Re: Do The Oxfordians Know Oxford? Was Did Oxford Know Thomas Nashe?
book...@yahoo.com
<message...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>______________________________________
>
>I started out as an Oxfordian but soon noticed
>that the Oxfordians were claiming as evidence
>of Oxford's authorship all sorts of collateral
>material that did not bear on the question.
>
What Oxford bashers overlook is the service, treasure, and stewardship
the family rendered England over the centuries. Possibly the thousand
pounds a year Elizabeth awarded de Vere compensates for earlier
financing of England's wars by the family? I see at
http://www.spamula.net/col/archives/2005/10/secret_history_of_edward_vere.html
something about *Secret History of Edward Vere, Earl of Oxford*, by
Isaac D'Israeli (1766-1848). D'Israeli suggests that Oxford
deliberately emptied the family coffers, that his burning of papers on
his death didn't include personal stuff, and that "These papers of
Anthony Wood probably still exist in the Ashmolean Museum."
>Of course Oxford knew Thomas Nashe. One of
>the first things I read was that Oxford hired
>Nashe and other rival poets (rivals of Shakespeare,
>oddly) to write on his behalf, procured an
>apartment, set them up and then, characteristically,
>stiffed the landlady.
>
>I don't doubt that Nashe et al lost their papers,
>books, clothes, personal belongings. The landlady
>would hold their possessions until Oxford paid but Oxford never paid.
>
>I later read a 19th century British historian who
>wrote that Oxford stiffed the merchants and
>tradesmen of London for the tidy sum of
>
> ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY THOUSAND
> POUNDS.
>
>My first thought was "how many poor children
>starved to death so Oxford could wear silk
>doublets on his Plague of Locusts tour of Italy?"
>
>Oxford had trashed his estate, he had no money,
>he even stiffed the Italian tradesmen as he
>left Italy for England. Oxford never paid for the
>construction of his mansion. The builder got
>stiffed.
>
>The same historian remarked that upon his return, Oxford simply handed
>all the duns over to Burghley to deal with.
>
>Of course Burghley was (coincidently) in debt
>for one hundred and twenty thousand pounds but
>Burghley owned seven lavish estates furnished
>with the finest portraits, furniture and antiquities
>from the Continent. In that instance the tradesmen
>recovered some portion of their expenditures.
>
>I have noticed that the Oxfordians are always
>diverting our attention to works not attributable
>to Oxford as if those works somehow established Oxford as a playwright
>by proxy -- Anne Cecil's
>Geneva Bible is a prime example.
>
>That reminds me that Oxfordians will not deal forthrightly with
>Oxford's Roman Catholicism despite the fact that top scholars have
>written
>on that subject -- the authentic historical Oxford is always reduced
>to putty for the Oxfordians to remould as the Protestant Reformation
>Bard.
>
>At the same time there is near total neglect of
>Oxford's personal documents. I probably know
>more about the content of Oxford's letters than
>the Oxfordians, i.e., which Oxfordian has written
>on Oxford's fascinating reference to "concealed lands?"
>
>Does any Oxfordian know what Oxford's allusion
>to the Queen's having received "twenty-six shillings" means in the
>context of Oxford's loss of the Danver's escheat?
>
>Has any Oxfordian noticed that Oxford's lack of knowledge the law ("I
>did not know that the lands would not be carried without deeds")
>tends
>to indicate that Oxford did not write the plays as
>every play stuffed with allusions to the law.
>
>But hey, it's ok to neglect the documents of historical earl, just
>beat up on some innocent bystander like Strachey (I've found three
>pieces of additional evidence that attest to the fact that Strachey
>was in fact Lord De La Warr's "Achates" or trusted spy, and not the
>n'er do well the Oxfordians would like us to think).
Mike
> >______________________________________
>
> >I started out as an Oxfordian but soon noticed
> >that the Oxfordians were claiming as evidence
> >of Oxford's authorship all sorts of collateral
> >material that did not bear on the question.
