Shakespeare tomb - has a secret message about Jesus (?)
Lyra
GOOD FREND FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE,
TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
BLESTE BE Ye MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
AND CURST BE HE Yt MOVES MY BONES.
http://www.folger.edu/template.cfm?cid=862
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
The fourth word of each line...
Jesus
dust
man
he
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Jesus(') dust.........man, he
may be a secret message by someone wishing to deny that Jesus
resurrected,
or went to Heaven,
if he was a man, i.e., mortal.
A view not unknown in those days.
(or now, of course)
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Francis Bacon? he was alive at the time.
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Why the fourth word, I don't know - something Masonic, maybe.
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Lyra
(quote)
```````````
FOUR
Four is the tetrad or Quaternary of the Pythagoreans! and it is a
sacred number in the advanced Degrees.
The Pythagoreans called it a perfect number, and hence it has been
adopted as a sacred number in the Degree of Perfect Master.
In many nations of antiquity the name of God consists of four letters,
as the Adad, of the Syrians, the Amum of the Egyptians, the efos of
the Greeks, the Deus of the Romans, and pre-eminently the
Tetragrammaton or four-lettered name of the Jews. But in Symbolic
Freemasonry this number has no special significance.
lackpurity
> GOOD FREND FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE,
> TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
> BLESTE BE Ye MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
> AND CURST BE HE Yt MOVES MY BONES.
MM:
I've mentioned many times that Shakespeare was Jesus. This quatrain
corroborates what I've been saying. The implication is that the bones
of Shakespeare meant something to Jesus? What? Shakespeare was
Jesus. Probably some people of that era knew that truth, but they had
to keep quiet for obvious reasons.
Michael Martin
Roundtable
>
> - Show quoted text -
I love you guys, you make me laugh.
Jesus is the dustman. Jesus is the janitor who cleans up after
all the rubbish we produce?
Guys, be a little more Christian. :-)
RT
lackpurity
MM:
Jesus wrote the canon. Mother has to change the baby's diaper,
doesn't she? LOL
> Guys, be a little more Christian. :-)
MM:
Roundtable, to be a Christian means to follow Christ's teachings. He
taught to follow the True Masters. He said to let the chief among you
lead the others. He gave the keys to Mary Magdalene and Peter,
indicating that his work was finished. He even said, "It is
finished," on the cross, according to the Bible.
> RT
Michael Martin
Lyra
lackpurity wrote:
>
> On Oct 11, 3:25?am, Roundtable wrote:
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
> >
> > > > The fourth word of each line...
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
> >
> > > > Jesus(') dust.........man, he
It refers to Jesus' dust,
i.e.
Dust to dust, ashes to ashes
- alleging that there are bones.
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
This, of course, would shake the faith of some.
But of what kind of people?
My own view is that it doesn't make any difference,
it is
totally irrelevant whether anyone went in
their body, to the sky...
the body is a temporary covering, of NO lasting importance.
In another realm, there will be other bodies, of another kind.
Certainly not the dense physical ones of earth.
Insofar as I am a Christian,
I do NOT let it rest on whether a physical body went to heaven.
What kind of people do?
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
> >
> > > > may be a secret message by someone wishing to deny that Jesus
> > > > resurrected,
> > > > or went to Heaven,
> > > > if he was a man, i.e., mortal.
> >
> > > > A view not unknown in those days.
> > > > (or now, of course)
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
> >
> > Jesus is the dustman. Jesus is the janitor who cleans up after
> > all the rubbish we produce?
>
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
ALL will clear up ALL their own garbage,
NO exceptions.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
The Coasters; words and music by Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller
Take out the papers and the trash
Or you don't get no spendin' cash
If you don't scrub that kitchen floor
You ain't gonna rock and roll no more
Yakety yak (don't talk back)
Just finish cleanin' up your room
Let's see that dust fly with that broom
Get all that garbage out of sight
Or you don't go out Friday night
Yakety yak (don't talk back)
http://kids.niehs.nih.gov/lyrics/yakety.htm
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
bobgr...@nut-n-but.net
They're nuts. The message is "Jesus, bust man, he." The "d" in
"DUST" is a reversed "b." The latters in the inscription were all
capitalized by an ignorant engraver. Chaucer, who wrote the
gravestone's words (at God's command), wanted to counter the
homosexuality that was rife in those days by pointing out the Our Lord
was definitely heterosexual. (Chaucer was a reincarnation of Moses,
so used to making inscriptions of this sort.)
--Sir B.
Art Neuendorffer
> >
> > Guys, be a little more Christian. :-)
lackpurity <lackpur...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Roundtable, to be a Christian means to follow Christ's teachings.
That's a tautology isn't it?
.
Matthew 6:24 No one can serve True Masters.
.
lackpurity <lackpur...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> He said to let the chief among you lead the others.
http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/f/f9/Chief_Thunderthud.jpg
<<"Kawagoopa" was an all-purpose exclamation of the Tinka Tonka
Indians, the fictitious tribe of Princess Summerfall Winterspring and
Chief Featherman, and "kawabonga" was the equivalent exclamation of
Chief Thunderthud, who was of the Ooragnak Tribe.>>
.
> He gave the keys to Mary Magdalene and Peter,
> indicating that his work was finished.
Mary Magdalene & Peter were still expected to be back before curfew,
however.
> He even said, "It is finished,"
> on the cross, according to the Bible.
.
His English was excellent!
.
Art Neuendorffer
Peter Farey
"Lyra" wrote:
>
> GOOD FREND FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE,
> TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
> BLESTE BE Ye MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
> AND CURST BE HE Yt MOVES MY BONES.
>
>
> http://www.folger.edu/template.cfm?cid=862
Art Neuendorffer wrote
(in the "Ovid, book the first" thread):
>
> Ovid died at Tomis after nearly ten years of banishment.
> He is commemorated today by a statue in the Romanian city
> of Constanta (modern name of Tomis) and the 1930 renaming
> of the nearby town of Ovidiu, alleged location of his tomb.
> The Latin text on the statue says (Tr. 3.3.73-76):
> ........................................................
> . Hic ego qui iaceo tenerorum lusor amorum
> . . Ingenio perii, Naso poeta, meo.
> . At tibi qui transis, ne sit grave, quisquis amasti,
> . . Dicere: Nasonis molliter ossa cubent.
> ........................................................
> . Here I lie, who played with tender loves,
> . . Naso the poet, killed by my own talent.
> . O passerby, if you've ever been in love, let it
> . not be too much for you
> . to say: May the bones of Naso lie gently.
I can't help wondering whether the writer of the
inscription on Shakespeares's grave was influenced by
those on Ovid's? He does seem to have read Marlowe's
*Hero and Leander*:
And thus bespake him: "Gentle youth, forbear
To touch the sacred garments which I wear.
(H&L 343-4)
I haven't been able to find the 'forbear'/'To' + rhyme
usage anywhere else. Can anyone?
Peter F.
<pet...@rey.prestel.co.uk>
<http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rey/index.htm>
Chess One
"Roundtable" <lancelo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1192091138.2...@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> I love you guys, you make me laugh.
>
> Jesus is the dustman. Jesus is the janitor who cleans up after
> all the rubbish we produce?
Jesus means: The Candidate
Phil Innes
Art Neuendorffer
>
>>GOOD FREND FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE,
>>TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
>>BLESTE BE Ye MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
>>AND CURST BE HE Yt MOVES MY BONES.
>>
Not that specifically but....
----------------------------------------------
. Sonnet 139
.
Use power with power and slay me not by Art.
Tell me thou lovest elsewhere, but in my sight,
Dear heart, *FORBEAR TO* glance thine *EYE aside*:
What need'st thou wound with cunning when thy might
Is more than my o'er-press'd defense can bide?
..................................................
ORB, n. [F. *ORBE* ] 1. A *GLOBE* 2. The *EYE*
..................................................
March 6, 1616 Francis BEAUMONT's non-Tomb in Westminster
.
<<MORTALITY, behold and FEAR! [= F(orb)EAR(e)- orbe]
. What a change of flesh is HERE!
. Think how many royal *BONES*
. Sleep within this heap of *STONES*>>
..................................................
William Basse (1622) _On Mr. Wm. Shakespeare,
. he dyed in April 1616."
.
Renowned SPENCER, LIE A THOUGHT more nigh
To learned Chaucer; and *RARE BEAUMONT* ,
LIE A LITTLE neerer *SPENSer* to make roome
For Shakespeare in your threefold fowerfold Tombe.
-------------------------------------------------
A Rocking Hymn
.
Hallelujah, or Britain's Sacred Remembrancer
http://www.hymnsandcarolsofchristmas.com/Hymns_and_Carols/a_rocking_hymn.htm
.
Words: George Wither, 1588-1667
.
1. Sweet baby, sleep; what ails my dear?
. What ails my darling thus to cry?
Be still, my child, and lend thine ear
. To hear me sing thy lullaby.
. My pretty lamb, *FORBEAR TO* weep;
. Be still, my dear; sweet baby, sleep.
.
2. Thou blessed soul, what canst thou fear?
. What thing to thee can mischief do?
Thy God is now thy father dear;
. His holy spouse thy mother too.
. Sweet baby, then, *FORBEAR TO* weep;
. Be still, my dear; sweet baby, sleep.
----------------------------------------------
Pilgrim's Progress
Valiant: Yes, it doth. Now that which caused me to come on pilgrimage
was this: We had one Mr. TELL-TRUE come into our parts, and he told it
about what CHRISTIAN had done, that went from the city of Destruction;
namely, how he had forsaken his wife and children, and had betaken
himself to a pilgrim's life. It was also confidently reported how he had
killed a serpent that did come out to resist him in his journey; and how
he got through to whither he intended. It was also told what welcome he
had at all his Lord's lodgings; especially when he came to the gates of
the Celestial City. "For there," said the man, "he was received with
sound of trumpet by a company of shining ones." He told it also how all
the bells in the City did ring for joy at his reception; and what golden
*GARMENTS* he was clothed with; with many other things that now I shall
*FORBEAR TO* relate. In a word, that man so told the story of CHRISTIAN
and his travels, that my heart fell into a burning haste to be gone
after him; nor could father or mother stay me: so I got from them,
and am come thus far on my way.
----------------------------------------------
http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~ahnelson/PERSONAL/951020.htm
[=24] Cecil Papers 35/84 (bifolium, 286mm x 200mm), Oxford to Cecil; 20
October 1595.
.
Good Sir Robert Cecil. I have often receyved from yow manye wordes of
curtesies, & fauours, when I showld have occasione to vse ye, all which
I have beleued, & doo styll, imagininge those promises to procede of a
free & lyberall dispositione. wherfore havinge at thys tyme an espetiall
opportunite to trye my friendes In a cause which I doo not dowt but
iust, I make thus far bowlde wythe yow, that wheareas a fewe yeares
sythence I was a swter [=suitor, petitioner] to her Magesty, for her
fauour thus farr, that my ryght which I dyd not dowt, to the forest of
Waltham & parke of Haveringe concerninge the kepinge therof, myght have
tryall at lave [=law], which is a common course to every subiect, & that
then vnder pretense to doo me a fauour her Magesty to avoyd charge, and
delay of the lave [=law], greatly to myne ease and for better
expeditione, her plesure was that the matter showld be referred to
arbitriment, which was so done as her Magesty takinge exception to my
arbitror, had her owne Sir Christopher Hatton then Lord Chanceler,
appoynted as indifferent for vs bothe, as she dyd measure yt. He havinge
hard [=heard] the matter and her Magesty councell with myne, was
resolued, and hervpon wished me to vrge her Magestie to call for his
report, which accordinglie I dyd and the lord chancelor present. In
short she refusd to heare him. she flattly sayd whether yt weare myne or
hears [=hers] she wowld bestowe yt at her plesure, and so vnder pretence
of kepinge the same from spoyle tyll the matter weare decyded betwiene
her Magesty and my self, she put yt into the handes of Sir Thomas
Henige, and thys after a yeares travell [=travail], I had for my short
expeditione. Now my lord yowre father is a full wittnes of all thes
thinges, beinge present when the matter was committed, and the
intentiones and all are sufficiently knowne to him with all the course
obserued. I have written also to him and also to her Maiestie. I only
desyre my friendes that may speake theare myndes to her Magesty & have
oportunite that they will be meanes, yat eyther she will lett me inyoy
that which my ryght dothe cast vpon me and the lave [=law] with her
fauoure, or that she will protect me with her lave [=law] as her
subiect, and that yf ^\\yt// be none of myne she will rather take yt
away by order, then oppressione.
.
(sideways in left margin)
.
this 20tie of October 1595
Youre assured friende,
(signed) Edward Oxenford (sec. f; 4+7)
.
