If you're looking for more recent examples of this type of literature, Gareth Penn's "Times 17: The Amazing Story of the Zodiac Murders In California and Massachusetts 1966-1981" is a remarkably kooky dissection of that mystery along the sames lines as the one you've described here. Don't get offput if the author appears at first a bit too credible.... I don't have a hard-copy version but it's available for free online (drop me a line if you're interested and have trouble finding a link). Raymond Grant's "The Zodiac Murders Solved" is in a similar vein and was until recently available online as well but the domain has expired. Really both works ought to be considered together; Mr. Grant was deeply impressed by Mr. Penn's logical constructions, and his book is really a tribute to Mr. Penn, in a rather hilarious way which I would hate to spoil for you.
I presume I am not the only one reminded of Wodehouse's story "The Reverent Wooing of Archibald," wherein a character finds proof of Bacon's authorship by taking these lines by Milton:
"Who needs my Shakespeare for his honoured bones?
The labour of an age in piled stones?
Or that his hallowed Reliques should
Be hid under a starry-pointing Pyramid?"
I always found that very funny, but now I see it as a case where the truth was much stranger than the fiction.
and subjecting them to a mathematical formula that converts them to:
"What need Verulam for Shakespeare? Francis Bacon England's King be hid under a W. Shakespeare? William Shakespeare. Fame, what needst Francis Tudor, King of England? Francis. Francis W. Shakespeare. For Francis thy William Shakespeare hath England's king took W. Shakespeare. Then thou our W. Shakespeare Francis Tudor bereaving Francis Bacon such a tomb William Shakespeare."
A site called "Booktryst" had this to say on Phillip Samuels' work:
"Man v’ Ape in the Play of Ear-Ce-Rammed. (Boston): Samuels-Bacon, ‘sam ls-ot, (1933). First edition.
A prime contender for the title of most eccentric entry in the annals of the Bacon-Shakespeare controversy, Man v’ Ape is Samuels’ heavily (even tortuously) annotated edition of Hamlet. Using a numeric cipher and a host of obscure symbolic, linguistic and Biblical interpretations, he here proves that Francis Bacon had prophesized the coming of Philip Samuels as the incarnation of Jehovah, and that Samuels is charged with leading the Jews to an independent state in Palestine. Among the many arguments: attacks on Darwin that give this volume its name (“The image of God did bury Malthus-Darwin under a heap of dust never to rise again”), allusions to Hamlet’s encoded attacks on the Roman Catholic Church (“Ham=21. Ham plus Pope=70,” etc.) and even perhaps the murky claim that Samuels is Bacon reborn."
Pretty much this is the Francis E. Dec rant flyers arranged into a book and focusing into one point, not fifteen.
I can't believe no one has ever commented on this book. All I can say is, Francois is close to Francis, and I love bacon, so I must be Francis Bacon as well. That alone makes more sense than all the quotes from this book.
Thanks for the tip Murray,
Thanks for the tip Murray, sounds very interesting. I'll look into both of those.
If you're looking for more
If you're looking for more recent examples of this type of literature, Gareth Penn's "Times 17: The Amazing Story of the Zodiac Murders In California and Massachusetts 1966-1981" is a remarkably kooky dissection of that mystery along the sames lines as the one you've described here. Don't get offput if the author appears at first a bit too credible.... I don't have a hard-copy version but it's available for free online (drop me a line if you're interested and have trouble finding a link). Raymond Grant's "The Zodiac Murders Solved" is in a similar vein and was until recently available online as well but the domain has expired. Really both works ought to be considered together; Mr. Grant was deeply impressed by Mr. Penn's logical constructions, and his book is really a tribute to Mr. Penn, in a rather hilarious way which I would hate to spoil for you.
Anyways, thanks for the entertaining site!
I presume I am not the only
I presume I am not the only one reminded of Wodehouse's story "The Reverent Wooing of Archibald," wherein a character finds proof of Bacon's authorship by taking these lines by Milton:
"Who needs my Shakespeare for his honoured bones?
The labour of an age in piled stones?
Or that his hallowed Reliques should
Be hid under a starry-pointing Pyramid?"
I always found that very funny, but now I see it as a case where the truth was much stranger than the fiction.
and subjecting them to a mathematical formula that converts them to:
"What need Verulam for Shakespeare? Francis Bacon England's King be hid under a W. Shakespeare? William Shakespeare. Fame, what needst Francis Tudor, King of England? Francis. Francis W. Shakespeare. For Francis thy William Shakespeare hath England's king took W. Shakespeare. Then thou our W. Shakespeare Francis Tudor bereaving Francis Bacon such a tomb William Shakespeare."
Thanks. A pretty accurate
Thanks. A pretty accurate summary of this truly bizarre work.
A site called "Booktryst" had
A site called "Booktryst" had this to say on Phillip Samuels' work:
"Man v’ Ape in the Play of Ear-Ce-Rammed. (Boston): Samuels-Bacon, ‘sam ls-ot, (1933). First edition.
A prime contender for the title of most eccentric entry in the annals of the Bacon-Shakespeare controversy, Man v’ Ape is Samuels’ heavily (even tortuously) annotated edition of Hamlet. Using a numeric cipher and a host of obscure symbolic, linguistic and Biblical interpretations, he here proves that Francis Bacon had prophesized the coming of Philip Samuels as the incarnation of Jehovah, and that Samuels is charged with leading the Jews to an independent state in Palestine. Among the many arguments: attacks on Darwin that give this volume its name (“The image of God did bury Malthus-Darwin under a heap of dust never to rise again”), allusions to Hamlet’s encoded attacks on the Roman Catholic Church (“Ham=21. Ham plus Pope=70,” etc.) and even perhaps the murky claim that Samuels is Bacon reborn."
Pretty much this is the Francis E. Dec rant flyers arranged into a book and focusing into one point, not fifteen.
Thanks. A pretty accurate
Thanks. A pretty accurate summary of this truly bizarre work.
I can't believe no one has
I can't believe no one has ever commented on this book. All I can say is, Francois is close to Francis, and I love bacon, so I must be Francis Bacon as well. That alone makes more sense than all the quotes from this book.