When our great author came to write (S.14) one particular day dominated his thinking – the day he was born! And while you may believe that day to be St Georges Day – 23rd April 1564, or possibly the 12th June 1550, his TRUE date-of-creation was actually July ‘14’ 1548 – precisely why sonnet ‘14’ begins with an astrological allusion:
Not from the stars do I my judgement pluck
And yet me-thinks I have Astronomy.
All societies have consensual beliefs accumulated from a consensus of social or cultural consciousness – which may be termed ‘socialization’, a conditioning bringing about beliefs that may become convictions as individuals we are not easily parted from. While, we should not be ashamed that often as children, we were attracted to what could loosely fall under the (polka-dot) umbrella term ‘fairy-tales’, but if as adults – we are subsequently presented with logical-criteria and facts contradicting and negating these childish tales – by ignoring them, we then become culpable.
The following ‘logical-criteria’ are simple mathematical subtractions harvested from (S.14) details of which I shall shortly come to explain in greater detail:
15 – 1 = 14, & 19 – 2 = 17.
While I doubt, if any of you disagree with these figures, I realise many of you will hate the fact they exist, as we progress to something known as simple Hebrew gematria (a code that assigns numerical values to individual letters).
In respect of William Shakespeare’s works, we must remember we are dealing with a much earlier alphabet. Inevitably then, as every letter has a numerical value so does every word, and to illustrate our author’s commitment to this system, it is worth noting the word “Rose” converts gematrically to ‘54’ exactly why sonnet ‘54’ is a about a “Rose”, but not any old “Rose”, it is about ‘One’ particular “Rose” indeed! “Henry VVriothesley” 3rd Earl of Southampton – whose TRUE date-of-creation 20th May 1574 was the reason Shakespeare selected (S.20) for a short physiological portrait of him.
The first Elizabethan English-language writing manual by Jehan de Beau-Chesne & John Baildon was published in 1570 and contained 23 letters – excluding the three modern day letters ‘J’, ‘U’ & ‘W’.
In simple terms then: A = 1, B = 2 & C = 3.
Therefore, as an example – the word “bad” (found three times in S.121) converts to ‘7’ because B = 2, A = 1 & D = 4. The following transcription is therefore a simple encoding in respect of the Elizabethan alphabet:
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.
When studying Shakespeare, it is absolutely crucial to always reference the original ‘quarto’ works, because many modern transcriptions fail in respect of this responsibility, losing important and some-times critical details – an unfortunate development by some editors occasionally pursued deliberately.
The following illustration is a rather scruffy facsimile of the ‘quarto’ original of (S.14) although not so terrible – it is impossible to see – there are only four capitalised words in the main corpus of the sonnet “Astronomy” & “Princes” in lines 2 & 7, followed more significantly in line ‘14’ with the words “Truthes” & “Beauties”.
Therefore, utilizing gematria: ‘A’ for Astronomy = 1, and ‘P’ for Princes = 15, while our author requires us to subtract one from the other so we arrive at his TRUE date-of-creation (the day of his delivery unto this world) July ‘14’.
Then using the same method ‘T’ for Truthes = 19 and ‘B’ for Beauties = 2, then again subtracting one from the other: 19 – 2 = ‘17’, a number which references our author’s Earldom, as we learn who our TRUE author, playwright and poet was – the 17th Earl of Oxford Edward de Vere’ who wrote during his lifetime using hundreds of different pseudonyms, but overwhelmingly is remembered by only one brand name: “William Shakespeare”.
“Thence comes it that my name receives a brand”. (L.5 – S.111).
Confirming this – it is very interesting to learn – the following startling fact:
Romeo & Juliet met on Edward de Vere’s TRUE birthday!
Near the beginning of Act 1 scene 3 of “Romeo & Juliet” we discover that although Juliet is thirteen years of age, the number (rather strangely) mentioned (‘five times’) is not thirteen, but ‘14’, and the good reason for this is found 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, therefore we find unveiled the ground-breaking revelation that – “Romeo & Juliet” meet on our great author’s TRUE date-of-creation July ‘14’. Shakespeare uses the word “birthday” in his plays but he doesn’t like to use it in respect of his immediate family as he believed them all divinely ordained in Heaven – we should therefore be aware – “Princes” (mentioned in line seven) are Godly creatures! While naturally, you will have been wondering about my birthday usurping expression.
