That on the 14th July 1548, the ’14’ year old princess Elizabeth gave birth to a child fathered by ‘Lord Admiral Sir Thomas Seymour”, was the persistent rumour voluminously heard in England at a time ‘Seymour’ was married to the Dowager Queen Katherine Parr – a marriage he hastily convened following the death of Elizabeth’s father King Henry VIII.

The honest answer to the question: Did Queen Elizabeth 1st have children? is Yes (something I intend to prove to you) in fact she had five children, which were Christened the following way:  Edward, Francis, Robert, Arthur & Henry.

Incredibly, this rumour surrounding princess Elizabeth is given further credence by ‘William Shakespeare’s’ sonnet ‘14’ which not only identifies her as being ‘14’ years old at the time of birth, but the child she bore was born on the 14th day. Shakespeare’s play “King John” adds substance to this rumour, identifying a royal bastard born prematurely:

Full ‘14’ weeks before the course of time. (K.J.)

While on the first page of “King Lear” ‘Q’ beginning in line ‘17’ greater weight is added to this knowledge of prematurity – regarding “The first” of five births.

Though this knave came something saucily to this world before he was sent for, yet was his mother faire. (K.L.)

These are “Gloucester’s” words – a character so named because ‘Lord Admiral Sir Thomas Seymour’s’ stately pile ‘Sudeley Castle’ just happened to be in the county of Gloucestershire, while he is perfectly described by the alliteration ‘Saucy-Seymour’, having said that, ‘seeing more than he should have’ in respect of the maidenly princess Elizabeth is what got him blinded in Lear, while the blinding itself is a metaphor for castration, our author proving this very point when describing the physical consequences of Gloucester’s torture:

My father with his bleeding rings, their precious stones new lost. (K.L.)

We often speak of allusion & allegory when analysing such literature, but the opening passages of Lear (in particular Edmund’s soliloquys) should more correctly be described as autobiographical, because Gloucester/Seymour & Edmund/Edward are synonyms.

Gloucester/Seymour (our great author’s father) is cast in a very unpleasant light in respect of princess Elizabeth’s deflowering, as the following sombre observation from Edgar is heard when referring to the conception of his brother Edmund/Edward:

The dark and vicious place where thee he got cost him his eyes. (K.L.)

It makes utter good sense that facts found regarding this princely birth are authenticated in line ‘14’ of sonnet ‘14’, but, here’s the thing, to become fully conversant with this intrigue, it is absolutely essential to understand the words “Truth & Beauty” as allusions to our author and Queen Elizabeth I – because “Beauty” was an honorific often used during her lifetime to describe her, while his motto ‘Vero Nihil Verius’ (nothing truer than truth) is why he so frequently uses the word “Truth” when referencing himself.

This is what line ‘14’ of sonnet ‘14’ says:

“Thy end is Truth and Beauty’s doom and date”.

“Thy end” relates to the princely Henry Wriothesley’s life (also known to us as the faire youth). If he dies without ‘procreating’ (providing an heir to the throne) it would (as far as Shakespeare was concerned) anticipate the end of the ‘Tudor Dynasty’ (their doom). This line also prognosticates what would befall both our most celebrated Queen, and our most celebrated author, if these facts became common established knowledge to English society as a whole – a scenario certainly pre-empting “Truth & Beauty’s doom”.

More obviously though, if princess Elizabeth had given birth to our ‘great author’ (a fact I know to be absolutely true) then this July ‘14’ date-of-creation would be common to them both i.e. “Truth and Beauty’s date”.

Confirmation found in “Romeo & Juliet”.

Quite Remarkably (though rather strangely) near the beginning of act one scene three “Romeo & Juliet” we discover that although Juliet is thirteen years old, the number mentioned (‘five times’) is not thirteen, but ‘14’, and the good reason for this is found revealed in conversation between nurse & mother.

Juliet’s nurse says:

“How long is it now to Lammas-tide?”

To which Lady Capulet answers:

“A fortnight and odd days”.

To which the nurse responds:

“Come Lammas-eve at night she shall be fourteen”.

“Lammas-eve” is the 31st July, while “A fortnight and odd days”, obviously are ‘17’ days, our author sensibly not playing into the hands of the censors by using the word ‘seventeen’, we therefore find unveiled the amazing revelation: “Romeo & Juliet” meet on Edward de Vere 17th Earl of Oxford’s birthday! Or as he would preferentially term it – his TRUE date-of-creation July ‘14’.

The word “TRUE” I use because the nativity of all illegitimate princes is represented by two dates – their TRUE date-of-creation (the day they were born on) along with an official birthday – in our author’s case 12th April 1550. He is therefore identifiable not only by the numbers ‘17’ & ‘40’ but also by the numbers ‘12’ & ‘14’ (his official and TRUE dates of birth) precisely the reason why in the first soliloquy found in Lear the bastard character Edmund/Edward feels deprived of a brother – as he says:

“For that I am some twelve or 14 moonshines lag of a brother”.

Elizabeth is alluded to here by the word “Moonshines” due to her association with the ancient moon-Goddesses of myth, while the brother referenced is the recently deceased ‘Robert Devereux 2nd Earl of Essex’, who our author cunningly links with ‘Christ’ utilising gematria in respect of the word “lag” which converts (in conjunction with the Elizabethan alphabet) to the ‘Christian’ number ‘XIX’ because L = 11, A = 1 & G = 7.

‘Tau’ letter ‘XIX’ of the Greek alphabet relates to Christ’s crucifixion and is the preferential number our author uses when alluding to his half-brother “Essex”, because:

Both Essex & Christ were born of Virgins
And both put to death for their beliefs.

