondi and Cabala del cavallo Pegaseo. Use of the term "cabala" reappears in the Fama Fraternitatis and in the Nova Atlantis.

Like the plays of Shakespeare, the writings of Bruno reflect insider knowledge of Merlin’s prophecies so we can assume that Bruno and the real Shakespeare were in close contact from 1583 to 1585 when Bruno resided at the French embassy in London.
Jim F.
2016-12-25 11:50:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
You still believe Merlin places his mother in the Moon while she
is still alive?
I have only stated that she was buried on the Moon.
. . .

Morten, Check the marked words:

MERLIN.
leave this soyl, and Ile *conduct* you to a place *retir'd*, which I by art
have rais'd, call'd _Merlins Bower_, there shall you *dwell* with solitary
sighs, . . . and when you *die*, I will erect a Monument . . .

So where shall Merlin's mother dwell when she is still alive?
Not Merlin's Bower?
Morten St. George
2016-12-25 18:21:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
MERLIN.
leave this soyl, and Ile *conduct* you to a place *retir'd*, which I by art
have rais'd, call'd _Merlins Bower_, there shall you *dwell* with solitary
sighs, . . . and when you *die*, I will erect a Monument . . .
So where shall Merlin's mother dwell when she is still alive?
Not Merlin's Bower?
Jim,

Everyone in this forum knows that my comprehension of the English language is extremely weak and I make no pretenses in this regard.

With my limited understanding, I see Merlin offering Merlins Bower on the Moon to his Mom as a place of solace far removed from the place where she was so tormented by the devil. This offer is phrased in the future tense of the hypothetical mood, but there appears to be no affirmation that his Mom actually accepted the offer nor is it asserted that construction of the Monument was dependent upon acceptance of the offer.

The Monument (Stonehenge) was built (still extant today), but I feel we can safely assume no more than that Merlin’s Mom had died and that Merlin fulfilled his commitment to bury her at Merlins Bower on the Moon.

Merlins Bower and the Monument are not the only things that Merlin raised by art:

"I will in visible apparitions
Present you prophecies which shall concern
Succeeding princes which my art shall raise,
Till men shall call these times the latter days."

Note that the Drammatis Personae of this play describes Merlin as "Merlin the Prophet", not as Merlin the Wizard or Merlin the Magician. You must evaluate the play for what it is: a theatrical enactment of medieval legends regarding the origin of Merlin’s prophecies.
Jim F.
2016-12-26 02:24:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
MERLIN.
leave this soyl, and Ile *conduct* you to a place *retir'd*, which I by art
have rais'd, call'd _Merlins Bower_, there shall you *dwell* with solitary
sighs, . . . and when you *die*, I will erect a Monument . . .
So where shall Merlin's mother dwell when she is still alive?
Not Merlin's Bower?
Jim,
Everyone in this forum knows that my comprehension of the English language is extremely weak and I make no pretenses in this regard.
With my limited understanding, I see Merlin offering Merlins Bower on the Moon to his Mom as a place of solace far removed from the place where she was so tormented by the devil. This offer is phrased in the future tense of the hypothetical mood, but there appears to be no affirmation that his Mom actually accepted the offer nor is it asserted that construction of the Monument was dependent upon acceptance of the offer.
The Monument (Stonehenge) was built (still extant today), but I feel we can safely assume no more than that Merlin’s Mom had died and that Merlin fulfilled his commitment to bury her at Merlins Bower on the Moon.
"I will in visible apparitions
Present you prophecies which shall concern
Succeeding princes which my art shall raise,
Till men shall call these times the latter days."
Note that the Drammatis Personae of this play describes Merlin as "Merlin the Prophet", not as Merlin the Wizard or Merlin the Magician. You must evaluate the play for what it is: a theatrical enactment of medieval legends regarding the origin of Merlin’s prophecies.
Morten,

Have you checked the date of werewolf "only on the night of a full moon"?
I don't see such information before the 20th century. It's more likely being
invented by someone later.
Morten St. George
2016-12-26 06:55:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
Have you checked the date of werewolf "only on the night of a full moon"?
I don't see such information before the 20th century. It's more likely being
invented by someone later.
It is my understanding that Ovid wrote about the transformation of man into wolf in his Metamorphoses, a book used by Shakespeare as source material for Venus and Adonis, Titus Andronicus, A Midsummer Night's Dream, Twelfth Night, The Winter's Tale, and The Tempest. Thus, S had to have been familiar with wolf men, but Ovid makes no association with the moon.