This refers to the actual day “Princes” (legitimate or illegitimate) were born, a term necessarily replacing the word “birthday”, although (illegitimate princes) also have one of these – an official birthday – let me explain further.
Knowingly placed in line ‘14’ (the last line) of the quarto of Edmund/Edward’s first soliloquy in “King Lear”, we hear the primal scream of a disenfranchised illegitimate prince – our author expressing his dissatisfaction at the reality he found himself in – as voluminously his outrage transcends Earth & eternity:
“God’s stand up for bastards!”
With yet, further reality transpiring (to shake the proud English psyche) because existing are some extremely unpalatable facts in respect of our Royal author and his mother ‘Elizabeth’ who gave birth to him as a ‘14’ year old princess approximately eight weeks before she reached fifteen years of age.
Quite remarkably these facts also prove his immortality – for we learn from analysing the complex and obscure details of (Sol.3) Lear (while remembering we are talking mid -16th cent) that our great poet ‘Oxford’ was miraculously born ‘14’ weeks prematurely. This reality we find confirmed in “King John” where ‘Robert Foulconbridge’ half-brother to ‘Philip the Bastard’ explains during his audience with the King, in a passage completely superfluous to the story (but pertinent to Oxford’s nativity) that ‘Philip the Bastard’ son of ‘Richard the Lionheart’ was born:
“Full 14 weeks before the course of time”.
Words completely autobiographical, in the sense Philip the Bastard had a very famous father ‘Richard the Lionheart’ as Edward the Bastard had a very famous mother – Queen Elizabeth I. Then staying in autobiographical vein, a most obvious further allusion to ‘Ox-ford’ immediately emerges in the play – upon ‘Robert Foulconbridge’ asking the King a question which he he promptly answers:
“In sooth, good friend, your father might have kept this calf,
Bred from his cow, from all the world”.
This “calf-cow-Ox” allusion – I would say is rather obvious, while there exists a logical consensus of thought regarding the first ‘17’ Shakespeare sonnets as the ‘procreation sonnets’, wherein our author pleads with the ‘faire youth’ (Henry VVriothesley) to make division of himself – in point of fact (S.1) begins this very way:
From fairest creatures we desire increase,
That thereby beauties ‘Rose’ might never die.
Our author persists for ‘17’ sonnets in trying to persuade the ‘faire youth’ to multiply, because any such issue would become heir to the throne and prevent “Beauties Rose” (the Queen’s Tudor-rose dynasty) coming to a premature end. (S.14) obviously comes within this literary-milieu – where we find in line twelve our author singing the following refrain:
12 ….. If from thyself, to store thou wouldst convert.
Here he expresses his thoughts using covert language, because “to store” means “to have children” (to procreate). ‘Jonathan Bate’ gives this very definition in his book on Shakespeare’s sonnets, and although this description is fundamentally true, it views the word without the purple-haze of authority our great poet was imbued with, because:
S * T * O * R * E
Converts gematrically the following way:
S = 18, T = 19, O = 14, R = 17 & E = 5.
In our author’s mind ‘S’ always represents ‘Southampton’ his Royal son 3rd Earl of Southampton, ‘T’ which is the nineteenth letter of the Greek alphabet ‘Tau’ (a symbol of Christ) in this particular instance represents ‘Essex’ 2nd Earl – ‘Robert Devereux’ half-brother to both ‘Southampton’ & ‘Oxford’ whose TRUE date-of-creation ‘14’ is represented by ‘O’ and his Earldom by ‘R’ which equates to ‘17’. Then last but not least comes the keeper of this Royal-male hareem ‘Elizabeth’ (mother to them all) represented by the letter ‘E’.
The firmament which this Royal coterie of princes inhabited is brought sharply into focus by a slightly haughty Earl of Oxford in (S.11) when describing us less privileged commoners:
Let those whom nature hath not made for Store,
Harsh, featureless, and rude, barrenly perish:
Look whom she best endowed she gave the more;
Which beauteous gift thou shouldst in bounty cherish.