>
> What Oxford bashers overlook is the service, treasure, and stewardship
> the family rendered England over the centuries. �Possibly the thousand
> pounds a year Elizabeth awarded de Vere compensates for earlier
MM:
He did give it up, didn't he?
I don't think Oxenford could have been as bad as what is alleged here,
frankly. He must have revised his thinking, when he came under the
influence of Edmund Spenser and other members of the Wilton Cult.
> >At the same time there is near total neglect of
> >Oxford's personal documents. �I probably know
> >more about the content of Oxford's letters than
> >the Oxfordians, i.e., which Oxfordian has written
> >on Oxford's fascinating reference to "concealed lands?"
>
> >Does any Oxfordian know what Oxford's allusion
> >to the Queen's having received "twenty-six shillings" means in the
> >context of Oxford's loss of the Danver's escheat?
>
> >Has any Oxfordian noticed that Oxford's lack of knowledge the law ("I
> >did not know that the lands would not be carried without deeds")
> >tends
> >to indicate that Oxford did not write the plays as
> >every play stuffed with allusions to the law.
MM:
Well, the Strat Man wasn't a lawyer, either. This is immaterial and
irrelevant, I'd say. Oxfordians have implied that Oxenford had a
better knowledge of law. I grant you that. Apparently, their
knowledge of law was about equal, but I don't know all the details of
exactly how much law they knew. I wouldn't say that Oxenford had a
superior knowledge of law to William Shakespeare of Stratford.
> >But hey, it's ok to neglect the documents of historical earl, just
> >beat up on some innocent bystander like Strachey (I've found three
> >pieces of additional evidence that attest to the fact that Strachey
> >was in fact Lord De La Warr's "Achates" or trusted spy, and not the
> >n'er do well the Oxfordians would like us to think).- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
MM:
Does this mean that Oxford knew that he was about to vacate his body?
I'm referring to the burning of papers.
Michael Martin
art
>>______________________________________
>>I started out as an Oxfordian but soon noticed
>>that the Oxfordians were claiming as evidence
>>of Oxford's authorship all sorts of collateral
>>material that did not bear on the question.
What made you "start an Oxfordian" in the first place, Elizabeth?
.
bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> What Oxford bashers overlook is the service, treasure, and stewardship
> the family rendered England over the centuries. Possibly the thousand
> pounds a year Elizabeth awarded de Vere compensates for earlier
> financing of England's wars by the family? I see at
> something about *Secret History of Edward Vere, Earl of Oxford*,
> by Isaac D'Israeli (1766-1848). D'Israeli suggests that Oxford
> deliberately emptied the family coffers, that his burning of papers
> on his death didn't include personal stuff, and that "These papers
> of Anthony Wood probably still exist in the Ashmolean Museum."
Knock on Wood.
.
> elizabeth wrote:
>>
>>Of course Oxford knew Thomas Nashe. One of
>>the first things I read was that Oxford hired
>>Nashe and other rival poets (rivals of Shakespeare,
>>oddly) to write on his behalf, procured an
>>apartment, set them up and then,
>>characteristically, stiffed the landlady.
NOT THE LANDLADY! (We all thought Eddy was gay.)
.
> elizabeth wrote:
>>
>>I don't doubt that Nashe et al lost their papers,
>>books, clothes, personal belongings.
It was mostly Al's fault.
.
> elizabeth wrote:
>>
>> The landlady would hold their possessions
>> until Oxford paid but Oxford never paid.
Dead men don't Weir paid.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083798/quotes
Rigby Reardon: All dames are alike: they reach down your throat and
they can grab your heart,
pull it out and they throw it on the floor, step on it with their high
heels, spit on it, shove
it in the oven and cook the shit out of it. Then they slice it into
little pieces, slam it on a
hunk of toast, and serve it to you and then expect you to say,
"Thanks, honey, it was
delicious."
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083798/quotes
.
> elizabeth wrote:
>>
>>I later read a 19th century British historian who
>>wrote that Oxford stiffed the merchants and
>>tradesmen of London for the tidy sum of
>
>> ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY THOUSAND
>>. . POUNDS.
