It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Discovery that may change western history

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

+25 more 
posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 06:04 PM
Amazing discovery, codes and conspiracy in Shakespeare's works

I am watching a documentary on the findings Norwegian code cracker Petter Amundsen made. In this documentary, called "Sweet Swan of Avon - The Shakespeare Treasure", he has found codes that:

1) ...makes Shakespeare's plays a secret freemason project, it's purpose to enlighten the people of the world.

There has already been a controversy as to whether or not Shakespeare wrote the Shakespearean works himself, and Amundsen also claims that:

2) ...Shakespeare is not Shakespeare. In his search to learn more about cryptography, he stumbled upon a string of ciphers in Shakespeare's First Folio. He was shocked to find what appeared to be another author, a man called Francis Bacon. Shakespeare was only a payed frontman, for a freemason project.

(By the way, His plays and poetry must have required thousands of hand-written manuscript pages, but no one now knows where these are to be found.)

3) ...he found a treasure map leading to an island in Nova Scotia, Canada, called Oak Island. The findings take us into a story revolving around the knights templar, and their lost treasure.

When the Shakespeare code is released it could cause a sensation because of the highly controversial implications of the story. Amundsen's work is based on well known code systems, and every step is thoroughly documented. This is not fiction, it is all based on facts that can be tested!

If Amundsen gains recognition for his theories, the history of literature will have to be rewritten! He will be forever known as the man who cracked Shakespeares big riddle. If he fails, he will just another fanatic in line with naive conspiracy theorists.

I will try to describe what his findings are, and i will have to translate the documentary from norwegian. The only english version i found are intros with english subtitles. (There are 4 episodes each 50 min long, and only 2 have been released so far) But what i have seen so far is way enough to start off with, so I'll go into detail about what i have learned this far.

Norwegian whole episodes here:

Trailer 1)

Trailer 2)

Trailer 3)

More coming...

posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 06:39 PM
Haven't Manly P. Hall and other occult writers spoken of this already? I mean, decades ago!

I do have books (In The Secret Teachings of All Ages ??? ) that talk about Shakespear being Bacon and that Bacon used something called the "Bacon Cipher" which consists of minor character variation to encode messages (more of a steganographic technique than anything). If any of Shakespear's original manuscripts used the Bacon Cipher than of course the problem is obvious in trying to retrieve anything unless someone's got stuff stashed somewhere.

I guess I need to go dig it up and remind myself exactly where it came from and what I'm supposed to know. LOL.

Edit - NVM, Found where MPH discusses this cypher, Bacon and Shakespeare:
The Secret Teaching of All Ages - The Cryptogram as a factor in Symbolic Philosophy

[edit on 12/20/2009 by EnlightenUp]

[edit on 12/20/2009 by EnlightenUp]

posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 07:07 PM
Episode 1

Code on the grave of Shakespeare

William Shakespeare is buried in the Holy Trinity Church, Stratford-on-Avon, Warwickshire, England. There is no name on the stone.

On his grave it says:

Good friend, for Jesus' sake forebeare
To digg the dust enclosed heare;
Bleste be the man that spares thes stones,
And curst be he that moves my bones

This stone isnt the original one that was put on his grave, as it was replaced in the 1820s, but they had the same text, with one difference.. on the original one the letters were a mix of small and capital letters.

Now why would anyone make it like that?

Coincidently, at the time he lived, a code system was beeing made that used big and small letters, called biliteral cipher... contructed by scientist and philosopher Francis Bacon.

Francis Bacon's celebrated biliteral cipher (1605) was an arrangement of the letters a and b in five-letter combinations, each representing a letter of the alphabet. This code illustrates the important principle that a code employing only two different signs can be used to transmit information.

But noone has manage to prove that the code can be used to decipher the gravestone, so they havent found any potential secret messages.

This is what you get when using the code on the grave
(big letters are B, small A)

The first word "GooD" becomes BAAAB, and if you use the code on the entire text, you will get this:

The code teaches that BAAAB equals the letter S. If you look at all the letters you end up with these:

Are these random letters, or can we find stuff in it? Well this is where it gets interesting.

In here you find interesting letters clustered. Keep in mind we are just looking for stuff, not makin any conclusions. So look at this:

It seems to spell Shaxspheare. And down in the middle is also a W. Lets keep those for now. (Shakespeare was written with x sometimes)

We can find the first letters of the maker of this code also, Francis Bacon, FR BA

On the gravestone it said:
"To dig the dust enclosed here" Amundsen saw a similarity between the letters DUST on the grave and the letters YETA. They were both enclosed. The dust of Shakespear is indeed enclosed in his own tomb, and the words YETA is enclosed by the surrounding letters.