If eVer we need of a way of remembering Oxford’s TRUE date-of-creation, reflecting on the fact a Shakespearean sonnet is composed of ‘14’ lines should suffice. And while there are a couple of exceptions to this rule in his sonnet sequence, looking at “Love’s Martyr” which was written by him using the witty pseudonym ‘Ro. Chester’ (for Rochester) his very last contribution (in terms of verse) is a sonnet composed of ‘18’ lines – entitled: “To Perfection”.
This Godly creature (VVriothesley) has many aliases, in the opening line of the “Threnos” of “The Phoenix and the Turtle” – “The Tudor Trinity” become “Beauty, Truth and Rarity” (Elizabeth, Oxford & VVriothesley).
Our faire-youth – an “Eagle” in Oxford’s avian-poem – is here presented ‘perfectly’ by ‘17’ (Oxford) because ‘S’ = ‘18’ and it is the eighteenth line of the poem in which ‘Southampton’ arrives.
17 …… Nature long time hath ‘stored’ up virtue, fairenesse,
18 …… Shaping the rest as foils unto this Rareness.
Returning to (S.14) we see it concludes referencing “The Tudor Trinity”.
13 ….. Or else of thee this I prognosticate,
14 ….. Thy end is Truth’s and Beauties doom and date.
As just reflected upon – a Shakespearean sonnet is composed of ‘14’ lines and VVriothesley’s “end” (his death) we understand would be synonymous with the end of the Tudor dynasty, our author’s paranoia seeping on to the page, with his greatest fear – his son dying without producing an heir to the throne – an all-consuming anxiety characterised in line ‘14’ the following way:
“Truth & Beauty’s doom and date”.
“Truth & Beauty” (Oxford & Elizabeth) believe without an heir to the throne “doom” an inevitable consequence (while “do = ‘18’ & “Om” = 26) we then find “Truth & Beauty’s date” equally synonymous, representing the date our author ‘Truth’ was born & the date ‘Beauty’ gave birth to him – July ‘14’ 1548. I Should also point out, for those of you unaware, the meaning of our author’s personal motto: “Vero Nihil Verius” is (Nothing truer than Truth).
Sonnet 14 by William Shakespeare (quarto spelling) follows:
01 …… Not from the stars do I my judgement plucke,
02 …… And yet me thinks I have Astronomy,
03 …… But not to tell of good, or evil lucke,
04 …… Of plagues, of dearths, or seasons quality,
05 …… Nor can I fortune to breefe mynuits tell;
06 …… Pointing to each his thunder, raine and winde,
07 …… Or say with Princes if it shal go wel
08 …… By oft predict that I in heaven finde
09 …… But from thine eies my knowledge I derive,
10 …… And constant stars in them I read such art
11 …… As truth and beautie shal together thrive
12 …… If from thy selfe, to store thou woudst convert:
13 …… Or else of thee this I prognosticate,
14 …… Thy end is Truthes and Beauties doome and date.
Our author – ambivalent about astrology – is certainly not about his son ‘Henry VVriothesley – in whose eyes “constant stars” his knowledge he derives, a Christian knowledge imparted to him because it arrives in line ‘IX’, and he knows the Tudor dynasty’s future determinate on the “faire-youth” reproducing an heir to the throne in order that (Truth & Beauty) “shall together thrive”.
Dr John Dee (Oxford’s friend) in a typically Elizabethan axiom informs us that:
“All things have their being in number”.
Queen Elizabeth is alluded to numerically by numbers ‘5’ & ‘7’ because ‘E’ is the fifth letter of the alphabet, while equally significant is her birthday seventh-September, then by adding these two numbers together we arrive at ‘12’. Embracing the genius of Shakespeare, we find nothing more autobiographical than Edmund/Edwards three soliloquy’s in the first act of Lear which help explain the age-old custom of illegitimate princes having two birthdays – an official birthday (in Oxford’s case 12th April 1550) and his TRUE date-of-creation (dates which didn’t necessarily have to be in the same year) in Oxford’s case the 14th July 1548.
The following is how Edmund/Edward’s ‘Soliloquy 1’ begins in Lear:
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.
“Nature” & “Moonshines” rather obviously relate to Elizabeth – so often associated with the moon-goddesses of ancient myth – particularly ‘Phoebe’. While in respect of the narrative of Lear what Edmund/Edward somewhat superficially refers to as being deprived of is ‘inheritance’, more significantly though, what he is actually deprived of “lag of” is an executed brother (Essex).