In his famous metaphysical poem “The Phoenix and the Turtle” the first and fifth stanzas briefly narrate Elizabeth’s life. In the first stanza she is the fabulous young ‘Phoenix’ in the prime of life (a songstress), while in the fifth stanza the opposite is true, for with her sanity in decline as the “treble-dated-crow” she begins (to caw) while it is no coincidence when the 67 lined poem was published in the summer of 1601, she was 67 years old. Then, in further honouring the Queen we find her date-of-creation (7th Sept. 1533) alluded to as the metrical-rhythm of the Phoenix-poem is composed of ‘7’ heart-beats, not only that – but in the fifth stanza the ‘17th Earl of Oxford’ identifies himself as the ‘Turtle’ by including ‘17’ letter ‘T’s in it.                                        

17 ….. And thou treble dated crow,
18 ….. That thy sable-gender mak’st,
19 ….. With the breath thou giv’st and tak’st,
20 ….. Mong’st our mourners shalt thou go.

The creation of ‘Essex’ (Oxford’s half-brother) is denoted by the words “sable-gender” (sable being the heraldic term for black) his personal device a sable-shield with the words:

“Par-Nulla-Figura-Dolori”

Emblazoned upon it – rather ironically meaning “nothing can represent sorrow”

Easily seen in the poem – the words ‘sable’ & ‘crow’ add gravitas to this final ‘dark period’ of Elizabeth’s life, as momentarily they precede the Essex execution, although when his life is taken, what succeeds is “fevers end” a desperately sad period announcing the death throes of the Tudor dynasty, words that appear in line ‘7’ of the poem – remembering Elizabeth is a Virgo (the virgin) her date-of-creation 7th September 1533.

(7) ….. “Auger of the fever’s end”. (P&T)

Further back in time – at the finale of his play “King Henry VIII” Shakespeare illustrates the historical importance of this period in prophesy pronounced by ‘Thomas Cranmer the Archbishop of Canterbury’ who at Elizabeth’s-birth briefly summarises her life to be as the “maiden Phoenix”, while also alluding to the arrival of the ‘Faire-Youth’ referred to as “One” (the Hebrew word for God) something I shall eventually be elaborating upon:

“But when the bird of wonder dies, the maiden Phoenix, her ashes new create another heir, so she shall leave her blessedness to ‘One’ (When Heaven shall call her from this cloud of darkness)”.

“This cloud of darkness” and “Fever’s end” are two and the same thing – both representing the short but melancholic dark lady era (expressed in the sonnets) which characterise the concluding part of Queen Elizabeth’s life – following the loss of important life-long friends including Essex. While it is worth reflecting upon how Elizabeth’s ashes “create another heir”, a creature known to us as ‘Henry VVriothesley’ (the faire youth).

The dreadful execution of Essex is committed to posterity in line ‘XIX’ of the Phoenix poem, which sadly chronicles Elizabeth’s participation regarding the beginning and end of her son’s life.

‘XIX’ ….. “With the breath thou giv’st and tak’st”.

Elizabeth gave breath to Essex when she gave birth to him and when she signed his death warrant and he was executed – she took his breath away.

Whenever Shakespeare wishes to convey to us some deep and meaningful truth of an autobiographical nature, to verify his meaning he repeats it three times, a phenomenon I refer to as ‘Sacred 3’.

Therefore, there follows a third rendition of The Essex/Christ allusion – recorded unsurprisingly by sonnet ‘XIX’, with the first stanza extolling the virtues of ‘Essex’ in whom our author visualised a ‘lion and fierce tiger’ while the disdain that ensued following his half-brother’s death is revealed in his somewhat unusual but uncompromising, attitude towards his Queen:

“And burn the long-lived Phoenix in her blood”.

This first stanza of (S.XIX) glorifies the passing of ‘Robert Devereux 2nd Earl of Essex’ – Oxford identifying him twice, honouring his title (2nd Earl) in the first and second lines:

Devouring time, blunt thou the lion’s paws,
And make the earth devour her own sweet brood,
Pluck the keen teeth from the fierce tiger’s jaws,
And burn the long lived Phoenix in her blood.

Confirmation ‘Oxford’ was ‘created’ in 1548 on July ‘14’.

Although our great-author does use the word birthday in his plays, as I have said – he doesn’t like to use it in respect of his immediate family because he believed all princes divinely ordained in heaven, which is why I use the word created in respect of his arrival on Earth – because princes are Godly creatures.

The following illustration of (S.14 Q) is rather scruffy, but we are still able to find “Truth & Beauty” mentioned twice (lines 11 & 14), while more importantly (to save confusion) it is only in the final line we see both words capitalised. In fact, there are only four words in total capitalised in the main body of the text:

Astronomy” in line two, Princes” in line seven – “Truth & Beautie” in line ‘14’.

All Shakespearean gematrical equations must to be considered in conjunction with the Elizabethan alphabet, while the first English-language writing manual by Jehan de Beau-Chesne & John Baildon wasn’t published until 1570, officially it had only 23 letters, excluding the three modern day letters ‘J’, ‘U’ & ‘W’.

The following transcription represents a simple encoding.

A = 1, B = 2, C = 3, D = 4, E = 5, F = 6, G = 7, H = 8, I = 9, K = 10, L = 11, M = 12, N = 13, O = 14, P = 15, Q = 16, R = 17, S = 18, T = 19, V = 20, X = 21, Y = 22, Z = 23.

If we then convert the four identified capitalised words: Astronomy, Princes, Truthes & Beauties, where: A = 1 & P = 15, then subtract 1 from 15 we get a date common to our two royals ‘14’, the day ‘Elizabeth’ gave birth – and the day ‘Oxford’ was created.

Additionally, we can determine he was this royal child, because T = 19 & B = 2 then by employing the same method – subtracting one from the other, 19 – 2 we arrive at ‘17’ the number of Oxford’s English Earldom. He is therefore identifiable both by the numbers ‘14’ and ‘17’, his TRUE date-of-creation and Earldom.

(S.14) begins ‘undeniably’ with an astrological allusion, because as said, our author’s TRUE date-of-creation was July ‘14’.

Not from the stars do I my judgement pluck,
And yet methinks I have astronomy.     