He thought that maybe, just maybe DUST is the key.. so what if he needed to somehow combine the two.

He used an accepted code he says, where he combines the value of letters based on where they are in the alphabet (a=1, b=2 etc) and finds another: Didnt go into detail, so i dont know how he got what numbers. He explained that:


replace the letters YETA with CANV, and you might just see something.
FR BACAN V. See it?

It is Francis Bacon Verulam, (Verulam beeing the title he used all the time)
Amundsen then realized it doesnt matter how it is spelled, this is a phonetic system, you cant realy hear the difference if someone says

bacon with o
bacan with a

But there are still unused letters remaining on the code.
Read more in my next post...

[edit on 20/12/2009 by Daniem]
edit on 5/4/11 by argentus because: repaired broken coding

posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 07:19 PM
reply to post by Daniem

What is interesting about those letters are distinct absence of other letters of the alphabet. They could be anything. Coordinates, Scrambled. inverted, how many times each letter comes up in ot out of sequence - anything.. we need another Key for this part

posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 07:22 PM
reply to post by Daniem

Thanks for this, fascinating stuff. It's late here now but I will certainly take this up again in the morning. Just thought I would muddy the waters some more by adding this:

Marlowe as…… Shakespeare

One group of conspiracists believe that Marlowe never died as Deptford. Why? Because Marlowe was Shakespeare! Propounded by the Marlowe Society, this thesis found its most articulate and commited exponents in Calvin Hoffman, who wrote The Man Who Was Shakespeare in 1955, and A.D. “Dolly” Wraight. Hoffman believed that Thomas Walsingham was Marlowe’s lover, and that he faked the playwright’s death to save him from execution.

Dolly Wraight, on the other hand, works backwards, beginning with clues found in “Shakespeare’s” sonnets ( which, if read in the right way, apparently fit every detail of Marlow’s life – notwithstanding the fact that such sonnet sequences were rarely autobiographical) and ending with a faked death at Deptford. So relentlessly have the Marlovians pushed their case, that Marlowe’s memorial in Westminister Abbey’s Poet’s Corner actually has a question mark inscribed after his date of death.

If you can find an English version of that documentary that would be great

posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 08:44 PM
reply to post by EnlightenUp

I was hoping someone would mention Manly P. Hall. Now I feel comfort that someone else remembers this.

Also, Manly P. Hall gave his ENTIRE life thesis to Jordan Maxwell.

Manly P. Hall apparently was a good man, many new researchers instantly hate any Freemason. Even though Manly P. Hall is by far the only person to release such secret information about Freemasonry. The biggest whistle blower in a more professional academic way.

(No I am not a Freemason

posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 08:54 PM
Lets look at Francis Bacon.
People have long thought about him beeing the composer of the shakespeare works... but noone could prove it.

He is like the founder of modern science, the man behind The scientific method, and the one who said the famous words "knowledge is power"

Many view him as the best scribe and thinker for his time, only contested by.... William Shakespeare.

Some believe his philosophy and life experience fits PERFECTLY in what we find in the Shakespeare works.

In a letter to the king he refers to himself as a concealed poet. Could Francis have written the Shakespeare works?

The remaining code:
4 letters remain. two A's and two R's

" target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

Amundsen felt that ARRA is the word with most possibilities. What is ARRA? An Arras is a wall rug, (i think you call it)

Here we find a paralell with Hamlet, who stabs such a rug, killing a man who was hiding behind it. He hid the body, and when people started asking about the man, Hamlet said: "HE IS COMPOUNDED WITH DUST"

That is one variant, the other is that ARRA is short for "Aragon" (?) which is a deal made by pre-payment. This leads back to the thought that Shakespeare earned a large amount of money to serve as a fasade for the texts.
It reads in a book from 1709 states that Shakespeare was paid 1000 pounds by the Earl of south hampton, for no special reason.

In any case, it was usual to use cover names at the time, to hide sensitive info, or the writer. It was also looked as bad taste if someone who was upper class published poetry, something Francis Bacon did.

Francis was a master at cryptation and secret correspondanse.

Another anomality is that the code Francis made, wasnt published until 7 years AFTER Shakespeare died. So how can the gravestone have used that code?

[edit on 20/12/2009 by Daniem]

posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 08:56 PM
reply to post by the_denv

The reason I brought it up was to temper the air of novelty this thread put forth upon initial reading, just in case code cracker Petter Amundsen was really claiming to have entirely original insight on the matter.

So, was it an independant path of realization based upon reasearch, did he give credit where credit is due or was it plagiarism? I haven't watched the documentary yet thus I am not leveling any accusations.