What 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 (as above). The purpose of this, of course a lure, to reel us in regarding the previously mentioned two dates relating to Oxford’s nativity 12 & 14 which may be characterised by the following simple mathematical sum 12 + 14 = 26. The words “that I am” are taken from Verse ‘14’ chapter ‘3’ Exodus in the Old Testament of the Bible – with Moses seeking advice from God – how he should be identified when going amongst the Israelities 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.
As William Shakespeare and Edward de Vere are precisely the same person, it is hardly surprising that in a letter found in the Burghley-archives written by ‘Oxford’ to William Cecil dated 30th October 1584, we find again in postscript, this same religious phrase – illuminating the Godliness of both Oxford and his beloved son, while I must say Oxford extends his obligations to her majesty (far beyond the call of duty) servicing her so completely.
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 ……………
Looking again at gematria – this favourite idiom of Oxford’s “I AM THAT I AM” appearing three times across the lifetime of his works equates numerically to ‘91’, numbers he sees individually as ‘IX’ & ‘One’ therefore representing the divine ordination in Heaven of these Godly princes – the Earl of Oxford and his Royal son Henry VVriothesley (3rd Earl of Southampton).
‘IX’ are Christs initials in Greek: Ιησούς Χριστός.
‘One’ the Hebrew word for God.
While I believe it is worth recalling – at this point – line ‘IX’ of (S.33)
“Even so my sunne one early morn did shine”. (my son ‘One’)
This intellectual capacity Oxford was anointed with – gave him the ability to see off-the-top-of-his-head the gematrical summation of words, and a simple way of illustrating this is by looking at the concluding couplet of his favoured (S.18).
So long as men can breath and eyes can see,
So long lives this, and this gives life to thee.
In the word “So” (which converts gematrically to 18 & 14) our author sees the words “Southampton” & “Oxford”, not surprisingly then, we understand (S.18) to be a sonnet glorifying Henry VVriothesley, while equally (S.14) is a sonnet about Oxford (or more specifically about his birth).
If you are now throwing your arms in the air with incredulity – I completely understand, but remember our author institutes this system for other words too (and there are many of these) in fact, in an extension of this process – just looked at – regarding the short word “so” we find the word ‘S*O*M*E’ succeeding it. Now, to explain its gematrical Royal essence!
S = Southampton – the royal son of ‘O’ & ‘M’ (Oxford) & ‘E’ = Elizabeth.
‘Om’ (this sacred sound) pronounced A-U-M is represented gematrically by the numbers ‘14’ & ‘12’ because as we have said – it relates to Oxford’s nativity. Confirmation of what I say – is found by looking at the first stanza of (S.91) ‘numbers’ perceived by our author as ‘IX’ & ‘One’, its alliterative & incestuous beginnings littered with the word ‘S*O*M*E’ actually appearing ‘7’ times (alluding to Elizabeth). Unfortunately, if you are a ‘Stratfordian’ this is a four lettered word representing a trinity (the Earl of Oxford’s royal family) “The Tudor Trinity” (VVriothesley, Oxford & Elizabeth) and cannot be removed, but will persistently remain enigmatically representing a long-gone Royal family.
Some glory in their birth, some in their skill,
Some in their wealth, some in their body’s force,
Some in their garments, though new-fangled-ill,
Some in their hawks and hounds, some in their horse.
And every humour hath his adjunct pleasure,
Wherein it finds a joy above the rest,
But these particulars are not my measure,
All these I better in One generally best,
Thy love is better than high birth to me,
Richer than wealth, prouder than garments’ cost,
Of more delight than hawks or horses be:
And having thee, of all men’s pride I boast –
Wretched in this alone, that thou mayst take
All this away and me most wretched make.
Oxford returned in 1576 from his extended ‘grand-tour’ of Italy, putting the Alps behind him the first city he visited was faire-Verona – at which point many courtiers commented on his ‘alla moda’ dress – considering it “new-fangled-ill”. While nobody in the entire world gloried more in their Royal birth than Henry VVriothesley – because although there were six Elizabethan princes in total – it was him alone – with both a biological royal mother and royal father, I should also point out – the sporting pursuits entailing “hawks & hounds” – mentioned in (S.91) were entirely privileges of the nobility – while we see Oxford’s Royalty alluded to when addressing his Godly son “One” in line ‘IX’.
