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: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 08:40 AM
In Shakespeare's sonnets there is plenty of those new words, including economic and legal jargon. Most sonnets are nothing but direct propaganda of procreation (smells catholic?)...

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 09:39 AM
haha Francis Bacon wrote shakespear? Bacon was a great guy but; Othello, Hamlet, King Leer? haha not a chance!

Bacon could be called the king of scientific method - Shakespear could be called the king of poetic method, they both posses skill sets so unique that them being the same person is a ridiculous concept. The history of both men explain fairly well their mindsets, it's hard to see the author of shakespear being as foolishly involved in his own games as to die stuffing a duck with snow for example -that goes against the teaching of his entire cannon!

anyway i haven't watched the docu yet but i'll go do it now, sure to be a laugh i love watching illiterates misrepresent shakespear - to have the extra serving of botched Bacon should heighten the comedy no end.

oh and if a secret shadow group brought us Bacon and Shakespear then where do i sign up? I for one welcome our new intelligently realist and yet highly compassionate and fair new overlords, i look forward to the works of sublime beauty they will no doubt fill the world with.

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 10:10 AM
reply to post by NatureBoy

haha Francis Bacon wrote shakespear? Bacon was a great guy but; Othello, Hamlet, King Leer? haha not a chance!

Definitely, Bacon had the quality to write or instruct/edit.
Sonnets are just propaganda and very amateurish "poetry".
Some plays directly expose court/political manipulation with insider's knowledge.

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 10:12 AM
At the ripe old age of 13 I found the State had decided yours truly was quite incorrigible so for a spell I found myself banished to the School Library several periods a day to wile away the time normally spent in class on my own.

For some strange reason I decided reading all of Shakespeare’s works would be a good use of that time.

If you haven’t read Shakespeare’s works I highly recommend it they are as insightful as they are prophetic and are masterpieces in the truest sense of the word.

It would not surprise me that Shakespeare’s works were authored by Francis Bacon in whole or in part.

Many posters seem to be unsure why such elaborate lengths would have been gone too for just plays and poems and sonnets. It doesn’t make much sense in the context of our times but in the context of those times things were radically different. The Dark Ages of Church Hegemony over art and sciences was just coming to an end via the Renaissance period. Two centuries before Shakespeare’s works could have never been published because of Papal restrictions and anyone who might have attempted to write them would have surely been imprisoned, subject to Papal inquisition and likely executed after prolonged torture. Art and science were much more tenuous and risky undertakings than they are today. Even in Shakespeare’s day with the Renaissance well under way a play, book, poem or even song that was viewed to be offensive by a Monarch or other significant Royal or Noble could land one in prison or swinging from the gallows pole. Shakespeare’s work were truly revolutionary and visionary for their times.

It would not be surprising that someone like Bacon who was closely tied and aligned with the Masons and the Rosicrucian Order and looking to create a new Atlantis in America would have used Shakespeare’s works to code messages to people in those Orders flung far throughout the world.

That Bacon could have been working with Shakespeare or was himself Shakespeare and was acting as an agent of Rome and the Pope to clandestinely codify new universal laws, principles and attitudes is a very thought provoking one especially for me as I favor the theory that Rome still runs and controls the world and is the New World Order.

Amongst Shakespeare’s possibly most prophetic passage is one that has always stuck with me in a worrisome way as it reeks of biblical Armageddon but with a very different reason and purpose:

O, pardon me, thou bleeding piece of earth,
That I am meek and gentle with these butchers!(275)
Thou art the ruins of the noblest man
That ever lived in the tide of times.
Woe to the hand that shed this costly blood!
Over thy wounds now do I prophesy
Which like dumb mouths do ope their ruby lips(280)
To beg the voice and utterance of my tongue,
A curse shall light upon the limbs of men;
Domestic fury and fierce civil strife
Shall cumber all the parts of Italy;
Blood and destruction shall be so in use,(285)
And dreadful objects so familiar,
That mothers shall but smile when they behold
Their infants quarter'd with the hands of war;
All pity choked with custom of fell deeds,
And Caesar's spirit ranging for revenge,(290)
With Ate by his side come hot from hell,
Shall in these confines with a monarch's voice
Cry “Havoc!” and let slip the dogs of war,
That this foul deed shall smell above the earth
With carrion men, groaning for burial.

I often fear it shall be Caesar’s revenge that is that last apocalyptic act before the introduction of a one world government.

Yet who and what is that Caesar whose vengeance simmered for an extraordinary two thousand years before reaching fruition?

Like the mighty Julius Caesar in Shakespeare’s awesome tragedy, a small group of men have banded together in our modern age to assassinate another great leader. This new “leader”, however, is not a king of men but the undisputed ancient Caesar of the financial world. This Caesar has been lusted after for six millennia of human history, and has always been the ultimate standard of wealth, trade, and money. The neo-conspirators have drawn up Machiavellian plans to viciously assassinate the legendary king of assets itself, gold.