>
>>My first thought was "how many poor children
>>starved to death so Oxford could wear silk
>>doublets on his Plague of Locusts tour of Italy?"
.
Oh, a half dozen or so.... How many did he
leave stranded in Venice to die of the plague?
.
> elizabeth wrote:
>>
>>Oxford had trashed his estate, he had no money,
>>he even stiffed the Italian tradesmen as he left Italy
>> for England. Oxford never paid for the construction
>> of his mansion. The builder got stiffed.
Was the builder a guy?
.
> elizabeth wrote:
>>
>>The same historian remarked that upon his return, Oxford
>> simply handed all the duns over to Burghley to deal with.
------------------------------------------
*DUN* , a. *DARK* , *GLOOMY*
.............................................
*TENEBROSE* : *DARK* , *GLOOMY* , mysterious (Italian: f, plural)
.............................................
_____ *PR(FRANCIS TENEBROSE* )
__________ {anagram}
_____ *PR(INCE FORTENBRASSE* )
--------------------------------------------------
. Hamlet, Prince of Denmark Act 5, Scene 2
.
*PRINCE FORTENBRASSE* : *Let four captains*
. *Bear Hamlet, like a soldier, to the stage*
.
http://www.shakespeares-sonnets.com/Images/vere01.JPG
.
. For he was likely, had he been put on,
. To have proved most royally: and, for his passage,
. The soldiers' music and the rites of war
. Speak loudly for him.
-----------------------------------------------------------
____ *OBSCURIS VERA INVOLVENS*
http://www.fbrt.org.uk/pages/athena/frameset-athena.html
.
. <<Inscribed on Athena's shield is a Latin motto,
.
____ *OBSCURIS VERA INVOLVENS*
.
. meaning *TRUTH is enveloped in obscurity* , which explains
. the imagery on the shield-the central sun representing
. *TRUTH* and the surrounding clouds obscurity.>>
...................................................
__ *OBSCURIS VERA INVOLVENS*
_______. {anagram}
__ *BACON {SVS} NIL VERO VERIUS*
__ *BACONVS {'S} NIL VERO VERIUS*
--------------------------------------------------------
. King Henry VI, Part i Act 5, Scene 4
.
JOAN LA PUCELLE: Then lead me hence; with whom I leave my curse:
. May nEVER glorious sun reflex his beams
. Upon the country where you make abode;
. But *DARKNESS* and the *GLOOMY* shade of death
. Environ you, till mischief and despair
. Drive you to break your necks or *HANG* yourselves!
-------------------------------------------------
. Thomas Shelton and Hamet Benengeli
.. by Francis Carr
. http://www.sirbacon.org/links/carrq.html
. http://ww2.netnitco.net/users/legend01/falcon.htm
.
. THE FIRST EDITION OF "DON QUIXOTE." 1605
.
<<We see a hooded falcon resting on the gloved hand of a man
hidden from view. Swirling shapes, possibly mist, on one side only,
stress the fact that the falconer is hidden, just out of sight.
Around the arm and the bird is the inscription:
.
.. *POST TENEBRAS SPERO LUCEM*
. after *DARKNESS* I hope for light.
.
. Beneath the falcon a lion is keeping his eye on the bird.
It could be said that both the lion and the falcon hope for light
after the *DARKNESS* , for the clear light of day after the dark
night, or a time of impaired vision. The lion could symbolise
England; the falcon could be Cervantes. Who is the falconer?
...................................................................
The inscription takes us to Chapter 68 of the 2nd Part of Don Quixote,
in which the knight tells Sancho Panza that he too hopes for light:
.
O hard heart! oh ungodly Squire! oh ill given bread, and favours ill
placed which I bestowed, and thought to have more and more conferred
upon thee... for *POST TENEBRAS SPERO LUCEM* . I *UNDERSTAND*
not that, said Sancho, only I know that whilest I am sleeping,
I neither feare nor hope, have neither paine nor pleasure.
.
