Concemlnff im 1
<^9X;M:JZi2Zi2.
■ram
^aconM-M-
'><'''9>im^'>Mmci9^y: «
of the Controtfersy
\
I
AM In |$ood hope (hat if (h^ first reading
move an objection, the second reading
will make an answer,— -ilcTv. ofL,
Ex Libris
C. K. OGDEN
THE LIBRARY
OF
THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA
LOS ANGELES
u
ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP
CONCERNING THE
BI-LITERAL CYPHER OF
FRANCIS BACON
DISCOVERED IN HIS WORKS BY
ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP
PROS AND CONS OF THE
CONTROVE RSY
Explanations, Reviews
Criticisms and Replies
DETROIT, MICH., U. S. A.:
HOWARD PUBLISHING CO.
LONDON :
GAY & BIRD.
1011592
A]^]STOTJNCEMENT.
THE BI-LITERAL CYPHER OF FRANCIS BACON,
Deciphered bj Elizabeth Wells Gallup.
THIED EDITION
This edition embraces decipherings from the commence-
ment of the use of Bacon's Cipher inventions — now found to be
1579 — and covering the entire period of his literary career,
including some works published by Rawley subsequent to 1626.
The Cypher has been traced with certainty down to 1651.
This Bi-Uteral Cypher reveals much secret history concern-
ing Queen Elizabeth, who, it is now learned, was the wedded
wife of Robert, Earl of Leicester — ^while posing as the Virgin
Queen — and was the mother of Francis Bacon.
It also discloses the existence of a second so-called Key-
Word Cipher, of broader scope, running through all of Bacon's
literary works, with instructions by which they may be de-
ciphered to disclose other hidden dramatical and historical pro-
ductions of larger importance and greater historical accuracy
than those upon the printed pages which enfold them. These
are found also to contain secret history, dangerous to Bacon,
who sought by this means to transmit it to a future time in
which he hoped the Ciphers would be discovered and the truth
proclaimed.
The method of the Word Cipher is shown in the deciphered
Tragedy of Anne Boleyn, published simultaneously with this
Third Edition, — also in the Tragedy of Robert, Earl of Essex,
— and the Tragedy of Mary, Queen of Scots.
TEE TRAGEDY OF ANNE BOLEYN ,
Deciphered by Elizabeth Wells Gallup,
One of the Historical Dramas in Cipher named in the Bi-
literal Cypher as concealed in the works of Bacon.
Part I.
Contains extracts from the Bi-literal, with Bacon's in-
structions and the Keys by which this Tragedy has been ex-
tracted fully illustrating the Word Cipher method of its re-
construction.
An appendix gives the editions used and pages on which
may be found the scattered sections brought together in new
sequence to form the new play.
Included in Part I will also be found the decipherings made
by Mrs. Gallup in the British Museum subsequent to the publi-
cation of the Second Edition of the Bi-literal Cypher, and are
from Old Editions appearing between 1579 and 1590, establish-
ing the earliest dates this Cypher appeared. They are placed
here for the convenience of these having Second Editions only.
THE TRAGICAL EI8T0RIE
OF OUR LATE BROTHER,
PtOBERT, EARL OF ESSEX.
Deciphered by Orville TV. Owen, M. D. One of the Histori-
cal Dramas in Cipher.
THE HISTORICAL TRAGEDY OF MARY, QUEEN
OF SCOTS.
Deciphered by Orville W. Oiuen, M. D. One of the Histori-
cial Dramas in Cipher.
Howard Publishing Co.,
Gay &■ Bird, Detroit, Michigan, U. S. A.
London, England.
CONTENTS
(of this volume)
Frontispiece Portrait Elizabeth Wells Gallup
Announcements 6
Title Page "The Bi-literal Cypher" 11
(Plates from the book)
Contents of "Bi-literal Cypher"
Personal 15
Publishers Note. Third Edition 19
De Augmentis, Original Title page 1624 21
Cyphars in Advancement of Learning, 1605 22
Cyphars in De Augmentis, Wats Translation, 1640 23
Bi-literarie Alphabet 24
Bi-formed Alphabet 25
Cicero's First Epistle — Method of deciphering '26
Cicero's First Epistle — Cipher infold 27
Tragedy of Anne Boleyn 29
(Plates from the book)
Preface 30
Argument of the Play 35
Keys for Deciphering 38
FROM MAGAZINES, ETC.
BACONIANA— LONDON :
Elizabeth Wells Gallup — Descriptive 43
— Explanatory 122
—Henry VII 222
Editorial — Book Review 74
Connonbury Tower 227
D. J. Kindersley— Henry VII 218
COURT JOURNAL— LONDON:
Fleming Fulcher Review 81
COSMOPOLITAN— NEW YORK:
Garrett P. Serviss Review 112
FREE PRESS— DETROIT :
Editorial, Book Review 69
LITERARY WORLD— LONDON:
Elizabeth Wells Gallup. Replies MI 150
NINETEENTH CENTURY AND AFTER— LONDON:
W. H. Mallock, Review 94
NEW YORK TIMES— LITERARY REVIEW:
Elizabeth Wells Gallup— Reply to C. L. Dana 163
PALL MALL MAGAZINE— LONDON:
Elizabeth Wells Gallup — Descriptive 51
Explanatory 126
TIMES— LONDON:
Elizabeth W, Gallup 144
W. H. Mallock 169
A. P. Sinnett 172
A. P. Sinnett 176
Parker Woodward 175
REPLIES TO CRITICISMS:
Elizabeth Wells Gallup 179
Illustration of Method 198
Fac-Simile Plates De Augmentis Scientiarum, London
Ed., 1623 201
Fac-Simile Plates Paris Ed., 1624 205
Henry Irving, Princeton Address 211
THE
Bi-literal Cypher
of
S" Francis B
rancis oacon
difcovered in his works
AND DECIPHERED BY
MRS. ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP
THIRD EDITION
x^
DETROIT. MICHIGAN. U.S.A.:
HOWARD PUBLISHING COMPANY
LONDON:
CAY 6 BIRD
i2 Bedford St.
CONTENTS.
PART I.
PAGE
Personal — Mrs. Elizabeth Wells Gallup 1
Explanatory Introduction First Edition 5
Preface, Second Edition 15
Argument 18
Notes on the Shakespeare Plays 28
Stenography in the tiflae of Queen Elizabeth 35
Francis Bacon, Biographical 39
Ciphers 47
Cyphars in Advancement of Learning, 1605 51
Gyphars in De Augmentis 52
Bi-literal Cipher Plan and Illustration 53
Fac-simile pages from De Augmentis, 1624 57
^ Fac-simile pages from Novum Organum, 1620 63
Fac-simile title page Vitae et Mortis 67
Shakespeare Plays — Fac-simile Quarto Title Pages 69
Publisher's Note 76
BI-LITERAL CYPHER.
DECIPHERED SECRET STORY. 1579 to 1590.
Shepheard's Calender 1579 Anonymous 79
The Araygnement of Paris. .1584 George Peele 80
The Mirrour of Modestie.. .1584 Robert Greene 82
Planetomaehia 1585 Robert Greene 87
A Treatise of Melancholy. . . 1586 T. Bright 89
Euphues-Morando 1587 Robert Greene 91
Perimedes-Pandosto 1588 Robert Greene. 93
Spanish Masquerado 1589 Robert Greene 94
12
PART II.
DECIPHERED SECRET STORY FROM
EDMUND SPENSER:
PAGK
Complaints, 1591 1
Colin Clout, 1595 3
Faerie Queene, 1596 4
Faerie Queene, second part 7
SHAKESPEARE QUARTO:
Richard Second, 1598 10
GEORGE PEELE:
David and Bethsabe. 1599 11
SHAKESPEARE QUARTOS:
Midsommer Night's Dream, 1600 12
Midsommer Night's Dream, Fisher Ed 13
Much Ado About Nothing, 1600 14
Sir John Oldcastle and Merchant of Venice, Roberts Ed.,
1600 15
Richard, Duke of York, 1600 18
FRANCIS BACON:
Treasons of Essex, 1601 20
SHAKESPEARE QUARTO:
London Prodigal, 1605 23
FRANCIS BACON:
Advancement of Learning, 1605 25
SHAKESPEARE QUARTOS:
King Lear, 1608 33
King Henry The Fifth. 1608 34
Pericles, 1609 35
Hamlet, 1611 36
Titus Andronicus. 1611 38
13
EDMUND SPENSER:
PAGE
Shepheards Calender, 1611 40
Faerie Queene, 1613 43
BEN JONSON:
Plays in Folio, 1616 49
SHAKESPEARE QUARTOS:
Richard The Second, 1615 72
Merry Wives of Windsor, 1619 73
Contention of York and Lancaster, 1619 74
Pericles, 1619 77
Yorkshire Tragedy, 1619 78
Romeo and Juliet, no date 79
ROBERT GREENE:
A Quip For an Upstart Courtier, 1620 80
>
FRANCIS BACON:
Novum Organum, 1620 81
The Parasceve 133
Henry The Seventh, 1622 136
CHRISTOPHER MARLOWE:
Edward The Second, 1622 151
FRANCIS BACON:
Historia Vitae & Mortis, 1623 153
SHAKESPEARE PLAYS:
First Folio, 1623 165
ROBERT BURTON:
Anatomy of Melancholy, 1628 218
"Argument of the Iliad" 220
FRANCIS BACON:
De Augmentis Scientiarum, 1624 310
"Argument of the Odysses" 313
New Atlantis, 1635 334
Sylva Sylvarum, 1635, Rawley's Preface 339
Natural History 341
William Rawley's Note 368
14
PERSONAL.
TO THE READER:
The discovery of the existence of the Bi-literal Cipher
of Francis Bacon, found embodied in his works, and the
deciphering of what it tells, has been a work arduous, ex-
hausting and prolonged. It is not ended, but the results
of the work so far brought forth, are submitted for study
and discussion, and open a new and large field of investi-
gation and research, which cannot fail to interest all stu-
dents of the earlier literature that has come down to us as
a mirror of the past, and in many respects has been adopted
as models for the present.
Seeking for things hidden, the mysterious, elusive and
unexpected, has a fascination for many minds, as it has
for my own, and this often prompts to greater effort than
more manifest and material things would command. To
this may be attributed, perhaps, the triumph over diffi-
culties which have seemed to me, at times, insurmountable,
the solution of problems, and the following of ways tor-
tuous and obscure, which have been necessary to bring out,
as they appear in the following pages, the hidden mes-
sages which Francis Bacon so securely buried in his writ-
ings, that three hundred years of reading and close study
have not until now uncovered them.
This Bi-literal Cipher is found in the Italic letters that
appear in such unusual and unexplained prodigality in the
original editions of Bacon's works. Students of these old
editions have been impressed with the extraordinary num-
ber of words and passages, often non-important, printed in
Italics, where no known rule of construction would require
their use. There has been no reasonable explanation of
this until now it is found that they were so used for the
15
2 PEKSONAL
purposes of this Cipher. These letters are seen to be in
two forms — two fonts of type — with marked differences.
In the Capitals these are easily discerned, but the distin-
guishing features in the small letters, from age of the
books, blots and poor printing, have been more difficult to
classify, and close examination and study have been re-
quired to separate and sketch out the variations, and edu-
cate the eye to distinguish them.
How I found the Cipher, its difficulties, methods of
working, and outline of what the several books contain,
will more fully appear in the explanatory introduction.
In assisting Dr. Owen in the preparation of the later
books of "Sir Francis Bacon's Cipher Story," recently pub-
lished, and in the study of the great Word-Cipher discov-
ered by him, in which is incorporated Bacon's more exten-
sive, more complete and important writings, I became con-
vinced that the very full explanation found in De Aug-
mentis, of the bi-literal method of cipher-writing, was
something more than a mere treatise on the subject. I
applied the rules given to the peculiarly Italicised words
and "letters in two forms," as they appear in the photo-
graphic Fac-simile of the original 1623, Folio edition, of
the Shakespeare Plays. The disclosures, as they appear in
this volume, were as great a surprise to me, as they will
be to my readers. Original editions of Bacon's known
works were then procured, as well as those of other authors
named in these, and claimed bv Bacon as his own. The
story deciphered from these will appear under the sev-
eral headings.
From the disclosures found in all these, it is evident
that Bacon expected this Bi-literal Cipher would be the first
to be discovered, and that it would lead to the discovery
of his principal, or Word-Cipher, which it fully explains,
and to which is intrusted the larger subjects he desired to
have preserved. This order has been reversed, in fact, and
the earlier discovery of the Word-Cipher, by Dr. Owen,
becomes a more remarkable achievement, being entirely
16
PERSONAL. 3
evolved without the aids which Bacon had prepared in this,
for its ehicidation.
The proofs are overwhelming and irresistible that Bacon
was the author of the delightful lines attributed to Spen-
ser, — the fantastic conceits of Peele and Greene, — the his-
torical romances of Marlowe, — the immortal plays and
poems put forth in Shakespeare's name, as well as the
Anatomv of Melancholy of Burton.
The removal of these masques, behind which Bacon
concealed himself, may change the names of some of our
idols. It is, however, the matter and not the name that
appeals to our intelligence.
The plays of Shakespeare lose nothing of their dramatic
power or wondrous beauty, nor deserve the less admiration
of the scholar and critic, because inconsistencies are re-
moved in the knowledge that they came from the brain of
the greatest student and writer of that age, and were not
a "flash of genius" descended upon one of peasant birth,
less noble history, and of no preparatory literary attain-
ments.
The Shepherds' Calendar is not less sweetly poetical,
because Francis Bacon appropriated the name of Spenser,
several years after his death, under which to put forth the
musical measures, that had, up to that time, only appeared
as the production of some Muse without a name; nor will
Faerie Queene lose ought of its rythmic beauty or romantic
interest from change of name upon the title page.
The supposed writings of Peele, Greene and Marlowe
are not the less worthy, because really written by one
greater than either.
The remarkable similarity in the dramatic writings at-
tributed to Greene, Peele, Marlowe and Shakespeare has
attracted much attention, and the biographers of each have
claimed that both style and subject-matter have been imi-
tated, if not appropriated, by the others. The practical
explanation lies in the fact that one hand wrote them all.
17
4 PERSONAL.
I fully appreciate what it means to bring forth new
truth from unexpected and unknown fields, if not in ac-
cord with accented theories and long held beliefs. ^'For
what a man had rather were true, he more readily be-
lieves," — is one of Bacon's truisms that finds many illus-
trations.
I appreciate what it means to ask strong minds to change
long standing literary convictions, and of such I venture
to ask the withholding of judgment until study shall have
made the new matter familiar, with the assurance mean-
while, upon my part, of the absolute veracity of the work
which is here presented. Any one possessing the original
books, who has sufficient patience and a keen eye for form,
can work out and verify the Cipher from the illustrations
given. Nothing is left to choice, chance, or the imagina-
tion. The statements which are disclosed are such as could
not be foreseen, nor imagined, nor created, nor can there be
found reasonable excuse for the hidden writings, except for
the purposes narrated, which could only exist concerning,
and be described by, Francis Bacon.