As I was fooldinge vp this letter I receyved a very honorable answer
from my Lord Thresorer. my whole truste in this cause ys in yow twoo, my
lord for yat he ys pryvie to the whole cause and handlinge therof from
tyme to tyme, and in yow for yat I assure myself in so iust [=just] a
matter yow will not abandone me.
.
He semethe to dowt [=doubt, anticipate] yet of his dethe, & wishethe me
to make meanes to the Earle of Essex yat he wowld *FORBEARE TO* deale
for yt. A thinge I cannot do in honor, sythe I have alredie receyved
diuerse iniuries and wronges from him, which bare [=bar] me of all suche
basse [=base] courses. Yf her maiesties affectiones be forfets of mens
estates we must indure yt.
.
Addressed: To the ryght honorable & hys very good friend & brother, Sir
Robert Cecil one of her Magestyes pryvoy [=privy] Concell. [seal]
Endorsed: 20 October 1595; Earl of Oxforde to my Master.
----------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer
Peter Groves
news:fen563$al8$2$8302...@news.demon.co.uk...
I take it you just want imperative examples (there are plenty more
indicative ones). The most famous would be Donne, from "A Valediction of
weeping", written in the 1590s: [from Poems (1633)]
19 O more then Moone,
20 Draw not up seas to drowne me in thy spheare,
21 Weepe me not dead, in thine armes, but **forbeare**
22 To teach the sea, what it may doe too soone,
Jonson, Ben, 1573?-1637: LVIII. To Groome Ideot. [from The Workes (1640)]
1 Ideot, last night, I pray'd thee but **forbeare**
2 To reade my verses; now I must to heare:
3 For offring, with thy smiles, my wit to grace,
4 Thy ignorance still laughs in the wrong place.
5 And so my sharpnesse thou no lesse dis-joynts,
6 Than thou did'st late my sense, loosing my points.
7 So have I seene at Christ-masse sports, one lost,
8 And, hood-wink'd, for a man, embrace a post.
Prince HENRIES Obsequies;
OR Mournfull Elegies upon his Death.
Wither, George, 1588-1667:
To the Right Honourable ROBERT Lord Sidney of Penshurst, Vicount Lisley,
Lord Chamberlain to the Queens Majesty, and L. Governour of Vlushing, and
the Castle of Ramekins.
George Wither presents these Elegiak-Sonnets, and wisheth double Comfort
after his two-fold Sorrow. [from Iwenilia (1633)]
37 Here under lies a Sidney: And what then?
38 Dost think here lies but reliques of a man?
39 Know 'tis a Cabinet did once include,
40 Wit, Beauty, Sweetnesse, Court'sie, Fortitude.
41 So let him rest to Memorie still deare,
42 Till his Redeemer in the Clouds appeare.
43 Mean while, accept his will, who meaning plain,
44 Doth neither write for Praise, nor hope of Gain.
45 And now your Tears and private Griefe **forbeare**,
46 To turne unto our Great and Publike Care.
Anton, Robert, b. 1584 or 5: THE PHILOSOPHERS THIRD Satyr of Iupiter. [from
The philosophers satyrs (1616)]
05 The honor of this Planet shewes the minde,
106 And not the cast-clothes of some fawning hinde,
107 That by obseruance to his mightie Lord,
108 Hath crept into good outsides by a word,
109 Bought afore mou'd. For some poore office feede,
110 That now is fallen to helpe the busie neede,
111 Of some poore Groome. Great Iupiter **forbeare**,
112 To hurle thy influence from thy princely Spheare,
Ross, Alexander, 1591-1654: DÆDALUS. [from Mel Heliconium (1642)]
1 He who hath Faith's swift wings to flye
2 Out of the labyrinth of sin,
3 In pride will neither soare too high,
4 Nor flye too low, lest he fall in
5 The sea of desperation;
6 He knows the golden mean is best.
7 Or if he with the pinion
8 Of honour flyes; or if he's blest
9 With Fortunes wing, hee'l alwayes hold
10 The middle way; and when he flyes
11 With mounting thoughts, he'l not be bold
12 In needlesse curiosities.
13 On that bright lamp he will not stare,
14 Nor draw too nigh with waxen wings
15 Of humane reason, but **forbear**
16 To pry into transcendent things.
Bancroft, Thomas, fl. 1633-1658:
To the never-dying Memory of the Noble Lord Hastings, &c. The meanest Son of
the Muses consecrates this ELEGIE. [from To the Noble Lord Hastings (1649)]
An Epitaph on the same.
55 Tread off, prophaner feet, **forbear**
56 To press this hallowed mold, where lies
57 Fair Vertue's and high Honour's Heir,
58 The Darling of the bounteous Skies;
59 Who by rare Parts, the flight of Fame,
60 In Life, out-went; in Death, his Name.
Quarles, John, 1624-1665:
Englands Complaint. [from Fons Lachrymarum (1648)]
Wither, George, 1588-1667: Hymn XCVII. When our Fancies affright us, with
Illusions, or dreadfull Apparitions. [from Haleluiah (1641)]
21 By that great God, who did not scorn
22 Our Nature; but the same hath took:
23 By Him, that of a Maid was born;
24 By Him, whose pow'r thy head hath broke:
25 By Him, that for my Ransome di'de;
26 By Him, that conquer'd Death, and Hell;
27 By Him, who now is glorifi'd,
28 Where all the blessed Holies dwell:
29 By Him, I charge that thou **forbear**
30 To Harm, or put my Heart in Fear.
Peter G.
Art Neuendorffer
>>
>>>GOOD FREND FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE,
>>>TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
>>>BLESTE BE Ye MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
>>>AND CURST BE HE Yt MOVES MY BONES.
>>>
>>>
>>>http://www.folger.edu/template.cfm?cid=862
>>
>>Art Neuendorffer wrote
>>(in the "Ovid, book the first" thread):
>>
>>>Ovid died at Tomis after nearly ten years of banishment.
>>>He is commemorated today by a statue in the Romanian city
>>>of Constanta (modern name of Tomis) and the 1930 renaming
>>>of the nearby town of Ovidiu, alleged location of his tomb.
>>>The Latin text on the statue says (Tr. 3.3.73-76):
>>>........................................................
>>>. Hic ego qui iaceo tenerorum lusor amorum
>>>. . Ingenio perii, Naso poeta, meo.
>>>. At tibi qui transis, ne sit grave, quisquis amasti,
>>>. . Dicere: Nasonis molliter ossa cubent.
>>>........................................................
>>>. Here I lie, who played with tender loves,
>>>. . Naso the poet, killed by my own talent.
>>>. O passerby, if you've ever been in love, let it
>>>. not be too much for you
>>>. to say: May the bones of Naso lie gently.
> "Peter Farey" <Peter...@prst17z1.demon.co.uk> wrote{
>>
>>I can't help wondering whether the writer of the
>>inscription on Shakespeares's grave was influenced by
>>those on Ovid's? He does seem to have read Marlowe's
>>*Hero and Leander*:
>>
>> And thus bespake him: "Gentle youth, forbear
>> To touch the sacred garments which I wear.
>> (H&L 343-4)
>>
>>I haven't been able to find the 'forbear'/'To' + rhyme
>>usage anywhere else. Can anyone?
Peter Groves wrote:
>
> I take it you just want imperative examples (there are plenty
> more indicative ones). The most famous would be Donne, from
> "A Valediction of weeping", written in the 1590s: [from Poems (1633)]
>
> 19 O more then Moone,
> 20 Draw not up seas to drowne me in thy spheare,
> 22 To teach the sea, what it may doe too soone,
>
>
>
> Jonson, Ben, 1573?-1637: LVIII. To Groome Ideot. [from The Workes (1640)]
>
> 2 To reade my verses; now I must to heare:
> 3 For offring, with thy smiles, my wit to grace,
> 4 Thy ignorance still laughs in the wrong place.
> 5 And so my sharpnesse thou no lesse dis-joynts,
> 6 Than thou did'st late my sense, loosing my points.
> 7 So have I seene at Christ-masse sports, one lost,
> 8 And, hood-wink'd, for a man, embrace a post.
>
> Prince HENRIES Obsequies;
> OR Mournfull Elegies upon his Death.
> Wither, George, 1588-1667:
> To the Right Honourable ROBERT Lord Sidney of Penshurst, Vicount Lisley,
> Lord Chamberlain to the Queens Majesty, and L. Governour of Vlushing, and
> the Castle of Ramekins.
> George Wither presents these Elegiak-Sonnets, and wisheth double
> Comfort after his two-fold Sorrow. [from Iwenilia (1633)]
>
>
> 37 Here under lies a Sidney: And what then?
> 38 Dost think here lies but reliques of a man?
> 39 Know 'tis a Cabinet did once include,
> 40 Wit, Beauty, Sweetnesse, Court'sie, Fortitude.
>
> 41 So let him rest to Memorie still deare,
> 42 Till his Redeemer in the Clouds appeare.
> 43 Mean while, accept his will, who meaning plain,
> 44 Doth neither write for Praise, nor hope of Gain.
> 46 To turne unto our Great and Publike Care.
>
>
> Anton, Robert, b. 1584 or 5: THE PHILOSOPHERS THIRD Satyr of Iupiter.
> [from The philosophers satyrs (1616)]
>
> 05 The honor of this Planet shewes the minde,
> 106 And not the cast-clothes of some fawning hinde,
> 107 That by obseruance to his mightie Lord,
> 108 Hath crept into good outsides by a word,
> 109 Bought afore mou'd. For some poore office feede,
> 110 That now is fallen to helpe the busie neede,
> 112 To hurle thy influence from thy princely Spheare,
>
> Ross, Alexander, 1591-1654: DÆDALUS. [from Mel Heliconium (1642)]
> 1 He who hath Faith's swift wings to flye
> 2 Out of the labyrinth of sin,
> 3 In pride will neither soare too high,
> 4 Nor flye too low, lest he fall in
> 5 The sea of desperation;
> 6 He knows the golden mean is best.
> 7 Or if he with the pinion
> 8 Of honour flyes; or if he's blest
> 9 With Fortunes wing, hee'l alwayes hold
> 10 The middle way; and when he flyes
> 11 With mounting thoughts, he'l not be bold
> 12 In needlesse curiosities.
> 13 On that bright lamp he will not stare,
> 14 Nor draw too nigh with waxen wings
> 16 To pry into transcendent things.
>
> Bancroft, Thomas, fl. 1633-1658:
> To the never-dying Memory of the Noble Lord Hastings, &c.
> The meanest Son of the Muses consecrates this ELEGIE.
> [from To the Noble Lord Hastings (1649)]
> An Epitaph on the same.
>
> 56 To press this hallowed mold, where lies
> 57 Fair Vertue's and high Honour's Heir,
> 58 The Darling of the bounteous Skies;
> 59 Who by rare Parts, the flight of Fame,
> 60 In Life, out-went; in Death, his Name.
>
> Quarles, John, 1624-1665:
> Englands Complaint. [from Fons Lachrymarum (1648)]
>
> Wither, George, 1588-1667: Hymn XCVII. When our Fancies affright us,
> with Illusions, or dreadfull Apparitions. [from Haleluiah (1641)]
>
> 21 By that great God, who did not scorn
> 22 Our Nature; but the same hath took:
> 23 By Him, that of a Maid was born;
> 24 By Him, whose pow'r thy head hath broke:
> 25 By Him, that for my Ransome di'de;
> 26 By Him, that conquer'd Death, and Hell;
> 27 By Him, who now is glorifi'd,
> 28 Where all the blessed Holies dwell:
> 30 To Harm, or put my Heart in Fear.
Art Neuendorffer
Peter Farey
Peter Groves wrote:
> plenty more indicative ones).
Yes, that was what I had in mind. Thanks. I suppose I
should also have said that I was really only looking for
ones that predated 1621/2, which is most probably when
the inscription on the grave first appeared.
> The most famous would be Donne, from "A Valediction of
> weeping", written in the 1590s: [from Poems (1633)]
>
> 19 O more then Moone,
> 20 Draw not up seas to drowne me in thy spheare,
> 21 Weepe me not dead, in thine armes, but **forbeare**
> 22 To teach the sea, what it may doe too soone,
Thanks. That is certainly one I should have known (although
it isn't in any of the anthologies I have).
> Jonson, Ben, 1573?-1637: LVIII. To Groome Ideot. [from
> The Workes (1640)]
>
> 1 Ideot, last night, I pray'd thee but **forbeare**
> 2 To reade my verses; now I must to heare:
> 3 For offring, with thy smiles, my wit to grace,
> 4 Thy ignorance still laughs in the wrong place.
> 5 And so my sharpnesse thou no lesse dis-joynts,
> 6 Than thou did'st late my sense, loosing my points.
> 7 So have I seene at Christ-masse sports, one lost,
> 8 And, hood-wink'd, for a man, embrace a post.