As previously stated, his motto “Vero Nihil Verius” means ‘Nothing truer than truth’ and why, when alluding to himself he uses the word “Truth”, thereby convening a metaphorical marriage with his mother in which they become “Truth & Beauty”.

Confirmation found in “King Lear”.

In earlier times, this ancient king was ‘Leir’ or ‘Lyr’, while before continuing I would like to mention the pitifully obvious, in respect of how close the words “King Lear” are to “King Vere” an event that came very close to reality in the early spring of 1574, when on three separate occasions the pregnant Queen Elizabeth and the incestuous lover she had taken ‘Edward de Vere’ sort the approval of the Archbishop of Canterbury to marry.

In many ways ‘Archbishop Mathew Parker’ was not the person they should have confided in having previously been chaplain to Elizabeth’s mother ‘Anne Boleyn’, he therefore knew all the ins and outs of recent Tudor relationships, while he was the only person in the realm that could legally marry them. In fact, so perplexed was he by the possibilities of this incestuous marriage, he tried distancing himself by fleeing London to the ‘Old-Palace’ in Croydon, but our love birds on a third occasion even tracked him down there, but their plea was inevitable answered the same way – No!  Although the fly in the ointment was not the unspeakable reality that Elizabeth and Oxford were mother and son, the big drawback the archbishop kept returning to, was Oxford was already married to Anne Cecil, Lord Treasurer Burghley’s daughter. In this sense Elizabeth was her own worst enemy, because “the lusty stealth of nature” (K.L.) she so liked to practice – meant she suffered from ‘James Bond Syndrome’, the lovers she favoured were all married.

This intimacy existing between Elizabeth and Oxford was a well-known fact in courtly circles (though something best kept quiet by courtiers) nevertheless, there does exist some documentary evidence written by a young courtier named ‘Gilbert Talbot’ in a letter to his father – dated May 11th 1573.

“My Lord of Oxford is lately grown into great credit, for the Queen’s Majesty delighteth more in his personage and his dancing and valiantness than any other”.

The letter concluding:

“At all these love matters my Lord Treasurer (Burghley) winketh and will not meddle in any way”.

Only a week or so after Gilbert Talbot’s letter was written, because of the privileged and intimate position Oxford held at court with the Queen, he found himself privy to some tantalising intelligence. ‘The Lord Treasurer (Cecil) was arranging the carriage of a cache of funds from London to Canterbury’.

Literature shows us how great a story teller Edward de Vere was, a gift very much an integral part of his personality, while it was well known amongst his friends, that once he started telling a tale (true or not) he could hardly stop himself, and because of intelligence received through Elizabeth (a true tale) eventually to become known as the “Gads Hill Robbery” became his very favourite story, therefore, within sight of means to do ill deeds, he saw ill deeds were done!

This pre-meditated mischief of Oxford’s, regarding the period of time his men persistently tried to rob the Lord Treasure’s men, culminated in success on the 21st May 1573 at the foot of “Gads Hill” just outside the city of Rochester in the county of Kent.

Now, as luck would have it, Oxford and Elizabeth’s son – the Godly “Henry Wriothesley” who he describes in Line ‘IX’ (S.20) in divine language as being “first created” actually arrived on planet-earth on May 20th 1574, a year minus a day after the ‘Gads Hill Robbery”, while it is important to bear in mind, quite how momentous a day the 20th May 1574 was for the Earl of Oxford – put more simply – it was the greatest day of his life. Consequently, to honour the arrival of this most princely of princes the “Gads Hill Robbery” got moved forward a day, so when mentioned subsequently it was deemed to have happened on May 20th thereby commemorating the proudest day of our author’s life.

Unfortunately, the ‘Cecil’s’ were less than impressed with the reality that yet another bastard prince had been born – and as Oxford compared his son to a summer’s day, bawdy “rough-winds” shook “the darling buds of May”. Due to the fact, the TRUE date-of-creation of this most royal of princes was not officially recognised, our author turned to irony in one of his very earliest plays “The Famous Victories of Henry V” while ‘Richard Malim’ in his enlightening book “The Earl of Oxford and the Making of Shakespeare” quotes from the play regarding the “Gads Hill Incident”, where the thief is indicted:

“For robbing a poor carrier the 20th May last past, in the fourteenth year of the reign of our sovereign lord King Henry fourth”.

As ‘Malim’ points out, there was no 20th May in the fourteenth year of the reign of Henry IV, because he died two months prior – on March 20th 1413. While regarding this sentence, it is significant that both dates-of-creation in respect of author and son are mentioned i.e. (14 & 20). In terms of DNA ‘Henry VVriothesley’ (was the only illegitimate prince) that had both a royal mother & royal father, and the reason why in (S.154) he is described as a “little love god” and also the reason, our author is found in slightly self-conscious mood at the outset of (S.105) – which begins: 

“Let not my love be called idolatry”.

Then, remembering Elizabeth’s date-of-creation 7th Sept. 1533 and that Christ died age 33, in (S.33) Oxford is found obsessing over the faire-youth’s Godliness, where he has both a “golden face” & “sovereign eye” and is found serenely “gilding pale streams with Heavenly alchemy”, with line eight of the sonnet relating to the historical fact of Elizabeth’s 1574 summer-progress to Bristol then on to Bath, where she arrived on the 21st August with her bastard three-month-old infant (who she couldn’t bear to be parted from) in tow:

‘VIII’      Stealing unseen to west with this disgrace.
‘IX’       Even so my sunne one early morn did shine.  (S.33)

One” is the Hebrew word for God – the words “my son one” deliberately appearing in line ‘IX’ allude to Jesus Christ – as in Greek ‘IX’ (iota & chi) are the Lords initials – his name in Greek: Ιησούς Χριστός.