A book about werewolves states:

"The oldest lore states that a lycanthrope enters the werewolf state only on the night of a full moon. Later werewolf lore, however, as well as the majority of modern lore, insists that this is a misconception."

My guess is that the "oldest lore" would refer to lore dating from ancient or medieval times. In the early 17th century, S would have known the old lore, not modern lore.

Shakespeare’s use of the word "Ware" with wolf (so far found nowhere else in early English literature) suggests that he was familiar with the Germanic Wer legends. On Germany, Wikipedia writes:

"In Italy, France and Germany, it was said that a man or woman could turn into a werewolf if he or she, on a certain Wednesday or Friday, slept outside on a summer night with the full moon shining directly on his or her face."

Unfortunately, Wikipedia does not date that sentence, but it is inserted between something of the "16th century" and something dated 1628.

Elsewhere I read:

"Many ancient civilizations stretching back to the Neolithic Age continually paired wolves with the moon in images and literature."

Overall, I am satisfied that "Ware-wolf" alludes to the moon. Note that it does not necessarily have to be a full moon (any phase would do) to affirm the location of Merlins Bower.
Jim F.
2016-12-26 12:14:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
. . .
Post by Morten St. George
"In Italy, France and Germany, it was said that a man or woman could turn into a werewolf if he or she, on a certain Wednesday or Friday, slept outside on a summer night with the full moon shining directly on his or her face."
Unfortunately, Wikipedia does not date that sentence, but it is inserted between something of the "16th century" and something dated 1628.
. . .
Morten,

In your "inserted between something of the 16th century and
something dated 1628," has another source inserted: "Ralston in
his _Songs of the Russian People_ gives the form of incantation
still familiar in Russia."

William Ralston Shedden (1828–1889) published his _Songs of the
Russian People_ in 1872, so you can't date that between 16th century
and 1628, right?
Morten St. George
2016-12-26 14:21:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
In your "inserted between something of the 16th century and
something dated 1628," has another source inserted: "Ralston in
his _Songs of the Russian People_ gives the form of incantation
still familiar in Russia."
William Ralston Shedden (1828–1889) published his _Songs of the
Russian People_ in 1872, so you can't date that between 16th century
and 1628, right?
Right. Thanks for pointing out that Wikipedia has no concept of presenting information in chronological order. It seems that Wikipedia’s source is unavailable online, so for the moment it cannot be ascertained whether or not the cited werewolf legend predates Shakespeare.

A few moments ago I found the following:

"The earliest documented instance on French lycanthropy was found in 1214. In a report, Gervaise of Tilbury told Emperor Otto IV that people in Auvergne, France were seen to transform into wolves during the full moon."

I’m confident that if I were to continue the search I’d find more examples. Consequently, your acclamation that werewolves were never associated with the moon until the 20th century cannot be sustained.

Keep in mind that Shakespeare made a point of becoming familiar with a wide range of medieval folklore which he used as source material for many of his plays. I very much doubt that these werewolf legends would have escaped him.
Jim F.
2016-12-26 16:37:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
In your "inserted between something of the 16th century and
something dated 1628," has another source inserted: "Ralston in
his _Songs of the Russian People_ gives the form of incantation
still familiar in Russia."
William Ralston Shedden (1828–1889) published his _Songs of the
Russian People_ in 1872, so you can't date that between 16th century
and 1628, right?
Right. Thanks for pointing out that Wikipedia has no concept of presenting information in chronological order. It seems that Wikipedia’s source is unavailable online, so for the moment it cannot be ascertained whether or not the cited werewolf legend predates Shakespeare.
"The earliest documented instance on French lycanthropy was found in 1214. In a report, Gervaise of Tilbury told Emperor Otto IV that people in Auvergne, France were seen to transform into wolves during the full moon."
I’m confident that if I were to continue the search I’d find more examples. Consequently, your acclamation that werewolves were never associated with the moon until the 20th century cannot be sustained.
Keep in mind that Shakespeare made a point of becoming familiar with a wide range of medieval folklore which he used as source material for many of his plays. I very much doubt that these werewolf legends would have escaped him.
Morten,

Yes. Come back when you have any Solid Date.

My solution is more direct. Night-hag and Ware-wolf describe
both Joan Go-too't in the play, and Mary Sidney in the real world.
This can explain many things; e.g. why Prince Uter would beat
a pregnant woman, and why Toclio has seen Joan's face before.
(Who is Toclio?)