And that one too, given that I have Parfitt's Penguin "The
Complete Poems" by my side right now. Another one addressed
to Shakespeare, I suppose?
> Prince HENRIES Obsequies;
> OR Mournfull Elegies upon his Death.
> Wither, George, 1588-1667:
> To the Right Honourable ROBERT Lord Sidney of Penshurst,
> Vicount Lisley, Lord Chamberlain to the Queens Majesty,
> and L. Governour of Vlushing, and the Castle of Ramekins.
> George Wither presents these Elegiak-Sonnets, and wisheth
> double Comfort after his two-fold Sorrow. [from Iwenilia
> (1633)]
>
> 37 Here under lies a Sidney: And what then?
> 38 Dost think here lies but reliques of a man?
> 39 Know 'tis a Cabinet did once include,
> 40 Wit, Beauty, Sweetnesse, Court'sie, Fortitude.
>
> 41 So let him rest to Memorie still deare,
> 42 Till his Redeemer in the Clouds appeare.
> 43 Mean while, accept his will, who meaning plain,
> 44 Doth neither write for Praise, nor hope of Gain.
> 45 And now your Tears and private Griefe **forbeare**,
> 46 To turne unto our Great and Publike Care.
Don't you think the 'forbear/To' should be an enjambment?
Imperative?
> Bancroft, Thomas, fl. 1633-1658:
> To the never-dying Memory of the Noble Lord Hastings, &c.
> The meanest Son of the Muses consecrates this ELEGIE.
> [from To the Noble Lord Hastings (1649)] An Epitaph on
> the same.
>
> 55 Tread off, prophaner feet, **forbear**
> 56 To press this hallowed mold, where lies
> 57 Fair Vertue's and high Honour's Heir,
> 58 The Darling of the bounteous Skies;
> 59 Who by rare Parts, the flight of Fame,
> 60 In Life, out-went; in Death, his Name.
>
> Quarles, John, 1624-1665:
> Englands Complaint. [from Fons Lachrymarum (1648)]
?
> Wither, George, 1588-1667: Hymn XCVII. When our Fancies
> affright us, with Illusions, or dreadfull Apparitions.
> [from Haleluiah (1641)]
>
> 21 By that great God, who did not scorn
> 22 Our Nature; but the same hath took:
> 23 By Him, that of a Maid was born;
> 24 By Him, whose pow'r thy head hath broke:
> 25 By Him, that for my Ransome di'de;
> 26 By Him, that conquer'd Death, and Hell;
> 27 By Him, who now is glorifi'd,
> 28 Where all the blessed Holies dwell:
> 29 By Him, I charge that thou **forbear**
> 30 To Harm, or put my Heart in Fear.
Thanks, Peter. I certainly think that the couplets by
Jonson and Anton are early enough and as like the one
on the grave as Marlowe's is.
Just as a matter of interest (and forgive me if I
wrongly assume that you didn't have *all* of these in
your own memory!) which database would you use for a
search like this - JSTOR?
Chess One
<bobgr...@nut-n-but.net> wrote in message
news:1192130388....@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
>> I love you guys, you make me laugh.
>>
>> Jesus is the dustman. Jesus is the janitor who cleans up after
>> all the rubbish we produce?
>
> They're nuts. The message is "Jesus, bust man, he." The "d" in
> "DUST" is a reversed "b." The latters in the inscription were all
> capitalized by an ignorant engraver. Chaucer, who wrote the
> gravestone's words (at God's command), wanted to counter the
> homosexuality that was rife in those days by pointing out the Our Lord
> was definitely heterosexual. (Chaucer was a reincarnation of Moses,
> so used to making inscriptions of this sort.)
I can't believe Bob posted this before I did, its the exact same thing! I
was merely going to add a few extra notes to connect it with the Tomb
inscription which by cipher wheel, number substitution, Templar bread-making
recipe #4 and The Annunciation [if read in Despotic Greek] clearly predicted
that the Author would return, as 'Eldyis', again with the inverted b/d known
to initiates and illiterates.
The etymology is simple! ELIE; Elijah [Chaucer], and ELICHE: alike //Depos.
Ric. II p. 6 and from ELFE; a witch or fairy [A. Sax].
But the clincher is surely: ELVENE: Elves [A. Sax].
Of course; PRESCELLE merely means; to excel //Palsgrave, and the Author
himself joked on this topic, by coining PRECEDENT meaning; prognostic,
indication and also 'a rough draft of writing'. What the Author is really
intimating is her knowledge of the word PRESEPE: a precept of order
for here es comene a presepe, swykke menne to take //MS Lincs A. i. 17,
f. 148
an ani ful no
Now, the word DUST means [A. Sax] 'to shake the hips' ('to dust one's
jacket' is a phrase still in use, meaning to shake it all about. See also
DUSCHYNG //Hampole, from DUSH; to gyrate wildly, to swivel with an attitude)
Hence the author anticipates his own future incarnation, this time as a man,
named ELFLICHE PRESCEPE
Phil Innes
Warden, Northern Marches.
> --Sir B.
>
Peter Groves
It must be, always; some ELiabethan and Jacobean printers had a habit of
bunging in commas at line-endings regardless.
No, indeed; careless of me.
>
> > Bancroft, Thomas, fl. 1633-1658:
> > To the never-dying Memory of the Noble Lord Hastings, &c.
> > The meanest Son of the Muses consecrates this ELEGIE.
> > [from To the Noble Lord Hastings (1649)] An Epitaph on
> > the same.
> >
> > 55 Tread off, prophaner feet, **forbear**
> > 56 To press this hallowed mold, where lies
> > 57 Fair Vertue's and high Honour's Heir,
> > 58 The Darling of the bounteous Skies;
> > 59 Who by rare Parts, the flight of Fame,
> > 60 In Life, out-went; in Death, his Name.
> >
> > Quarles, John, 1624-1665:
> > Englands Complaint. [from Fons Lachrymarum (1648)]
>
There are several in Quarles, but all indicative; I forgot to remove the
heading.
>
> > Wither, George, 1588-1667: Hymn XCVII. When our Fancies
> > affright us, with Illusions, or dreadfull Apparitions.
> > [from Haleluiah (1641)]
> >
> > 21 By that great God, who did not scorn
> > 22 Our Nature; but the same hath took:
> > 23 By Him, that of a Maid was born;
> > 24 By Him, whose pow'r thy head hath broke:
> > 25 By Him, that for my Ransome di'de;
> > 26 By Him, that conquer'd Death, and Hell;
> > 27 By Him, who now is glorifi'd,
> > 28 Where all the blessed Holies dwell:
> > 29 By Him, I charge that thou **forbear**
> > 30 To Harm, or put my Heart in Fear.
>
> Thanks, Peter. I certainly think that the couplets by
> Jonson and Anton are early enough and as like the one
> on the grave as Marlowe's is.
>
> Just as a matter of interest (and forgive me if I
> wrongly assume that you didn't have *all* of these in
> your own memory!) which database would you use for a
> search like this - JSTOR?
No, it's a thing of wonder and beauty called Literature Online or LION, a
more or less comprehensive (up to C20) searchable database of published
English literature published by Chadwyck-Healey. Unfortunately it's not
free (my university subscribes) but it's an extraordinarily useful research
tool.
Peter G.
Peter Farey
I was suggesting that your list ought to restrict itself to
enjambments, because I don't think that this is one. He is
not saying "forbear to turn...". It is the "Tears and private
Griefe" over the death of Sidney's son which he is asking him
to forbear (withhold, keep back), so that he can now get on
with writing about the "Great and Publike Care" of Prince
Henry's death.
> free (my university subscribes) but it's an extra-
> ordinarily useful research tool.
Ah yes. They're the Scrooges who sought permission to
include my transcript of *Groatsworth* on their database
and, when having given it I suggested a *quid pro quo* in
the form of free (or far less expensive) access, very
politely told me to piss off.
Paul Crowley
>> GOOD FREND FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE,
>> TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
>> BLESTE BE Ye MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
>> AND CURST BE HE Yt MOVES MY BONES.
> I can't help wondering whether the writer of the
> inscription on Shakespeares's grave was influenced by
> those on Ovid's? He does seem to have read Marlowe's
> *Hero and Leander*:
>
> And thus bespake him: "Gentle youth, forbear
> To touch the sacred garments which I wear.
> (H&L 343-4)
The inscription implies that its word are
those of the poet ("my bones"). Yet they
clearly are not. We are therefore supposed
to assume that the poet expressed these
sentiments strongly -- to his nearest and
dearest -- but never got around to putting
them into writing, (even though he seems
to have known that he was dying) leaving
it to some much less competent local
person.
Yet the skilled use of enjambment indicates
that the author was not unsophisticated,
even it the rest of verse is close to doggerel.
The use of 'yt' for 'that' (twice) seems to me
deliberately rustic and old-fashioned.
The purpose of this verse was to ensure
that the body of the Stratman would never
be re-located to Westminster Abbey.
Local rustics were supposedly burying
him, expressing his wishes with this curse.
Of course, none if it was their idea -- let
alone his -- but that was how it had to
appear.
The author was probably Thomas Greene,
who had shown considerable competence
as a poet when he was a law student . He
was soon to be a great London barrister, but
while the Stratman was alive, he remained
Stratford's Town clerk, and, almost certainly,
the chief government agent in charge of this
matter.
He did his best to make this inscription as
crude as possible, but could not restrain
himself from exploiting an enjambment that
was far too sophisticated.
Paul.
Art Neuendorffer
>>>TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
>>>BLESTE BE Ye MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
>>>AND CURST BE HE Yt MOVES MY BONES.
> "Peter Farey" wrote:
>>
>>I can't help wondering whether the writer of the
>>inscription on Shakespeares's grave was influenced by
>>those on Ovid's? He does seem to have read Marlowe's
>>*Hero and Leander*:
>>
>> And thus bespake him: "Gentle youth, forbear
>> To touch the sacred garments which I wear.
>> (H&L 343-4)
Paul Crowley wrote:
>
> The inscription implies that its word
> are those of the poet ("my bones").
> Yet they clearly are not.
*OS* : *BONES* (French)
*OS* : *A BONE*, *A MASK* (Latin)
*OS* : *mouth, countenance, sight, source* (Latin)
*OS* : *OX/NEAT* (Dutch)
*OS* : *SMELL* (Norwegian, Swedish)
----------------------------------------------
. Aubrey on Francis Bacon: Viscount St. Albans
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~paul/bacon/biographies/aubrey.html
.
[Francis Bacon] was wont to say to his servant Hunt (who was a
notable thrifty man and loved this World, and the only Servant
he had that he could *nEVER* gett to become BOUND for him)
The World was made for man, Hunt, and not man for the World.
Hunt left an estate of *1000 pound per annum* in Somerset.
. None of his servants durst appeare before him
. *without Spanish LEATHER bootes* ; for
he would *SMELLE the NEATES LEATHER* , which offended him.
---------------------------------------------------
*TAW* : prepare *LEATHER* , twist (Scottish)
...............................
*OS* : *A MASK* (Latin)
*OS* : *OX/NEAT* (Dutch)
*OS* : *STENCH , *SMELL* (Norwegian, Swedish)
-------------------------------------------------------------
. To the memory of my beloved, The Author
. MR. W I L L I A M S H A K E S P E A R E :
.
.[W]hich, since thy flight frõ hence, hath mourn'd like night,
.[A]nd despaires day, but for thy Volumes light.
---------------------------------------------------------
.[T]o draw no envy (Shakespeare) on thy name,
.[A]m I thus ample to thy Booke, and Fame;
.[W]hile I confesse thy writings to be such,
.[A]s neither Man, nor Muse, can praise too much.
'[T]is TRUE, and all men's suffrage. But these wayes
.
. Were not the paths I meant unto thy praise;
. For seeliest Ignorance on these may light,
. Which, when it sounds at best, but *ECCHO's right* ;
.
.[W]hich were so richly spun, and wouen so fit,
.[A]s, since, she will vouchsafe no other Wit.
.[T]he merry Greeke tart Aristophanes,
------------------------------------------------
.[T A W] Phoenician letter for T
------------------------------------------
. SONNET 32
.
[W]hen that churl death my *BONES with DUST* shall cover
[A]nd shalt by fortune once more re-survey
[T]hese poor rude lines of thy deceased lover:
---------------------------------------------------
*TAW* : prepare *LEATHER* , twist (Scottish)
...............................
*OS* : *BONES* (French)
*OS* : *A BONE*, *A MASK* (Latin)
*OS* : *OX/NEAT* (Dutch)
*OS* : *STENCH , *SMELL* (Norwegian, Swedish)
----------------------------------------------------
"Was *Thomas WATSON* Shake-speare's Precurser?"
by Dr. Eric Altschuler & Mr. William Jansen (SOS newsletter)
................................................