These polyglot beginnings in our author can be traced to his studies between the ages of five and fourteen when tutored by ‘Sir Thomas Smith’ an acclaimed academic in both the Greek & Hebrew languages, while the facts of this “study” period we find laid bare in ‘Q’ on only page-two of Lear.

Edmund/Edward (to Kent):  “Sir, I shall ‘study’ deserving”.

Gloucester/Seymour:  “He hath been out nine years, and away he shall again”.

The “nine-years” referred to are 1553 – 1562 while “away he shall again” refers to the time ‘Oxford’ became a ward of court to her Majesty, beginning his studies at ‘Cecil House’ when he was fourteen. While it was in part, because of these classes in Hebrew he knew where to find in the Bible a definition of God.

Zechariah; Chapter ‘14’ Verse ‘IX’

And the Lord will be King over all the land,
In that day the Lord will be one and his name is One.

Many of you will have heard the expression:
‘There is nothing closer to God than Shakespeare’.
Therefore, if it is possible for a mortal to be spiritually related numerically to God? Then in terms of numerology Oxford ‘14’ & Christ ‘IX’ would appear so, while it should not be forgotten that although he was born in the 16th Century, he was ‘14’ weeks premature – a fact (to my mind) proving his immortality!

Having already taken a cursory look at the first soliloquy in Lear, as it is so incredibly important, I am now going to reproduce it’s beginning in full, before briefly deconstructing it:

“Thou Nature, art my Goddess; to thy law my services are bound. Wherefore should I stand in the plague of custom, and permit the curiosity of nations to deprive me?”
“For that I am some twelve of 14 moonshines Lag of a brother”.

The words “Nature” & “Moonshines” rather obviously relate to Elizabeth, while in context of the narrative of Lear what ‘Edmund’ somewhat superficially refers to as being deprived of is ‘inheritance’, though far more significantly what ‘Edward’ is actually deprived of is an executed brother.

What particularly attracted me to this passage in ‘Q’ in the first place, was highly unusually the number ‘14’ is written in numbers – using the digits 1 & 4 and not written as twelve in letters. The purpose of this a lure, to reel us in regarding the previously mentioned two dates of Oxford’s nativity 12 & 14, with the words “that I am” appearing in both Soliloquys 1 & 2 extrapolated from Verse ‘14’ chapter ‘3’ Exodus in the Old Testament of the Bible – where Moses is found seeking advice from God – how he should be identified when going amongst the Israelites in Egypt.

Verse 14: And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM:  And he said, thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

The disparaging scourge of being an illegitimate prince, the heartache of disenfranchisement, the injustice felt at being an illegal bastard, (partially causing Oxford’s crises of identity) were criteria naturally alleviated by having royal-blood and believing he was divinely ordained in Heaven, while the church at every opportunity sort to vilify incest as endogamous and intra-familial marriages meant in a practical sense ultimately, they (the church) would be inheriting less land.

“Sportive” incestuous, sexual behaviour, was one of the many ways (contrary to Romish doctrine) in which Elizabeth followed her father, and in some ways as this behaviour was abhorrent to Papist theology, in terms of psychological-warfare the intimacy that took place between “Truth & Beauty” helped inspire and strengthen their union, while adversely Oxford was aware such:

“Deeds must not be shown”.   (S.121)

Knowing as we do, in Hebrew ‘One’ means ‘God’, we can see the title of (S.121)
in a different shade of light; as Sonnet ‘one-to-one’ (a confessional sonnet) a mortal God atoning with a Heavenly God – while if its theme is incest? Then unsurprisingly it is inconclusive in revealing itself that way, although it does contain some rather telling words:
“Vile”, “sportive-blood”, “frailties”, “abuses” & “evil”.

Aiming at his detractors in (S.121) he says:

7 … Or on my frailties why are frailer spies
8 … Which in their wills count bad what I think good?
9 … No. I AM THAT I AM and they that level
10 …  At my abuses reckon up their own.

“Wills” could simply mean: wanderings of the mind, although alternatively it could mean, sexual inclination, orientation, or proclivity, referring to ‘INCEST’ what our author might think good (because princes don’t think or behave like other mortals). Although, whatever is referred to is mitigated in line ‘IX’ when alluding to his Godliness, by using the words “I AM THAT I AM”, implying divine retribution may be appropriate for his adversaries, one of them identified as “bevel” (crooked or bent) his brother-in-law Robert Cecil?

Influenced by the Hebrew, again (S.111) becomes ‘sonnet one-one-one’ or as he sees it: ‘Sonnet God-God-God’, in fact – it is one of Shakespeare’s most important sonnets, as it announces the agreement made with Her Majesty in which his TRUE name receives a literary brand:

5 … Thence comes it that my name receives a brand.

The name ‘William Shakespeare’ was almost forensically considered by our great author, cleverly relating to Pallas Athene the Goddess of arts & drama incestuously born from the forehead of Zeus while ‘shaking a golden spear at ignorance’. In terms of gematria the double ‘U’ or double ‘V’ with which the name ‘William’ begins converts to ‘40’, while the remaining number of letters amount to ‘17’, we therefore arrive at 1740 – the number of Oxford’s Earldom ‘17’ plus his Elizabethan-secret-code number ‘40’, together = ‘1740’.  The Oxford/Shakespeare brand 1740 is how (S.111) commences, the ‘O’ for ‘Oxford’ followed by four lines all beginning with the letter ‘T’ equalling 4’T’ or ‘40’.

Allusion – found in the very first line is between ‘The Tudor Trinity’ (Oxford, Wriothesley & Elizabeth) and ‘The Holy Trinity’, the purpose – to illuminate the Godliness of these divine mortals.

‘O’ for my sake do you with fortune chide.

As said, the ‘O’ stands for ‘Oxford’ as ‘Wriothesley’ chides ‘Elizabeth’ (fortune) for not having made better provision for the future of his father, a Godliness confirmed in the second line where she is charged: “The guilty Goddess”. Her Majesty, the instigator responsible for his “harmful deeds” (incestuous behaviour) is a condemnation found mirrored in (S.121 – L 12) where the word “deeds” is used in an identical sense:

“By their rank thoughts my deeds must not be shown”.