I would beg that the readers of this book will bring to
the consideration of the work minds free from prejudice,
judging of it with the same intelligence and impartiality
they would themselves desire, if the presentation were their
own. Otherwise the work will, indeed, have been a thank-
less task.
To doubt the ultimate acceptance of the truths brought
to light would be to distrust that destiny in which Bacon
had such an abiding faith for his justification, and which,
in fact, after three centuries, has lifted the veil, and
brought us to estimate the character and accomplishments,
trials and sorrows of that great genius, with a feeling of
nearness and personal sympathy, far greater than has been
possible from the partial knowledge which we have here-
tofore enjoyed.
ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP.
Detroit, March 1st, 1899.
18
PUBLISHERS' NOTE.
THIRD EDITION.
The publication of the second edition of the Bi-literai
Cypher of Francis Bacon, which embraced the period of his
Cipher writing between 1590 and the end of his career,
emphasized the importance of finding the earlier writings
— preceding 1590. The old books necessary to the re-
search could not be procured in America, and during the
summer of 1900 Mrs. Gallup and her assistant, Miss Kate
E. Wells, visited England to carry on the work in that
treasure house of early literature, the British Museum.
The investigations yielded rich returns, for in Shepheard's
Calender of 1579 was found the commencement of what
proved to be an important part of Bacon's life work.
Following Shepheard's Calender, the works between
1579 and 1590, so far deciphered, are:
Araygnement of Paris, 1584; Mirrour of Modestie,
1584.
Planetomachia, 1585.
Treatise of Melancholy, 1586. Two editions of this
were issued the same year, with differing Italics. The first
ends with an incomplete cipher word which is completed in
the second for the continued narration, thus making evident
which was first published, unless they were published at
the same time.
Euphues, 1587; Morando, 1587. These two also join
together, with an incomplete word at the end of the first
finding its completion in the commencement of the Cipher
in the second.
Perimedes the Blacke-smith, 1588; Pandosto, 1588.
These two also join together.
19
Spanish Masquerado, 1589. Two editions of this work
bear date the same year, but have different Italicising. In
one edition the Cipher Story is complete, closing with the
signature: "Fr., Prince." In the other the story is not
complete, the book ending with an incomplete cipher word,
the remainder of which will be found in some work of a
near date which has not yet been indicated.
Several months were spent in following, through these
old books, the thread of the concealed story until it joined
the work which had already been published. Overstrained
eye-sight, from the close study of the different forms of
Italic letters, and consequent exhaustion on the part of
Mrs. Gallup, compelled a cessation of the work before all
that would have been desirable to know concerning that
early period was deciphered ; and while these are not all the
works in which Cipher will be found, between the years
1579 and 1590, they are sufficient unmistakably to connect
the earlier writings with those of later date which had
already been deciphered — as published in the Bi-literal
Cypher — so that we now know the Cipher writings were
being continuously infolded in Bacon's works, for a period
of about forty-six years, from the first to the last of his lit-
erary productions, including some matter he had prepared,
which was published by Rawley subsequent to 1626.
These few pages of deciphered matter, now added to that
published in the Second Edition, have a unique distinction
in the costliness of their production, but they are of ines-
timable value, historically, as well as from a literary point
of view, in demonstrating with certainty the scope and
completeness of the Cipher plan which has so long hidden
the secrets of a most eventful period.
20
FRANCISCI
BARONI S
DE VERVLAMIO,
VICE-COMITIS
SANGTI ALBANf.
DE DIGNITATE ET jiFGMEHTiS
SClENTlARfM.
L I B R I I X.
^ D KEG E M S J/" y M
luxta Exemplar Londim I ttipreflum.
P A R I S I IS,
Typis Petri METTAYER,Typographi K'^gij
M. DC. X X I V.
Of the Advancement of Learning.
(London, 1605.)
CYPHARS
For C Y p H A R s ; they are commonly in Letters
or Alphabets, but may bee in Wordes. The kindes
of C Y p H A R s, (befides the Simple Cyphars
with Changes, and intermixtures of N v lles, and
Nonsignificant s) are many, according to
the Nature or Rule of the infoulding : W h e e l e -
Cyphars, Ka y-C yphars, Dovbles,
&c. But the vertues of them, whereby they are
to be preferred, are three ; that they be not labor-
ious to write and reade; that they bee impofsible
to difcypher ; and in fome cafes, that they bee
without fufpition. The higheft Degree whereof,
is to write Omnia Per Omnia; which is
vndoubtedly pofsible, with a proportion Quintuple
at moft, of the writing infoulding, to the writing
infoulded, and no other reftrainte whatfoeuer.
This Arte of Cypheringe, hath for Relatiue, an Art
of Difcypheringe ; by fuppofition vnprofitable ; but,
as things are, of great vfe. For fuppofe that
Cyphars were well mannaged, there bee Multitudes
of them which exclude the Difcypherer. But in
regarde of the rawneffe and vnskilfulneffe of the
handes, through which they paffe, the greateft
Matters, are many times carryed in the weakeft
Cyphars.
22
De Augmentis Scientiarum
(Translation, Gilbert Wats, 1640.)
Wherefore let us come to C y p h a R s. Their kinds
are many, as Cyphars fwiple; Cyphars intermixt with
VXulloes, or non - fignificant Characters; Cyphars of
double Letters under one Character; Wheele-Cyphars ; Kay-
Cyphars; Cyphars of Words; Others. But the virtues
of them whereby they are to be preferr'd are Three;
That they be ready, and not laborious to write; That they be
lure, and lie not open to Deciphering; And laflly, if it be
pofsible, that they be managed without fufpition.
But that jealoufies may be taken away, we will
annexe an other invention, which, in truth, we
devifed in our youth, when we were at Paris : and
is a thing that yet feemeth to us not worthy to be
loft. It containeth the highefl degree of Cypher, which
is to fignifie omnia per omnia, y el fo as the writing
infolding, may beare a quintuple proportion to the
writing infolded; no other condition or reftriction
whatfoever is required. It fhall be performed thus:
Firft let all the Letters of the Alphabet, by tranfpo-
fition, be refolved into two Letters onely ; for the
tranfpofition of two Letters by five placings will be
fufficient for 32. Differences, much more for 24.
which is the number of the Alphabet. The example
of fuch an Alphabet is on this wife.
23
An Example of a 'Bi-literarie Alphabet.
^ "B C T> E F
oAaaaa aaaab aaaba. aaabb. aabaa. aabab.
G ' H I K L iM
aabba aabbb abaaa. abaab. ababa. ababb.
3f O T d Ti S
abbaa, abbab. abbba. abbbb. baaaa. baaab.
7 V IV X Y Z
baaba. baabb. babaa. babab. babba. babbb.
Neither is it a fmall matter thefe Cypher-Characten
have, and may performe : For by this Art a way is
opened, whereby a man may expreffe and fignifie
the intentions of his minde, at any diftance of
place, by objects which may be prefented to the
eye, and accommodated to the eare ; provided thofe
objects be capable of a twofold difference onely ;
as by Bells^ by Trumpets, by Lights and Torches,
by the report of Muskets, and any inftruments of
like nature. But to purfue our enterprife, when
you addreffe your felfe to write, refolve your in-
ward-infolded Letter into this "Bi-literarie Alphabet.
Say the interiour Letter be
Fuge.
Example of Solution.
F V G E
aabab. baabb. aabba. aabaa.
Together with this, you muft have ready at
hand a "Bi-formed Alphabet, which may reprefent all
the Letters of the Common Alphabet, as well Capitall
Letters as the Smaller Characters in a double
forme, as may fit every mans occafion.
24
An Example of a "Bi-formed Alphabet.
( a i a i> a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b
\jiAaa ^Bbh COccDDdd EEee FFff
( a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b
\GGgg HHhh Jlii KKkh LLll MMmm
i a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b
Xt^iNmi OOoo TPpp Q^Qqq Ti^rr SSss
( ababababab a b a b a bababababab
\ T TttVVvvuu IVWww XXxx YYyy ZZ^z
Now to the interiour letter, which is Biliterate,
you fhall fit a biformed exteriour letter, which fhall
anfwer the other, letter for letter, and afterwards
fet it downe. Let the exteriour example be,
zManere te volo, donee venero.
An Example of Accommodation.
F V G E
a a b a b. b a a b b. a a b b a. a a baa.
(Man ere te volo donee venero
We have annext likewife a more ample example
of the cypher of writing omnia per omnia: An interiour
letter, which to expreffe, we have made choice of
a Spartan letter fent once in a Scytale or roi.nd
cypher'd ftaffe.
Spartan Dispatch.
<Jlll is lost. (Mindarus is killed. The soldiers
want food. We can neither get hence nor stay longer
here.
An exteriour letter, taken out of the firft Epiftle
of Cicero, wherein a Spartan Letter is invnUfd.
26
Cicero's hirst Epistle.
Jn all duty or rather piety towards
a a aaa\abab a\a b a b a\a b a a a\b a a a b \a b a b
A \ L \ L \ I \ S \ L
you, I satisfy everybody except myself.
a\ a b b a b\i a a a b \ b a a b a\a b a b b\ab a a a \ a b b a a\a
I o \s\t\m\i\n\
(Myself J never satisfy. For so great are
a a b b\a a a a a\b a a a a\b a a b b I b a a. a b \ a b a a a\ b a a
d\a\r\u\ S I / \ S
the services which you have rendered me,
a b\ a b a a b\ ab a a a \a b a b a\a b a b a\a abaa\aaab b\ b
\ K \ I \ L \ L \ E \ D \
that y seeing you did not rest in your en-
a a b a I a a b b b\a a b a a\b a aab\a.bba b \a b a b a \ a a
T \ H \ E \ S \ O \ L \
deavoiirs on my behalf till the thing was
abb\abaaa\aa b a a\baaaa\baaa b\b a b a a\ a a a a a\
D \ / \ E \ R \ S \ ly \ A \
done, 7 feel as if life had lost all its sweet-
abba a \ b aa b a\a a b a b\a b bab\abba b\aa abb\babiia\
N \t\f\0\0\d\VV\
ness, because J cannot do as much in this
a a b a a\a a a b a\a ct a a a \ a b b a a \ a b b a a\a a b a a\a b
E \ C \ A \ N \ N 1^1
cause of yours. The occasions are these:
a a a\b a a b a\ a a b b b\ a a b a a\b a a a a\a abb a\a a h a
I \ T \ H \ E \ R \ G \ E
zAmmonius, the king' s ambassador, open-
a I b a a 3 a\ a a bbb\aaba a \ tz b ba-a\aaaba\aaba
I T \ H \ E \ N \ C \ E
ly besieges us with money. The business
a\a b b a a\a- b b a b \b a a a a \ b a a a h I b a a b a\a a a a a\b
\ N \ O \ R \ S \ ' T 1^1
is carried on through the same creditor s
a b b a\a b a b a \ a b bab\abba a\a a b b a \ a abaa\baaaa\
Y \ L \ O \ N \ O \ E \ R \
who were employed in it when you were
a a b b b\a a b a a\b a a a a \ a a b a a\a a a a a a a a a a
H \ E \ R \ E I
here S-c.
(Note )— This Translation from Spedding, ElHs & Heath Ed.
26
(REPRODUCTION .)
Epistle.
Jn all duty or rather piety towards you, I satisfy
everybody except myself. Myself J never satisfy.
For so great are the services which you have rendered
me, that, seeing you did not rest in your endeavours
on my behalf till the thing was done, 7 feel as if life
had lost all its sweetness, because 7 cannot do as
much in this cause of yours. The occasions are these:
j^mmonius, the king's ambassador, openly besieges us
with money. The business is carried on through the
same creditors who were employed in it when you
were here S-c
Cipher infolded.
i/Ill is lost. zMindarus is killed. The soldiers
want food. We can neither get hence nor stay longer
here.
The knowledge of Cyphering, hath drawne on with it
a knowledge relative unto it, which is the knowledge
of Difcyphering, or of Difcreting Cyphers, though a man
were utterly ignorant of the Alphabet of the Cypher,
and the Capitulations of fecrecy paft between the
Parties. Certainly it is an Art which requires great
paines and a good witt and is [as the other was]
confecrate to the Counfels of Princes: yet notwith-
ftanding by diligent previfion it may be made un-
profitable, though, as things are, it be of great ufe.
For if good and faithfull Cyphers were invented &
practifed, many of them would delude and foreftall
all the Cunning of the Decypherer, which yet are very
apt and eafie to be read or written: but the rawneffe
and unskilfulneffe of Secretaries, and Clarks in the
Courts of Princes, is fuch, that many times the
greateft matters are committed to futile and weake
Cyphers.
27
THE
TRAGEDY OF
Anne Boleyn.
A DRAMA IN CIPHER
FOUND IN THE WORKS OF
SIR FRANCIS BACON.
DECIPHERED BY
ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP.
DETROIT, MICHIGAN, U. S. A.:
HOWARD PUBLISHING COMPANY.
LONDON:
GAY & BIRD,
22 Bedford St. Strand.
PKEFACE.
The Cipher discoveries in some of the literature of the
Elizabethan period, as set forth in Francis Bacon s Bi-
literal Cypher — a book recently published in America and
England — are most strange and important. To those not
familiar with them, a few words are requisite for an under-
standing of the methods of the production of this Cipher
play — The Tragedy of Anne Boleyn.
Two principal Ciphers have been found to exist in the
works of Bacon. The first, the Bi-literal, by the use of
Italic letters in different forms, concealed the rules and
directions for writing out a second of greater scope — a so-
called Word Cipher, in which key words indicate sections
of similar matter, that, brought together in a new sequence,
tell a different story. Both were invented by Bacon in his
youth. The primary, or Bi-literal Cypher, is fully ex-
plained in De Augmentis Scientiaruni, but it is only re-
cently that it has been found to exist in the Italic printing
of a number of the books of the Elizabethan era — books
ascribed to different authors but now proved to have been
written by Bacon.
On pages following are extracts from the Bi-lUeral Cy-
pher, as published, relating in the words of the inventor
himself the manner of using the Key-Word Cipher for the
segregation and reconstruction of the hidden narratives,
infolded in the pages as originally printed, with which we
are familiar. These directions are fragmentary, scattered
through many of the books deciphered, and are many times
repeated in varying forms of expression.
The more important only are here gathered, which, with
the "Argument" and the keys, now given, of this tragedy.
31
II PREFACE.
will outline the plan of this work. It may be interesting to
know that the use of the key words is progressive, and that
a small number only are used at one time : the first six or
seven writing the prologue, a few of the next the opening
scenes of the play, and so on through the entire work, some
being dropped as others are taken up successively until all
have been used. An appendix gives the book and page
from which the lines are taken that have been brought to-
gether as the "great architect or master-builder directed."
In the reconstruction, especially when prose is changed
to verse, the order of the words is slightly changed to meet
the requirements of "rythmic measure in the Iambic."