. Sonnet 76:
.
.Why is my VERsE so barren of new pride,
.So far from variation or quick change?
.Why with the time do I not glance aside
.To new-found methods and to compounds strange?
.
.[W]hy write I still all one, ever the same,
.[A]nd keep invention in a noted weed,
.[T]hat every word doth almost tell my name ,
.[S]howing their birth and where they did proceed?
.[O], know, sweet love, I always write of you,
A[n]d you and love are still my argument;
----------------------------------------------------------------
*PrOSOpopoeia* , n.[Latin, from Greek prOSOpopoiia, from prOSOpon
*MASK* , perSOn (from *prOS- + OpS* face) + poiein to make c 1555]
.
A figure by which an absent perSOn is introduced as speaking.
.
. - Garber, Marjorie. "Hamlet: Giving Up the GhOSt."
.
<<prOSOpopoeia as the "fiction of the voice from-beyond-the-grave."
.
PrOSOpopoeia is the trope of autobiography, by which one's name, as
in the Milton poem, is made as intelligible and memorable as a face.>>
-------------------------------------------------------------
*PrOSOpopoia* Or Mother Hubberds Tale. By ED. SP. 1591.
.
And EUER when he ought would bring to pas,
His long experience the platforme was:
And when he ought not pleasing would put by,
The *CLOKE* was care of thrift, and husbandry,
For to encrease the common treasures store;
But HIS OWNE tresure he encreased more
And lifted vp his *LOFTIE TOWRES* thereby,
That they began to threat the neighbour sky;
The whiles the Princes pallaces fell fast
.
[T]o ruine: (for what thing can EUER last?)
[A]nd whilest the other Peeres for poUERtiE
[W]ere forst their auncient houses to let lie,
.
And their olde Castles to the ground to fall,
[W]hich their forefathers famous OUER all
[H]ad founded for the Kingdomes *ORNAMENT* ,
And for their memories long *MONIMENT* .
-------------------------------------------
. SONNET 1
.
[T]hou that art now the world's fresh *ORNAMENT* ,
[A]nd only herald to the gaudy spring,
[W]ithin thine own bud buriest thy content,
----------------------------------------------------
http://comp.uark.edu/~mreynold/aulicus.html
.
. Edouardus Verus, Co-
. mes Oxoniae, Vicecomes
. Bulbeck, Dominus de Scales
. & Badlismer, D. Magnus Angliae Ca-
. merarius: Lectori. S. D.
.
Quae si sapientissimorum principum clarissima insignia,
si florentis reip. certissima praesidia, si optimorum
ciuium *ORNAMENTa* maxima, & suo merito, & omnium iudicio,
----------------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer
bobgr...@nut-n-but.net
<slkwuoiutiuytciu...@slkjlskjoioue.com> wrote:
> "Peter Farey" <Peter.Fa...@prst17z1.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
Sorry, Paul, but louts were using enjambments to get end rhymes for
years before there was a term for them. Enjambments are not
sophisticated. If you had studied the works of more than one poet,
you might know this. Furthermore, gravestone rhymes like this one
(I'm sure) were common and would have had time to become standard
enough for any doggerelist to use. I wasn't there, and I lack your
knowledge as to what any given human being would have to do in a given
circumstance, so I don't know how the rhyme was chosen for the grave,
but my hunch is that Shakespeare did voice his superstition enough for
whoever was in charge of his burial to grab a standard don't move
these bones rhyme for the gravestone.
Paul Crowley
news:mFaQi.426$cR5...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> "Peter Farey" <Peter...@prst17z1.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:feq359$l7s$1$830f...@news.demon.co.uk...
>> Just as a matter of interest (and forgive me if I
>> wrongly assume that you didn't have *all* of these in
>> your own memory!) which database would you use for a
>> search like this - JSTOR?
>
> No, it's a thing of wonder and beauty called Literature Online or LION, a
> more or less comprehensive (up to C20) searchable database of published
> English literature published by Chadwyck-Healey. Unfortunately it's not
> free (my university subscribes) but it's an extraordinarily useful research
> tool.
It's a shame that it's not in the hands
of anyone who could use it.
Paul.
Lyra
``````````````````````````````
Stratford on Avon
(anagram)
dvst of orator, Ann
```````````````````````````````
Stratford on Avon Ch.
A Chrst - o no art fovnd?
```````````````````````````````````````
i.e.....Stratford on Avon
O dvst of a riter anon...
O an art is vnder-foot
```````````````````````````````````````````
Stratford on Avon
O an art's vnd'r-foot
`````````````````````````````````````````````
lackpurity
> On Oct 10, 10:00 pm, Lyra wrote:
>
> ``````````````````````````````
>
> Stratford on Avon
>
> (anagram)
>
> dvst of orator, Ann
MM:
Dust. Nothing but dust. What good is dust? It is pretty much
worthless. Ann Hathaway was a Saint and ONE of Shakespeare's
successors.
> ```````````````````````````````
>
> Stratford on Avon Ch.
>
> A Chrst - o no art fovnd?
MM:
Good one. Either we learn that Shakespeare was Christ, or we're still
seeking the truth, one or the other.
> ```````````````````````````````````````
>
> i.e.....Stratford on Avon
>
> O dvst of a riter anon...
MM:
Again, dust is not important. The Living Successor is important.
Bacon, Hathaway, Lanyer, Donne, etc., etc...
> O an art is vnder-foot
MM:
His form was an art, but now it is just dust. Better to forget dust
(forbear) and to seek the Living Master. Maharaj Charan Singh Ji used
to say, "We are reluctant to follow the Successor, but we're willing
to worship the shoes of the Predecessor." This is wrong, of course.
> ```````````````````````````````````````````
>
> Stratford on Avon
>
> O an art's vnd'r-foot
MM:
Yes, we should let the dead bodies go back to nature.
Jesus advised us to merge into the Holy Spirit. Why worry about dust,
or bones? If we are so stupid that we neglect the Living Master, for
his shoes, dust, bones, etc., then we will end up cursed. We will end
up being reborn again. That's what it means.
Thanks for the good post, Lyra. Good anagrams, too.
Michael Martin
> `````````````````````````````````````````````
>
>
>
> > GOOD FREND FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE,
> > TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
> > BLESTE BE Ye MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
> > AND CURST BE HE Yt MOVES MY BONES.
>
> >http://www.folger.edu/template.cfm?cid=862
>
> > ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` ````````````
>
> > The fourth word of each line...
>
> > Jesus
>
> > dust
>
> > man
>
> > he
>
> > ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` `````````````
>
> > Jesus(') dust.........man, he
>
> > may be a secret message by someone wishing to deny that Jesus
> > resurrected,
> > or went to Heaven,
> > if he was a man, i.e., mortal.
>
> > A view not unknown in those days.
> > (or now, of course)
>
> > ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` ```````````````````````````````````````````
>
> > Francis Bacon? he was alive at the time.
>
> > ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
>
> > Why the fourth word, I don't know - something Masonic, maybe.
>
Lyra
>
>
>
``````````````````````````````````````````
>
> Stratford on Avon
>
> (anagram)
>
> dvst of orator, Ann
```````````````````````````````````````````````
>
> Stratford on Avon Ch.
>
> A Chrst - o no art fovnd?
>
> ```````````````````````````````````````
O, nor a Chrst fovnd at?
````````````````````````````````````````````````
> i.e.....Stratford on Avon
>
> O dvst of a riter anon...
>
> O an art is vnder-foot
>
> ```````````````````````````````````````````
>
> Stratford on Avon
>
> O an art's vnd'r-foot
>
````````````````````````````````````````````
O fovr stand on art
```````````````````````````````````
Art of V adorns not?
````````````````````````````````````````````````
Lyra
````````````````````````````
Stratford on Avon
(anagrams)
````````````````````````````
>
> > O an art's vnd'r-foot
>
```````````````````````````````````````
>
> O fovr stand on art
>
> ```````````````````````````````````
O and start on "fovr"...
Fovr do start, anon
`````````````````````````````````````````````
>
> Art of V adorns not?
>
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````
A linked story,
of the discovery of 16th century art, hidden.
````````````````````````````
(quote, excerpts)
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Last Updated: Sunday, 14 October 2007, 14:16 GMT 15:16 UK
E-mail this to a friend Printable version
`````````````````````````````````
Archbishop opens medieval church
The restoration included colourful wall paintings, uncovered during
dismantling
A 13th Century church, which was dismantled and rebuilt 50 miles away
at a museum in Cardiff,
has been opened by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
St Teilo's Church has been recreated stone-by-stone over 20 years at
the National History Museum, St Fagans.
The church from Pontarddulais near Swansea has been restored to
recreate its appearance in 1520.
Copies of a rare series of 16th Century paintings, which were
uncovered as it was being dismantled, adorn the walls.
First Minister Rhodri Morgan also attended the ceremony with the
archbishop, Dr Rowan Williams.
The first minister said: "I have watched the incredible skills of the
restoration team
that have reconstructed the building and saved the frescoes.
"This is a stunning addition to the treasure trove of Welsh history
contained in St Fagans."
Curator Gerallt Nash said: "Before we actually started the work of
dismantling the building,
we carried out a rescue operation to uncover what was hidden away
beneath layer upon layers of lime wash.
"That was when we found the amazing series of wall paintings here."
The congregation inside St Teilo's church
The congregation gathered inside the rebuilt church
The discovery influenced the decision to reconstruct the church as it
would have looked in the 16th Century - prior to the Reformation.
"Most of the people who do remember it there and who remember going to
services there in the summer will have quite a surprise, because it's
going to be 'dressed up' as it were in its medieval guise.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_east/7043147.stm
> ``````````````````````````````````````````
>
>
>
> > Stratford on Avon
>
> > (anagram)
>
> > dvst of orator, Ann
>
> ```````````````````````````````````````````````
>
> > Stratford on Avon Ch.
>
> > A Chrst - o no art fovnd?
>
> > ```````````````````````````````````````
>
> O, nor a Chrst fovnd at?
>
> ````````````````````````````````````````````````
>
> > i.e.....Stratford on Avon
>
> > O dvst of a riter anon...
>
> > O an art is vnder-foot
>
`````````
>
lackpurity
> On Oct 14, 7:15 pm, Lyra wrote:
>
> ``````````````````````````````````````````
>
>
>
> > Stratford on Avon
>
> > (anagram)
>
> > dvst of orator, Ann
>
> ```````````````````````````````````````````````
>
>
>
> > Stratford on Avon Ch.
>
> > A Chrst - o no art fovnd?
>
> > ```````````````````````````````````````
>
> O, nor a Chrst fovnd at?
>
> ````````````````````````````````````````````````
>
> > i.e.....Stratford on Avon
>
> > O dvst of a riter anon...
>
> > O an art is vnder-foot
>
> > ```````````````````````````````````````````
>
> > Stratford on Avon
>
> > O an art's vnd'r-foot
>
> ````````````````````````````````````````````
>
> O fovr stand on art
MM:
Sometimes four Khands (regions) have been described. They are
supported and sustained by the Shabd, Nam, or Holy Spirit, which
Shakespeare often called "Art." Good one.
> ```````````````````````````````````
>
> Art of V adorns not?
MM:
Similarly, five main stages have been described in mysticism. The
"art of V," could be the Shabd (Sound) of each particular one. If it
does not adorn us, it means that we should forbear the dust of the old
dead Master, and look for the living, breathing Master, to follow him
to the True Home. Good one.
Michael Martin
> ````````````````````````````````````````````````
>
>
>
> > > GOOD FREND FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE,
> > > TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
> > > BLESTE BE Ye MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
> > > AND CURST BE HE Yt MOVES MY BONES.
>
> > >http://www.folger.edu/template.cfm?cid=862
>
> > > ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` ````````````
>
> > > The fourth word of each line...
>
> > > Jesus
>
> > > dust
>
> > > man
>
> > > he
>
> > > ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` `````````````
>
> > > Jesus(') dust.........man, he
>
> > > may be a secret message by someone wishing to deny that Jesus
> > > resurrected,
> > > or went to Heaven,
> > > if he was a man, i.e., mortal.
>
> > > A view not unknown in those days.
> > > (or now, of course)
>
> > > ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` ```````````````````````````````````````````
>
> > > Francis Bacon? he was alive at the time.
>
> > > ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
>
> > > Why the fourth word, I don't know - something Masonic, maybe.
>
conra...@gmail.com
but.net> wrote:
> GOOD FREND FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE,
> TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
> BLESTE BE Ye MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
> AND CURST BE HE Yt MOVES MY BONES.