This documentary evidence shows to my mind the ‘Holy incest’ Elizabeth studied as an eleven-year-old child became a life-style philosophy she remained comfortable with even as an adult; Oxford of course was a victim, although the greatest victim of all was VVriothesley (poor-blue-eyed-boy) what chance did he ever have? His mother England’s greatest Queen – his father, England’s most celebrated writer, with the nothingness of this incestuously begotten child still existing today, for the man who could have become ‘King Henry IX’ only really exists today in portraiture – his true place in literature, not a “Rose” but a “Shadow” of a rose (L.8 – S.67) rather like his father’s half-sister ‘Mary’, inconvenient blots upon ‘cosmetic history’ (les enfants perdus), while we find VVriothesley quantified the following way in (S.136):

(8) ….. Amongst a number ‘One’ is reckon’d none.

Returning to (S.111) the Godliness in the title permeates the entire work. Oxford’s hands, like the “Dyer’s hand” stained with ink, irony coming to the fore as he alludes to drinking “Eysell” (an antidote for ink) his meaning clear – as he foresees his life’s works erased – at the point his “name receives a brand”.

His wit and intelligence do not end there, because the ‘D’ of Dyers equally stands for ‘De Vere’ while the ‘E’ of Eysell stands for ‘Edward’, then further still in terms of gematria D = 4 & E = 5, numbers which when added together allude to his Godliness = ‘IX’, or alternatively, we can find his even more Godly son ‘VVriothesley’ by subtracting D = 4 from E = 5 arriving at ‘One’.

Edmund’s Second Soliloquy in “King Lear”.

The very first word in Lear is “Kent” a character so named – because the location of our author’s favourite story was just outside Rochester in the county of “Kent”, while we see the allegorical “Gloucester” deputising for Oxford’s TRUE father “Thomas Seymour” the character blinded in the play.

“Gloucester’s bastard son “Edmund” represents the real-life bastard “Edward” the illegitimate character famously demanding in line ‘14’ of the first soliloquy: “Gods, stand up for bastards!”

In real life, Edward de Vere’s father ‘Thomas Seymour’ (executed when Oxford was eight months old) was master of the ordinance, before being promoted (much to the chagrin of the Earl of Warwick) to Lord Admiral of the fleet, a profession necessitating an understanding of the stars, while it must be remembered at this period there was no discernible difference between astronomy & astrology. Nevertheless it would appear that in respect of the ‘33’ charges brought against the admiral by the state (amounting to high treason) in mitigation, he charged the stars were aligned against him. Therefore, against a very suspect bill of attainder – primarily prosecuted by his own brother (Lord Protector of the State – Edward Seymour), Thomas found himself fundamentally defenceless.

Looking at the detail of ‘soliloquy two’ from Lear – the following is what “Edmund” says, or is that “Edward”? (it’s difficult to tell).

This is the excellent foppery of the world, that when we are sick in fortune, often the surfeits of our own behaviour, we make guilty of our disasters the sun, the moon and the stars, as if we were villains on necessity, fools by heavenly compulsion, knaves, thieves and treachers by spherical predominance, drunkards liars and adulterers by an enforced obedience of planetary influence, and all that we are evil in by a divine thrusting on. An admirable evasion of whoremaster man, to lay his goatish disposition on the charge of a star.

My father compounded with my mother under the dragon’s tail and my nativity was under Ursa Major, so that it follows I am rough and lecherous.  Fut! …….. I should have been that I am had the maidenliest star in the firmament twinkled on my bastardising.

Unfortunately for Edward de Vere – the maidenliest star in the firmament (Virgo) the virgin – did not twinkle on his bastardising – he was born a bastard, and he died a bastard – his name buried where his body is. Nevertheless, to we few, we happy few, we infinitesimal minority – he remains in our patriotic hearts the greatest Englishman that ever lived.

In the beginning (remembering Oxford was three months premature) his conception didn’t involve something we ordinary mortals might refer to as ‘sexual-intercourse’, for when ‘Sir Thomas Seymour’ saw sacred petals of divinity (blinding him to morality) and Princess Elizabeth felt uncompromising waves of love, her conquistador ultimately found himself passionately engaged in something, that in the due course of time will more correctly be known as: “divine thrusting on” (words composed of 17 letters).

Words describing the conception of a prince! Oxford’s paternity by ‘Thomas Seymour’ confirmed – because the very next adjective used in (Sol.2) is the word “admirable” where not particularly well secluded within it, is its marsupial ‘Admiral’ a father Oxford derogatorily labels “whoremaster”, a sire with a “goatish disposition” he literally calls “father”, before proceeding to inform us “his nativity was under Ursa Major”.

Now, a fact our precocious polyglot poet as a child would have known about the Greek Goddess of the moon and chastity – Apollo’s twin sister ‘Artemis’, was her name translates to ‘bear’ perhaps the reason our antihero determined himself “rough and lecherous” a condition swiftly mitigated again by touching on his Godliness:

“I AM THAT I AM”.

This idiom Oxford rather liked – gently reminds us of his Godliness, confirming he saw himself as a messenger of the Lord on Earth. While interestingly, in the Burghley archives there is a letter written by him to Sir William Cecil dated 30th October 1584 stressing how very fond he was of this particular phrase – found in postscript it says:

My Lord, leave that course, for I mean not to be your ward nor your child.
I serve her Majesty, and I AM THAT I AM ……………

Intriguingly, by employing simple gematria (using addition) this concise five-word phrase converts to ‘91’, numbers we have previously seen individually as ‘IX’ & ‘One’, numbers emphatically representing ‘Oxford’ & his Godly son.