“Thy love is better than high-birth to me”.
Incredible, as it may seem – all significant facts regarding Oxford’s miraculous nativity – can be found in the autobiographical first act of Lear. ‘Gloucester’ is the illegitimate Edmund’s father, so named because Edward de Vere’s TRUE father was Lord Admiral Sir Thomas Seymour (brother of Jane Seymour) whose country pile Sudeley Castle – happens to be in the county of Gloucestershire.
In Edmund/Edwards three soliloquys in Lear he explains:
(1) The dates of his unusual nativity (12 & 14)
(2) The identity of his father (Thomas Seymour).
(3) The year of his birth (1548) plus details of his premature delivery at gestation week 26.
(Sol.1) ‘quarto’ Lear (which we have already looked at) is deliberately composed of ‘14’ lines – Oxford rather famously confirming his illegitimacy in line ‘14’ with the following inglorious announcement:
“Now, Gods, stand up for bastards!”
These illegitimate princes by “the lusty stealth of nature” possibly conceived within “a stale dull lyed bed, goe to the creating of a whole tribe of fops” are purely gematrical fashionistas, because “fo” = 20 & “ps” = 33, sonnet numbers that personalise, and more than any others describe VVriothesley as a God.
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 & treachers by spherical predominance, drunkard 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 tale and my nativity was under Ursa Major, so it follows that I am rough and lecherous. Fut!…………………………………. I should have been that I am had the maidenliest star in the firmament twinkled on my bastardising.
Here, easily determined – is Oxford’s TRUE father, as we find the word ‘admiral’ a marsupial of the word “admirable”.
In the ethereal and vaulted world Oxford lived in – he didn’t like to consider his own conception as happening in “a dark and vicious place” (Lear) he therefore romanticised it – so what happened under the Dowager Queen Katherine Parr’s roof – he more amiably termed “divine thrusting on” (words composed of ‘17’ letters). Then, with the further knowledge his nativity was under “Ursa Major” we become educated by Ptolemy who listed this star-cluster as one of the original ‘48’ constellation – one of the ways we know Oxford’s TRUE year of creation, while equally interesting is the fact Oxford’s death was also marked by the arrival of star – which shone for three weeks in the year of his death, and is remembered as SN.1604. (Gratias Alexander Waugh) for your astronomical competence – illuminating this “Starre of Poets”.
The obscure “fashion fit” manner – in which the mathematics delineating the 17th Earl of Oxford Edward de Vere’s miraculous nativity (detailed in Edmund’s ‘Soliloquy 3’) are laid bare – for your attention on page 119 of my work – or will be on 4th Dec. 2023.
“With the Breath thou Giv’st and Tak’st” – www.call-me-naive.com
As it’s churlish – to reflect upon the TRUE and well-known fact Edward de Vere had three daughters to whom before death he divided his estate – therefore, I shall not mention it!
What I shall mention though – is through the insinuation of language found in (S.14) we find ourselves stumbling upon remembrances of servile ministers “thunder, rain and wind” (L.6) elemental to the “True Chronical Histories of the Life & Death of King Lear and his Three Daughters”, with the manicule of our author’s pen kindly pointing us in the direction of Edmund’s three soliloquy’s (representing ‘Sacred 3’) where we find Oxford’s nativity expressed by the simple yet sacred sum 12 + 14 = 26.
This labyrinth of incest infecting Royalty – Elizabeth believed had Holy origins, Godly behaviour she liked to intellectualise, before making it a life-style choice, firstly conceiving, then condemning by “her foul pride” her first son – the greatest writer of the English language to obscurity.
Yet, while it took somewhere between one-hundred and one-hundred & fifty years for theory of the ‘Heliocentric-system’ of the universe – outlined by ‘Nicolaus Copernicus’ to become generally accepted by humanity, regretfully So – this Oxfordian ellipsis also continues to evolve slowly – seemingly at the rate the sunne cools.
Philip Cooper fecit © 19th November 2023.