In Cervantes' text, Quixote follows the words in Latin with a
translation into the vernacular: "after *DARKNESS* I expect light".
.
. Sancho, howEVER, still says "I don't *UNDERSTAND* that".
.
Shelton's version makes sense. It seems that Cervantes'
explanation has been added to help the reader, but it is
a mistake, as it makes Sancho's reply incomprehensible.
.
*Was Cervantes' text a translation of Shelton* ?
----------------------------------------------------------
> elizabeth wrote:
>>
>>Of course Burghley was (coincidently) in debt
>>for one hundred and twenty thousand pounds but
>>Burghley owned seven lavish estates furnished
>>with the finest portraits, furniture and antiquities
>>from the Continent. In that instance the tradesmen
>>recovered some portion of their expenditures.
Thank God!!!
>>I have noticed that the Oxfordians are always
>>diverting our attention to works not attributable
>>to Oxford as if those works somehow established
>> Oxford as a playwright by proxy --
>> Anne Cecil's Geneva Bible is a prime example.
-----------------------------------------------
Anne Cecil continues to study the Geneva Bible.
A guy sitting opposite on the subway
(bald, glasses, anorak inside & out) proffers a pen.
RICKY: Highlighter?
Anne Cecil: Excuse me?
RICKY: To highlight the programmes you plan to watch.
-----------------------------------------------
> elizabeth wrote:
>>
>>That reminds me that Oxfordians will not deal forthrightly with
>> Oxford's Roman Catholicism despite the fact that top scholars
>> have written on that subject -- the authentic historical
>> Oxford is always reduced to putty for the Oxfordians
>> to remould as the Protestant Reformation Bard.
.................................
"Shakespeare" Identified In Edward De Vere
by J. Thomas Looney
<<In view of the fact that Protestantism was at that time in the
ascendant, whilst Catholicism was under a cloud, a writer of plays
intended for immediate representation whose leanings were Protestant
would be quite at liberty to expose his personal leanings, whilst a
pronounced Roman Catholic would need to exercise greater personal
restraint. Now it is impossible to detect in "Shakespeare" any
Protestant bias or any support of those principles of individualism in
which Protestantism has its roots. On the other hand, he seems as
catholic as the circumstances of his times and the conditions under
which he worked would allow him to be. Macaulay has the following
interesting passage on the point:
"The partiality of Shakespeare for Friars is well known. In 'Hamlet'
the ghost complains that he died without extreme unction, and, in
defiance of the article which condemns the doctrine of purgatory,
declares that he is
"Confined to fast in fires,
Till the foul crimes, done in his days of nature,
Are burnt and purged away."
These lines, we suspect, would have raised a tremendous storm in the
theatre at any time during the reign of Charles the Second. They were
clearly not written by a zealous Protestant for zealous
Protestants.">>
-----------------------------------------------------
> elizabeth wrote:
>>
>>At the same time there is near total neglect of
>>Oxford's personal documents. I probably know
>>more about the content of Oxford's letters than
>>the Oxfordians,
....................................................
I am aduised, that I may passe *MY BOOKE* (Don Quixote)
from her Magestie, yf a warrant may be procured to my cosen
*BACON* & [*SERGEANT*] *HARRIS* to *PERFET [=perfect] yt* .
Whiche beinge doone, I know to whome formallye to thanke,
but reallye they shalbe, and are from me, and myne,
*to be sealed vp in an AETERNALL REMEMBRANCE to yowre selfe*
And thus *WISHINGE ALL HAPPINES* to yow....
-----------------------------------------------------
> elizabeth wrote:
>>
>>Does any Oxfordian know what Oxford's allusion
>>to the Queen's having received "twenty-six shillings" means in the
>>context of Oxford's loss of the Danver's escheat?
-----------------------------------------------------
It ys now a yeare sythence BY YOWRE ONLY MEANES her
Magestye graunted her intereste in *DANVERS ESCHEETE*
.
- Hackney (Rozinante) , 22nd March, 1601.
(Hatfield MSS., Vol. XII.)