Looking further at ‘Oxfordian-numerology’ I should mention – that by adding together the Christian number ‘IX’ (which our author most liked to be identified with) to his date-of-creation ‘14’ and his Earldom ‘17’ these figures total ‘40’ – the Elizabethan secret-code-number he had been issued with by the state.

Therefore, collating these various pieces of information together we realise (rather tantalisingly) that both ‘William Shakespeare’ and the ‘Earl of Oxford’ considered themselves disciples of the Almighty. While on the battlefield of history, close to the conclusion of “Troilus and Cressida” the following conversation can be found:

Margareton:   Turn, slave, and fight.

Thersites:         What art thou?

Margareton:    A bastard son of Priam’s.

Thersites:         I am bastard too; I love bastards, I am bastard begot, bastard instructed, bastard in mind, bastard in valour, in everything illegitimate. One bear will not bite another, and wherefore should one bastard? Take heed, the quarrel’s most ominous to us. If the son of a whore fight for a whore, he tempts judgement. Farewell bastard!

In the great menagerie of our author’s mind only one animal springs to mind ‘Ursa’ or “bear” and as ‘Charles Beauclerk’ perceptively remarks in his book “Shakespeare’s Lost Kingdom”.

I can’t help feeling this was Shakespeare’s predicament exactly:
The son of a whore fighting for a whore!

Oxford said: “Time cannot make that false which once was true”.
For every kiss and every crime, every laugh and every lie, are written into the history of the world, while there are some very simple truths humanity cannot come to terms with.

Bearing in mind; all states, tribes and nations have consensual beliefs, we also recognise a person in a powerful position continually repeating the same refrain (very possibly not true) has a more than even chance of their views being generally accepted by their followers.

For instance:

“The election has been stolen from us”.

“The royal family are racist”

“God created the Heavens and the Earth in seven days”

“William Shakespeare was a writer from Stratford upon Avon”.

“Queen Elizabeth I – was a Virgin”.

In my case, my views go against the common perception of accepted beliefs to such a degree that although I know they are true, they even seem far-fetched to me.

These are they:

  1. William ‘Shakspere’ of Stratford-upon-Avon was illiterate and never went to school.
  2. Works signed “William Shakespeare” were written by Edward de Vere.
  3. Queen Elizabeth 1st was not a Virgin.
  4. Edward de Vere was Elizabeth’s first son.
  5. Queen Elizabeth had five children all males.
  6. Queen Elizabeth’s first son incestuously fathered her final son ‘Henry VVriothesley’.
  7. ‘Henry VVriotheley’ is the “faire youth” of William Shakespeare’s sonnets.
  8. “Love’s Martyr” signed “Robert Chester” was one of hundreds of works written by ‘Edward de Vere’ and signed by him using a pseudonym.
  9. William Shakespeare’s tomb in Westminster Abbey is where ‘Edward de Vere’ is buried.
  10. Princess Elizabeth became pregnant at 14, giving birth at 14 to Edward de Vere, who 14 weeks premature – was born in July on day 14, these events – all taking place within the year 1548.

Why “Love’s Martyr” is so Incredibly Important.

Loves Martyr (the host publication for “The Phoenix and the Turtle”) confirms all these love games William Shakespeare so beautifully illuminated in his first published poem “Venvs & Adonis” where the older more experienced lover “Venus” (Elizabeth) sort to lead the way – were true.

As an eleven-year-old, princess Elizabeth translated a work on ‘Holy-incest’ out of French verse into English prose, entitling it “The Glass of the Sinful Soul” the original written by ‘Margarite Angouleme’ Queen of Navarre – the sister of Francis I – King of France, a work arriving in England via her mother ‘Anne Boleyn’. This was a gift of invaluable proportions to Elizabeth of whom it should be remembered – wore a locket enclosing an image of her mother around her neck throughout her life.

We know therefore she had a keen interest in the subject of incest – a matter that also considerably dominated the life of her father King Henry VIII. Having already explained that the Christian-number ‘3’ was sacred to Shakespeare, we must then realise whatever line ‘IX’ of (S.3) says must be highly significantly:

Thou art thy mother’s glass, and she in thee
Calls back the lovely April of her prime.

The word “glass” as used here has a binary meaning – in the first instance it literally means ‘looking-glass’ because VVriothesley was not only the spit ‘n’ image of his mother ‘Elizabeth’ but also his grandmother ‘Anne Boleyn’. Speaking ‘surreptitiously’ the word “glass” had a more philosophical meaning for our author – relating to the previously mentioned translation of “Elizabeth’s Glass” first published in “April” in the year of his birth, with the word “prime” referring to  ‘prime-publication’ as ‘Elizabeth’s Glass’ was first published by Dirik van Straten in Marburg, Germany in “April 1548” as you may see below.

Image by kind permission of ‘The Folger Shakespearian library’.

All Tudor princes legitimate or not – believed themselves divinely ordained in Heaven. Elizabeth (ex-voto) seen in the woodcut above – with book in hand – seeks Christ’s approval for her translation on ‘Holy-incest’, a work given as a new-years day gift to her stepmother Katherine Parr for 1545, Katherine later forwarding the revised manuscript to John Bale for publication to which he added an “Epistle Dedicatory” and “Conclusion”, rather wisely renaming the work: “A Godly Medytacyon of the Christian Soule”.

As birth often falls hard upon the heels of death, within a year of her father’s demise in mid-January 1548 Elizabeth fell pregnant with the Admiral’s child.

Katherine, rather alarmingly – had caught Elizabeth and her husband ‘Saucy-Seymour’ in flagrante delicto, a scene subsequently described in the deposition by ‘Thomas Parry’ Elizabeth’s cofferer (accountant) to the council of the Lord Protector Edward Seymour, the elder brother of Thomas:

I do remember she (Elizabeth) told me, the Admiral loved her and had done so for a good while, and that the Queen (Katherine) was jealous of their relationship, in so much as on one occasion, the Queen suspicious of their frequent meetings “came suddenly upon them, when they were all alone (he having her in his arms) wherefore the Queen fell out, both with the Admiral and with her Grace” (Elizabeth).

