It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Shakespeare has demonstrated a known Elizabethan cipher method to us with Sonnet 136 in which he tells us his "name is Will", and then uses the number cipher totals of the first letters of the lines of the Sonnet to give us the Simple and Kaye Ciphers of "WILL SHAKESPEARE". A question is inevitable to come up as to why he would use any cipher at all. This is where the Truth Seeker must use his wits to find out Truth. The Shakespeare Authorship question is not new, and is debated very passionately by several sides of the argument. One theory that has come up in the discussions is that Shakespeare may be somehow related to Queen Elizabeth. One of the themes in the Sonnets is repeated often, and that theme is "Succession". As a Truth Seeker we must use all the clues which we have at our disposal to seek Truth. In Sonnet 136 Shakespeare tells us his name is "Will", and gives us a cipher method to use. So what if indeed Shakespeare's name is "Will", but he is the son of the Queen, "Elizabeth Tudor"?
Between 1607 and 1616, two anonymous manifestos were published, first in Germany and later throughout Europe. These were Fama Fraternitatis RC (The Fame of the Brotherhood of RC) and Confessio Fraternitatis (The Confession of the Brotherhood of RC). The influence of these documents, presenting a "most laudable Order" of mystic-philosopher-doctors and promoting a "Universal Reformation of Mankind", gave rise to an enthusiasm called by its historian Dame Frances Yates the "Rosicrucian Enlightenment".
The manifestos were and are not taken literally by many but rather regarded either as a hoax or as allegorical statements. The manifestos directly state: "We speak unto you by parables, but would willingly bring you to the right, simple, easy, and ingenuous exposition, understanding, declaration, and knowledge of all secrets". Others believe Rosenkreuz to be a pseudonym for a more famous historical figure, usually Francis Bacon.
Originally posted by mmiichael
I've read a lot of what's out there on Shakespeare and his authorship Very little actually known about the man, most of it is surmise. He was not particulary literate or well-traveled based on the little contemporary documentation on him, including the fact that he was not in possession of a single book at his death.
He was actively involved in the theatre and probably had some involvement with the body of plays published under his name. Most likely there was a floating group of writers contributing, and Bacon is a prime suspect. Even highly conservative scholars concede some of the later plays are not form the same hands as the earlier ones.
I could go on but there are volumes of fascinating literary and historical scholarship putting forward many convincing theories.