> you might know this. Furthermore, gravestone rhymes like this one
> (I'm sure) were common and would have had time to become standard
> enough for any doggerelist to use. I wasn't there, and I lack your
> knowledge as to what any given human being would have to do in a given
> circumstance, so I don't know how the rhyme was chosen for the grave,
> but my hunch is that Shakespeare did voice his superstition enough for
> whoever was in charge of his burial to grab a standard don't move
> these bones rhyme for the gravestone.- Hide quoted text -
Basic question here -- I'm grateful to Lyra for posting this, btw;
I tried posting it a few weeks ago, asking for opinions, but
Google apparently flaked --
What makes you say this is doggerel? I've come across that
opinion before, and don't see it.
Is there a consensus on this evalutation?
Conrad.
ps - Was all Jesus's poetry doggerel?
C.
lackpurity
> On Oct 14, 7:40 pm, Lyra wrote:
>
> ````````````````````````````
>
> Stratford on Avon
>
> (anagrams)
>
> ````````````````````````````
>
>
>
> > > O an art's vnd'r-foot
>
> ```````````````````````````````````````
>
>
>
> > O fovr stand on art
>
> > ```````````````````````````````````
>
> O and start on "fovr"...
MM:
It means to find the Master and follow him, to start the meditation.
> Fovr do start, anon
MM:
Ditto. "anon" might mean to start humbly, I'd think.
MM:
Very interesting. If it's beautiful, then it might inspire us.
Michael Martin
> > > > ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` ```````````````````- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
nordicskiv2
Lyra <mountai...@RockAthens.com> wrote:
> On Oct 10, 10:00 pm, Lyra wrote:
> Stratford on Avon
>
> (anagram)
>
> dvst of orator, Ann
> Stratford on Avon Ch.
> A Chrst - o no art fovnd?
[...]
You missed a few. How about the following?
Art N.'s orotvnd oaf.
Lyra
>
> A linked story,
> of the discovery of 16th century art, hidden.
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
>
> (quote, excerpts)
>
> ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
>
> St Teilo's Church has been recreated stone-by-stone over 20 years at
> the National History Museum, St Fagans.
>
> The church from Pontarddulais near Swansea has been restored to
> recreate its appearance in 1520.
>
> Copies of a rare series of 16th Century paintings, which were
> uncovered as it was being dismantled, adorn the walls.
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
(quote, excerpts)
As far back as the Roman period, Livy - writing in around 17 AD -
described how Celtic warriors decorated skulls with gold and used them
for drinking cups and for offerings to their gods. It is believed that
this was the origin of such practices as those seen not too long ago
with the famous St. Teilo's skull.
St. Teilo's well is in Wales, at Llandeilo Llwydarth, where the water
is renowned the world over for its healing abilities. The skull,
Penglog Teilo, is said to be the oldest surviving Welsh skull, still
used for healing purposes - indicating the fact that there were indeed
many others. At Carmarthen the skull of Ffynnon Llandyfaen was used in
the same way - as was the skull of a Welsh nobleman named Gruffydd ap
Adda ap Dafydd.
In a paper published in 1893 Sir John Thys cited the examples of
Ffynnon Elian and Ffynnon Deilo as remnants of the priestly caste of
'well keepers', which had survived into modern times. But why would
this practice have occurred? Why would it be so widespread and so
ancient?
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
But, we can still see the skull or head being associated with the
healing waters of the serpent deity. We were amazed to discover that
virtually the same story is to be discovered in the stories of the
founding Saint of the Sinclair family - the same family intricately
linked with the Templars, the Holy Grail, Rosslyn Chapel and the
Masons.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
We also find that the patron Saint of the Sinclair's is actually St.
Katherine, who is often pictured holding the sword, which severed her
head!
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
>
> ````````````````````````````
>
> Stratford on Avon
>
> (anagrams)
>
> ````````````````````````````
>
>
>
> > > O an art's vnd'r-foot
>
> ```````````````````````````````````````
>
>
>
> > O fovr stand on art
>
> > ```````````````````````````````````
>
> O and start on "fovr"...
>
> Fovr do start, anon
>
> `````````````````````````````````````````````
>
>
>
> > Art of V adorns not?
>
>
>
> > ``````````````````````````````````````````
>
Peter Groves
You're quite right -- I was skimming, not reading (the downside of being
presented with so much information is the temptation to take short cuts in
evaluating it).
> >
> > > Thanks, Peter. I certainly think that the couplets by
> > > Jonson and Anton are early enough and as like the one
> > > on the grave as Marlowe's is.
> > >
> > > Just as a matter of interest (and forgive me if I
> > > wrongly assume that you didn't have *all* of these in
> > > your own memory!) which database would you use for a
> > > search like this - JSTOR?
> >
> > No, it's a thing of wonder and beauty called Literature
> > Online or LION, a more or less comprehensive (up to C20)
> > searchable database of published English literature
> > published by Chadwyck-Healey. Unfortunately it's not
> > free (my university subscribes) but it's an extra-
> > ordinarily useful research tool.
>
> Ah yes. They're the Scrooges who sought permission to
> include my transcript of *Groatsworth* on their database
> and, when having given it I suggested a *quid pro quo* in
> the form of free (or far less expensive) access, very
> politely told me to piss off.
>
That's extraordinary -- it would have cost them virtually nothing in any
case, since they wouldn't (I presume) be forgoing a likely sale. Think of
the good will they could earn so cheaply with a discount to private
scholars.
Peter G.
Bianca Steele
It isn't the universities who are mandating that policy, either.
Anybody who uses the computer facilities at a university library will
know that the extra security on the online databases is on account of
the publishers' refusing to make their databases available even to
universities unless the universities agree to extremely tight
restrictions on who has access. In my experience universities go to
some lengths to ensure they're in compliance with that policy
(instituting two or more tiers of access, if necessary, to ensure they
can't be accused of opening the door to anybody and everybody).
In the case of articles on nuclear physics, for example, it makes
sense. You wouldn't want just anybody to have access to this sort of
thing.
--
Bianca Steele
lackpurity
MM:
Reminds me of the story of Saint Sarmad. Reportedly he was beheaded,
then held his own head high proclaiming that he was God. After this
demonstration, his Master, Bhika, told him to die, now that he had
proved his omnipotence. Here is one account of that story:
http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/2003-September/003051.html
It is here that Sarmad, the digambar (nude/ skyclad)
Sufi fell in love with Abhay Chand, the Hindu
merchant's son.. and renounced the world. It is here
that Aurangzeb ordered his execution.. apparently for
'insulting Islam', but essentially for befriending
Dara and influencing the masses of Delhi with his
blending message..
Three executioners tried unsuccessfully to behead
him.. till Sarmad himself handed Abhay Chand the
sword..singing' Come my beloved, in whatsoever garb
thou come, I recognise thee well'..His severed head
walked the steps of the Jama Masjid before thousands
of Dilliwalas and had to be restrained from destroying
the whole city..the legend says. He was followed by
the Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur, who he and Dara Shikoh
loved dearly- beheaded at Gurudwara Sheesh(Head) Ganj,
again in the heart of Chandni Chowk.
The Mughals were never to regain their glory..and
Dara's grave was never found.
But then, this is Dilli..
MM:
Guru Tegh Bahadur was also a Saint, in the line from Guru Nanak.
Sarmad wrote some beautiful rubaiyats. He extolls the Sant Mat
teachings in them, referring to the Shabd, Nam, or Holy Spirit, as
"Wine," in the same style as Omar Khayyam.
Michael Martin
> > > > > ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````- Hide quoted text -
Peter Groves
news:KksQi.22597$j7.4...@news.indigo.ie...
It's certainly of no use to a fantasist like Crowley, who (in any case)
produces all his material from a more fundamental source.
Peter G.
Paul Crowley
news:1192375884.0...@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> >> GOOD FREND FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE,
>> >> TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
>> >> BLESTE BE Ye MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
>> >> AND CURST BE HE Yt MOVES MY BONES.
>> He did his best to make this inscription as
>> crude as possible, but could not restrain
>> himself from exploiting an enjambment that
>> was far too sophisticated.
> Sorry, Paul, but louts were using enjambments to get end rhymes for
> years before there was a term for them. Enjambments are not
> sophisticated.
So you could readily find examples,
in ballads and the like.
> Furthermore, gravestone rhymes like this one
> (I'm sure) were common and would have had time to become standard
> enough for any doggerelist to use.
Given that inscriptions on gravestones
are easy to see, and often recorded, and
given the vast amount of Stratfordian
'research', lists of instances will be in
Stratfordian books. Find one.
> I wasn't there, and I lack your
> knowledge as to what any given human being would have to do in a given
> circumstance, so I don't know how the rhyme was chosen for the grave,
> but my hunch is that Shakespeare did voice his superstition enough for
> whoever was in charge of his burial to grab a standard don't move
> these bones rhyme for the gravestone.
Do you really think that the poet was
superstitious? Or that, IF he was, and
felt so strongly about this matter, he'd
not have written the inscription before
he died?
This is a nice test case. Strats must say
that this was put on the grave merely
because it seemed a good idea at the time
-- and that it was an unexceptional thing
to do. As so often, they must claim 'it
was conventional'. So they should be
able to find plenty of other instances.
Oxfordians (and other anti-Strats) must
say it was contrived (to ensure that the
Stratman was never re-buried in Poet's
Corner). While evidence of similar
inscriptions will not destroy their case,
it would undermine it -- especially if
some used enjambments.
Paul.
lackpurity
<slkwuoiutiuytciu...@slkjlskjoioue.com> wrote:
> <bobgrum...@nut-n-but.net> wrote in message
MM:
I saw a program on TV last night. It was about incorruptible bodies
of so-called Holy People. One is 700 years old, enclosed in a glass
case, and the public views it as a tourist attraction. Science is at
a loss why their bodies don't decompose in a normal fashion. They
were not embalmed, either. There are a lot of them, and the Catholic
Church used to canonize those people, thinking it was proof of
holiness, according to the program, anyway. There were so many of
them, that the Catholic Church stopped that practice, however.
Maybe that is what Shakespeare wanted to avoid, becoming a tourist
attraction in death?
Michael Martin
Lyra
````````````````````````````````````
Stratford on Avon
(anagrams)
no rotvnda of arts?
star of no rotvnda?
`````````````````````````````````````
Note the rotunda in the following...
(quote, excerpts)
Ye Olde Giftshop
The arrival of the Jubilee brought with it the mass production of
Shakespeare souvenirs. Garrick's literary agent, Thomas Beckett,
proclaimed himself the official bookseller of the Jubilee, but the
plays, pictures and songbooks that he was selling were all directly
related to Garrick and the Jubilee, rather than Shakespeare alone.
The first day of the Jubilee was a success but then it started to rain
heavily. Garrick tried to continue the celebrations on the second day,
but the rains proved to be too much. The firework display was ruined
and the specially built rotunda (a replica of Garrick's personal
shrine to Shakespeare) was submerged under half a foot of water.
The rain only added to other problems, such as a lack of
accommodation, huge amounts of traffic and the general chaos of the
event. Garrick was forced to cancel the activities on the third day,
much to the annoyance of many.
The one highlight was Garrick's performance of his Ode Upon Dedicating
A Building And, Erecting A Statue, To Shakespeare, At Stratford-upon-
Avon. Despite the rain and floods, people crammed into the rotunda to
hear Garrick's now famous dedication - the greatest performance of his
life.
http://www.icons.org.uk/theicons/collection/globe-theatre/features/birth-of-the-shakespeare-industry
Lyra
>
> ````````````````````````````````````
>
> Stratford on Avon
>
> (anagrams)
>
> no rotvnda of arts?
>
> star of no rotvnda?
>
> `````````````````````````````````````
Rotunda (architecture)
>From Wikipedia
The famous Rotunda church in Thessaloniki, Greece.
The attractive historic Band Rotunda in Bairnsdale, Victoria,
Australia.
Rotunda in Starý Plzenec (Old Pilsen near Pilsen, Czech Republic),
from the 10th century.
Beehive, Wellington, NZ
Rotunda - Öskü, Hungary.
A rotunda is any building with a circular ground plan, often covered
by a dome. It can also refer to a round room within a building (a
famous example being within the United States Capitol in Washington,
D.C.). The Pantheon in Rome is a famous rotunda. A Band Rotunda is a
circular bandstand, usually with a dome. Several cities have buildings
referred to as "the Rotunda," among them:
The Pantheon, Rome, Italy, originally built as a temple to the seven
deities of the seven planets in the state religion of Ancient Rome.
The Church of the Rotonda in Thessaloniki, built as the "Tomb of
Galerius" in 306 AD.
The St George Rotunda in Sofia, Bulgaria, a 4th-century Early
Christian church
St. George Cathedral Church at Zvartnots, Armenia
St. Martin's Rotunda in Vyšehrad Castle, Prague, Czech Republic
The Rotunda of St Marija Assunta in Mosta, Malta
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotunda_(architecture)
>
> Note the rotunda in the following...