The great author used large parts of many scenes in two
distinct plays — open and concealed — now and then with
the same dramatis personae, again with others clearly indi-
cated as belonging, historically, to these particular scenes.
This fact may jostle our ideas somewhat, as we find new
speakers using the familiar lines, but there is an added
interest, when the transposition gives the accuracy of his-
tory to the beauty of dramatic expression. This seems the
reverse of the natural order, but it is seeming only, for the
literary world became acquainted with the rewritten plays
three centuries before the hidden originals came to light.
In the banquet scene of this tragedy, the iffrst part is
almost identical with that of Henry Eighth, although —
when "like joins like," something from Macbeth, from
Hamlet, from Romeo and Juliet, etc., etc., is added —
while other diversions of that festival night are not given
openly in any of the works. The handkerchief scenes of
the imagined tragedy of Othello belong to this real, but
concealed, tragedy of Anne Boleyn, and the accusations
against the Queen of Sicilia are a part of the charge against
this martyred Queen ; the reply, a part of the pathetic but
brave response she made. The second part was never be-
fore in any published drama.
32
PREFACE. Ill
It would seem that Bacon learned from Cicero the
method of preparing matter which could with slight varia-
tions be adapted to more than one purpose. We find this
in the Advancement of Learning (1605, p. 52).
"And Cicero himself e, being broken unto it by great ex-
perience, delivereth it plainelj; That whatsoever a man
shall have occasion to speake of, (if he will take the
paines) he may have it in effect premediate, and handled
in these. So that when hee cometh to a particular, he shall
have nothing to doe, but to put too Names and times, and
places; and such other Circumstances of Individuals."
A little further on (p. 56), is an instance where an in-
quiry about the tablets in K'eptune's Temple is ascribed to
Diagoras, while in the Apothegms this same question is put
in the mouth of Bion. And, in the First Folio of the
Shakespeare Plays, a very marked example occurs in Romeo
and Juliet.
Romeo speaking, says :
"The gray ey'd morne smiles on the frowning night,
Checkring the Easterne Clouds with streakes of light,
And darknesse fleckel'd like a drunkard reeles.
From forth dayes pathway, made by Titans wheeles."
Then almost immediately after, the Friar gives the same
lines, with very slight but distinctive changes :
"The gray ey'd morne smiles on the frowning night,
Checkring the Easterne Cloudes with streaks of light,
And fleckled darknesse like a drunkard reeles.
From forth dales path, and Titans burning wheeles.''
The modern editors cut out one quatrain as a supposed
mistake, the decipherer discovers by the keys and joining-
words that each has a place — the first in one work, and the
second in another.
As the tragical events of this period in the history of the
ill-fated queen, now known to be Bacon's ancestress, have
33
IV PREFACE.
little by little unfolded in the deciphering, there has been a
deepening sense of the pathos of the story. Like dissolving
views the scenes appear, and fade, and this mightiness
meets misery so soon that we feel the shock. There is the
gentle Anne's appearance at the banquet, "when King
Henry for the first time cometh truely under the spell of
her beautie" — his infatuation — his determination that
nothing should stand in the way of making her his wife —
the divorce from Katherine — the coronation — the disap-
proval of the people, not of Anne but of the King — the in-
sulting song at the coronation festivities — the birth of
Elizabeth, Bacon's mother, and the King's disappointment
that the princess was not a prince. Later there is the
King's fickleness, which prompted the false charges against
his wife — the mockery of the trial — the true nobleness of
the victim — the injustice of her condemnation — the pa-
thetic message to the King, as she was led to the scaffold —
the cruelty of her execution.
It is no wonder that Bacon felt this deeply, nor that
"every act and scene is a tender sacrifice, and an incense lo
her sweet memory."
ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP.
Detroit, November, 1901.
34
AEGUMEXT OF THE PLAY.
As may bee well knowne unto yon, tli' qiiestio' of Eliza-
beth, her legitimacie, made her a Protestant, for the Pope
had not recognis'd th' union, tho' it were royale, which her
sire made with fayre x\nne Boleyn. Still we may see that
despite some restraining feare, it suited her to dallie with
the question, to make a faint shew of settling the mater as
her owne co'sie'ee dictated, if we take th' decisions of
facts; but the will of th' remorse-tost king left no doubt
in men's minds concerning th' former marriage, in fact, as
th' crowne was giv'n first to Mary, his daughter of that
marriage, before commi'g to Elizabeth.
In th' storie of my most infortunate grandmother, the
sweet ladie who saw not th' headsman's axe when shee
went forth proudly to her coronation, you shall read of a
sadnesse that touches me neere, partlie because of neere-
nesse in bloud, partlie from a firme beliefe and triist in
her innocencie. Therefore every act and scene of this play
of which I speake, is a tende' sacrifice, and an incense to
her sweete memorie. It is a plea to the generations to
come for a just judgement upon her life, whilst also giving
the world one of the noblest o' my plays, hidden in Cy'hrc
in many other works.
A short argument, and likewise th' keies, are giv'n to
ayde th' decypherer when it is to be work'd out as I wish.
This doth tell th' story with suflBcient clearnes to guide you
to our liidden storie.
This opeth at th' palace, when King Henry for the
first time cometh truely under the spell of her beautie, —
then in th' highest perfection of dainty grace, fresh, un-
spoiled, — and the charme of youthlie manners. It iti
XVIII ARGUMENT.
thought this was that inquisition which brought out f eares
regarding th' marriage contracted with Katharine of Arra-
gon, so that none greatly wond'red whe' prolonged consul-
tation of the secret voyce in his soule assur'd the questioner
noe good could ever come from the union. Acti'g upon
this conviction he doth confer money and titles upon his
last choise to quiet objections on score of unmeetnes.
But tho' an irksome thing, truth shall be told. Tho' it
be ofttimes a task, — if selfe-imposed, not by any meanes
th' lesse, but more wearisome, since the work hath noe
voyce of approvall or praise, — I intend its completion. For
many simple causes th' historic of a man's life cometh
from acts that we see through stayned glasse darkelie, and
of th' other sexe, a man doth perceyve lesse, if possible,
but th' picture that I shall heere give is limn'd most care-
fully. However m' pen hath greatly digress'd, and Lo
returne.
Despite this mark of royall favour, a grave matter like
the divorcement of a royall spouse to wed a maide, suited
not with fayre Anne's notions of justice, and with a sweete
grace she made answere when the King sued for favour : —
"I am not high in birth as would befit a Queene, but I am.
too good to become your mistresse." So there was no waye
to compasse his desires save to wring a decree out o' th'
Pope and wed th' maide, not a jot regarding her answer
unlesse to bee the more eager to have his waye.
Th' love Lord Percy shew'd my lady, although so
frankly return'd, kept the wish turning, turning as a rest-
less mill. Soone he resolv'd on proof of his owne spirit, doe
th' Pope how he might, and securing a civill decree, pri-
vately wedded th' too youthfuU Anne, and hid her for space
of severall dales untill th' skies could somewhat cleare ; but
when th' earlie sumer came, in hope that there might
soone bee borne to them an heyre of th' desir'd kinde,
36
OF THE PLAY. XIX
order'd willinglie her coronation sparing noe coste to make
it outvie anie other.
And when she was borne along, surrounded by soft
white tissew, shielded by a canopie of white, whilst she is
wafted onwards, you would say an added charme were to
paint the lillie, or give the rose perfume.
This was onely th' beginning of a triumph, bright as
briefe, — in a short space 'twas ore. Henry chose to con-
sider th' infant princesse in the light of great anger of a
just God brought upon him for his sinnes, but bearing this
with his daring spirit, he compelleth the Actes of Suprem-
acy and Succession, which placed him at the head of the
Church of England, in th' one case, and made his heires
by Queene Anne th' successours to th' throne. Untill that
time, onely male heyres had succeeded to th' roiall power
and the act occasioned much surprise amongst our nobilitie.
But Henry rested not the'. The lovelinesse of Anne
and her natural opennesse of manner, so potent to winne
th' weake heart o' th' King, awaken'd suspition and much
cruell jealousie when hee saw th' gay courtiers yielding to
th' spell of gracefuU gentility, — heighten'd by usage for-
rayn, as also at th' English Court. But if truth be said,
th' fancy had taken him to pay lovi'g court unto the faire
Jane Seymour, who was more beautifuU, and quite young,
— but also most ordinary as doth regard personall manner,
and th' qualitie that made th' Queene so pleasing, — Lady
Jane permitting marks of gracious favour t' be freelie
offered.
And the Queene, unfortunately for her secret hope,
surpris'd them in a tender scene. Sodaine griefe orewhelm-
ing her so viole'tlie, she swound before them, and a little
space thereafter the infant sonne so constantly desir'd,
borne untimely, disappointed once more this selfish mon-
arch. This threw him into great fury, so that he was
cruellie harsh where [he] should give comfort and sup-
37
XX ARGUMENT.
port, throwing so much blame upon the gentle Queene,
that her heart dyed within her not long after soe sadde
ending of a mother, her hopes.
Under pretexte of beleeving gentle Queene Anne to be
guilty of unf aithfullnesse, Henry had her convey' d to Lon-
don Tower, and subjected her to such ignominy as one can
barelie beleeve, ev'n basely laying to her charge the
gravest sins, and summoning a jury of peeres delivered the
Queene for tryal and sentence. His act doth blacken
pitch. Ev'n her father, sitting amidst the peeres before
whom shee was tried, exciteth not so much astonishment
since hee was forc'd thereto.
Henry's wdll was done, but hardly could hee restraine
the impatience that sent him forth from his pallace at th'
hour of her execution to an eminence neare by, in order
to catche th' detonation (ation) of th' field peece whose
hollow tone tolde the moment at which th' cruell axe fell,
and see the blacke flag, that signall which floated wide to
tell the world she breath'd no more.
Th' hast with which hee then went forward wdth his
marriage, proclaym'd the reall rigor or frigidity of his
hart. It is by all men accompted strange, this subtile
power by which soe many of the peeres could be forc'd to
passe sentence upon this lady, when proofes of guilt were
nowhere to bee produced. In justice to a memorie dear
to myselfe, I must aver that it is far from cleare yet, upon
what charge shee was found worthie of death. It must of
neede have beene some quiddet of th' lawe, that chang'd
some harmlesse words into anything one had in minde, for
in noe other waye could speech of hers be made wrongf uU.
Having fayl'd to prove her untrue, nought could bring-
about such a resulte, had this not (have) beene accom-
plish'd.
Thu% w^as her good fame made a reproache, and time
hath not given backe that priceles treasure. If my plaie
38
OF THE PLAY. XXI
shal shew this most clearly, I shall be co'tente. And as
for my roiall grandsire, whatever honour hath beene lost
by such a course, is re-gain' d by his descendants from the
union, through this lovi'g justification of Anne Bulle', his
murther'd Queene.
Before I go further with instructions, I make bold to
say that th' benefits we who now live in our free England
reape [are] from her faith and unfayling devotion to th'
advancement, that she herselfe promoting, beheld well
undertaken. It was her most earnest beliefe in this re-
markable and widelie spread effecte on th' true prosperitie
of the realme, and not a love o' dignity or power, — if the
evidence of workes be taken, — that co'strain'd her to take
upon her th' responsibility of roialtie. And I am fullie
perswaded in mine owne minde that had shee lived to carry
out all th' work, her honours, no doubt, had outvied those
of her world-wide famed and honour'd daughter who con-
tinu'd that which had beene so well commenc'd.
I am aware many artes waned in the raignes of
Edward and bloodie Mary, also that their recovery must
have requir'd patient attention and the expenditure of
money my mother had no desire so to imploy, having many
other things at that time by whicli th' coffers were drayn'd
subtly ; but that it must require f arre greater perseverance
in order to begin so noble work, devising th' plannes and
ayding in their execution, cannot be impugn'd. Many
times these things do not shewe lightness or th' vanitie
which some have laid to her charge.
However th' play doth reveale this better, f arre, then 1
wish t' give it in this Cypher, therefore I begge that it
shall bee written out and kept as a perpetual monument of
my wrong'd, but innocent ancestresse.
My keies mentio'd in the beginning of this most help-
full work, will follow in this place : —
39
XXII KEYS OF THE PLAY.
The King Henry Sevent, Kath'rine th' Infanta,
Prince Arthur, Catholicke Spaine, Prince of Wales, King
Henry th' Eight, Rome, nu'cio, Pope, Protestant, Anne
Bullen, prelate, Wolsey, divorce, fury, excommunication,
France, Francis First, marriage, ceremony, brother, pa-
geant, barge, Richmond, Greenwich, Tower, procession,
cloth, tissue, panoply, canopy, cloth o' gold, litter, bearing-
staves, pageant, streets, coronation, crowne of Edward,
purple robe, roiall ermine, mace, th' sword, wand, esses,
French, Spanish ambassadours, advance-guards, mayor,
dutchesse, Duke Suffolke, oSTorfolke, Marquesse Dorset,
Bishop London, same Winchester, th' Knights of th' Gar-
ter, Lord Chancellour, judges, Surrey, Earle, quirrestres,
lords, ladies, et al., Westminster, Rochford, Wiltshire,
manors, castles, land, valew, titles, Marchionesse of Pem-
brooke, ports, countesses, roiall scepter, stile, power, title,
pompe, realme, artes, advancement, liberty, treasure, warre,
treaty, study, benefit, trade, priest, monastery, restitution,
acts, supremacy, succession, Elizabeth, daughter, sonne,
heyres, unfaithfulnesse, treason, j^orris, Weston, subtile
triumph, hate, losse, evill, jealousie, love, beautie, Tower,
tryall, proofe, sentry, sentence, executed, burning, choyce,
the axe, block, uncover'd face, report, black-flag, freedom,
marriage-vow, Edward.
As hath most frequentlie bin said these will write th'
play, but th' foregoing abridgeme't, or argument, wil ayde
you. In good hope of saving th' same from olde Father
Time's ravages, heere have I hidden this Cypher play. To
you I entruste th' taske I, myselfe, shall never see com-
plete, it is probable, but soe firme is my conviction that it
must before long put up its leaves like th' plant in th'
sunne, that I rest contente awaiting that time.
40
CONCERNING! THE
Bi-LiTERAL Cypher
PROS AND CONS
OF THE CONTROVERSY
THE BI-LITEKAL CYPHEE OF FEAI^CIS BACOTnT.
ARTICLES FROM MAGAZINES AND OTHER SOURCES.
In the following pages will be found the statement of its
discovery in the Works of Bacon, and discussions by the public
Press. Inquries, objections and answers from so many different
points of view would seem to cover every phase of the matter.
Unreasoning prejudice is, of course, beyond reply. To those
of open mind this exposition of the discovery will be most in-
teresting. Its importance cannot be overestimated. A new
literature, buried these three hundred years, as interesting as it
it surprising, has been unearthed. Its authenticity is placed
beyond question.
BI-LITERAL CYPHER OF FRAISTCIS BACOK
Baconiana.