It was just an odd preemptive impulse that I for some reason obeyed.

posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 09:28 PM
The theory that Bacon was Shakespeare goes back at least to 1805.

The pit at Oak Island was discovered in 1795.

While this Amundsen may be piling a bunch of stuff together, it's nothing nearly as earth shattering as you make it out to be. These are theories that have been going around for literally centuries. Unless he can prove something that nobody else has to date, you'd be better served going to his sources.

posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 09:46 PM
Amundsen discovered that the number 53 is of importance. He looked at the bust next to Shakespere's grave and noticed that it says Shakespeare dies at 53. He died in fact at 52. This number you will see more of.

Amundsen goes on to look for similar codes in the works of Shakespeare. He got a hold the FIRST FOLIO:

Mr. William Shakespeares Comedies, Histories, & Tragedies is the 1623 published collection of William Shakespeare's plays. Modern scholars commonly refer to it as the First Folio

Does the works mention BACON? By doing a search via computer, for Bacon we find that Bacon is used twice. Once in "The merry wifes of Windsor" (comedy), on page 53.

The second time bacon is used is in the history section of the folio, in the Henrik the 4th story, on page number 53.

But what is the purpose of the number 53?
As seen earlier, letters can be numbers and vise versa, in the world of codes. Was Bacon the poet?


Dont know.. but maybe

Free thought wasnt looked upon lightly by the authoroty in those days, young poets with dangerous ideas were punished harsly. No doubt that people developed codes to talk with the like minded.. they served something that looked obvious, but that had some secret meaning.

So did Bacon code his own name into Shakespeare?

Amundsen feels he has found a code that has such a low chance of occuring randomly, that it must be real.

This can be seen of the very first page with a poem, where the headline is "To the reader"

In poems theres usually a capital letter starting each line. But not here. one w is small. The word reads "TwO"

He immediately thinks that it is a referance to page 2, so he turns to page 2 of the first play called "the tempest". And there he discovers the same typo, a small w, reading out TwO.

Then he looks over to the other edge of the same page, only to find what reads as F BACon

Now how likely is this to happen? They say in the documentary it is 1:2billion shot of this happening. Also there isnt any more of these typos. He compares it to beeing as likely as drawing TO BE OR NOT TO BE perfectly, in the right order from randomly tossed scrabble bricks.

[edit on 20/12/2009 by Daniem]
edit on 5/4/11 by argentus because: remove [ i m to repaire image embed

posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 10:03 PM

Originally posted by Daniem

more more!

Francis Bacon Wrote Shakespeare plays

It has balance too
First 2 first part ,middle mostly middle, and end 2 end

[edit on 20-12-2009 by '___'omino]

posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 10:35 PM
That was the first episode.. i dont know if i BELIEVE this stuff, but it sure was entertaining.

It is worth adding that Bacons parents both hired people to front their publications...

And in those days it would be very dangerous for Bacon to be accociated with something so politically explosive as the Shakespear works.

Oh yeah.. on Bacon's book on his code invention, you find the same letters on page 2. OwT.. or TwO, with the small w.

Maybe i'll do more on this if there is interest.

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 04:01 AM
reply to post by Daniem

This sounds a little like the bible code and that has been thoroughly debunked. I don't mean to be rude but any book of such long length could contain a code because there are so many words and possible combinations. I think people just see what they want to see, he looked for a code, expecting to find one and found one.

Also which edition of the book is he using? I only ask because maybe other editions don't have those red, highlighted letters in that order. I somehow doubt shakespeare himself made them red in the original manuscripts as it would be a waste of time.

[edit on 21-12-2009 by ImaginaryReality1984]

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 04:25 AM
I personally do not think that Shakespeare was the 100% contributor to all of those works. Maybe he had a hand in them (like a storyteller ... not a "writer") or possibly he was just a front man for Bacon.

Then I ask WHY would Bacon disguise this talent?

Secondly, the one thing that I cannot get my head around is that Shakespeare never taught his children to read or write ...

Now if I was a famous writer ... the first thing my children would learn is to read and write. That for me is key to this mystery. Allegedly he couldn't teach them to read or write because he could not himself (hence being a "storyteller" not "writer").

Little bit of info on the subject.

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 04:28 AM
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

I would have to agree that if you look for a code ... you will find one.

Also, the code would only ever be hidden in the original works but the works that you buy from Amazon are now likely to be warped and brought into modern syllabus etc. Any code that was there is probably now lost.

Do not let this remove you from the mystery. There are still plenty of points that can be chewed on.

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 07:02 AM
reply to post by Daniem

I know zilch about this subject but cannot help but as why ? Why go to so much trouble to conceal the fact that someone didn't write what is alleged he wrote and why allege it in the first place ?

A play is a play who cares who wrote it ? If Shakespeare didn't and Bacon (or whoever) did why hide it ? Makes no sense to me.

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 07:06 AM
Fascinating stuff!

This is the kind of thing that drives histories forensic scientists and treasure hunters alike. Damn! Where is that guy from National Treasure when you need him!?!?

Re: moocowman

People care because if this does indeed point us in the direction of the Templar Knights treasures and if it was ever found it would be one of the largest archeological finds in a long time. It would be interesting to see if they did indeed have in their possession things like the Holy Grail or the Ark of the Covenant.

[edit on 21-12-2009 by ch1ldofthe70s]

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 07:17 AM
Everybody knows that Francis Bacon wrote the best of S plays.
There are plays, like Henry V and sonnets, which are totally propaganda and have no artistic value. There were probably several people who wrote all that is ascribed to Shakespeare.

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 08:17 AM
Fascinating stuff
star and flag

I love stuff like this

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 08:26 AM
Greg Szymanski, JD, over at Artic Beacon (scroll down to "The Manufacture of Shakespeare") makes a very interesting case for jesuit involvement. The shear volume of work output and the creation of words to provide architecture for a new legal frame work are compelling arguments for their being more than one "Shakespeare".

It in 1623 that the first full folio of the works of “Shakespeare” were published under James I and that England was finally recognized under international law and Charter to hold possession of key parts of North America (excluding Mexico) under the newly formed English “Crown Corporation” in competition to the Aragon “Crown Corporation” of Spain.

The Crown Corporation still exists today and is in fact the final arbiter, the final court and judge of the legal system under which you probably exist today. The fact that the Crown Corporation could not have existed in law and function without the works of William Shakespeare has never been fully explored until now.

The purpose of this article is to reveal clearly, once and for all that William Shakespeare is a Myth—created by the Jesuits and Vatican to help implement a new deal to end the war with its ancient trading partner England, through the creation of the Crown Corporation under Holy Charter—the laws and precedents brilliantly embedded in seemingly harmless plays and sonnets.

That far from just being a cultural gem in English history, the Works of Shakespeare represent a cornerstone in the way the modern world continues to be held under the control of the Holy See, the Vatican through the tricky use of words.

Shakespeare and the creation of a whole new legal language

William Shakespeare is credited with writing 37 plays, 154 sonnets and 2 narrative poems from no earlier than 1598 to no later than 1613–the first folio of “his” works being published in 1623.

Of the works attributed to Shakespeare–comprising of some 884,000 words contained in 34,896 lines and spoken by 1,211 characters–33% were histories of immense and unprecedented historical research, 32% were comedies, 29% were tragedies, 4% were poems and 2% were sonnets.

If Shakespeare truly was the author, then he had to have handwritten every last word–as typewriters did not exist. To put this massive undertaking into perspective–if Shakespeare made not one single mistake on any page, nor re-wrote a single line of dialogue, nor scene, then he would have to had written a minimum of one page per day for fifteen years (1598-1613) to complete this body of work. Given, no author in history has written even half as much without making mistakes, Shakespeare then must have written well over 15,000 hand written pages –yet not one single page has ever been found–an unbelievable and unprecedented anomaly that defies all logic.

Yet what is rarely discussed by scholars is the incredible fact that the works attributed to Shakespeare contain no less than 28,829 unique word forms–of which over 2,500 were new words to the English language for the first time (The Oxford English Dictionary attributes only around 2,000 new words to Shakespeare). These were not weird and strange words, but incredibly over 1,700 of our most common words today, including such fundamental legal words as accused, addiction, assassination, bandit, bar, case, contract, courtship, crown, employer, investments, law, bond, lawyer, majestic, negotiate, secure, submit, understand.

Again to put this in perspective, King James or Authorized Version of the Holy Bible, published in 1611 makes use of a mere 8,000 words; the playright Christopher Marlowe used around 7,000; the poet John Milton 6,000, Charles Dickens 8,000.

It appears that Shakespeare went out of his way to create new and unusual words. Given the plays were supposed to be aimed at commercial venture, it would have been a huge commercial risk to introduce so many new words to a paying audience — and must have alienated 99% of them given they could not possibly have understood what they were hearing. So how could The Globe and the plays of Shakespeare possibly have been a financial success? The answer is simply, that from the time of James I, the Crown (of England) treated Shakespeare as if it were an extension of its own legal statutes–required reading for all judges, lawyers and men involved in trade. Why? Because it was common knowledge up until the 20th Century that Shakespeare remained the most comprehensive reference of legal statutes and procedures for English and common law for nearly 400 years.

new topics

top topics

active topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in