These amorous shenanigans were the cause of their parting of the ways, from which Elizabeth in the company of her governess ‘Kate Ashley’ found herself on the way to ‘Cheshunt’ in the county of Hertfordshire, the family home of Kate’s sister ‘Joan’ and her husband Sir Antony Denny. This was the fortress in which on the 14th July 1548 the greatest Englishman that ever lived ‘Edward Tudor’ known to us as ‘Edward de Vere’ was born.

Therefore moving forward – peeping through windows to an age in which our author incestuously begot Elizabeth’s final child, we understand more completely the meaning of the following:

Thou art thy mother’s glass, and she in thee
Calls back the lovely April of her prime.

‘Oxford’ sees in his son’s face a reflection of his mother, whose translated philosophy of incest propounded in “Elizabeth’s Glass” was published in the “lovely April” of our author’s own 26-week gestation in 1548 – a confinement so frightening for Elizabeth – it miraculously fell short of full-term – a term found in (Love’s Martyr) from which some “deepe-read scholler” famed for poetry was born:

Full ‘14’ weeks before the course of time. (K.J.)

While Elizabeth, only too aware she was a sinner, in a further publication written in Latin when she was 30 years of age – in prayers asked our Heavenly Father for forgiveness:

“From my secret-sins cleans me, from the sins of others spare your handmaid, many sins have been forgiven her because – she has loved too much”.

The most pertinent point to be made here, is – “LOVE” is a virtue, not a sin!

“Gads Hill”.

As a story, time cannot halt its continuing elevation – even ‘Charles Dickens’ found time to revel in it (being particularly enamoured with the Falstaff element of the robbery) while ‘Dickens’ further enhanced the stories mystique by moving into the Georgian mansion he purchased on top of “Gads Hill” before writing some of his most famous novels there.

The somewhat mischievous ‘Earl of Oxford’ & the “Gads Hill Robbery” are the “Jack & Jill” of history – inseparably linked – as is the fact “Love’s Martyr” was written immediately following the execution in 1601 of ‘Robert Devereux 2nd Earl of Essex’ with the dedication in “Loves Martyr” to “Sir John Salisburie” including the words: “envie, every one”    

These allusions are to the arch-leaders of the Essex-faction ‘Essex, Oxford & Wriothesley’, a dedication we find cheekily signed off:  Ro. Chester. This rather clever pseudonym obviously relating to Oxford’s fond inclination toward the extravaganza that took place outside the city of “Ro-chester” at “Gads Hill”. We should of course ask ourselves, if anyone who’s supposed real name was “Robert Chester” would sign the dedication page of such an illustrious work – so frivolously – surely, they would sign their name in full? “Robert Chester”. Studying content found in the very first two poems of “Loves Martyr” (removed at the first reprint – by order of the censors) brings confirmation of Oxford’s hand – with the second verse of the first poem entitled:

“The Author’s Request to the Phoenix” beginning:

Some deepe-read scholler fam’d for Poetry,
Whose wit-enchanting verse deserveth fame.

And Yes!  It is difficult to say which of these two lines most blatantly allude to him, particularly as in the second line he twice nearly manages to spell his surname – with the words: “verse de-serve-th”, while in the first line the words: “deepe-read scholler” – amount to ‘17’ letters.

Looking beyond the main body of “Love’s Martyr” following page 165 ‘Q’ there is a section called: “Diverse Poetical Essaies” with ‘14’ poems appearing on ‘17’ pages, six of the poems written by guest authors, either signed John Marston, George Chapman or Ben Johnson, with all remaining works including “The Phoenix and the Turtle” by the 17th Earl of Oxford Edward de Vere, while if you need to know the unmitigated truth about these love-birds it is imperative, you read my work:

With the Breath thou Giv’st and Tak’st”.   www.call-me-naive.com

At this juncture of proceedings, I am only going to look at the most important passages of Oxford’s poems found in “Love’s Martyr” relating to his mother Elizabeth. These works begin, confirming her Majesty in all these sexual encounters to be very much the proactive Godly “Venus” like figure – as described in the first work ever published under the name ‘Shakespeare’ “Venvs and Adonis”. Now, as tradition would have it, this work begins by invoking ‘Apollo and the Muses’ and simply entitled “Invocatio” although more unusually this particular rendition is incestuous.

In the first stanza, we find our obliging Queen (in the hight of Grace) inviting “our eVer-youthful Bromius” (Oxford) “to delights”:

“Sprinkling his suit of Vərt with pearle”.

Not surprisingly, in this first sexual-encounter our prince experiences with his mother – he can’t help but notice:

“His cheeks waxing red with shame”.                                                                

Poor-old-Oxford! He swans through life leading an ethereal life of privilege, his early childhood blessed by a troupe of players resident from the 15th century at the ancestral de Vere home in Essex ‘Castle Hedingham’. He then receives in part from Sir Thomas Smith one of the greatest humanist educations known to mankind, learning important classical languages, Greek, Hebrew and Latin, along with more modern Romance languages, while imbued with further cultural accomplishments such as helping his step-uncle ‘Arthur Golding’ translate ‘Ovid’s Metamorphoses’ from Latin to English, then learning to play the Virginals & Lute before going on to studying ‘Law’ at Greys Inn, only to find himself bought down to earth with a bang – abused by his own mother!

Looking at the “Invocatio” more closely – on an important historical note (regarding literature) we find in line ‘7’ within the word “Vərt” the first use of the schwa /e/ in the English Language, and for those of you not familiar with the ‘schwa’ sound – it should be noted – it is by far the most common sound heard in the English language, our polyglot author finding himself highlighted again because the schwa /e/ originated in the Hebrew language, his purpose once again disclosed by Hebrew gematria, because if we take into account the literal meaning of “Schwa” as being ‘emptiness’, then logically – empty it from the word “Vərt” the remaining letters are VRT.