To thousands who tread unthinkingly the earth's fair sur-
face, the mineral constitution of the globe, or the history of its
formation, is as a sealed book. The geologist, however,
pointing out the parallel lines in a rock will tell us they indicate
the glacial period. From a piece of coal he will describe the
forests and plant life which formed the coal measures of the
carboniferous era. He finds where volcanic action reveals
strata from unknown depths, and reads their history like a
printed page.
In architecture, the ages stamped, each its own, peculi-
arities upon column and temple, and the student of that science
will declare the date of the ruins which accident or excavation
have brought to view.
We see a tapering obelisk inscribed with hieroglyphics, and
say this is Egyptian. The eye educated to discriminate will
study the writings upon the stone that has been preserved from
remote ages, and will say. this is the hieroglyphic proper; this
ideographic: this the phonetic, or of this or that peculiar
character, this is the Egyptian Hieratic ; this the Phoenecian ;
these the Cuniform characters of the ancient Persian or
Assyrian inscriptions, and few will challenge the correctness
of the decipherings.
The savant will tell us that the environment, the nationality
and personality are unmistakably impressed upon the literature
of ever}^- country, mark the times and character of its people
and the stage of its progress. Year by year, decade by decade,
age by age. time passed and wrought its changes until that
period was reached in Vv^hich the English people of the present
day are interested because of ihe discussion which it has
aroused — the latter part of the XVIth and beginning of the
XVHth Centuries. Knighthood had passed its flower but the
English Court still loved the tales of Knightly deeds and found
43
delight in the fancies of the Shepheard's Calender and Faerie
Queene. Legitimate drama began to develop, replacing
masques and mysteries. History was written and its lessons
emphasized by dramatic representations. Essays brought the
truth "home to men's bosoms and business," and experimental
science made clear that "there are more things in heaven and
earth than are dreamt of in our philosophy."
This was the age when Francis Bacon lived and wrote, and
fantasy, and essay, and drama began to appear, at first
anonymously, and then under names of men as authors, whose
lives, habits and capabilities presented the most incongruous
contrasts to the works produced. They were days of peril and
secret intrigue, when the words from the lips of the Courtier
were often farthest removed from the thought of the brain,
and when all secret communications were committed to cipher.
Of all the weighty secrets of that time, none save the Queen
of England herself bore any more momentous than that pro-
lific author. So momentous were they that few traces of their
import found place upon the public records in connected or
intelligible form, and were supposed to have died with those
most intimately connected with them.
Bacon placed in his De Augmentis Scientiarum the key to a
simple but most useful Cipher, of his own invention, and we
now find that through its instrumentality the secrets so
jealously guarded in his life time, were committed to his works,
and waited only the hand and vision of a decipherer to be
revealed to the ages which should follow.
Because the writer of this article has for seven years worked
upon the Ciphers of Bacon, not as a dilettante, but as one who
realized the importance and vastness of the undertaking, urged
on by the fascination of a great discovery and a growing
interest in the developments of it, the statements made con-
cerning the "Bi-literal Cypher of Francis Bacon" are not
"uninspired guesses," nor mere conjecture, but such as come
from knowledge gained by the hardest work and closest appli-
cation, until the eye has been trained to that degree of dis-
crimination by which, like that of the geologist, it is able to
make hidden things plain.
In pursuit of the same objects as other students of things
Baconian, my own investigations have been in quite a different
field from theirs, and have met with most successful, as well as
44
most surprising results, not less surprising to myself, than they
will be to my readers. I have been glad to submit the results of
my years of study for the edification of those interested in the
same subject, for they supply missing links in the literature
of that era and explain much, if not all, that has been
mysterious and difficult of explanation.
The last two numbers of Baconiana have presented varied
comments upon the published results of my investigations.
Naturally opinions differ, according to the point of view.
Although the things discovered and brought to light are those
which have been so diligently sought for, and believed to exist
by the deepest students, yet the wider field unexpectedly dis-
closed and the marvelousness of it all, prompt to incredulity.
The objections urged against a belief in the cipher dis-
closures appear in a variety of forms. The astounding
revelations are beyond the dreams of the most ardent believers
that Bacon's sphere of action and achievements were far
greater than had been acknowledged, and some have gone so
far as to think the recent publication of the "Bi-literal Cypher"
must have been a romantic creation of my own, the words made
to fit the differing forms of the Italic letters in the old books,
and written out in imitation of the forms of thought and
manner of speech of the old English language, enriched by the
vocabulary of the great Francis. To suggest such a thing,
with all that it implies, would bring its own refutation.
It is true that the Cipher Story does not in all respects accord,
or stop with what has been supposed to be the "facts of
history." Authorities do not agree as to what the "facts"
were, nor is it believed that all have found place on the records,
and historians have filled gaps with deductions and conjectures,
some of which have been most extravagant and impossible.
Especially does this appear to be true in the light of the cipher
disclosures, and whatever of variation there may be will
furnish a profitable field for the investigators, and there is little
reason to doubt their ultimate harmony. Cyphers would not
be used to hide known facts, and could be useful only in
recording those that had been suppressed.
Some have given expression to the thought that the Cipher
Story shows a most unpleasant phase of character in Bacon,
and a lack of that princely spirit which should have actuated
the son of Elizabeth, entitled to the throne, in not trying to
45
possess himself of royal power at any cost. Essex, of a more
martial spirit, essayed to seize it, when Francis refused to
make open claim to being Prince, in the face of the denials of
the Queen, — and Essex was beheaded for the attempt. The
murder of two princes of the blood royal by Richard Third;
the imprisonment and execution of another, by Henry
Seventh; the juggling with all rights by Henry Eighth, were
not remote, — quite near enough to chill the blood of the peace-
loving student and deter him from making himself sufficiently
, obnoxious to invite a similar fate. Later, his own account,
in the Cipher, of the reasons for not striving to establish him-
self upon the throne appear quite adequate, — the succession
established by law, and quite satisfactory to the people. — "our
witnesses dead, our certificates destroyed," etc., (pages 33, 38,
47, 201, and other references). He submitted to the inevitable
as did Prince Napoleon, and as others have done in our own
time, — for "what will not a man yield up for his life."
Whether or not Bacon has "told the truth" in the Cipher,
is not in the province of the decipherer to discuss. A decipherer
can only disclose what is infolded. As to "slandering the
Queen" in the statements which the Cipher records, — if so,
, Bacon would not be alone, for the old MSS, and as reliable and
recent an authority as the National Dictionary of Biography
admit the motherhood of Elizabeth, though they do not give
the names of the offspring. This is supplied by the Cipher,
written by the one person most likely to know. If the Cipher
exists, and we know that it does, there must be some more
reasonable theory for its being written into so many pub-
lished books for more than fifty years, than for the purpose of
slander or falsification. The peril of its discovery in the early
days of its infolding would be enhanced by its being a slander,
and the head would have "stood tickle on the shoulders" of
anyone guilty of so causeless a crime.
Francis would have been more "lunatic" for risking such
matter in cipher if not true, than "coward" for not daring
openly to proclaim the truth which was being so carefully
suppressed.
Many inquiries have reached me, asking "how is the Cipher
worked," and expressing disappointment that the inquirer had
been unable to grasp the system or its application. It would
be difficult to teach Greek or Sanscrit, in a few written lines.
46
or to learn it by a few hours study. It is equally so with the
Cipher. Deciphering the Bi-literal Cipher, as it appears in
Bacon's works, will be impossible to those who are not pos-
sessed of an eyesight of the keenest, and perfect accuracy of
vision in distinguishing minute differences in form, lines,
angles and curves in the printed letters. Other things
absolutely essential are unlimited time and patience, per-
sistency, and aptitude, love for overcoming puzzling difficul-
ties and, I sometimes think, inspiration. As not every one can
be a poet, an artist, an astronomer, or adept in other branches
requiring special aptitude, so, and for the same reasons, not
every one will be able to master the intricacies of the Cipher,
for in many ways it is most intricate and puzzling, — not in the
system itself, but in its use in the books. "It must not be made,
too plain lest it be discovered too quickly nor hid too deep, lest
it never see the light of day," is the substance of the inventor's
thought many times repeated in the work.
The system has been recognized, and used, since the day that
De Augmentis was published, and has had its place in every
translation and publication since, but the ages have waited to
learn that it was embedded in the original books themselves
from the date of his earliest writings (1579 as now known)
and infolded his secret personal history. To disbelieve the
Cipher because not "every one" can decipher it, would be as
great a mistake as it would be to say that the translations of the
character writings and hieroglyphics of older times, which have
been deciphered, were without foundation or significance,
because we could not ourselves master them in a few hours of
inefficient trial. I would repeat, Ciphers are used to hide
things, not to make them plain.
The different editions of the same work form each a separate
study and tell a different Cipher Story. The two editions of
De Augmentis form an illustration. The first, or "London"
edition, was issued, according to Spedding, in October, 1623.
The next, or "Paris" edition, was issued in 1624. They differ
in the Italic printing, and some errors in the second do not
occur in the first. The 1624 edition has been deciphered; and
the hidden story appears in the "Bi-literal Cypher" (page 310).
The 1623 edition has not, as yet, been deciphered. It seems to
be a rare edition. I found a copy in the British Museum, one in
the Bodleian library at Oxford, two in Cambridge, and one in
47
the choice collection of old books in the library of Sir Edwin
Burning Lawrence.
In the course of my work, Marlowe's Edward Second had
been deciphered before De Augmentis was taken up. At the
end of Edward Second occurs this "veiled" statement,
referring to De Augmentis (page 152 Bi-literal Cypher) ". .
. . the story it contains (our twelft king's nativity since
our sovereign, whose tragedy we relate in this way) shall now
know the day . . " Had Francis succeeded to the throne,
he would have been the twelfth king (omitting the queens)
after Edward Second, hence the inference that De Augmentis
would contain much of his personal history. My disappoint-
ment was great when instead of this the hidden matter was
found to be the Argument of the Odyssey, something not
anticipated, or wanted, and would never have been the result of
my own choice or imagination. At the close of the deciphered
work in Burton's Anatomy, in which the Argument of the Iliad
was most unexpectedly found — another great disappoint-
ment — is this "veiled" statement: (page 309) ". . . while
a Latin work — De Augmentis — will give aid upon the other
(meaning the Odyssey). As in this work (meaning the Iliad)
favorite parts are enlarged (in blank verse) yet as it lendeth
ayde . . .," etc., — i. e., sets a pattern for the writing out of
the Odyssey in the Word Cipher. This explained the 1624 edi-
tion, and the inference is that the 1623 edition will disclose the
personal history referred to on page 1 52.
In the 1624 edition there are some errors in the illustration
of the cipher methods and in the Cicero Epistle which do not
occur in the 1623 edition. The Latin words midway on page
282, "qui pauci sunt" in the 1623 edition, are "qui parati sunt"
in the 1624, page 309, — an error referred to on page 10 of the
Introduction of the "Bi-literal Cypher" as wrong termination,
there being too many letters for the group, and one letter must
be omitted. Other variations show errors in making up the
forms on pages 307 and 308 in the 1624 edition, whether pur-
posely for confusion or otherwise, it is impossible to tell. The
line on page 307,
"Bxemplum Alphaheti Biformis,"
should be placed above the Bi- formed Alphabet on page 308,
while
"Bxemplum Accommodationis"
48
■>J
should be placed above the example of the adaptation just pre-
ceding. The repetition of twelve letters of the bi-formed alpha-
bet could hardly be called a printer's error, as they are of
another form, unlike those on the preceding page, and may be
taken as an example of the statement that "any two forms will
do." In these illustrations the letters seem to be drawn with a
pen and are a mixture of script and peculiar forms, and unlike
any in the regular fonts of type used in the printed matter. No
part of the Cipher Story is embodied in the script or pen letters
on these pages. Whether or not the changing of the lines was
done purposely, the grouping of the Italic letters from the
regular fonts is consecutive as the printed lines stand, the
wrong make-up causing no break in the connected narration.
There are many "veiled" statements throughout the "Bi-literal
Cypher," such as are noted in Edward Second and in Burton.
To the decipherer they have a meaning, indicating what to look
for and where to find that which is necessary for correct and
completed work, as well as to guard against errors and incor-
rect translation.
My researches among the old books in the British Museum
the past season have borne rich fruit, for there were found the
earlier cipher writings. Shepheard's Calendar, which appeared
anonymously in 1579, contains the first, and discloses the signi-
fication of the mysterious initials "E. K." and the identity of
this person with the author of the work. The Cipher narrative
begins thus : "E. K. will be found to be nothing less than the
letters signifying the future Sovereign, or England's King. .
. . In event of death of Her Ma., who bore in honorable
wedlock, Robert, now known as sonne to Walter Devereaux,
as well as him who now speaketh to the unknown aidant
decypherer . . . we, the eldest borne should by Divine
right of a law of God, and made binding on man, inherit
scepter and throne. . . . We devised two Cyphers, now
used for the first time, for this said history, as safe, clear and
undecipherable, whilst containing the keys in each which open
the most important. . . . Till a decypherer find a pre-
pared or readily discovered alphabet, it seemeth to us almost
impossible, save by Divine gift and heavenly instinct, that he
should be able to read what is thus revealed."
Following Shepheard's Calender, the works between 1579
and 1590, so far deciphered (but as yet unpublished) are:
49
Arraignement of Paris, 1584.
Mirrour of Modestie, 1584.
Planetomachia, 1585.
Treatise of Melancholy, 1586. Two editions of this were
issued the same year, with differing Italics. The first ends
with an incomplete cipher word which is completed in the
second for the continued narration, thus making evident which
was first published, unless they were published at the same
time.
Euphues, 1587; Morando, 1587. These two also join
together, with an incomplete word at the end of the first finding
its completion in the commencement of the Cipher in the second.
Perimedls the Blacke-smith, 1588; Pandosto, 1588. These
two also join together.
Spanish Masquerado, 1589. Two editions of this work bear
date the same year, but have different Italicising. In one edition
the Cipher Story is complete, closing with the signature : "Fr.
Prince." In the other the story is not complete, the book
ending with an incomplete cipher word, the remainder of which
will be found in some work of near that date which has not yet
been indicated and deciphered.
These, while not all the works in which Cipher will be found
between the years 1579 and 1590, unmistakably connect the
earlier writings with those of later date than 1590 which have
been deciphered — as published in the "Bi-literal Cypher" — so
that we now know that the Cipher writings were being con-
tinuously infolded in Bacon's works, from the first to the last
of his literary productions.
Elizabeth Wells Gallup.
50
THE BI-LITERAL CYPHER OF SIR FRAXCIS BACOX.
A NEW LIGHT ON A FEW OLD BOOKS.
By Elizabeth Wells Gallup.