Gold is a powerful and formidable foe. It is the primary financial asset that has intrinsic worth in its own right, that does not represent the mere good faith and credit of another party. Every other non-commodity paper asset is only as good as the people backing it, the folks promising to meet the contractual obligations outlined on the inherently worthless fiat paper.

In our wacky modern world, the financial markets have been besieged by a blizzard of paper. Throughout virtually all of human history, paper promises to pay were backed at least in part by gold. For the last half dozen years, paper assets have made some people fantastically rich. The seductive allure of controlling the paper assets is that more can always be created with a stroke of the pen. The paper fiat “assets” can be expanded ad infinitum, creating truly vast personal paper wealth for the entities controlling the paper. There is a catch to this massive Ponzi scheme, however. The paper game only works as long as the general populace in the nations besieged with the paper BELIEVES and has FAITH in the paper assets. The moment that faith begins to wane, the gig is up and the false “wealth” that the paper once seemed to represent rapidly sublimates to its true value, zero.

The goal of the paper game for the paper hangers is to rapidly create paper and convert it into REAL assets, including gold, land, buildings, companies, etc before the public faith in the new paper is lost. American investors have received a very painful first hand lesson this year in the NASDAQ of what happens when paper assets are totally divorced from reality and historic cashflow valuations are scoffed at. The bust after a bubble is always wicked, and the pain sustained from that inevitable “correction” gravely outweighs any pleasure derived from riding the original bubble up to the heavens.

Shakespeare may have foreseen many things in part because his monumental landmark works were part of a conspiracy to help bring them about!

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 10:57 AM
I'm shocked and insulted by this Thread.

How DARE they slur the good name of Will.

I for one KNOW that he was and IS Shakespere.

For how>

Simple, I saw him on the Series 3 Episode of Doctor Who.

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 11:05 AM
There is a very good story by Anthony Burgess (at least I think it was him who wrote it), about how Shakespeare "created" all his works

Got them all from time-travellers

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 11:15 AM
I think its good that you have brought this up. I heard about this theory whilst reading Jonathon Blacks' "Secret History of the World".

It went into it quite deeply looking at Bacons ties and he is really an interesting guy who apparantly was tied up with the freemasons and Roscrusions as already mentioned, along with Allister Crowley, the Queen, many french and German Occultists among others.

As for actualy being the same guy, its plausable bit in my opinion what is even more plausable is the fact that they had a connection and they decided to use Williams literacy skills to get out some hidden messages that they both agreed were very important.

I will post an Ebook if I find a copy to anyone who is intersted.

Good Topic!

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 11:20 AM
There are a few problems with trying to find a code in something. First, I'm sure that if I looked through 20 - 30 books, I could probably find the word BACON going down the side.

Plus, I always get skeptical when they start making exceptions to their own rules in code-breaking. In other words, he says that it would have spelled BACAN, but since it sounds like (or the same as) BACON it makes no difference. I would argue that it makes a huge difference.

The only purpose to a code would be if the KEY remains the same always. A changing or exception-filled key would make for an incredibly ineffective code.

The problem with codes is that they have to be exact. It can't work for one poem or play and not another.

It is a very interesting theory however.

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 12:37 PM
I am by far no expert on anything, but it seems just be the sheer volumn of work done, It must have been penned by more than one author. If not he was one writing fool! Different styles (between WS and FB) might be as simple as some works were contracted, or even the need to not be mistaken for a flippant playwrite with radical ideas, some of which most people of the time were not even ready to understand. Handing over pre-scribed works would account for some of the numbers, and the difference of styles would lean toward multiple authors. I have the complete works, and will now reread. I never before associated the legal precedence though. I've been getting into law studies and any info on this especially would be great. Thanks for bringing the topic up. Star and flag, and thank some of you posters for your insightful and knowledgeable comments.

[edit on 21-12-2009 by eazyriderl_l]

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 01:26 PM
reply to post by moocowman

We might not care these days, but going back to the late 16th / early 17th century period, things were a bit different.

If your ideas were in any way considered a threat to the church, the political establishment, the monarchy you would be made to regret it in quick order.

Most often the punishment was of the permanent variety.

Plus as the OP says, being a highbrow figure in society and politics, Bacon would not want to publish the works under his own name, as the consensus of the day amongst 'the elites', as they saw themselves, was that poetry and such was grossly vulgar (akin to what a lot of people in the establishment today, would probably think of any Sex Pistols track) and any respectable elite wouldn't be caught dead writing such uncouth piffle.

And he hasn't been caught has he...not yet at least.

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 01:43 PM
reply to post by Daniem

Oak Island

Well if it is buried there it would take nearly a super human effort to bring the treasure/Evidence to the surface. There have been so many amateur destructive attempts to retrieve the loot that it's a disaster area. Retrieving "Whatever" is there would cost a fortune.

S & F

Very interesting topic.

