In 2019 Alexander Waugh (the grandson of the author Evelyn Waugh) finally deciphered the cryptic message left in the Sonnet’s dedication which revealed that Edward de Vere’s body was exhumed from its original grave in Hackney and later laid alongside that of Edmund Spenser in Poet’s Corner at Westminster Cathedral. A ground penetrating radar investigation into Shakespeare’s grave in Stratford revealed the absence of any physical remains. We are now left with several unanswered questions with regard to the authorship controversy as well as other matters and where it will go in the future. Waugh’s startling discovery that the title page dedication, when decoded using a 19×8 grid which includes the publisher’s initials (TT) reveals the actual location of the burial of Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford on the floor plan of Westminster Abbey at Poet’s Corner alongside the Queen’s poet Edmund Spenser. Clearly revealing the words DE VERE LIES HERE.
Also highlighted are the words EVER-LIVING SONNET POET as well as the word “FORTH”(TT) suggesting that Edward de Vere’s body lies in the space afforded by the 4th TT (being the last), the actual location of his tomb. As the evidence for the Oxfordian view accumulates annually one is tempted to ask how will it affect the tourist industry at Stratford-upon-Avon and when will the Royal Shakespeare Trust, Stratford Birthplace Trust as well as the Royal Shakespeare Company recognise Edward de Vere as the true author of Shakespeare’s plays. How does it affect the true line of accession of the Royal family today? Are any of Shakespeare’s original manuscripts still extant and who has them in their possession? Who should have succeeded to the throne of England after the death of Elizabeth Tudor? Why was this grand literary fraud allowed to occur, who planned it and for what purpose? And more importantly will public houses named in honour of the Bard have to change their name as a result of this catastrophic revelation?
Here “SHAKE-SPEARE” employs George Eld as printer with Thomas Thorpe as his publisher (so that he could use the TT encoding as a “red herring”, ie: Thomas Thorpe wrote the dedication?) Where previously he employed Richard Field as printer and William Jaggard or John Harrison as publishers and subsequently Edmund Blount was designated by presumably the actors from the Globe theatre, John Heminges and Henry Condell as the publishers of the 1623 Folio although two of the sonnets were released and printed within a collection entitled “A Passionate Pilgrim” much earlier. I strongly suspect Heminges and Condell were merely “front-men” for this enterprise and that Lady Mary Pembroke was behind much of the financial and operational side of the publication. In this area of research Alexander Waugh (the grandson of the author Evelyn Waugh) has discovered various cryptic emblems or ‘hidden symbols’ in the layout of Shakespeare’s title pages.
Alexander Waugh thinks, and quite rightly, that Dr. John Dee wrote the cipher code for Shakespeare’s Sonnets but it must have been the last thing he did secretly because he died in 1608. Through the use of sacred geometry, (a frequent approach by Freemasons to conceal a reference) it appears that an inverse pentagram can be deduced from the lines “SHAKES-PEARES” and “SONNETS” and from the letter ‘P’ in SHAKESPEARE’S there is a further clue to the formation of an ancient Christian Greek Cross (Chiro) which was the inspiration for the first Christian Emperor, Constantine: “By this sign thou shalt conquer”.
The title page of Shakespeare’s Sonnets again features a header with the head of Dionysus with three fish hanging down and on either side with decorative foliage that mutates into the heads of two gargoyles facing inwardly towards Dionysus. Facing outward are two rabbits or hares and two winged cherubs facing inward leaning on the stem of a variety of flowers among which appear to be ‘forget-me-nots’. If the author had chosen symbolically to ditch the honeysuckle (Lonicera periclymenum-a solar symbol) in favour of forget-me-nots (Myosotis palustris) perhaps he might have feared being forgotten for whatever reason or in the face of his anonymity in the London theatrical milieu. On the issue of ‘Remembrance’ there is a scene in Romeo & Juliet where Juliet’s nurse mentions the plant rosemary and an exchange occurs between her and Romeo:
Nurse:
Doth not rosemary and Romeo begin both with a letter?
Romeo:
Ay, nurse; what of that? Both with an R.
Nurse:
Ah. Mocker! That’s the dog’s name; R is for
the–No; I know it begins with some other
letter:–and she hath the prettiest sententious of it,
of you and rosemary, that it would do you good
to hear it.
The word sententious means pompous moralising, so is Juliet’s nurse saying that Juliet, like the Virgin Queen Elizabeth, is hypocritical and unworthy of true love? Clearly, Romeo is an anagram of MOREO – or the surname of Sir Thomas Moore and if spelt without the double O merely ROME. One is also tempted to ask what letter could be substituted for the letter R? According to the nurse it is the so-called dog’s name (ie: r-r-r-r, the sound an angry dog makes when threatened or about to bite). Could the nurse be about to reveal the word POPE or possibly Prig? In fact because the sentence breaks off speculation runs riot as the names Robert Dudley, Robert Cecil, David Riccio (secret advisor/lover of Mary Queen of Scots) or King Richard II begins with an R, as well as Lady Penelope Rich, the supposed “Stella” of Sir Phillip Sidney’s poem. Or possibly even Richard Rich the prosecutor to Sir Thomas More who assisted in the dissolution of the monasteries.
| The links to my current publications, on the Shakespeare Authorship Controversy; “Shakespeare’s Qaballah” and an anthology of poetry “Parthenogenesis” are as follows: |
https://www.amazon.com/dp/8182537193
https://www.cyberwit.net/publications/1721
Website: www.qudosacademy.org