Merlin's prophecy about his mother riddles two places,
one for her retirement and one for her sepulcher.
You're free to make both the Moon, but then all your words
become fictional and worthless (without sarcasm).
Anagram is the only way to solve names in this play.
Morten St. George
2016-12-26 19:30:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim F.
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
In your "inserted between something of the 16th century and
something dated 1628," has another source inserted: "Ralston in
his _Songs of the Russian People_ gives the form of incantation
still familiar in Russia."
William Ralston Shedden (1828–1889) published his _Songs of the
Russian People_ in 1872, so you can't date that between 16th century
and 1628, right?
Right. Thanks for pointing out that Wikipedia has no concept of presenting information in chronological order. It seems that Wikipedia’s source is unavailable online, so for the moment it cannot be ascertained whether or not the cited werewolf legend predates Shakespeare.
"The earliest documented instance on French lycanthropy was found in 1214. In a report, Gervaise of Tilbury told Emperor Otto IV that people in Auvergne, France were seen to transform into wolves during the full moon."
I’m confident that if I were to continue the search I’d find more examples. Consequently, your acclamation that werewolves were never associated with the moon until the 20th century cannot be sustained.
Keep in mind that Shakespeare made a point of becoming familiar with a wide range of medieval folklore which he used as source material for many of his plays. I very much doubt that these werewolf legends would have escaped him.
Morten,
Yes. Come back when you have any Solid Date.
My solution is more direct. Night-hag and Ware-wolf describe
both Joan Go-too't in the play, and Mary Sidney in the real world.
This can explain many things; e.g. why Prince Uter would beat
a pregnant woman, and why Toclio has seen Joan's face before.
(Who is Toclio?)
Merlin's prophecy about his mother riddles two places,
one for her retirement and one for her sepulcher.
You're free to make both the Moon, but then all your words
become fictional and worthless (without sarcasm).
Anagram is the only way to solve names in this play.
It seems all sides on the Shakespeare authorship debate have become fixated in their point of view, making rational arguments useless as it would be in any case of one religion debating another.

The 400th anniversary of Shakspere’s death comes to an end in a few days, and it seems he has escaped my attacks wholly unscathed. But I continue to believe that his days of glory are numbered. I think the survivors of Merlin’s predicted doomsday will be more rational and will promptly do away with him.
A***@germanymail.com
2016-12-26 19:55:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
Post by Morten St. George
Post by Jim F.
In your "inserted between something of the 16th century and
something dated 1628," has another source inserted: "Ralston in
his _Songs of the Russian People_ gives the form of incantation
still familiar in Russia."
William Ralston Shedden (1828–1889) published his _Songs of the
Russian People_ in 1872, so you can't date that between 16th century
and 1628, right?
Right. Thanks for pointing out that Wikipedia has no concept of presenting information in chronological order. It seems that Wikipedia’s source is unavailable online, so for the moment it cannot be ascertained whether or not the cited werewolf legend predates Shakespeare.
"The earliest documented instance on French lycanthropy was found in 1214. In a report, Gervaise of Tilbury told Emperor Otto IV that people in Auvergne, France were seen to transform into wolves during the full moon."
I’m confident that if I were to continue the search I’d find more examples. Consequently, your acclamation that werewolves were never associated with the moon until the 20th century cannot be sustained.
Keep in mind that Shakespeare made a point of becoming familiar with a wide range of medieval folklore which he used as source material for many of his plays. I very much doubt that these werewolf legends would have escaped him.
Morten,
Yes. Come back when you have any Solid Date.
My solution is more direct. Night-hag and Ware-wolf describe
both Joan Go-too't in the play, and Mary Sidney in the real world.
This can explain many things; e.g. why Prince Uter would beat
a pregnant woman, and why Toclio has seen Joan's face before.
(Who is Toclio?)
Merlin's prophecy about his mother riddles two places,
one for her retirement and one for her sepulcher.
You're free to make both the Moon, but then all your words
become fictional and worthless (without sarcasm).
Anagram is the only way to solve names in this play.
It seems all sides on the Shakespeare authorship debate have become fixated in their point of view, making rational arguments useless as it would be in any case of one religion debating another.
The 400th anniversary of Shakspere’s death comes to an end in a few days, and it seems he has escaped my attacks wholly unscathed. But I continue to believe that his days of glory are numbered. I think the survivors of Merlin’s predicted doomsday will be more rational and will promptly do away with him.
Art N

g***@btinternet.com
2016-12-22 13:13:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by akadeepee
A momument at Salisbury is Stonehendge
Well Merlin did not erect Stonehenge and he could not have gone to the Moon either.

So you lot are plain bonkers for even trying to sense of such pure tales of fantasy.
Loading...