------------------------------------------------------
_. *DAN* : *DON* (Spanish)
. *VERS* : *QUI-OX*
A title of honour, common with the old poets, as
*DAN* Ph'bus, *DAN* Cupid , *DAN* Neptune, *DAN* Chaucer,
.
. "That old *DAN* Geffrey, in whose GENTLE spright
. The pure well-head of poesie did dwell."
-- Spenser: _Two Cantos of Mutability,_ Cant. VII.
---------------------------------------------------------
<< *ESCHEAT* is a common law doctrine that operates to ensure
that property is not left in limbo and ownerless. It originally
referred to a number of situations where a legal interest in
land was destroyed by operation of law, so that the ownership
of the land reverted to the immediately superior feudal lord.>>
--------------------------------------------------------------
___ *DANVERS ESCHEATE*
_______ {anagram}
___ *SE HA DE CERVANTES*
_ *[IT] SHALL BE DE CERVANTES*
...................................
___ *SE HA DE VER*
_ *[IT] SHALL BE MANIFEST*
................................................
‘This is, Sancho, the day wherein *SHALL BE MANIFEST* - Shelton
"Este o dia," digo, " em que *SE HA DE VER* " - Cervantes
................................................
*MANIFEST* , a. [L. manifestus.] Plain, open, clearly
visible to the eye or obvious to the understanding;
apparent; not obscure or difficult to be seen or understood.
From the testimony, the TRUTH we conceive to be *MANIFEST* .
---------------------------------------------------------
Shelton's Don Quixote, Part 1. The Third Book
http://www.bartleby.com/14/304.html
‘This is, Sancho, the day wherein *SHALL BE MANIFEST* the good which
fortune hath reserved for me. This is the day wherein the force of
mine arm must be shown as much as in any other whatsoEVER; and in
it I will do such feats as shall for EVER remain recorded in the
*BOOKS OF FAME* . Dost thou see, Sancho the *DUST* which ariseth
there? Know that it is caused by a mighty army, and sundry and
innumerable nations, which come marching there.’
..............................................................
"–Éste es el día, ¡oh Sancho!, en el cual *SE HA DE VER* el bien que
me tiene guardado mi suerte; éste es el día, digo, en que se ha de
mostrar, tanto como en otro alguno, el valor de mi brazo, y en el que
tengo de hacer obras que queden escritas en *EL LIBRO DE LA FAMA*
por todos los venideros siglos. ¿Ves aquella *POLVAREDA* que allí
se levanta, Sancho? Pues toda es cuajada de un copiosísimo ejército
que de diversas e innumerables gentes por allí viene marchando.
-------------------------------------------------------------
> elizabeth wrote:
>>
>> Has any Oxfordian noticed that Oxford's lack of
>> knowledge [in] the law ("I did not know that
>> the lands would not be carried without deeds")
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carry_Me_Back_to_Old_Virginny
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creigh_Deeds
>> tends to indicate that Oxford did not write the plays
>> as every play stuffed with allusions to the law.
------------------------------------------------------------
. _Dunciad_ 4th book (1742) by Alexander Pope
.
. Next bidding all draw near on bended knees,
. The Queen confers her title and degrees.
. Her children first of more distinguished sort,
. Who study Shakespeare at the Inns of Court,
. Impale a *glow-WORM, or VERtù* profess,
. Shine in the dignity of F. R. S.,
. Some, *DEEP FREE-MASONS* , join the silent race,
. Worthy to fill Pythagoras's place:
. Some botonists or florists at the least,
. Or issue Members of an Annual feast.
-----------------------------------------------------------
> elizabeth wrote:
>>
>>But hey, it's ok to neglect the documents of historical earl, just
>>beat up on some innocent bystander like Strachey (I've found three
>>pieces of additional evidence that attest to the fact that Strachey
>>was in fact Lord De La Warr's "Achates" or trusted spy, and not
>> then'er do well the Oxfordians would like us to think).
*ACHATES* : trusted spy
*ACHETAS* : you bought... (French)
*CHATEAS* : you chat (Spanish)
--------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer