Hình như bạn đang muốn tìm hiểu bài viết nói về font vni-ariston có phải không? Phải chăn bạn đang muốn xem chia sẻ về chủ đề Francis Meres Knew… phải không? Nếu đúng như vậy thì mời bạn xem nó ngay tại đây.
Francis Meres Knew… | Thông tin hay nhất liên quan đến chủ đề làm video.
[button color=”primary” size=”medium” link=”#” icon=”” target=”false” nofollow=”false”]XEM HƯỚNG DẪN BÊN DƯỚI[/button]
Ngoài xem những video về Kinh nghiệm hữu dụng nhất liên quan đến chủ đề làm video này bạn có thể xem thêm nhiều nội dung có liên quan khác do Logobox chia sẻ tại đây nhé.
Hướng dẫn liên quan đến nội dung font vni-ariston.
In 1598 Francis Meres, an Elizabethan theologian, published what he knew about the identity of William Shakespeare.
Another episode in the series of contemporary witnesses who knew that ‘William Shakespeare’ was a pseudonym, all of which are gathered together in the playlist called ‘WHO KNEW?’
Hình ảnh liên quan đến chủ đề Francis Meres Knew….
>> Ngoài xem chuyên mục này bạn có thể truy cập thêm nhiều Chia sẻ hay nhất liên quan đến chủ đề làm video tại đây: Tại đây.
Từ khoá có liên quan đến bài viết font vni-ariston.
#Francis #Meres #Knew.
Alexander Waugh,William Shakespeare,Francis Meres,Palladis Tamia,James Shapiro,Best of Comedy,Edward de Vere,Earl of Oxford.
Francis Meres Knew….
font vni-ariston.
Mong rằng những Thông tin về chủ đề font vni-ariston này hữu ích cho bạn. Cảm ơn bạn rất nhiều.
@Alexander Waugh
Hi Alexander. There may be another hidden reference to Oxford in Meres' section on music.
Seemingly inexplicably, Meres lists 17 classic musicians, but only 16 English.
"As Greece had these excellent Musitians; Arion, Dorceus, Timotheus Milesius, Chry∣sogonus, Terpander, Lesbius, Simon Mag∣nesius, Philamon, Linus, Stratonicus, Aristo∣nus, Chiron, Achilles, Clinias, Eumonius, Demodochus, and Ruffinus: so Englande hath these; Maister Cooper, Maister Fair∣fax, Maister Tallis, Master Tauerner, Mai∣ster Blithman, Maister Bird, Doctor Tie, Doctor Dallis, Doctor Bull, M. Thomas Mud, sometimes fellow of Pembrook hal in Cambridge, M. Edward Iohnson, Maister Blankes, Maister Randall, Maister Phi∣lips, Maister Dowland, and M. Morley."
The 17th English composer is unnamed. Funnily enough a Stratfordian pointed this out to me.
My suspicion was that the line – "M. Thomas Mud, sometimes fellow of Pembrook hal in Cambridge" refers to two different people. This would make the count 17:17.
Digging a little deeper I saw that this is 17 lines from the bottom of the page. 17 words from the bottom of the section is the word "hal". Seemingly in reference to Pembroke Hall at Cambridge College. But this may well be a nod to Oxford in the character of Prince Hal, sometimes fellow of the Earl of Pembrook.
And Oxford did go to Cambridge. I am aware that Oxford also composed music. Do you know if he spent any time at Pembroke Hall?
One other possible 17 count is the unitalicized words on the page before Pembrook hal. In addition, the specific piece is 40 characters if you include the comma – "sometimes fellow of Pembrook hal in Cambridge,".
Lastly, I followed Roger's method of lining up the Latin and English musicians. Coming 11th in the list between Mud and Iohnson, "hal" is paired with Aristonus. Paralleling the pairing with Aristonymus.
In the text, the name is split by a line break as "Aristo-nus". Translated from Latin, this is "Aristo-less". But another translation seems more interesting to me – Aris tonus, translates to "Altars tone". Considering that this is in the section concerning music, this seems fitting.
This is a house of cards. There's no evidence that Oxford was known as the seventeenth earl during his lifetime. That form of counting did not arise until after Oxford died, years after Meres was writing. What's more, a genealogy of Oxford's line created during Oxford's life would have numbered him as either 16th or 18th earl, depending on how they were counted. The records of the early generations of the Earldom were muddled. The numerology of 17 would not have been known by Meres, so all your analysis based on that number is pointless.
But let's imagine that your point about there being 16 classical writers and 17 early modern writers was valid (I do not believe it is, but let's pretend.) Let's assume also that Meres intended for this to suggest that two of the EM writers were the same — that one was the real writer, and out of discretion, he was listing a person who took credit for this other's writing.
There is only one person on the list who incontrovertibly hired others on the list. We know that two writers listed, Lilly and Munday, had been hired by Oxford as "secretaries." Yet there's no evidence that either of them served the menial purpose of being a scribe to the Earl. There are numerous manuscript letters attributed to Edward de Vere, all in his carefully practiced hand. So what were these notable professional playwrights doing on his staff? The only reasonable possibility is that they were hired as theater professionals — ghost writers — for their noble master.
The earl could, with complete propriety, put his name to these plays when performed at court. Perhaps he really did write some part of them, or maybe he did the first draft and had his "secretaries" punch the scripts up. He paid for them to be written; the work of the servants purchased by their master was his to do with as he chose.
Since we've gone this far down the path of speculation entirely divorced from reality (the hallmark of your video), let's take another step by asking which one, Lyly or Munday, was the ghostwriter? As your video shows, Munday was identified as the "best plotter." Was one of the plots to give credit to the earl that he hadn't earned?
Really I don't think your speculative theory has a scrap of truth to it — you invented the methodology out of whole cloth (actually took most of it from fellow fantasist Stritmatter). The actual evidence — Oxford hiring playwrights as "secretaries," one of whom (Lyly) managed his theatrical company Oxford's Boys– strongly suggests that the quality of Oxford's "comedy and enterlude" was due to the assistance of his servants.
But more importantly, there's no evidence that Meres had any personal knowledge of the quality or authorship of Oxford's work. Meres included in his lists the conclusions in George Puttenham's The Arte of English Poesie, written a decade earlier. His reference to "Maister Edwardes" is telling: Edwards died the year Meres was born; Meres was unlikely to have ever seen any of his plays. Meres probably never saw anything by Oxford, either. Oxford's name at the top of the list of contemporary writers was because Meres ordered the list by social rank (as was usual in those times). Oxford as the only earl on the list was first.
The whole discussion of Shakespeare authorship is now on life support. Time to pull the plug.
Amazing channel. I devour it's content.
9:00 "Anthony Mundye" is a pair.
“Shakespeare” is 17th word from bottom, but it’s also the first word of the paragraph’s 17th line (lost when you merged the two pages; “and” seems to be repeated for some reason, but the first seems to be its own line)
Ingeniously argued. How does this fit with the references to tragedy AND comedy, as well as his sugr'd sonnets, which obviously time disallowed you from discussing? Or was it enough to invent this cipher about his comedy and have every one assume he meant tragedy and poetry too? Or is there a further cipher that we need to pay attention to? Why would Meres not just point out that Oxford also translated his uncle's version of Ovid? Or Apuleius's Golden Asse? Or that he contributed to Lyly's Euphues? Or Anthony Munday's Zelauto? Or that he wrote Midsummer Night's Dream when he was but 12 years old? Oh yes, he added that play to a list of comedies (one being Love's Labours Wonne) plus tragedies, and attributes them: "As Plautus and Seneca are the best for comedy and tragedy among the Latines: so Shakespeare among the English for both kinds." That's 2 names for 1 name singled out for both. (Synchronicity where you at)? And why do you say Shapiro's photo makes him look plaintive and anxious? May i say then your voice sounds pompous and smug. Oxenfordian, of course.