[Mrs. Gallup professes to find in certain of Bacon's zvorks, the first
folio of Shakespeare, and other books of the period, tivo distinctive
founts of italic type employed. All the letters of one fount stand for
the letter a in the cipher, those of the other for b. Hence it is pos-
sible to translate, as it were, any given line of type into a scries of
abbba, abaab, baaba, abaaa. and so on, according to the type employed,
and thereby, to spell out words and sentences in accordance zvith the
principles laid down by Bacon himself in his account of the so-called
"Bi-literal" cypher in his "De Augmentis Scientiarium." In a further
article which she is now preparing Mrs. Gallup ivill deal zvith a
number of the individual writers who have taken part in the Bacon-
Shakespeare controversy during the last fezv weeks, zvhose criticisDts.
we learn by cablegram, and only nozv before her. This preliniinary
paper will enable our readers to acquaint themselves with the nature
of Mrs. Gallup' s laborious investigations. — Ed. P. M. M.].
Pall Mall Magazine, March, 1902.
It is a pleasure to respond to the cabled invitation from the
Pall Mall Magazine to write an article n]X)n the "Bacon-
Shakespeare Controversy," although I have really never bccni
concerned with it, except incidentally. I did not find myself
a Baconian until the discovery of the Bacon ciphers answered
the questions in such a final way that controversy should end.
I think my best plan will be to give a clear, authoritative,
and somewhat popular exposition of my book. The Bi-Jiteral
Cypher of Sir Francis Bacon, which was recently very kindly
and appreciatively reviewed by Mr. Mallock in the Nineteenth
Century and After. I had not the pleasure of knowing;' Mr, Mal-
lock, and his article was wholly a surprise.
In giving to the woidd the results of my researches, I have
felt, as have my publishers, that my work should be left with-
out attempt upon our part to influence or mould opinion in
any way otlicr tlmn by setting fortli what I have found.
61
Some one has said, "any man's opinion is the measure of
his knowledge." If his knowledge is ample his judgment should
be true, and I am well aware there has been little opportunity
for men of letters or the reading public to know about this new
phase of the old subject.
The book itself is much wider in its range, and much more
far-reaching in its literary and historical consequences, than the
mere settlement of the Bacon-Shakespeare question. It con-
cerns not only the authorship of much of the best literature
of the Elizabethan period, but the regularity of successions to
the throne of England ; and it transfers the "controversy" from
the realm of literary opinion and criticism to the determina-
tion of the question whether I have correctly and truthfully
transcribed a cipher.
That this will at once meet with universal acceptance is
not expected. On the face of things it seems improbable — al-
most as improbable to the world as the revolution of the earth
about the sun was to Lord Bacon, who declared it could in no-
wise be accepted. "Galileo built his theory. . .supposing the
earth revolved. . . . But this he devised upon an assumption
that cannot be allowed — viz. that the earth moves." (Nov. Org.)
Two limited editions of the book were published, mostly
for private circulation, while my researches were going on, but
with little effort to obtain public audience, awaiting the time,
now arrived, when I could present the first of the cipher writ-
ings from early editions of works in the British Museum.
The interest it has excited has been considerable, varying
in its expression from more or less good-natured doubts as to
my sanity and veracity, from those who are satisfied with first
impressions ; to the careful examination by such writers as
Mr. Mallock and some others who have regarded it as worthy
of serious consideration.
For myself, I have been satisfied to wait for tlie verdict.
It will be that I have at great cost put before the public a most
detailed and elaborate hoax — or worse; or that Francis Bacon
was a cipher writer and the most extraordinary personage in
literature the world has yet known.
Assuming for the moment the cipher as a fact, what are
the claims made in it for himself? Briefly, but startlingly
stated, they are : That he was the author of the works attribu-
52
ted to Edmund Spenser, and those of Greene, Peele, Marlowe,
and Shakespeare, a portion of those published by Ben Jonson,
also the Anatomy of Melancholy known as Burton's, besides the
works to which Bacon's name is attached; that these, instead
of being in fact the outpourings of literary inspiration, are lit-
erary mosaics, the repository of other literature — much of it
then dangerous to Bacon to expose — made consecutive by trans-
position, and gaining in literary interest by the new relations.
The bi-literal cipher gives the rules by which the constituent
parts of these mosaics are to be reassembled in their original
form by the "word-cipher," so called, a second system permeat-
ing the same works and hiding a larger and more varied liter-
ature than the first. It is also asserted that Bacon was the true
heir to the throne of England, through a secret marriage be-
tw^een the Earl of Leicester and Elizabeth, which took place
prior to her accession, while both were confined in the Tower
of London ; that for obvious reasons of state the marriage could
not be announced before the coronation, and that the Queen
afterwards refused to acknowledge it publicly ; that the unfor-
tunate Essex was in fact his younger brother, and the other-
wise inexplicable rebellion was undertaken by Essex to compel
from the Queen recognition of his descent, with expectation
of the throne if denied to, or not claimed by, Francis.
The personal matter, scattered in the bi-literal cipher
through the numerous volumes, is repeated in different forms
many times — evidently in the hope that the claims asserted to
the throne and the events of his life would be detected and de-
ciphered, from some, if not from all his works, at some future
time.
The book itself contains about 385 pages of deciphered
matter, written in the old English of the Elizabethan period,
and relating to men and things, literary and historical, then
existing. It affords the most ample and serious materials for
what may be called "the higher criticism" ; and such criticism
is very cordially invited, for reasons more important than any-
thing concerning my own abilities or personality. The most
sceptical will admit industry, and some sort of capability, in
producing a work of the kind. It is due to the pulolic that in
a presentation of this kind I should offer a prlma-facie case.
The (juestion most nearly related to the Bacon-Shakespeare
53
controversy, from a literary standpoint, is: Was Bacon's imag-
ination, fancy and ability, equal to the production of such poet-
ic and dramatic literature as is embraced in the Shakespeare
plays and other works named ? The dicta obtainable from mere
comparisons of style are scarcely final. Individual judgments,
in this field, are far from conclusive or satisfactory. There is
as much difference in style between the laboured, interminable
sentences of Bacon's philosophical works and the polished sen-
tences of the Essays as there is between the Essays and the
epigrams of the Plays.
Bacon has been somewhat out of fashion of late. His phil-
osophy, once strong and new, has been developed into the daily
practice of these forceful and effective times, and is now inter-
esting principally to the curious. His life, — reduced by Pope
to the inconclusive epigram, "the wisest, brightest, and meanest
of mankind," — ending in his disgrace, does not now attract the
average reader, while the compactness of the Essays deters many
from a second reading. It is well, therefore, to refresh our
minds concerning the man, and the estimation in which he was
held before the present-day rush for new things had become so
absorbing.
Briefly, the well-considered opinions of those best fitted
to judge are, that his abilities were transcendent in every field.
Lord Macaulay tells us that Bacon's mind w^as "the most ex-
quisitely constructed intellect that has ever been bestowed upon
any of the children of men" ; Pope, that "Lord Bacon was the
greatest genius that England, or perhaps any other country,
ever produced" ; Sir Alexander Grant, that "it is as an inspired
seer, the prose-poet of modern science, that I reverence Bacon" ;
Alexander Smith, that "he seems to have written his Essays
with the pen of Shakespeare." Mackintosh calls his literature
"the utmost splendour of imagery." Addison says, that "he
possessed at once all those extraordinary talents which were di-
vided among the greatest authors of antiquity. . . one does not
know which to admire most in his writings, the strength of rea-
son, force of style, or brightness of imagination." Mr. Welch
assures us : "Lord Bacon was a poet. His language has a sweet
and majestic rhythm which satisfies the sense, no less than the
superhuman wisdom of his philosophy satisfies the intellect."
While H. A. Taine, a Frenchman, recognising throughout the
54
V
differences of language the force of the poetic thought, gives
us this in his English Literature : —
''In this band of scholars, dreamers, and inquirers, appears
the most comprehensive, sensible, originative of the minds
of the age — Francis Bacon, a great and luminous intellect,
one of the finest of this poetic progeny. . . .There is nothing
in English prose superior to his diction. . , . His thought is in
the manner of artists and poets, and he speaks after the man-
ner of prophets and seers . . . Shakespeare and the seers do not
contain more vigorous or expressive condensations of thought,
more resembling inspiration. . . . His process is that of the crea-
tors: it is inspiration, not reasoning."
Again, Lord Macaulay tells us: "No man ever had an
imagination at once so strong and so thoroughly subjugated.
In truth, much of Bacon's life was spent in a visionary world,
amidst things as strange as any that are described in the Ara-
bian tales." — "A man so rare in knowledge of so many several
kinds, endued with the facility and felicity of expressing it all
in so elegant, significant, so abundant, and yet so choice and
ravishing array of words, of metaphors and allusions, as per-
haps the world has not seen since it was a world," said Sir Tobie
Mathew.
The German Schlegel, in his History of Literature, calls
him "this mighty genius," and adds, "Stimulated by his ca-
pacious and stirring intellect ... intellectual culture, nay, the
social organisation of modern Europe generally, assumed a new
shape and complexion." While again from Lord Macaulay we
quote this: "With great minuteness of observation he had an
amplitude of comprehension such as has never yet been vouch-
safed to any human being."
In the Encyclopoedia Britannica we read : "The thoughts
are weighty, and, even when not original, have acquired a pe-
culiar and unique tone or cast by passing through the crucible
of Bacon's mind. A sentence from the Essays can rarely be
mistaken for the production of any other writer. The short,
pithy sayings.
Jewels five words long
That on the stretched forefinger of all Time
Sparkle for ever,
55
have become popular mottoes and household words. The style
is quaint, original, abounding in allusions and witticisms, and
rich, even to gorgeousness, with piled-up analogies and meta-
phors."
In the presence of these acknowledged masters in literary
judgment, I may well be silent. These quotations might be
extended indefinitely. Anything I could add of my own would
be repetition. In the face of these well-considered opinions, the
flippant adverse judgment of newspaper critics, in the Bacon-
Shakespeare controversy, thrown off in the hurry of daily is-
sues, may for the present be disregarded. The writers of such
articles have never read Bacon well, if at all, — perhaps not
Shakespeare thoroughly.
My work in the past eight years of constant study of the
subject has led me, of necessity, through every line and word
that Bacon wrote, both acknowledged and concealed, so far as the
latter has been developed. The work I have done upon the
word-cipher in reassembling his literature from the mosaic to
its original form has given me a critical knowledge at least, and
a basis perhaps possessed by few for forming, to the extent of
my abilities, a critical judgment; but I would merely add, that
he was, assuredly, master in many fields of which even they
who knew him best were unaware.
Granting him these literary powers, was he at the same
time a cipher writer ? and did he particularly affect this bi-liter-
al method of cipher writing?
For the first I refer, for brevity's sake, to the article on
cryptograms in the Encyclopoedia BrUannica ; and for the
second to the original Latin De Augmentis Scientiarum (edi-
tions of 1623 and 1624), and its very excellent translation by
Messrs. Spedding, Ellis, and Heath, where the bi-literal cipher
precisely as I have used it is described and illustrated by Bacon
in full, with the statement that he invented it while at the Court
of France. This was between his sixteenth and eighteenth
years. His first reference to it was in 1605. Its first publica-
tion was in 1623, after he had used it continuously forty-four
years, confiding to it his wrongs and woes, and intending, in
thus explaining and giving the key, that at some near or distant
day his sorrows and his claims should be known by its decipher-
ment.
56
The cipher, described by Bacon in De Augmentis Scientiar-
um, is simplicity itself, being in principle mere combinations
and alternations of any two unlike things, and in practice as
used by him consisting of alternations of letters from two slight-
ly different founts of Italic type, arranged in groups of five.
This affords thirty-two possible combinations, being eight in~^
excess of the twenty-four letters of the alphabet he used. The
free use of these Italics is a notable feature in all his literature,
and has been the cause of much speculation. Sometimes the
differences between the letters of the two founts are bold and
marked, often delicate and very difficult for the novice to dis-
tinguish, but possible of determination by the practised eye. The
differences, especially in the capitals used in the 1623 Folio of
the Shakespeare Plays, are apparent to the dullest vision, and
photographic copies of it are in nearly every public and many
private libraries, and so accessible to all. ^ j
In making up his alphabet the two founts are called by him
the 'a fount' and the 'h fount,' and the several groups of five,
representing each letter of the alphabet he used in the cipher,
are as follows : aaaaa, a ; aaaah, h ; aaaha, c ; etc., etc.
After the full exposition of this cipher by Mr. Mallock, a
repetition here would seem superfluous, and I will only take
space to say that the detailed explanation is to be found in De
Augmentis Scientiarum in every edition of Bacon's complete
works.
One of the interesting incidents of the use of this bi-literal
method is, that it did not at all require taking the printer into
the writer's confidence. A peculiar mark under the letter would
indicate the fount from which the letter was to be taken. The
printer may have thought Bacon insane, or what not, but the
marking gave him no clue to the cipher.
Perhaps I cannot better illustrate the scope of the research-
es that have brought out such strange and unexpected disclo-
sures than l)y giving the bibliography of my work. This will
have an attraction for many, who will sympathise with me in
the pleasure I have known in working in these rare and costly
old books.
The deciphering has been from the following original edi-
tions in my possession:
57
%/
The Advancement of Learning 1605
The Shepheards' Calender 1611
The Faerie Queene 1613
Novum Organum 1620
Parasceve 1620
The History of Henry VH 1622
Edward Second 1622
The Anatomy of Melancholy 1628*
The New Atlantis 1635*
Sylva Sylvarum 1635*
and also a beautifully bound full folio facsimile of the 1623
edition of the Shakespeare plays, bearing the name of Coleridge
on the title page.
In the Boston Library I obtained:
Richard Second 1598
David and Bethsabe 1599
Midsummer Night's Dream 1600
Much Ado About Nothing 1600
Sir John Oldcastle 1600
Merchant of Venice 1600
Richard, Duke of York 1600
Treasons of Essex 1601
King Lear 1608
Henry Fifth 1608
Pericles 1609
Hamlet 1611
Titus Andronicus 1611
Richard Second 1615
Merry Wives of Windsor 1619
Whole Contention of York, etc 1619
Pericles 1619
Yorkshire Tragedy 1619
Romeo and Juliet (without date)
From the choice library of John Dane, M.D., Boston :
The Treasons of Essex 1601
Vitae et Mortis 1623
From the library of Marshall C. Lefferts, of IS'ew York,
I had:
Ben Jonson's Plays, Folio 1616
A Quip for an Upstart Courtier 1620
* These three bear dates after Bacon's death, and were undoubt-
edly completed by Dr. Rawley, his secretary, whose explanation
regarding them is found on pages 339-340 of the Bi-literal 'Cypher. ,
68
From the Lenox Librarv, ^STew York:
Midsummer Night's Dream 1600
Sir John Oldcastle 1600
London Prodigal 1605
Pericles 1619
Yorkshire Tragedy 1619
The Whole Contention, etc. 1619
Shakespeare, first folio 1623
and from Mrs. Pott, of London, England:
Ben Jonson's Plays 1616
De Augmentis Scientiarum 1624
During the five months spent at the British Museum :
The Shepheards' Calender 1579
Araygnement of Paris 1584
Mirrour of Modestie 1584
Planetomachia 1585
A Treatise of Melancholy 1586
A Treatise of Mel. (2nd. Ed.) 1586
Euphues 1587
Morando 1587
Perimedes 1588
Spanish Masquerade 1589
Pandosto 1588
Spanish Masq. (2nd Ed.) 1589
In the library of Sir Edwin Dnrning-Lawrence I was able
to decipher, from the Treatise of Melanclioly, some pages that
were missing from the copy at the British Museum.