We then find – utilizing gematria: V = 20, R = 17 & T = 19.

A result arriving with the somewhat dark implication that the incestuous veil of ‘Venvs’ ensnared three of her ‘spare’ five sons, ‘20’ representing Wriothesley’s date-of-creation (20th May 1574), ‘17’ more obviously representing Oxford’s Earldom, and ‘19’ representing the Christ like Essex. 

As previously explained (S.14) confirms ‘17’ was born on July ‘14’ 1548 – his TRUE date-of-creation, while the third poem found amongst the “Poetical Essaies” in “Love’s Martyr” helps establish this fact, a work simply entitled: “The first”, its meaning that Oxford was Elizabeth’s first-born son, a fact indelibly confirmed – as importantly we find the poem signed slap-bang in the middle with the triangulated anagrammatic signature: “E. de Vere”.

Notice; how the ‘T’ in the title predominates, representing the horns of an ‘OX’, while also associated with the ‘T’ of ‘Tau’, sacred to the Royal Arch Freemason’s and Knights Templar, while equally it could represent ‘Turtle’.

In the poem of the same name ‘Elizabeth’ is the ‘Phoenix’ & ‘Oxford’ the “Turtle”, while “The sil-ver Vault of Heaven” is Elizabeth’s womb, and although his initials “E & V” are prominently placed in the first line, he was more than aware as a piece of poetry it wasn’t up to much, therefore, to quench any suggestion his Apollonian fire was running short on fuel, this unconvincing sextet was swiftly followed by an octet of genius:

“The burning”

SVppose here burns this wonder of a breath,
In righteous flames, and holy heated fires:
(Like musicke which doth rapt itselfe to death,
Sweet’ning the inward room of man’s desires).
So she waft’s both her wings in piteous strife;
The flame that eats her, feeds the others life:
Her rare-dead ashes, fill a rare-live urne:
One Phoenix born another Phoenix burn.

The mythological/propaganda expressed within this beautiful little poem seeks to promote Oxford’s unrealistic desire that when Elizabeth (the Phoenix) dies, “rare” Wriothesley will succeed her on the throne of England, a scenario that would see him become ‘King Henry IX’.

This interpretation of Oxford’s is of course in stark contrast to the ancient myth of the Phoenix which doesn’t die but is re-born out of its own ashes, for as he reveals in the poem about the ‘Phoenix’, her ashes are dead:

“Her rare-dead ashes, fill a rare-live urn”.

Words reminding us how the burning love of “The Phoenix and the Turtle” finally concludes in Verse 18:

65 ….. To this urne let those repair
66 ….. That are either true or faire,
67 ….. For these dead birds sigh a prayer.

Now, in terms of Elizabethan History and literature, the poem immediately following “The Phoenix and the Turtle” in “Love’s Martyr” to my mind cradles the most revelatory line in all Shakespeare – the following the poems full title: 

A Narration and description of a most exact wondrous creature, arising out of the Phoenix and Turtle Doves ashes”.

Recalling the fact, the Earl of Oxford’s official birthday was the 12th and his TRUE date-of-creation the 14th, by adding these figures together we get ‘26’ the number of lines “A Narration” is composed of, while we should additionally remember Oxford was born ‘14’ weeks prematurely, meaning he arrived in this breathing world at gestation week ‘26’.

To cut to the chase, we find the most important line in Shakespeare at a place where two sets of ‘Oxfordian’ figures, ‘1740’ & ‘14’ converge, while the following illustration of “A Narration” you will find overlaid by me with a tetrahedron-pyramid-diagram centring on the ‘Q’ of “Quintessence” found in line ‘14’, a perception of mine – following an essential aria I heard – when in a dream italicised words wondrously sang to me.

With this elaborate rendition of ‘Sacred 3’ (in the sense the locus of this most important of lines is identifiable three different ways) we easily comprehend some explosive disclosure will follow.

In essence then, line ‘14’ represents Oxford reflecting upon the situation held by him within his royal family of brothers, where he considered himself:

“The soule of Heavens labour’d Quintessence”.

He, believed himself the “soul” of five princes (divinely ordained in Heaven) all the issue of Queen Elizabeth I.

“Labour’d”, obviously used in the sense of childbirth, while within the capitalised and italicised word Quintessence we find its marsupial “Queene” as spelled by our author, while as you well know “Quinte” means five.

Now, after reading this, if you continue to believe Elizabeth the Virgin Queen was still ‘intact’ at death, then you might just be needing what she desperately needed at the end of her life – a bit of therapy!

Seen in the above diagram – like an arrow – the lines of my pyramid design pierce both the hearts of Elizabeth & Essex, as they travel through the “de” of Devereux – found within three words: “devinest, death & Delius”.

The existence of ‘Sacred 3’ in the diagram is determined because:

  1. It centres on the elaborate ‘Q’ of Queene/Quintessence in line ‘14’.
  2. ‘The Oxford/Shakespeare brand 1740’ begins in line 6 with the words “can never remigrate” (17 letters).
  3. Line ‘14’ alludes to Oxford’s TRUE date-of-creation – and begins with a fourth ‘T’ bringing together 17 & 40.

Shakespeare’s “The Phoenix and the Turtle” appears on pages 170, 171 & 172 of “Love’s Martyr”, the above is the next page 173, my pyramid design centring on the letter ‘Q’ of Queene/Quintessence arriving in line ‘14’. While the locus of this most important line (of 26 lines) is equally identifiable by ‘The Oxford/Shakespeare brand 1740’.

Then to conclude, we find this most salient line ‘14’ succeeded by a further ‘12’ lines, making ’26’ in total – narration ending with nativity – so we can set aside the plague of custom and temper these curiosities with a little bit of “moonshine”.

 

Philip Cooper fecit:  July 14 2023

All Illustrations – by kind permission of the:
‘Folger Shakespeare Library’ Washington D.C.