Aristonymus – I think you missed a trick here,
:
If you exchange the ‘rist’ in A.rist.onymus for an ‘n’, you get A.n.onymus.
Shakespeare is Anonymus – indeed, this is the title of the modern film
RE
Another amazingly air-tight, thoroughly convincing examination of the available materials. I know there are reference books. I'm acquiring them..
I've found everything you have been saying very interesting and enlightening however after googling Penelope Rich I can't find any reference to a surrogacy. Can you explain where this idea comes from?
Is it perhaps a clue to the shakespeare name that the edward earle of oxforde line that is centered is 10 lines from top and bottom but 8 character spaces on either side of it also. VS(space)bee,(space) = 8 character spaces, then after "edward earle of oxforde" we have ,(space)doctor which again would be 8 character spaces placing the "edward earle of oxforde" not only centered on the x axis at 10 lines but also centered on the Y axis at 8 character spaces. Which gives us the 8-name-8 format and the number system needed to find the shakespeare name in the english playwrights as you noted there are 8 names before him and 8 names after him, those names could be understood as "characters" as such in both formats we have 8 characters, the name, then 8 characters. Seems far to coincidental to not be intended with so much here already!
Spent hours enjoying your stimulating uploads. In respect of Masonic emulation 'What is a centre'? perhaps adds a further moral interpretation to the arrangement?
Stratfordian argument: “he’s a genius”. Ugh!
————————————————————–
[F]rancis [MERES] (1565–1647) From Palladis Tamia
As Plautus and Seneca are accounted the best [F]or Comedy and
Tragedy among the Latines: so Shakespeare a[M]ong the English
is the most excellent in both kinds for th[E] stage. For Comedy,
witnes his Gentlemen of Verona, his Erro[R]s, his Loue Labors
Lost, his Loue Labours Wonne, his Midsumm[E]rs Night Dreame,
and his Merchant of Venice; For Tragedy, hi[S] Richard the 2,
Richard the 3, Henry the 4, King Iohn, Titus Andronicus,
and his Romeo and Iuliet.
.
[F.MERES] 48
…………………………………………………..
Start of Last 3000 Words:
…………………………………………………..
As Terence for his translations out of Apollodorus and Menander,
and Aquilius for his translation out of Menander, and C. Germanicus
Augustus for his out of Aratus, and Ausonius for his translated
Epigrams out of Greeke, and Doctor Iohnson for his Frogge-fight
out of Homer, and Watson for his Antigone out of Sophocles, have
got good commendations: so these versifiers for their learned
translations are of good note among vs, Pha[E]r for Virgil’s
Æneads, Golding for Ouid’s Metamorp[H]osis, Harington for his
Orlando Furioso, the Tran[S]lators of Seneca’s Tragedies,
Barnabe Googe for P[A]lingenius, Turb{E}ruile for Ouid’s
Epistles and Ma[N]tuan, and Chapman for his inchoate {H}omer.
As the La[T]ines haue these Emblematists, Andreas Alciatus,
Turb{E}ruile for Ouid’s Epistles and Ma[N]tuan, and Chapman for his
inchoate {H}omer. As the La[T]ines haue these Emblematists, Andreas
Alciatus, Reu{S}nerus, and Sambucus: so we haue these, Geffrey Whitney,
Andrew Willet, {A}nd Thomas Combe. As Nonnus Panapolyta w(R)it
the Gospell of Saint Ioh{N} in (G)reeke hexamet(E)rs: so Iervis
MA(R)KHAM hath written Salomon’s Can{T}icles in English verse.
…………………………
(ROGER) 13
[T.NASHE] -41
{T.NASHE} -56 : Prob. of 2 close [T.NASHE]s near PT end ~ 1 in 4,000
———————————————————————
Brilliant. Bloody good.