I wish here to express my deep obligation to the manage-
ment of the British Museum, and to those numerous friends I
was so fortunate as to make while in London, for their uniform
kindness to me — a stranger among them — and for the facilities
which they, to the extent of their power, never failed to afford
me in my work.
Every Italic letter in all the books named has been exam-
ined, studied, classified, and set down "in groups of five" and
the results transcribed. Each book deciphered has its own pe-
culiarities and forms of type, and must be made a separate
study.
'I'lif 1021} Eolio has the largest variety of letters and ir-
regiihiiitics ; but tlic most difficult work was Bacon's History of
59
Henry the Seventh, the mysteries of which it took me the great-
er part of three months of ahnost constant study to master. The
reason came to light as the work progressed, and will appear
from the reading of the first page of the deciphered matter,
with its explanations of ' 'sudden shifts" to puzzle would-be de-
cipherers.
In the deciphering of the different works mentioned, sur-
prise followed surprise as the hidden messages were disclosed,
and disappointment as well was not infrequently encountered.
Some of the disclosures are of a nature repugnant, in many re-
spects, to my very soul, as they were to all my preconceived
convictions, and they would never have seen the light, except
as a correct transcription of what the cipher revealed. As a de-
cipherer I had no choice, and I am in no way responsible for
the disclosures, except as to the correctness of the transcription.
Bacon, throughout the Bi-literal Cypher, makes frequent
mention of his translations of Homer, which he considered one
of his "great works and worthy of preservation," and which
had been scattered through the mosaic of his other writings.
One of the strongest of his expressed desires was that it should
be gathered and reconstructed in its original form.
Perhaps the greatest surprise that came to me in all my
work relates to what was found in the Anatomy of Melaricholy.
Several other of the works had been finished before this book
was taken up. After a few pages had been deciphered, relating
to points in Bacon's history, to my great disappointment the
cipher suddenly changed the subject of its disclosures to this :
"As hath been said, much of th' materiall of th' Iliad may
be found here, as well as Homer his second wondrous storie,
telling of Odysseus his worthy adventures. Th' first nam'd is
of greater worth, beautie and interesse, alone, in my estimation,
than all my other work together, for it is th' crowning triumph
of Homer's pen ; and he outstrips all th' others in th' race, as
though his wits had beene Atalanta's heeles. 'Next we see Vir-
gin, and close behind them, striving to attaine unto th' hights
which they mounted, do I presse on to th' lofty goale. In th'
plays lately publisht, I have approacht my modell closelie, and
yet it doth ever seem beyond my attainment.
"Here are the diverse bookes, their arguments and sundry
examples of th' lines, in our bi-literal cipher."
60
These "arguments," or outlines, are intended as a frame-
work about which, with the aid of the keys given, the fuller
deciphering from the printed lines is to take form through the
methods of the Word-Cipher.
The presence of lines, identical — or nearly so — with those
of Homer, have been noted by close students in all the works
now named as belonging to Bacon, and it has needed but to
bring the lines together from their scattered positions, transpose
names and arrange the parts in proper sequence, to form the
connected narrative.
I can best illustrate this — and it will be of interest to those
fond of the classics — ^by adding a few of the lines from some
of my unfinished and unpublished work, before I had discovered
the bi-literal cipher in the typography of the books I was
using. I will say regarding this part of my incomplete work,
that a very considerable portion of the material for the first
four books of the fuller translation of the Iliad had been collect-
ed and arranged in sequence by the word-cipher before the
w^ork was laid aside, four years ago, on account of the discov-
ery of the bi-literal, the development of which, it became at
once apparent, was of first importance. These directions re-
garding it occur in the Bi-literal Cypher:
"Keepe lines, though somewhat be added to Homer; in
fact, it might be more truly Homeric to consider it a poeme of
the times, rather than a historic of true events." (p. 168.)
". . . In all places, be heedfull of the meaning, but do not
consider the order of the words in the sentences. I should join
my examples and rules together, you will say. So I will. In
the 'Faerie Queene,' booke one, canto two, second and third
lines of the seventh stanzo, thus speaking of Aurora, write :
Wearie of aged Tithones saffron bed,
Had spreade, through dewy ayre her purple robe.
"Or in the eleventh canto, booke two, five-and-thirtieth
stanzo, arrange the matter thus, to relate in verse the great
attacke at the ships, at that pointe of time at which the great
Trojan took up a weighty missile, the gods giving strength to
the hero's arme: it begins in llio sixth verse:
There lay thereby an huge greate stone, which stood
Upon one end, and had not many a day
Removed beene — a signe of sundrie wayes —
This Hector snatch'd and with exceeding sway." (p. 169.)
61
Illustrative of the argument, the incideut in Book I.,
where the priest Chryses ''was evilly dismissed by Agamemnon,"
the bi-literal epitome reads:
"And th' Priest, in silence, walk'd along th' shore of the
resounding sea. After awhile with many a prayer and teare th'
old man cried aloud unto Apollo, and his voice was heard."
In the fuller translation by means of the word-cipher, the
lines collected from the different books result in the following-
rendering of the passage:
"The wretched man, at his imperious speech,
Was all abashed, and there he sudden stay'd,
While in his eyes stood tears of bitterness.
The resounding of the sea upon the shore
Beats with an echo to the unseen grief
That swells with silence in the tortur'd soul.
Apart upon his knees that aged sire
Pray'd much unto Latona's lordly son:
"Hear, hear, O hear, god of the silver bow !
Who'rt wont Chrysa and Cilia to protect.
And reignest in this island Tenedos,
If ever I did honour thee aright.
Thy graceful temple aiding to adorn,
Or if, moreover, I at any time
Have burn'd to thee fat thighs of bulls and goats.
Do one thing for me that I shall entreat —
Phoebus, with thy shafts avenge these tears."
A little farther on, after Achilles had "summon'd a coun-
cill" and charged Calchas to declare the cause of the pestilence.
Bacon's lines — that he warns the decipherer to retain, "though
somewhat be added to Homer" — gives the altercation thus :
To whom Atrides did this answer frame:
"Full true thou speak'st and like thyself, yet, though
Thou speakest truth, methinks thou speak'st not well.
It is because no one should sway but he
He's angry with the gods that any man
Goeth before him ; he would be above the clouds,
His fortune's master and the king of men.
And here is none, methinks, disposed to yield:
For though the gods do chance him to appoint
To be a warriour and command a camp.
Inserting courage in his noble heart.
Do they give right to utter insults here?"
There interrupting him, noble Achilles
Answer'd the king in few words: "Ay forsooth!
1 should be thought a coward, Agamemnon,
A man of no estimation in the world.
If what you will I humbly yield unto,
62
And when you say, 'Do this,' it is perform'd.
I, for my part — let others as they list, —
I will not thus be fac'd and overpeer'd.
Do not think so, you shall not find it so:
Some other seek that may with patience strive
With thee, Atrides; thou shalt rule no more
O'er me."
The transalation by George Chapman, Book 1., page 20,
line 11, reads:
"All this, good father," said the king, " is comely and good right;
But this man breaks all such bounds; he affects, past all men, height;
All would in his power hold, all make his subjects, give to all
His hot will for their temperate law: all which he never shall
Persuade at my hands: If the gods have given him the great style
Of ablest soldier, made they that his license to revile
Men with vile language?" Thetis' son prevented him, and said:
"Fearful and vile I might be thought, if the exactions laid
By all means on me I should bear. Others command to this.
Thou shalt not me; or if thou dost, far my free spirit is
From serving thy command."
The translation by William Cullen Bryant, book 1, page
13, line 22, reads:
To him the sovereign Agamemnon said:
"The things which thou hast uttered, aged chief,
Are fitly spoken; but this man would stand
Above all others; he aspires to be
The master, over all to domineer.
And to direct in all things; yet, I think
There may be one who will not suffer this.
For if by favor of the immortal gods.
He was made brave, have they for such a cause
Given him the liberty of insolent speech?"
Hereat the great Achilles, breaking in,
Answered: "Yea, well might I deserve the name
Of coward and of wretch, should I submit
In all things to do thy bidding. Such commands
Lay thou on others, not on me; nor think
I shall obey thee longer."
The translation by William Sotlieby, M. R, S. L., book 1,
page 16, line 21, runs as follows:
"Wise is thy counsel" — Atreus' son reply'd —
"Well thy persuasive voice might Grecia guide.
But this — this man must stretch o'er all his sway.
All must observe his will, his beck obey.
All hang on him — such, such o'erweening pride.
Rage as he may, by me shall be defy'd.
The gods, who to his arm its prowess gave.
Loose they his scornful tongue at will to rave?"
63
w^
Him interrupting, fierce Pelides said:
"Be on my willing brow dishonor laid,
If I — whate'er thy wish — whate'er thy will,
Imperious tyrant! — thy command fulfil.
O'er others rule; by others be obeyed;
No more Achilles deigns the Atridae aid."
The Earl of Derby's translation, book 1, page 16, line 12,
reads :
To whom the monarch, Agamemnon, thus:
"Oh, father, full of wisdom are thy words;
But this proud chief o'er all would domineer;
O'er all he seeks to rule, o'er all to reign,
To all dictate, which I will not bear.
Grant that the gods have giv'n him warlike might;
Gave they unbridled license to his tongue?"
' To whom Achilles, interrupting thus:
"Coward and slave I might indeed be deemed.
Could I submit to make thy word my law;
To others thy commands; seek not to me
To dicate, for I follow thee no more."
It is true that the presence of the bi-literal cipher in any
work does not prove authorship, being merely a matter of
typography which can be incorporated in any printed page,
as it was in fact in Ben Jonson's writings, for Bacon's pur-
poses. But when it is worked out, and its chief purpose is
found to be to teach the word-cipher, and that the latter pro-
duces practicable results such as given above, the confirmation
of both ciphers is unmistakable. On the other hand, the word-
cipher is a complete demonstration of the fact that the author
of the interior work was the author of the exterior.
I am not infrequently asked, and it is a very natural ques-
tion, why should Bacon put translations of the Iliad and Odys-
sey in his works, when neither required secrecy ? I quote a
sentence from the Bi-literal Cypher (p. 341), deciphered from
Natural History :
"Finding that one important story within manie others
produc'd a most ordinarie play, poem, history, essay, law-max-
ime, or other kind, class, or description of work, I tried th' ex-
periment of placing my tra'slations of Homer and Virgil within
my other Cypher, When one work has been so incorporated
into others, these are then in like manner treated, separated
into parts and widely scatter'd into my numerous books."
64
In this connection I will add another extract from Ad-
vancement of Learning (original edition, 1605, p. 52) :
'And Cicero himselfe, being broken unto it by great ex-
perience, delivereth it plainely: That whatsoever a man shall
have occasion to speake of (if hee will take the paines), he may
have it in effect premeditate, and handled in these. So that when
hee commeth to a particular, he shall have nothing to doe, but
to put too Names, and times, and places ; and such other Cir-
cumstances of Individuals."
In other words. Bacon first constructed, then reconstructed
from the first writing, such portions as would fit the "names
and times and places, and such other Circumstances of Individ-
uals," about which he wished to build a new structure of
history, drama, or essay. The first literary mosaic, containing
dangerous matter, as well as much that was not, was transposed
— the relative position of its component parts changed — to form
the one we have known. The decipherer's work is to restore
the fragments to their original form.
As intimated at the beginning, the value of anything I
could say upon the Bacon-Shakespeare controversy resolves
itself into a question of fact — Have I found a cipher, and has
it been corectly applied ?
I repeat, the question is out of the realm of literary com-
parisons altogether. Literary probabilities or improbabilities
have no longer any bearing, and their discussion has become
purely agitations of the air: the sole question is — What are
the facts ? These cannot be determined by slight or imperfect
examinations, preconceived ideas, abstract contemplation, or
vigour of denunciation.
During a somewhat lengthy literary life, I have come to
perceive the sharp distinction between convictions on any
subject and the possession of knowledge. I know it is no light
thing to say to those who love the literature ascribed to Shake-
speare, "You have worshiped a true divinity at the wrong
shrine," and the iconoclast should come with knowledge be-
fore he assails a faith.
The limits of this article will not permit me to do more in
tlie way of illustration ; but I beg to assure the English public
tliat I speak from knowledge obtained at a cost of time, money,
65
and injury to eye-sight and health greater than I should care
to mention.
I am satisfied that my work will not be disregarded ; but
instead, given a respectful, kindly and intelligent examination
in Great Britain, the home of Shakespeare and Bacon.
I say nothing at this time of the validity of all the claims
Bacon has made; but if they are accepted there will presently
be accorded to one of the line of English kings the royal title
of "the greatest literary genius of all time."
66
BOOK REVIEWS
BACON-SHAKESPEARE.
Mrs. Elizabeth Wells Gallup Throws New Light Upon the
Mystifying Question — The Bi-Literal Cipher.
Detroit Free Press.
It is always difficult to make headway against a well-estab-
lished tradition. Hence argument going to prove that Shake-
speare did not write the dramas that have come down to us in
his name, is discredited largely because we have so long ac-
cepted his authorship as a matter of fact. But the literature of
the anti-Shakespeareans is increasing, and the time is past when
a contemptuous ejaculation or a shrug of the shoulders can dis-
pose of the evidence they have so carefully and patiently con-
structed. In truth, the opponents of Shakespeare have been met
so often by this sort of rebuttal that they are becoming stronger
and more numerous every year.
That Shakespeare's plays were not written by the William
Shaksper of Stratford, was probably first suggested by the dis-
crepancy between the plays and what we know of the man.
That Francis Bacon, the great scholar, profound thinker and
literary genius of the EHzabethan era might be their author was
first suggested by similarity of philosophy and sentiment, and
parallelisms of thought and expression.
That Bacon's was the greatest mind of his age is incontro-
vertible. Pope calls him "the greatest genius that England, or
perhaps any other country, ever produced." Lord Macaulay
says : "Bacon's mind was the most exquisitely constructed in-
tellect that has ever been bestowed upon any of the children of
men;" while Edmund Burke is even more eulogistic : "Who is
there that, hearing the name of Bacon, does not instantly recog-
nize everything; of genius, the most profound; of literature,
the most extensive; of discovery, the most penetrating; of ob-
servation of human life, the most distinguishing and refined."
If we can accept Mrs. Elizabeth Wells Gallup's new book,
"The Bi-Literal Cipher of Francis Bacon," as a genuine dis-
covery and the story it tells for what it purports to be — Bacon's
own — the Bacon-Shakespeare controversy is forever at rest.
