visit the HLAS FAQ

[Greg Reynolds]

Anon, Francis?
No, Francis;
but to-morrow,
or, Francis, o' Thursday;
or indeed, Francis,
when thou wilt.
But, Francis!
- Prince Henry HIV, pt 1 II, iv

http://www.shakespeare.handshake.de/
- HLAS FAQ

Holy Saint Francis, what a change is here!
- Friar Laurence R&J II, iii

[Arthur Neuendorffer]

Greg Reynolds wrote:
>
> Anon, Francis?
> No, Francis;
> but to-morrow,
> or, Francis, o' Thursday;
> or indeed, Francis,
> when thou wilt.
> But, Francis!
> - Prince Henry HIV, pt 1 II, iv

---------------------------------------------------------
http://www.sacred-texts.com/eso/sta/sta41.htm

<<Abundant cryptographic proof exists that Bacon was concerned in the production of the Shakespearian plays. Sir Francis Bacon's cipher number was 33. In the First Part of King Henry the Fourth, the word "Francis" appears 33 times upon one page. To attain this end, obviously awkward sentences were required, as: "Anon Francis? No Francis, but tomorrow Francis: or Francis, on Thursday: or indeed Francis when thou wilt. But Francis.">>
---------------------------------------------------------
http://tinyurl.com/nayskj4

Anon, anon, Sir!

In Hal's long speech below, he alters the well known phrase Tom, Dick and Harry by substituting Francis for Harry. Apparently the common version hasn't been found in print earlier than the 18th century, but it's unlikely that Shakespeare would have used it had not it been standard in his time, and it couldn't have been, as he used it, "Tom, Dick and Francis." Tom, Dick and Harry (Thomas, Richard, and Henry) are such common names that the phrase makes a point--the OED defines it: "any men taken from the common run"--a point that's lost as Shakespeare uses it, since Francis, though not unusual, was nowhere near as common as Harry.

The word anon is interesting. According to the OED, to begin with
it was Old English for "in one" or "together," which by the 16th century was "misused" as "soon" or "as soon as," the surface meaning of the word as used by Francis the Drawer. The OED ignores its present use as a short form of anonymous, an entirely different word stemming from Greek dnonimos or Latin anonymus. Nor does it acknowledge it's use as a legal term (see Andrews, Law versus Equity in the Merchant of Venice #38: "Justice Spigurnel in the case of Anon. vs. Anon." from 1314). Although the OED gives 1601 as its first use in English, considering how often a word comes into common use long before it appears in print, and how often words were condensed in those days in typescript, it's hard not to see its use here as a purposeful pun, one intended perhaps to tease a member of the West End legal community.>>
---------------------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer

[graham.a...@btinternet.com]

Sir Francis Bacon and William Shakespeare were really good friends. The Northumberland Manuscript proves this. I think he would be appalled to know that people were claiming Shakespeare's works were by him.

To prove they were friends there is no way William would have got away with the Bacon joke with the latin twist in his play.

The crypto stuff is rubbish, Francis Bacon wanted to marry Queen Elizabeth. The crack-pot crpto people have him as the son of Queen Elizabeth. Now why would the son of Queen Elizabeth want to marry his mother!