[edit on 21-12-2009 by SLAYER69]

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 02:23 PM

Originally posted by NatureBoy
haha Francis Bacon wrote shakespear?

anyway i haven't watched the docu yet but i'll go do it now, sure to be a laugh i love watching illiterates misrepresent shakespear - to have the extra serving of botched Bacon should heighten the comedy no end.

You have not watched the "docu", yet you are compelled to post a barely literate blowhard response in a thread dedicated to this "docu".

A response, riddled with grammatical and spelling errors, where you accuse the film-makers and participants of being illiterate.

This, even though you admit you have not watched it and therefore could not possibly know their level of literacy.

Brilliant comedy writing, shakespear(sic)!

[edit on 21-12-2009 by Deny Arrogance]

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 02:32 PM
I'm surprised no one has mentioned famous mathematician Georg Cantor's mental-meltdown and his obsession with this very same notion,

When Cantor reached his breaking point, he became obsessed with a completely non sequitor unsolvable problem. He wanted to prove that Shakespeare never wrote any of his plays; that they were really written by Francis Bacon. A similar thing happened to Gödel -- in attempting to solve this continuum problem, he fell into an obsession with proving that the mathematician Leibniz plagiarized many of his theories. Both men faced the problem of actual infinity, and became paranoid, raving maniacs as a result. (1)

[edit on 21-12-2009 by Xtraeme]

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 02:52 PM
Ah, seems there was some interest for this .. i shall have to dig out the rest of the story then. It surtainly got interesting in part 2, the freemason symbols in Shakespeare's books

It will take some time though, hours, so maybe tonight, or tomorrow.

[edit on 21/12/2009 by Daniem]

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 04:28 PM
Francis Bacon has been one of the main suspected authors of some of the works attributed to Shakespeare for hundreds of years, so I don't think this revelation will "change western history". It will just be looked upon as another crackpot theory.

The way the British establishment feel about this issue is analogous to how the Egyptian authorities feel about Ancient Egypt, i.e. that the accepted official history is a major factor of national pride, and is too important to the establishment for someone to come along and blow down the house of cards.

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 04:59 PM

Originally posted by moocowman
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.

Some of Shakespeares plays were very political and parallels between the characters and the monarchs of the day (Elizabeth I, James I) could easily be made. This would have been dangerous for Bacon had he been the author as he was close to both and a member of parliament.

Bacon himself is an immensely interesting figure in history and notable author under his own name. His book 'New Atlantis' is often noted as influential on shaping the early ideals of the United States.

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 06:33 PM

Originally posted by DangerDeath
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.

I trust that you jest. Read the soliliquy of Henry V before the battle of Agincourt and then tell me the play has no artistic merit.
Of course its biased towars the English. Shakespeare was English after all , he is hardly going to big up the French in one of his works.
Henry V is a fine work.

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 06:37 PM
reply to post by kwisatz

I am pretty convinced that it was ordered. And it still works.

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 08:57 PM
This is really great that someone is working on the works of Bacon-Shakespear. I read not too long ago a couple of books discussing this very same subject, my god don't ask me what they were In these books it mentioned that it was Bacon that did the final edit on the original King James version of the Holy Bible. In this edit they said Bacon had entered encrypted text, Book of Psalms comes to mind now, the end result was to stimulate enlightenment and expand consciousness of the reader. Tony Bushby's book "The Secret in the Bible" was one book that mentions this, the other author may have been Peter Levenda but not sure.

I sure hope this thread keeps going as this is an interesting subject!

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 09:42 PM
Folks who are truly interested in this subject could do no better than by watching the excellent documentary from the eminent (and supremely adorable) historian Micheal Wood called "In search of Shakespeare". Elizabethan England was a police state, and there are tons of written records of what the alleged author was doing and when. William as a person left quite a bit in the historical record.

I wasn't able to find it on YouTube, but the documentary torrent site (beloved by geeks of all stripes) has it. There is a LOT of evidence for Will being the author, IMO. What I find amusing in this thread is that one of the big reasons non-Will theorist's give is that Shakespeare is known to have been involved in multiple law suites in his day. The idea being that someone who wrote such empathetic and socially ground breaking work could not have been so litigious. However, if in fact English law truly is sprinkled liberally throughout (and I can't say I have really noticed this in the multiple classes I have taken on the subject or plays attended, but assuming these posters are correct), then it points even more strongly to Will being the author. As a contextual note, please realize that the Crown actively encouraged folk to settle their differences through law than through duels or other ways common to the period.

One point about different ways of spelling. While I agree that a code that changes spelling is next to useless, remember that at this point the actual spelling of words had not yet been codified. People generally spelt how they wanted, as evidenced in the inside joke at the beginning of "Shakespeare in love" where our hero is seen trying out multiple versions of the spelling of his own name, all of which the actual Shakespeare used.

Watch In search of Shakespeare before making up your mind Will was not "the Bard". Either way, you will be glad you did....

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in