There can be no further doubt that Bacon wrote not only the
plays ascribed to Shakespeare, but also the works appearing
69
under the names of Spenser and Peele, Greene and Marlowe, and
Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy. Mrs. Gallup's discovery of
a cipher running through them all explains the remarkable sim-
ilarities that have perplexed critics by demonstrating beyond a
shadow of doubt — if we accept it at all — that Bacon's genius
originated them all.
Some inquiries naturally suggest themselves. The first and
most natural question is, Was Bacon a writer of ciphers? The
business of statesmanship required skill in ciphers in his day,
and little important court and diplomatic business was carried
on except under such cover. Bacon's earliest public experience
was with Sir Amyas Paulet for three years in the court of
France, and his was one of the brightest intellects of his time.
The next question is, Did he possess the cipher here used?
This must be answered in the affirmative, for it is found fully
explained and its uses pointed out in his Latin work, "De Aug-
mentis," the original of which, published in 1624, has been sub-
mitted to the writer for examination. It is found also trans-
lated in full in the standard Spedding, Ellis & Heath edition of
Bacon's works, found in every library.
A third question is, What is the nature and method of the
cipher? We cannot do better than quote directly from Bacon's
"Advancement of Learning," copied from this volume :
"For by this art a way is opened whereby a man may ex-
press and signify the intentions of his mind at any distance of
place, by objects which may be presented to the eye and accom-
modated to the ear, provided those objects be capable of a two-
fold difference only — as by bells, by trumpets, by lights and
torches, by the reports of muskets, and any instruments of a
like nature.
"But to pursue our enterprise, when you address yourself
to write resolve your inward infolded letter into this Bi-liter-
arie alphabet, * * * together with this you must have
a bi-formed alphabet, as well capital letters as the smaller char-
acters, in a double form, as fits every man's occasion."
Bacon calls this the "omnia per omnia," the all in all cipher,
and speaks of it as an invention of his own made while at the
Court of France, when he was but 16 or 18 years of age.
This cipher and its obvious adaptations, it is stated, is the
basis of nearly every alphabetical cipher code in present gen-
eral use — the alternating dot and dash of the Morse telegraph
code, the long and short exposure of light in the heliographic
telegraph and the "wig-wag" signals of flags or lights in the
armies and navies of the world.
70
As used by Bacon, two slightly differing fonts of Italic
type were employed, one font representing the letter a, the other
the letter b. These were alternated in groups of five in his liter-
ature, each group of five letters representing one letter of the
alphabet in the secret work. The full alphabet and several illus-
trations of the working of the cipher in the original works are
given; in fact, every possible aid to the student and investi-
gator who wishes to verify for himself the existence of the
cipher and the mode of its deciphering is freely offered in the
introduction, prefaces and fac-similes in Mrs. Gallup's work.
Assuming that the cipher is Bacon's and that it has been
accurately transcribed, the story told the world in it is beyond
the dreams of romance; it is simply astounding.
The cipher story asserts that Bacon was the grandson of
Henry VIII., the son of Queen Elizabeth and rightful heir to
the throne of England. That while imprisoned in the Tower of
London, where Lord Leicester was also confined, Elizabeth,
before becoming queen, was secretly married to Leicester. The
issue of the marriage was two sons, the so-called Francis Bacon
— whose life was, there is little reason to doubt, preserved
through the womanly pity and compassion of Mistress Anne
Bacon — and Robert Devereaux, afterward Earl of Essex. The
political exigencies of the time did not admit the public
acknowledgment of the marriage. Francis was raised as the
son of Nicholas and Anne Bacon, and Elizabeth crowned as the
Virgin Queen. It pleased her to continue the deceit and Francis
remained ignorant of his descent until about sixteen years of
age, when Elizabeth, in one of her historic rages, revealed the
truth to him and banished him to France.
Thenceforward Bacon's life was one long disappointed
hope, which found expression in the secrecy of the cipher. This
he interwove in every original edition of his works, hoping,
and intending, that in the long future the cipher would be read,
and he be justified in the opinion of mankind. If his cipher
was discovered too soon, his life would pay the forfeit, if never,
his labor would be in vain. In 1623, when 62 years of age
and near his death, he published the key to the cipher in "De
Augmentis" in the hope that it would lead to the unraveling.
If this volume is correct, it took 300 years of time and a bright
American woman to separate the web and woof.
If this story seems incredible, the literary claim is still more
so. The literary and philosophical works of Bacon are suf-
ficiently wonderful, without more. All reviewers and biogra-
phers regard him as possessing one of the most wonderful in-
71
tellects in the world's history. These opinions were based
upon his known works. We are now asked to believe that not
only these, but the works ascribed to Shakespeare, Spenser,
Marlowe, Greene, Peele, Burton, and part of Ben Jonson's were
written by him, and that in each and every one of them this bi-
literal cipher was placed, to the end that his rights and claims,
wrongs and sufferings could become known, at some time, to
the world.
Not the least of these marvels is that the "Anatomy of Mel-
ancholy" of Robert Burton is found to have been published
under the name of T. Bright, when Burton was lo years of age.
A later edition is now found to contain, in the bi-literal cipher,
the Argument of the Iliad, with portions freely translated into
blank verse, differing in form from any translation heretofore
made and remarkable for elegance of style and diction. Take
for example a passage describing the outbreak between the
Greeks and Trojans, incited by Minerva by the order of Jove,
at the solicitation of Juno :
"As in the ocean wide,
A driving wind from the northwest comes forth
With force resistless, and the swelling waves
Succeed so fast that scarce an eye may see
Where one in pain doth bring another forth,
Till, on the rockie shore resounding loud
They spit forth foam white as the mountain snows,
And break themselves upon the o'er-jutting rocks —
Thus mightily, the Grecian phalanxes
Incessantly mov'd onward to th' battaile.
It might not then be said that anie man
Possessed power of human speech or thought,
So silentlie did they their leaders follow
In reverentiall awe. Each chief commanded
The troops that came with him — each led his owne —
Glitt'ring in arms, bright shining as the sunne,
While in well ordered phalanxes they mov'd.
"The Trojan hosts were like unto a flock
Close in a penne folded at fall of night,
That bleating looked th' waye their young ones went
And filled th' avre with dire confusion —
Such was the noyse among the Trojan hosts.
No two gave utterance to the same crye,
So various were the nations and the countries
From whence they came. * * *
"Like wintry mountain torrent roaring loud
That frightes th' shepheard in th' deepe ravine
Mixing the floods tumultuously that poure
From forth an hundred gushing springs at once,
Thus did the deaf'ning battaile din arise,
When meeting in one place with direful force
In tumult and alarums th' armies joyned.
Then might of warriour met an equall might;
72
Shields clasht on shields, the brazen spear on spear
While dying groans mixt with the battaile cry-
In awesome sound ; and steedes were fetlock deepe
In blood, fast flowing as the armies met."
Still another chapter in the romance of Bacon's life is dis-
closed in the cipher. Because of a late and somewhat mercen-
ary marriage, he has been considered as having a cold nature,
a conclusion hightened by the loveless comments of his Essay
on Love. But the cipher writing discloses an early disappoint-
ment as the cause. While in France, and 17, he was violently
enamored of the beautiful but dissolute Marguerite, wife of
Henry of Navarre, and his senior by something like eight years.
A divorce from Henry and her union with Bacon, the rightful
Prince of Wales, was actually planned. The fair Marguerite
proved fickle also, but his writings are filled with references to
his affection for her which her falseness could not, apparently,
extinguish. He tells us himself that "Romeo and Juliet" was
written to picture their love, saying: "The joy of life ebb'd
from our hearts with our parting, and it never came againe into
this bosom in full flood-tide." Another interesting episode
brought out is Bacon's account of his brother's treason and his
self-justification and remorse at his own part in the punishment
that was meted out to him.
The verity of the cipher Mrs. Gallup has so painstakingly
and with such unwearied patience unfolded would seem to be
sustained by the fact that it is Bacon's own invention, fully —
even elaborately — set forth in one of his later writings, when,
Elizabeth being dead and he himself near his end, he had less
fear of consequences should his secret be discovered — indeed,
he came to fear it would not be discovered and that he would
not be justified to posterity.
So much of reserve as is due to lack of personal demonstra-
tion is maintained by the writer, but here are 360 pages of
deciphered matter, with sufficient means of proof to satisfy any
investigator. There can be no middle ground ; one must accept
or deny it in toto. Either the decipherer has made a most
remarkable discovery to which the key has been open for three
centuries, or the book is equally remarkable from an entirely
different point of view. If accepted, truly "th' tardy epistle
shall turn over an unknowne leaf of the historic of our land."
73
FRAIs^CIS BACO^T'S BI-LITERAL CIPHER.
Baconiana, London.
Before these lines are printed, Mrs. Gallup's very important
work on "Tlie Biliteral Cipher of Francis Bacon"* will have
been for two months in the hands of the public. Since it is
probable that there may be due discussion of its wonderful con-
tents, it seems desirable to say a few words, not by way of
review or mere expression of personal opinion (in such a case
valueless), but in order to draw attention to certain points
which, if not at present capable of absolute verification or con-
tradiction, yet surely demand and are worthy of the closest
investigation. Questions of this kind must naturally arise,
"Is this cipher such as any person of ordinary intelligence can
follow ? Is it provably correct ? Has any one besides Mrs.
Gallup succeeded in decpihering by the same means, and with
similar results?"
These questions may without hesitation be answered in the
affirmative. With the explanation given by the great inventor
himself, anyone can master the method described in the De
Aiignientis (Book VI.). Ordinary patience and contrivance
enable us to arrange two different alphabets of Italic letters and
to insert these in the printed type, forming cipher sentences
one-fifth in length of the "exterior" sentence or passage. Thus
to bury one story within another is easy enough. To unearth
it is another matter, and more difficult.
In the first place, there is nothing which particularly invites
the decipherer to discriminate between the two forms of Italic
letters which are essential to this typographical cipher; or, if
differences or deformities in letters are observed, we have been
required to believe them "errors," defects in printing, careless-
ness of the compositor, or anything else which may explain
them away. Be not deceived ; there is no error, but consum-
mate skill and subtle contrivance, all helping towards the cryp-
tographer's great ends.
*Pub. : Gay and Bird, London. The Howard Publishing Company,
Detroit.
74
Before beginning the work of deciphering, it is needful
thoroughly to learn by heart the Biliteral Alphabet given by its
Inventor in the De Aitgnientis. Here we see that the letters of
the common Alphabet are formed by the combination of the
letters A and B in five places, these two letters (A and B) being
represented by two distinct "founts" of Italic type. To dis-
criminate between these two founts, is the initial difficulty ; but
observing that, in the Biliteral Alphabet, A's preponderate, and
that no combination begins with tzuo B's, we judge that the
most frequent forms of Italic letters are almost certain to be
A's. A decision is best arrived at by repeatedly tracing and
drawing out the various letters ; and the decipherer must have
keen eyes and powers of observation to detect the minute dif-
ferences. For our Francis would not make things too easy.
He speaks of "marks" and "signs" to be heeded, and Roman
letters are often interspersed. It is also patent (and was found
by Mrs. Gallup, and independently by others) that, in every
biliteral alphabet, letters are here and there intentionally ex-
changed, as a device to confuse and confound the would-be
decipherer.
In many cases we find alphabets suddenly reversed — A
becoming B, and B, A, a change hinted by some "mark' or
"sign," as a tiny dot. These changes seem to occur most fre-
quently in very small books, where the limited space makes it
the more needful to set snares and stumbling-blocks at every
turn. Such things show that, besides the good eyes and keen
wits required for successful deciphering, there must be no small
amount of that "eternal patience" which Michael Angelo hon-
ored with the title of "genius."
Let us contemplate the goodly volume presented to us by
Mrs. Gallup, and try to realize the fact that every one of those
350 pages of deciphered matter was worked out letter by letter;
that each ONE letter in this deciphered work represents FIVE
letters extracted from the deciphered book — say, Shakespeare,
orSpenser, Burton, or any of the eight groups of works indi-
cated in the cipher. Not only should such reflections cause us
highly to respect the "endless patience," perseverance, and skill
of the cryptographer to whose labors we are so deeply indebted,
but they should warn us from depreciating or discrediting state-
ments or methods which we ourselves are incapable of testing.
"Disparage not the faith thou dost not know," is a good, sound
principle to begin upon, and bVancis ("cunyng in the humours
of persons") had evidently observed the tendency of the human
mind to fly. from things troublesome, or to take refuge in dis-
75
paragement and ridicule. His notes teem with reflections on
this matter. "Things above us are nothing to us" — "just noth-
ing." "Many things are thought impossible until they are dis-
covered, then men wonder that they had not been seen long
before." On the other hand, he continually encourages him-
self with thoughts, texts and proverbial philosophy, which we
find him instilling into his disciples. "Everything is subtile
till it is conceived." "By trying, men gained Troy," and so
forth. But we must "woorke as God woorkes," wisely, quietly,
with persistent patience and unremitting care, and "from a
good beginning cometh a good ending."
So much, then, for the "biliteral" itself. Another crop of
inquiries springs up when we attempt briefly to rehearse the
wonderful revelations now before us, and which it is within our
power to examine and essay to prove.
Elizabeth, when princess, and prisoner in the hands of
Mary, secretly married Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester. Of
this secret marriage two sons were born. Francis the elder
would have been "put away privilie" by the wicked woman
whom he never could bring himself to think of as "mother."
Lady Anne Bacon, however, saved his life, and under an oath
of secrecy adopted him as her own son. The scene when these
facts came to his knowledge, and again when they were tear-
fully confirmed by his "deare," "sweete mother," Lady Anne,
are graphically described in the cipher narrative extracted from
the ''History of Henry VH." (Ed. 1622). Further details of
the same extraordinary episode are, as may be remembered,
introduced in the "word cipher," discovered, and in part pub-
lished, by Dr. Owen, some seven years ago^ From the dis-
closures made in the books deciphered, "it is evident," says
Mrs. Gallup, "that Bacon expected the biliteral cipher to be
the first discovered, and that it would lead to the finding of his
principal or word cipher which it fully explains, and to which
is intrusted the larger subjects he desired to have preserved.
This order has been reversed, in fact, and the earlier discovery
by Dr. Owen becomes a more remarkable achievement, being
entirely evolved without the aids which Bacon had prepared in
this for its elucidation."
But to return to our story.
Francis was now sent abroad by Elizabeth's orders {not, as
has been declared by his biographers, because Sir Nicholas
Bacon wished him to see the wonders of the world abroad, but)
in order to get him out of the way at tHe time when he had been
the unwitting cause of a Court scandal. He left England in
76
v/
the suite of Sir Amyas Paulet, the EngHsh Ambassador. We
know a little, and surmise more, concerning his travels, and the
places which he visited, or where he stayed studying and writ-
ing. The sad story of his ill-fated love for "My Marguerite"
is briefly touched upon, rather as a thing understood to the
reader than as a record, and of this more will be related in a
future volume. The present extracts are from the undated 4to.
of Romeo and Juliet, where we may read :
"This stage-play, in part, will tell our real love-tale. A
part is in the Play previously nam'd or mention'd as having
therein one pretty scene acted by the two. So rare and most
briefe the hard-won happinesse, it affords us great content to
re-live in the Play all that as mist, in summer morning did roule
away. It hath place in the dramas containing a scene and
theame of this nature, since our fond love interpreted th' harts
o' others, and in this joy, th' joy of heaven was faintlie
guessed."