>
> (quote, excerpts)
>
> Ye Olde Giftshop
>
> The arrival of the Jubilee brought with it the mass production of
> Shakespeare souvenirs. Garrick's literary agent, Thomas Beckett,
> proclaimed himself the official bookseller of the Jubilee, but the
> plays, pictures and songbooks that he was selling were all directly
> related to Garrick and the Jubilee, rather than Shakespeare alone.
>
> The first day of the Jubilee was a success but then it started to rain
> heavily. Garrick tried to continue the celebrations on the second day,
> but the rains proved to be too much. The firework display was ruined
> and the specially built rotunda (a replica of Garrick's personal
> shrine to Shakespeare) was submerged under half a foot of water.
>
> The rain only added to other problems, such as a lack of
> accommodation, huge amounts of traffic and the general chaos of the
> event. Garrick was forced to cancel the activities on the third day,
> much to the annoyance of many.
>
> The one highlight was Garrick's performance of his Ode Upon Dedicating
> A Building And, Erecting A Statue, To Shakespeare, At Stratford-upon-
> Avon. Despite the rain and floods, people crammed into the rotunda to
> hear Garrick's now famous dedication - the greatest performance of his
> life.
>
> http://www.icons.org.uk/theicons/collection/globe-theatre/features/bi...
Peter Farey
Bob Grumman wrote:
>
> Sorry, Paul, but louts were using enjambments to get
> end rhymes for years before there was a term for them.
> Enjambments are not sophisticated. If you had studied
> the works of more than one poet, you might know this.
> Furthermore, gravestone rhymes like this one (I'm sure)
> were common and would have had time to become standard
> enough for any doggerelist to use. I wasn't there, and
> I lack your knowledge as to what any given human being
> would have to do in a given circumstance, so I don't
> know how the rhyme was chosen for the grave, but my
> hunch is that Shakespeare did voice his superstition
> enough for whoever was in charge of his burial to grab
> stone.
For me, the interesting thing is what was there *before*
the monument was erected. We know that Shakespeare died
on 23rd April 1616, and was buried (we don't actually
know where) two days later, on Thursday 25th.
From E.I. Fripp, however, we learn the following about the
condition of Holy Trinity's chancel two years later:
"The Chancel was pronounced 'ruinous' in 1618, the Cor-
poration resolved 'to bestow some charges' on keeping
it 'dry' in 1619, and they were presented by Quyney and
the churchwardens ... for its 'decay' in April 1621. In
1621-2 the walls were 'mended' and 'painted' and the
windows 'glazed', and the building was presentable, for
the first time since the Poet's interment, when his old
friends and fellow-actors of the King's Company paid
their one and only visit to Stratford, presumably to
see his monument, in the Summer of 1622."
It therefore seems almost certain that the erection of the
monument would have been undertaken at the same time as
the major work on the chancel was being done.
However, it is the monument which apparently supplies the
name of the person buried beneath it. So I wonder:
a) whether Shakespeare was even buried there originally,
and, if not, (given that the words on the tombstone don't
actually say he is there) whether his remains ever were
actually transferred to the grave we now assume to be his.
b) what it actually said on his grave during the five or so
years following April 1616, when there was no monument
to identify the occupant.
Tom Reedy
wrote:
No, it is not certain, nor even almost. For all we know, the
installation of a new monument to Shakespeare might have been the
incentive for the refurbishing of the chancel. As inheritors of the
parish tithes and therefore lay rectors, the family might have
complained of the condition of the burial site. Again, we just don't
know, but these possibilities are just as likely as your scenario.
> However, it is the monument which apparently supplies the
> name of the person buried beneath it. So I wonder:
>
> a) whether Shakespeare was even buried there originally,
> and, if not, (given that the words on the tombstone don't
> actually say he is there) whether his remains ever were
> actually transferred to the grave we now assume to be his.
>
> b) what it actually said on his grave during the five or so
> years following April 1616, when there was no monument
> to identify the occupant.
I'm sure there is more to be learned from close inspection of the
monument and the extant records.
TR
> Peter F.
> <pete...@rey.prestel.co.uk>
> <http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rey/index.htm>- Hide quoted text -
The Historian
> "Paul Crowley" <slkwuoiutiuytciu...@slkjlskjoioue.com> wrote in message
>
> news:KksQi.22597$j7.4...@news.indigo.ie...
>
>
>
> > "Peter Groves" <whate...@whatever.org> wrote in message
> >news:mFaQi.426$cR5...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> > > "Peter Farey" <Peter.Fa...@prst17z1.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> > >news:feq359$l7s$1$830f...@news.demon.co.uk...
> > >> Just as a matter of interest (and forgive me if I
> > >> wrongly assume that you didn't have *all* of these in
> > >> your own memory!) which database would you use for a
> > >> search like this - JSTOR?
>
> > > No, it's a thing of wonder and beauty called Literature Online or LION,
> a
> > > more or less comprehensive (up to C20) searchable database of published
> > > English literature published by Chadwyck-Healey. Unfortunately it's not
> > > free (my university subscribes) but it's an extraordinarily useful
> research
> > > tool.
>
> > It's a shame that it's not in the hands
> > of anyone who could use it.
>
> > Paul.
>
> It's certainly of no use to a fantasist like Crowley, who (in any case)
> produces all his material from a more fundamental source.
I don't agree, Dr. Groves. Imagine the hours of fun Crowley could have
with keyword searches under scatological terms!
Peter Farey
Tom Reedy wrote:
There had been pressure for the Chancel's refurbishment for
a couple of decades at least before Shakespeare's death.
Fripp also tells us that
"In 1593 the Chancel of the Church was in a bad state,
and the Corporation moved Lord Treasurer Burleigh (the
Chancel was Crown property) to compel the tithe-holders
to put it in repair; and not long after obtaining it as
a grant from the Crown, they proceeded to bring pressure
upon these gentlemen, of whom Shakespeare was one, and
to sell, or let, the right of burial within its walls.
Shakespeare was buried here in 1616; but it was not
until his monument was erected, or was about to be
erected, that they had the place made less unworthy of
its illustrious dead."
We also have Schoenbaum's comment (in his Compact Documentary
Life, p.10):
"The church's harmonious interior proportions have,
however, survived the vicissitudes (the chancel fell
into decay and was boarded up; two years after Shake-
speare's burial there, it was declared 'ruinous')."
It seems to me very unlikely that such a highly expensive
monument would have been erected in a place apparently shut
off to the public because of the ruinous state it was in.
Does it not also seem quite likely to you that the only
time the King's Men ever visited Stratford (1622) - given
that they were not to play there - might have been to attend
the unveiling of the monument to their fellow Shakespeare
in the church's newly renovated chancel?
In fact I would go further, and say that the erection of
the monument and the publication of the First Folio were
two parts of a single project, the same people being behind
both of them, and both scheduled for completion in 1622 -
the year when the FF had been intended to make its first
appearance at the Frankfurt Book Fair.
The only doubts I have about what both Fripp and Schoenbaum
say (and for the same reason) is whether Shakespeare was
indeed buried there in 1616, or whether this is something
that they just assume because there is no record of his
having ever been interred anywhere else and it being gen-
erally accepted that he is buried there now.
> > However, it is the monument which apparently supplies the
> > name of the person buried beneath it. So I wonder:
> >
> > a) whether Shakespeare was even buried there originally,
> > and, if not, (given that the words on the tombstone don't
> > actually say he is there) whether his remains ever were
> > actually transferred to the grave we now assume to be his.
> >
> > b) what it actually said on his grave during the five or so
> > years following April 1616, when there was no monument
> > to identify the occupant.
>
> I'm sure there is more to be learned from close inspection
> of the monument and the extant records.
So am I.
Christian Lanciai
> > GOOD FREND FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE,
> > TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
> > BLESTE BE Ye MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
> > AND CURST BE HE Yt MOVES MY BONES.
>
It would perhaps be the greatest stratfordian joke of all if his bones
weren't there at all.
Tom Reedy
wrote:
Yes, this seems reasonable to me.
> Does it not also seem quite likely to you that the only
> time the King's Men ever visited Stratford (1622) - given
> that they were not to play there - might have been to attend
> the unveiling of the monument to their fellow Shakespeare
> in the church's newly renovated chancel?
Yes, I agree with you now. Can you give me a reference on the King's
Men's 1622 visit?
> In fact I would go further, and say that the erection of
> the monument and the publication of the First Folio were
> two parts of a single project, the same people being behind
> both of them, and both scheduled for completion in 1622 -
> the year when the FF had been intended to make its first
> appearance at the Frankfurt Book Fair.
>
> The only doubts I have about what both Fripp and Schoenbaum
> say (and for the same reason) is whether Shakespeare was
> indeed buried there in 1616, or whether this is something
> that they just assume because there is no record of his
> having ever been interred anywhere else and it being gen-
> erally accepted that he is buried there now.
The fact that his wife is buried there also supports it as the
original grave site.
> > > However, it is the monument which apparently supplies the
> > > name of the person buried beneath it. So I wonder:
>
> > > a) whether Shakespeare was even buried there originally,
> > > and, if not, (given that the words on the tombstone don't
> > > actually say he is there) whether his remains ever were
> > > actually transferred to the grave we now assume to be his.
>
> > > b) what it actually said on his grave during the five or so
> > > years following April 1616, when there was no monument
> > > to identify the occupant.
>
> > I'm sure there is more to be learned from close inspection
> > of the monument and the extant records.
>
> So am I.
Right now I would just like to know the extent of what is known now!
On my next trip to Stratford I plan to ask permission to cloesly
inspect the monument and take measurements and photographs. Perhaps
there are some photographs that were taken the last time it was
dismantled.
Tom Reedy
TR
John Andrews
wrote:
Given the site, the likeliest problem was rising damp. The placing of
the monument quite high on the wall ( a common practice in similar
churches with similar problems) suggests that this may have been the
issue.
> Does it not also seem quite likely to you that the only
> time the King's Men ever visited Stratford (1622) - given
> that they were not to play there - might have been to attend
> the unveiling of the monument to their fellow Shakespeare
> in the church's newly renovated chancel?
This does indeed seem likely.
>
> In fact I would go further, and say that the erection of
> the monument and the publication of the First Folio were
> two parts of a single project, the same people being behind
> both of them, and both scheduled for completion in 1622 -
> the year when the FF had been intended to make its first
> appearance at the Frankfurt Book Fair.
>
> The only doubts I have about what both Fripp and Schoenbaum
> say (and for the same reason) is whether Shakespeare was
> indeed buried there in 1616, or whether this is something
> that they just assume because there is no record of his
> having ever been interred anywhere else and it being gen-
> erally accepted that he is buried there now.
We can say for sure that he was buried somewhere and given what we
know about Shakespeare's standing in the community the burial in the
chancel seems just about the only place he would have been buried.
There are a number of reasons to suppose Shakespeare anticipated his
death and took some interest in the disposal of his remains. I'm
interested too in the mention of a stone in the chancel marking his
resting place in addition to the stone containing the famous
adjuration concerning his bones (which reflects Shakespeare's
knowledge of the burial arrangements over the generations in the
church).
>
> > > However, it is the monument which apparently supplies the
> > > name of the person buried beneath it. So I wonder:
>
> > > a) whether Shakespeare was even buried there originally,
> > > and, if not, (given that the words on the tombstone don't
> > > actually say he is there) whether his remains ever were
> > > actually transferred to the grave we now assume to be his.
>
> > > b) what it actually said on his grave during the five or so
> > > years following April 1616, when there was no monument
> > > to identify the occupant.
>
> > I'm sure there is more to be learned from close inspection
> > of the monument and the extant records.
>
> So am I.
Actually, I would be astonished if anything was found that
contradicted what we already know.
John
Peter Farey
Tom Reedy wrote:
>
> Peter, do you know of a roster of those buried within the chancel?
>
> TR
No I don't. Sorry.
Peter Farey
Only the one I quoted: E.I. Fripp's "Shakespeare's Stratford"
(p.74). As Fripp was also the editor of the "Minutes and
Accounts of the Corporation of Stratford upon Avon and other
records (1553-1620)" I guess he must be a fairly reliable
source. He continued:
"...the building was presentable, for the first time
since the Poet's interment, when his old friends and
fellow-actors of the King's Company paid their one and
only visit to Stratford, presumably to see his monument,
in the Summer of 1622. Kemp, Pope, Phillips, Bryan long-
since, and Burbage of late, were dead; but others of
his once matchless brotherhood survived -- Lowin, Gough,
Tooley, Shanks, Underwood, and the editors of the forth-
coming Folio-edition of his Plays, Heminge and Condell.
It is significant of the change of mind in Stratford
with regard to the stage, as of the change in the char-
acter of the drama, that even those men were forbidden
to perform in the Gild Hall and were paid 6s. as a
*solatium*."
> > In fact I would go further, and say that the erection of
> > the monument and the publication of the First Folio were
> > two parts of a single project, the same people being behind
> > both of them, and both scheduled for completion in 1622 -
> > the year when the FF had been intended to make its first
> > appearance at the Frankfurt Book Fair.
> >
> > The only doubts I have about what both Fripp and Schoenbaum
> > say (and for the same reason) is whether Shakespeare was
> > indeed buried there in 1616, or whether this is something
> > that they just assume because there is no record of his
> > having ever been interred anywhere else and it being gen-
> > erally accepted that he is buried there now.
>
> The fact that his wife is buried there also supports it
> as the original grave site.
Not really. It supports it being where his remains were by
1623, when she was buried next to him, but not necessarily
where he was between 1616 and whenever the monument was
erected.
The point I am making is that the inscription on the grave
makes no sense without the monument being there *as well*.
Therefore the tombstone (if it *is* Shakespeare's) and the
monument must have been created at the same time. So what
was written over his grave (wherever it was) in the five
years or so before that? And why was it changed?
> > > > However, it is the monument which apparently supplies the
> > > > name of the person buried beneath it. So I wonder:
> >
> > > > a) whether Shakespeare was even buried there originally,
> > > > and, if not, (given that the words on the tombstone don't
> > > > actually say he is there) whether his remains ever were
> > > > actually transferred to the grave we now assume to be his.
> >
> > > > b) what it actually said on his grave during the five or so
> > > > years following April 1616, when there was no monument
> > > > to identify the occupant.
> >
> > > I'm sure there is more to be learned from close inspection
> > > of the monument and the extant records.
> >
> > So am I.
>
> Right now I would just like to know the extent of what is
> known now!
>
> On my next trip to Stratford I plan to ask permission to
> closely inspect the monument and take measurements and
> photographs. Perhaps there are some photographs that were
> taken the last time it was dismantled.
Good luck! Please keep us posted.
Tom Reedy
wrote:
> Tom Reedy wrote:
<snip>
> > > The only doubts I have about what both Fripp and Schoenbaum
> > > say (and for the same reason) is whether Shakespeare was
> > > indeed buried there in 1616, or whether this is something
> > > that they just assume because there is no record of his
> > > having ever been interred anywhere else and it being gen-
> > > erally accepted that he is buried there now.
>
> > The fact that his wife is buried there also supports it
> > as the original grave site.
>
> Not really. It supports it being where his remains were by
> 1623, when she was buried next to him, but not necessarily
> where he was between 1616 and whenever the monument was
> erected.
>
> The point I am making is that the inscription on the grave
> makes no sense without the monument being there *as well*.
> Therefore the tombstone (if it *is* Shakespeare's) and the
> monument must have been created at the same time.
I'm not following you here.
Good frend for Iesvs sake forbeare,
To digg the dvst encloased heare.
Blest be [th]e man [tha]t spares thes stones,
And cvrst be he [tha]t moves my bones.
How is the sense of the inscription dependent upon the monument being
present also? Why couldn't that have been there and then the monument
installed years later?
>So what
> was written over his grave (wherever it was) in the five
> years or so before that? And why was it changed?
Why was what changed?
TR
Christian Lanciai
> GOOD FREND FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE,
> TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
> BLESTE BE Ye MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
> AND CURST BE HE Yt MOVES MY BONES.
>
I wrote:
"It would perhaps be the greatest stratfordian joke of all if his
bones weren't there at all,"
the essence of the joke then being, the expressed admonition not to
dig in the dust (a covert suggestion or provocation for posterity to
really do it some day?) in order NOT to find any bones. IF there are
bones there, and if they be Shakspere's, then there is no issue and no
joke, but if there is nothing, where then are the bones? Should they
be dug for somewhere else? Maybe the issue should be investigated? We
are all eager to know the truth.
C.
Art Neuendorffer
> On 10 Okt, 23:00, Lyra <mountain_qu...@RockAthens.com> wrote:
>
>>GOOD FREND FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE,
>>TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
>>BLESTE BE Ye MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
>>AND CURST BE HE Yt MOVES MY BONES.
>>
>
> "It would perhaps be the greatest stratfordian joke
> of all if his bones weren't there at all,"
>
> the essence of the joke then being, the expressed admonition not to
> dig in the dust (a covert suggestion or provocation for posterity to
> really do it some day?) in order NOT to find any bones. IF there are
> bones there, and if they be Shakspere's, then there is no issue and no
> joke, but if there is nothing, where then are the bones? Should they
> be dug for somewhere else? Maybe the issue should be investigated? We
> are all eager to know the truth.
*OS* : *BONES* (French)
*OS* : *A BONE*, *A MASK* (Latin)
*OS* : *mouth, countenance, sight, source* (Latin)
*OS* : *OX/NEAT* (Dutch)
*OS* : *SMELL* (Norwegian, Swedish)
*OS* : *GOD* , one of the Aesir (Anglo-Saxon)
................................
The Anglo-Saxon Rune Poem
in Anglo-Saxon and Modern English
http://www.geocities.com/aeldricc/asrp.html
.
Here is my translation of the Anglo-Saxon Rune Poem.
This poem is perhaps the most important work in Englisc
(Old English) that has survived into our present day.
...................................
*OS* byþ ordfruma ælere spræce,
*OS* is the source of all speech
.
wisdomes wraþu ond witena frofur
wisdom's stay and wisemen's gladness
.
ond *EORLA gehwam eadnys ond tohiht*
and *each EARL's joy and good hope*
----------------------------------------------
. Aubrey on Francis Bacon: Viscount St. Albans
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~paul/bacon/biographies/aubrey.html
.
[Francis Bacon] was wont to say to his servant Hunt (who was a
notable thrifty man and loved this World, and the only Servant
he had that he could *nEVER* gett to become BOUND for him)
The World was made for man, Hunt, and not man for the World.
Hunt left an estate of *1000 pound per annum* in Somerset.
. None of his servants durst appeare before him
. *without Spanish LEATHER bootes* ; for
he would *SMELLE the NEATES LEATHER* , which offended him.
---------------------------------------------------
*TAW* : prepare *LEATHER* , twist (Scottish)
...............................
*OS* : *A MASK* (Latin)
*OS* : *OX/NEAT* (Dutch)
*OS* : *STENCH , *SMELL* (Norwegian, Swedish)
-------------------------------------------------------------
. To the memory of my beloved, The Author
. MR. W I L L I A M S H A K E S P E A R E :
.
.[W]hich, since thy flight frõ hence, hath mourn'd like night,
.[A]nd despaires day, but for thy Volumes light.
---------------------------------------------------------
.[T]o draw no envy (Shakespeare) on thy name,
.[A]m I thus ample to thy Booke, and Fame;
.[W]hile I confesse thy writings to be such,
.[A]s neither Man, nor Muse, can praise too much.
'[T]is TRUE, and all men's suffrage. But these wayes
.
. Were not the paths I meant unto thy praise;
. For seeliest Ignorance on these may light,
. Which, when it sounds at best, but *ECCHO's right* ;
.
.[W]hich were so richly spun, and wouen so fit,
.[A]s, since, she will vouchsafe no other Wit.
.[T]he merry Greeke tart Aristophanes,
------------------------------------------------
.[T A W] Phoenician letter for T
------------------------------------------
. SONNET 32
.
[W]hen that churl death my *BONES with DUST* shall cover
[A]nd shalt by fortune once more re-survey
[T]hese poor rude lines of thy deceased lover:
---------------------------------------------------
*TAW* : prepare *LEATHER* , twist (Scottish)
...............................
*OS* : *BONES* (French)
*OS* : *A BONE*, *A MASK* (Latin)
*OS* : *OX/NEAT* (Dutch)
*OS* : *STENCH , *SMELL* (Norwegian, Swedish)
----------------------------------------------------
"Was *Thomas WATSON* Shake-speare's Precurser?"
by Dr. Eric Altschuler & Mr. William Jansen (SOS newsletter)
................................................
. Sonnet 76:
.
.Why is my VERsE so barren of new pride,
.So far from variation or quick change?
.Why with the time do I not glance aside
.To new-found methods and to compounds strange?
.
.[W]hy write I still all one, ever the same,
.[A]nd keep invention in a noted weed,
.[T]hat every word doth almost tell my name ,
.[S]howing their birth and where they did proceed?
.[O], know, sweet love, I always write of you,
A[n]d you and love are still my argument;
----------------------------------------------------------------
*PrOSOpopoeia* , n.[Latin, from Greek prOSOpopoiia, from prOSOpon
*MASK* , perSOn (from *prOS- + OpS* face) + poiein to make c 1555]
.
A figure by which an absent perSOn is introduced as speaking.
.
. - Garber, Marjorie. "Hamlet: Giving Up the GhOSt."
.
<<prOSOpopoeia as the "fiction of the voice from-beyond-the-grave."
.
PrOSOpopoeia is the trope of autobiography, by which one's name, as
in the Milton poem, is made as intelligible and memorable as a face.>>
-------------------------------------------------------------
*PrOSOpopoia* Or Mother Hubberds Tale. By ED. SP. 1591.
.
And EUER when he ought would bring to pas,
His long experience the platforme was:
And when he ought not pleasing would put by,
The *CLOKE* was care of thrift, and husbandry,
For to encrease the common treasures store;
But HIS OWNE tresure he encreased more
And lifted vp his *LOFTIE TOWRES* thereby,
That they began to threat the neighbour sky;
The whiles the Princes pallaces fell fast
.
[T]o ruine: (for what thing can EUER last?)
[A]nd whilest the other Peeres for poUERtiE
[W]ere forst their auncient houses to let lie,
.
And their olde Castles to the ground to fall,
[W]hich their forefathers famous OUER all
[H]ad founded for the Kingdomes *ORNAMENT* ,
And for their memories long *MONIMENT* .
-------------------------------------------
. SONNET 1
.
[T]hou that art now the world's fresh *ORNAMENT* ,
[A]nd only herald to the gaudy spring,
[W]ithin thine own bud buriest thy content,
----------------------------------------------------
http://comp.uark.edu/~mreynold/aulicus.html
.
. Edouardus Verus, Co-
. mes Oxoniae, Vicecomes
. Bulbeck, Dominus de Scales
. & Badlismer, D. Magnus Angliae Ca-
. merarius: Lectori. S. D.
.
Quae si sapientissimorum principum clarissima insignia,
si florentis reip. certissima praesidia, si optimorum
ciuium *ORNAMENTa* maxima, & suo merito, & omnium iudicio,
----------------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer
Peter Farey
Tom Reedy wrote:
>
> Peter Farey wrote:
> >
> > makes no sense without the monument being there *as well*.
> > Therefore the tombstone (if it *is* Shakespeare's) and the
> > monument must have been created at the same time.
>
> I'm not following you here.
>
> Good frend for Iesvs sake forbeare,
> To digg the dvst encloased heare.
> Blest be [th]e man [tha]t spares thes stones,
> And cvrst be he [tha]t moves my bones.
>
> How is the sense of the inscription dependent upon the
> monument being present also? Why couldn't that have been
> there and then the monument installed years later?
The poem may make sense, but what is *omitted* from the
inscription does not. The idea that for up to 5 years
the body of such a prominent citizen would lie in a grave
giving no indication at all of who was buried there and
when they died makes no sense at all.
> > So what
> > was written over his grave (wherever it was) in the five
> > years or so before that? And why was it changed?
>
> Why was what changed?
I am saying that there must have been *something* not too
rough and ready indicating at the very least that it was
William Shakespeare who was buried there, having died in
1616. Since there is no such indication now, it is reason-
able to assume that what was there before was changed in
some way.
bobgr...@nut-n-but.net
wrote:
> <http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rey/index.htm>- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
What you say makes sense to me, Peter. I would just add that maybe no
indication of who was buried there was present because the monument
was known to be on its way. Which reminds me that I have on idea when
the monument was installed. Is there anything in the records about
that? We only know it was there by 1623, as far as I know.
--Bob G.
Peter Farey
Bob Grumman wrote:
> that maybe no indication of who was buried there was
> present because the monument was known to be on its way.
> Which reminds me that I have on idea when the monument was
> installed. Is there anything in the records about that?
> We only know it was there by 1623, as far as I know.
There is nothing that I know of which tells us precisely
when it was erected. However, as Tom and I have been
discussing and I think now agree, it seems very probable
that the work was done at the same time as the major
refurbishment of the chancel in 1621/2.
This would mean that the anonymous grave that you suggest
would have been in place for some 5 or 6 years, which I
find unbelievable.
(John A. and I are unhappy this morning, the England rugby
team having lost out to South Africa in the World Cup final.
And this despite the English team including two former
pupils of Edward Alleyn's College of God's Gift, Dulwich).
Lyra
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
A slightly alarming idea occurred to me the other day...
what if they were really JESUS' bones???
(in Stratford church)
Note,
FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE
and
BLESTE BE Ye MAN
- it could refer to the place being holy or sacred.
I know this sounds strange,
BUT,
IF Jesus' bones are SOMEWHERE,
(and as I've said before,
to me Christian belief does not require the
dense physical body of Jesus to have ascended -
why is it not sufficient that his SPIRIT would rise?)
Stratford has to at least be a possible place.
It (Warwickshire) is at the heart of England, geographically.
Also, a place so venerated for Shakespeare,
and so visited, and cared about,
would be safe for more sacred relics...
which could be visited, too,
without giving rise to any suspicion,
as may occur if a lot of visits are made
to a place with no apparent attraction.
What of Rennes-le-Chateau...
couldn't they BOTH have some relics...
maybe other places too.
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
I've just remembered, a book was written
saying that the Holy Grail was in Warwickshire...
only saw the book in a bookshop, don't know the details.
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Lyra
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
>
> I've just remembered, a book was written
> saying that the Holy Grail was in Warwickshire...
>
> only saw the book in a bookshop, don't know the details.
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Links to Warwickshire -
(quote, excerpts)
```````````````````````````````````````````````
1. An amateur historian has discovered what may be the original Holy
Grail - the vessel believed by the early medieval world to have been
used to collect the blood of Christ.
The extraordinary find came to light after seven years of
investigations by a Coventry-based historical researcher, Dr Graham
Phillips, who tracked the potential "relic" down to a house in Rugby,
Warwickshire, where its owner kept it in a box in the loft.
Dr Phillips has unearthed a substantial body of evidence linking the
find - a small green onyx cup of possible Roman date - to the Grail
legend.
In the medieval Arthurian romances, the Holy Grail was the cup used by
the man who buried Jesus - Joseph of Arimathea - to collect Christ's
blood. However, the origin of the medieval legend appears to have been
a real historical grail "found' in the 4th century AD by the newly-
Christianised Roman imperial authorities who turned it into a sacred
relic.
Independent, The (London), Aug 11, 1995 by David Keys reports
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_19950811/ai_n13999828
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
2. Birmingham Post Weekend: Archive:
Is the Holy Grail on our doorstep? Chris Upton takes up the legendary
search for the Holy Grail and asks if eternal life can be found in
Selly Oak
Birmingham Post; 6/21/2003; Chris Upton; 1117 words; ... strange and
mystical quest for the Holy Grail has inspired writers and artists ...
Arthur Mee's Warwickshire is the line: Holy Grail, see Selly Oak.
So that's where it ... evidence together and concluded that the Holy
Grail had miraculously come to Woodbrooke ...
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-Grail-Ho.html
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
3. Malory (Le Morte d'Arthur)
is from Warwickshire.
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
> > > GOOD FREND FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE,
> > > TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
> > > BLESTE BE Ye MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
> > > AND CURST BE HE Yt MOVES MY BONES.
>
Roundtable
church,. and had not been washed away by the rising river or
disintegrated by the 400 years in a presumably rather damp church,
what of it?
Do you have any DNA to compare them with?
(Traces of sweat from Hand A or Hand B or something?)
And how would finding his bones prove or disprove your authorship
arguments?
It's not Marlowe who's buried there, after all.
RT
Lyra
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
> > It (Warwickshire) is at the heart of England, geographically.
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
(quote, excerpts)
````````````````````````````
1.
This site is currently closed due to the closure of Heart of England
Tourist Board.
Watch this space for further updates.
http://www.visitheartofengland.com/
(the closure of the Heart of England Tourist Board ? - who did
this ?!!!)
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
2.
Heart of England Way
160km/100 miles
A green route across the West Midlands linking Cannock Chase in
Staffordshire with the Cotswolds, running to the east of Birmingham.
Generally gentle walking through low-lying country with woodlands,
canals and agricultural land, taking in Lichfield, Kingsbury Water
Park, the well-wooded landscapes of the Forest of Arden, the Avon
Valley, the Vale of Evesham and Chipping Campden.
http://www.ramblers.org.uk/info/paths/heartofengland.html
UK Attraction -> Heart of England -> Kenilworth
Kenilworth Castle
Kenilworth, Warwickshire CV8 1NE - England, UK
Map
Kenilworth Castle is a magnificent stone motte and bailey fortress and
the largest castle ruin in England. In the inner bailey stands a
massive Norman keep, with its huge forebuilding, John of Gaunt's 13th
century great palatial buildings and Robert Dudley's interesting 16th
century range of buildings. In the outer bailey are the Earl of
Leicester's gatehouse and a long range of stables. A high curtain wall
with round and polygonal flanking towers, two lakes and a great
barbican with earth and stone flankers defends all.
http://www.ukattraction.com/heart-of-england/kenilworth-castle.htm
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
3.
The following site fetched no pictures at the time I visited
Christian Lanciai
Since there probably are no bones there at all (in spite of what is
written in Shakspere's name above) they could hardly belong to anyone,
not even to Jesus. The problem is the express writ about the bones
assumedly by Shakspere himself while no one knows where the bones are,
and probably no one would be allowed to dig for them anywhere in
Stratford, least of all under the monument or in that grave, since
maybe even that could have been closed up by the Heart of England
Tourist Board. So we are left hanging in the blue with no way out,
with maybe the proper accompaniment by some coloured chorus singing
gleefully, "Dem bones gonna rise again..."...
C.
Roundtable
>
> - Zitierten Text anzeigen -- Zitierten Text ausblenden -
>
> - Zitierten Text anzeigen -
But you still didn't answer the question and maybe I'm being a bit
dumb
here, but say you dig up some bones and here you are with his
thigh-bone in your hand, what are you going to do with it?
After you''ve done the lab tests, and have proved that this is a 52
year old man who died of influenza, say, and a rotten tooth - HOW
are you going to prove that this skeleton wrote or did not write the
plays?
You can prove someone has been longer than 3 weeks in LA because
his lungs will have traces of smog, but how can you prove that
someone was continually in London in the Globe Theatre AND
writing the plays, simply by looking at his bones?
Tell me, please.
RT
Tom Reedy
>
> - Show quoted text -
>From a thigh bone we could learn many things, including his height,
his level of nutrition, and what diseases he may have suffered from
(were the last sonnets about taking the cure for venereal disease?).
In addition, it would give us his DNA so we could compare it and see
if his genius was a genetic accident. We might want to clone him and
see what happens (although I doubt such an experiment would be
approved for ethical reasons). We could dig up William Davenant and
see if he really was Shakespeare's son. Also we don't know what we
might find in a sealed lead casket, which given his status and wealth
he was probably buried in.
Finally, we could learn if the curse has any power. We should dig him
up on Hallowe'en.
TR
lackpurity
MM:
Mind, body, and spirit, are three different things. In the case of a
Sat Guru, such as Shakespeare, spirit controls the mind and mind
controls the body. The body just has to be reasonably functional, in
order for a quick wit to control it well. That is the case of
Shakespeare, IMO. It was his quick wit, or quick mind, not his
genetics, which made him the Sat Guru.
Genes have never made anyone a Sat Guru, and they never will. They
are limited in scope. Sri Aurobindo hinted at this, when he said that
the canon was dictated to Shakespeare from higher levels of
consciousness. This is spirit controlling the mind, mind controlling
the body. It's not the reverse.
> We might want to clone him and
> see what happens (although I doubt such an experiment would be
> approved for ethical reasons).
MM:
You would clone the physical body? Maybe that could be done, but no
scientist could clone his mind, or his spirit. You seem to be
pigeonholing the highly spiritual, subtle, ethereal Shakespeare to
nothing but a body. Sorry, but that is illogical.
> We could dig up William Davenant and
> see if he really was Shakespeare's son. Also we don't know what we
> might find in a sealed lead casket, which given his status and wealth
> he was probably buried in.
MM:
Why mess with bones? It's idol worship. We should go to the Living
Master of the time. That's what Shakespeare wanted us to do.
> Finally, we could learn if the curse has any power. We should dig him
> up on Hallowe'en.
MM:
If we love physical things, like bones, it's just idol worship. Idol
worshippers will stay confined to the physical plane, so they are
cursing themselves. Shakespeare was not cursing anyone. Our own mind
could curse us, however, if we are that much attached to physical
things. We should make the best use of this human life, but following
a Master, and merging by meditation into the Holy Spirit.
> TR
MM:
Reedy, you're like a man to whom St. Augustine referred, about trying
to put an ocean in a teacup. Shakespeare was much more than just a
physical body. That much should be quite clear by reading and
cogitating the canon.
Michael Martin
Christian Lanciai
We have found the perfect gravedigger.
C.
Tom Reedy
>
> - Show quoted text -
No, a Shakespearean gravedigger requires a sense of humor. He fails on
that count.
TR
lackpurity
MM:
You're still stuck on square one? That is, you're still interested in
his bones? Do you think they're going to corroborate your
Marlovianism? Or whatever you are? When I try to pin you down,
you're all over the map, like you can't decide whether you're
Stratfordian or Anti-Stratfordian. Why don't you get your own trip
together, before you go out criticizing others? That would seem to be
a wise course, IMO.
Michael Martin
lackpurity
MM:
Maybe since Christian is so interested in the bones, that he would do
the grave-digging for you? Are you going to risk your Stratfordian
position, though? Christian is slick as an eel, he plays both sides
of the fence. LOL Pinning Christian down is like trying to catch a
greased pig. He flip-flops all over the place. Roundtable should
know what I mean. Just read her message to him, and it's easy to
understand.
How's that for a sense of humor. LOL
I'm sure that digging up the bones would not help Anti-Strats, at all.
Michael Martin
Christian Lanciai
I never said that. I simply don't believe there are any bones until
they are properly unearthed, in spite of what Will Stratman expressly
told his gravediggers from his tomb. I think the true 'Shakespeare
clique' made a great joke of it all. That's just a theory, but until
the bones are unearthed, it has not been disproved.
Or whatever you are? When I try to pin you down,
> you're all over the map, like you can't decide whether you're
> Stratfordian or Anti-Stratfordian. Why don't you get your own trip
> together, before you go out criticizing others? That would seem to be
> a wise course, IMO.
>
Surely you must know, if you have read Shakespeare at all, that if any
writer couldn't be pinned down it was Shakespeare, and thus all who
know him should be equally difficult to get pinned down. It's simply
not worth the effort, as already Virginia Woolf concluded.
C.
Christian Lanciai
I didn't know Roundtable was a woman. That's news to me. I'll try to
treat her with some more respect, then.
> How's that for a sense of humor. LOL
>
> I'm sure that digging up the bones would not help Anti-Strats, at all.
It certainly wouldn't help any strats either, if there are no bones to
be found. This problem is actually relevant, since most graves of
important Elizabethans have been found to be empty.
C.
>
> Michael Martin- Hide quoted text -
Christian Lanciai
I didn't know Roundtable was a woman. That's news to me. I'll try to
treat her with some more respect, then.
> How's that for a sense of humor. LOL
>
> I'm sure that digging up the bones would not help Anti-Strats, at all.
It certainly wouldn't help any strats either, if there are no bones to
be found. This problem is actually relevant, since most graves of
important Elizabethans have been found to be empty.
C.
>
> Michael Martin- Hide quoted text -
lackpurity
MM:
This "bones," issue just seems to be another Anti-Strat wild goose
chase.
Michael Martin
>
>
>
>
>
> > Michael Martin- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
lackpurity
MM:
Is that a "yes" answer, or a "no" answer?
> I simply don't believe there are any bones until
> they are properly unearthed, in spite of what Will Stratman expressly
> told his gravediggers from his tomb. I think the true 'Shakespeare
> clique' made a great joke of it all. That's just a theory, but until
> the bones are unearthed, it has not been disproved.
MM:
I couldn't care less about the bones. I guess they are of great
interest to some Anti-Strats, however.
> Or whatever you are? When I try to pin you down,
>
> > you're all over the map, like you can't decide whether you're
> > Stratfordian or Anti-Stratfordian. Why don't you get your own trip
> > together, before you go out criticizing others? That would seem to be
> > a wise course, IMO.
>
> Surely you must know, if you have read Shakespeare at all, that if any
> writer couldn't be pinned down it was Shakespeare, and thus all who
> know him should be equally difficult to get pinned down. It's simply
> not worth the effort, as already Virginia Woolf concluded.
>
> C.
MM:
Why are you switching from you to him? There is abundant Stratfordian
evidence. Did you know that, or do you just choose to indulge in your
wild goose chases? I'd like to clarify that Shakespeare has been easy
to pin down. The problem is that Anti-Strats choose to ignore the
abundant evidence. Anti-Strats are still in a minority, despite the
fact that they've been trying to make a case for about 250 years.
Michael Martin