In the closing lines of King John are these instructions :
"Join Romeo with Troys famous Cressida if you wish to
know my story. Cressida in this play with Juliet b ,"
which, says the Editor,* "ends the cipher in King John with an
incomplete word. Turning to Romeo and Jtdiet (p. 53), the
remainder of the word and of the broken sentence is continued,
being a part of the description of Marguerite, and the love
Francis entertained for her."
This love never faded from his heart, although before he
married, at the age of 47, he had, he says, hung up, as it were,
the picture of his love on the walls of memory. We remember
the calm and uneffusive fashion in which he then imparted to
his friends the news that he had found "a handsome maiden
who pleased him well." The tones in which he bewailed his
lost love are pitched in a different key.
"It is sometimes said, no man can he wise and love, and yet
it would be well to observe many will be wiser after a lesson
such as wee long ago conn'd. There was noe ease to our
sufferi'g heart til our yeares of life were eight lustres. f The
faire face liveth ever in dreames, but in inner pleasances only
doth th' sunnie vision come. This will make clearlie scene
why i' the part a man doth play heerein and where-ere man's
love is evident, strength hath remained unto the end — the
want'n Paris recov'ring by his latter venture much previouslie
lost."
*"Introduction," p. 11.
tHe speaks in the third person — as a royal personage.
A second son was born to Elizabeth, and named Robert,
after his father, the Earl of Leicester. Robert was "made
ward" of Walter Devereaux, Earl of Essex, who "died" con-
veniently and unexpectedly, when Robert was old enough to
succeed to his title and estates. At what period the brothers
became aware of their kinship has not yet been told in the cipher.
Francis describes the personal beauty, gallantry, and boldness
of his brother, and says that for these qualities Robert was a
great favorite with the Queen, who thought that he resembled
herself. The tale is still incomplete; but enough has already
been disclosed to give us a firm sketch of the miserable outline.
We see Robert taking advantage of the Queen's doting fond-
ness for him, and Francis endeavoring to keep his ambition
within bounds, and to smooth matters with his irascible mother
when, as was often the case, she became irritated beyond endur-
ance by his arrogant audacity. The aim of Essex was, not only
in the future to supplant his elder brother, but even in the
Queen's lifetime to seize the crown, and rule as king. It is a
dark and painful page in history, and the more we read the less
we marvel at the efforts made by Elizabeth to destroy or garble
the records of her own private life, and of the times in which
she lived. Having spoilt and indulged Essex so long as she
believed him devoted to herself, she turned upon him "in a tiger-
like spirit" when "his treachery became patent, and because
Francis had spoken strongly on his brother's behalf, and had
endeavored to shield him from the wrath of the Queen, she
punished him by forcing him, under pain of death, to conduct
the case (in his official capacity) against Essex, whom she had
foredoomed to execution. An allusion is made to the ring
which the Queen expected Essex to send her, but which miscar-
ried. This story has been held doubtful, but it seems as though
we may find it true.
The sentence passed upon Essex was just ; but the horror of
the trial and the circumstances connected with the execution,
haunted Francis for the rest of his life, his tender and sensitive
nature, and his highly strung imagination continually reviving,
whilst they shrank from, the recollection of the horrible details
of which hereafter we shall have to read. Although Francis
speaks in affectionate terms of his "deere" and cruelly used
brother, we cannot but think that the tenderness grew out of a
deep pity; for Robert had long ago proved himself a most
selfish and unsatisfactory person, and a perpetual thorn in his
brother's side, but, however this may have been, the gruesome
tragedy remained imprinted on his soul, and clouded and embit-
tered his whole Hfe. "His references to the trial and execution
of Essex, and the part he was forced to take in his prosecution,
are the subject of a wail of unhappiness and ever-present
remorse, with hopes and prayers that the truth hidden in this
cipher may be found out, and published to the world in his
justification.
"O God! forgiveness cometh from Thee; shut not this
truest book, my God ! Shut out my past — love's little sunny
hour — if it soe please Thee, and some of man's worthy work;
yet Essex's tragedy here shew forth ; then posterity shall know
him truly."*
The Queen commanded Francis to write for publication an
account of the Earl of Essex's treasons, and he did so. But
the report was too lenient, too tender for the reputation of the
Earl to satisfy his vindictive mother. She destroyed the docu-
ment and with her own hand wrote another which was pub-
lished under his name, and for which he has been held responsi-
ble. Such matters as these were State secrets, and we cannot
wonder that Elizabeth should have taken care by all means in
her power to prevent them from becoming public property by
appearing in print. We may well believe that, as the cipher
tells us, all papers were destroyed which were likely to bring
dark things to light. Nevertheless much must have gradually
leaked out through the actors themselves, and more must have
been suspected, and only through dread of the consequences
withheld from general discussion. "See what a ready tongue
suspicion hath" ; in private letters and hidden records the value
of which is perhaps now for the first time fully understood,
evidence is forthcoming to substantiate statements made in the
deciphered pages of Mrs. Gallup, and her forerunner. Dr. Owen.
The matter gathered from the deciphered pages is not lim-
ited to personal or political history. For instance, speaking of
the "Anatomy of Melancholy (edition, 1628), the Editor
says : — "The extraordinary part is that this edition conceals, in
cipher, a very full and extended prose summary — argument,
Bacon calls it — of a translation of Homer's Iliad. In order
that there may be no mistake as to its being Bacon's works, he
precedes the translation with a brief reference to his royal birth,
and the wrongs he has suffered In the De Aug-
nientis is found a similar extended synopsis of a translation of
the Odyssey. This, too, is introduced with a reference to
Bacon's personal history, and although the text of the book is
in Latin, the cipher is in English.
♦Introduction, p. 8. It seems probable that this was written soon after
the events in 1601.
79
The decipherer is not a Greek scholar, and would be incapa-
ble of creating these extended arguments, which differ widely
in phrasing from any translation extant, and are written in a
free and flowing style."*
Readers must not expect to find in this book which we are
noticing, a complete and shapely narrative explaining every-
thing, and pouring out before us the true story of our wonder-
ful "concealed man" from beginning to end. The cipher utter-
ances are, for the most part, nothing if not fragmentary. The
writer himself says so, and adds that his objects in thus trust-
ing his secrets to the care of his friends and to the judgment of
time were, First, that he might hand down to the future age
the only faithful account of himself and his history, which
would ever be allowed to reach them. Secondly, he proposed
to link his unacknowledged works one with another in such a
way that hereafter his sons of science should from the hints
given in one work be led on to another, and so to another, until
the vast mass of books, Historical, Scientific, Poetical, Dramat-
ical Philosophical, which he wrote, should be connected, welded
together like an endless chain, and the true history of the Great
Restauration and of the English Renaissance fully revealed.
*Introduction, p. 13.
80
THE BACO]S^IAX CIPHEK*— I.
By Fleming Fulchek.
The Court Journal, London.
Dr. Rawley, "his Lordship's first and last chaplain," relates
in his Life of Lord Bacon that "when his History of King
Henry the Seventh was to come forth, it was delivered to the
old Lord Brooke to be perused by him, who, when he had
dispatched it, returned it to the author with this eulogy: 'bid
him take care to get good paper and inke; for the work is
incomparable.' " \Wq think "the old Lord Brooke" would
have been justified in sending this message (with a change
of pronoun) to the authoress of The Biliteral Cipher of Sir
Francis Bacon (for in its own way it is incomparable), and
we think he would have been satisfied with the result.
The book is divided into two parts, the first containing
introductory chapters, portraits, and facsimiles, while the
second, rather more than three-quarters of the book, consists
entirely of the story deciphered. The introductory chapters
are short, pithy, and well-written, and are full of literary
interest. The first chapter, from the pen of Mrs. Gallup herself,
tells how she came to discover the existence of the cipher in
certain books, and gives a brief account of her work, a work,
to quote her own words, "arduous, exhausting and prolonged" ;
and shows how, though her discovery "may change the names
of some of our idols," we are gainers, not losers, by the change.
If we can find a fault in this chapter, it is that there is only
enough of it to whet our appetite for more details of the
progress of her work. Perhaps we may hope that she will
satisfy us in this respect on a future occasion when her work
becomes widely known and read, as it deserves to be. After
Mrs. Gallup's "personal" chapter there follows the introduc-
tion to the first edition — printed for private circulation only.
It gives a short summary of the principal facts of the cipher
story, and touches on points of interest in connection with
the cipher, two of which we will briefly allude to here. It
shows how the cipher explains the reason for the extraordinary
*The Biliteral Cipher of Sir Francis Bacon, by Mrs. Gallup.
81
mispaging of the original editions, carefully adhered to in all
the copies, and of which no one had previously been able to
offer a satisfactory explanation ; and it touches on the curious
history of The Anatomy of Melancholy, which for nearly three
' centuries has been attributed to Burton, but which the British
Museum catalogue shows to have been first published under
another name when Burton was about ten years old, and of
which in the cipher story Francis Bacon claims the authorship.
The preface of the second edition, the one we are now con-
sidering and the first given to the public, shows the cogent
reasons Bacon had for using the cipher. "Two distinct pur-
poses," says the author, "are served by the two ciphers. The
Biliteral was the foundation which was intended to lead to
the other, and is of prime importance in its directions concern-
ing the construction of the Word Cipher, the keys, and the
epitome of the topics which were to be written out by its
aia. It seems also to have been * * * a sort of diary
* * * ^= and, as in many another diary, we find the trend
of the inind as affected by the varying moods — sometimes
sad and mournful — again defiant and rebellious — and again
despondent, almost in despair, that his wrongs might fail of
discovery, even in the times and land afar off to which he
looked for greater honor and fame, as well as vindication.
"Chafing under the cloud upon his birth, the victim of a des-
tiny beyond his control, which ever placed him in a false posi-
tion, defrauded of his birthright, which was of the highest, he
committed to this cipher the plaints of an outraged soul. * * *
To the decipherer, he unbends — to the rest of the world main-
tains the dignity which marked his outward life. * * * It is a
wonderful revelation of the undercurrents of a hidden life."
"Some Notes on the Shakespeare Plays," and a reprint of
an article on Shorthand in the days of Elizabeth from the
able pen of Mrs. H. Pott, whose clear and logical mind, no
less than her deep research into the literature of Bacon's
time, makes her writings always welcome; and lastly a brief
sketch of the outlines of Bacon's life, complete the original
portion of Part I. While the importance of these introduc-
tory chapters lies for our immediate purpose in their applica-
tion to the Biliteral Cipher of Sir Francis Bacon, it would
be difficult to overestimate their intrinsic merit, literary and
historical. We owe a debt of gratitude to the authoress and
publishers for their liberality in the matter of facsimiles by
which they enable us not only to follow the deciphering but
also to familiarize ourselves with the style and appearance
of the original editions of many old favorites, a privilege
82
hitherto ahnost confined to those who have time and oppor-
tunity for visiting the great hbraries. In this part are com-
prised Bacon's description of his BiHteral Cipher, with
examples and double alphabet ; the frontispiece and preface
to the Novum Orgamim, preceded by a talDle of the double
alphabet, by means of w^hich the cipher is unfolded ; the
Droeshout portrait and all the introductory pages of the
famous 1623 folio of the Shakespeare plays; and the title
pages of several other of the deciphered works. The preface
to the Novum Organiun is also given in modern type, the two
founts being marked a and b respectively, thus enabling the
reader to follow in extenso the method of deciphering.
The portraits of Bacon, two in number, to which we have
alluded, are the well-known one in which he is seen in his Chan-
cellor's robes, and the exquisite miniature of Hilyard sur-
rounded by the noblest halo that ever adorned a human portrait
— "Si tabula daretur digna, animum mallem" (If it were pos-
sible to have a canvas worthy, I had rather paint his mind").
Of the second part, because it is the most important, we
shall say least. The story it tells is startling, fascinating,
strange. As fiction it would be unique; as history, though
truth is proverbially stranger than fiction, it is unparalleled.
Nothing that can give interest to a book is wanting. There
is the excitement of discovery; the triumph of hidden truth
brought to light, of error refuted ; the romance of a great
prince, robbed of his birthright, who finds his consolation in
winning a nobler realm — the kingdom of the mind; the trag-
edy of a younger brother, a wild though generous spirit,
seduced by misdirected ambition into the thorny path of rebel-
lion that leads to the question and the block; the pathos of
a noble soul torn by the pangs of remorse for the part he
was forced to take in that brother's death by the inexorable
power of the loftiest sense of justice — that power which
impelled Lucius Junius Brutus to "call his 30ns to punish-
ment," Marcus Brutus to robe his daggei- in the imperial
purple of liberty drawn from the veins of his "best lover" ;
while the one note wanting to complete the full chord of
romance is struck in the tale of a fruitless passion for the fair
Queen of Navarre. Besides the story of Bacon's own life
and times, or rather of that part of his life and times hitherto
unknown to history, the deciphered story gives directions for
working out his "Word Cipher," and summaries of those noble
poems of Homer, the Illiad and Odyssey, with some passages
translated into blank verse, which we think will compare favor-
ably with any previous translations.
83
A few words must suffice as to the style. As we have
already quoted, the book is a diary; and the exigencies of
secrecy necessitate much repetition. For, as Bacon himself
notes in the cipher story, he could not tell what book might
be lost, or in which of those that survived, his decipherer
would first light on the discovery. Yet in parts the writing
rises to a great height of eloquence. We cannot resist the
temptation to quote two passages from the cipher which seem
to us, each in its own way, eminently beautiful. The first,
though it refers only to the difficulty of constructing the
Word Cipher can, we think, hardly be surpassed for happiness
of metaphors or grace of diction. "'Tis the labour of years,"
says Bacon, "to provide th' widely varied prose in which the
lines of verse have a faire haven, and lye anchor'd untill a
day when th' coming pow'r may say : 'Hoist sayle, away !
For the windes of heav'n kisse your fairy streamers, and th'
tide is afloode. On to thy destiny !' "
The second is the cry of a soul in anguish.
"O Source infinite of light, ere Time in existence was, save
in Thy creative plan, all this tragedy unfolded before Thee. A
night of Stygian darknesse encloseth us. My hope banish'd to
realms above, taketh its flight through th' clear aire of the
Scyences unto bright daye with Thyselfe. As thou didst con-
ceale Thy lawes in thick clouds, enfolde them in shades of
mysterious gloom, Thou didst infuse from Thy spirit a desire
to put the day's glad work, th' evening's thought, and mid-
night's meditation to finde out their secret workings.
"Only thus can I banish from my thoughts my beloved
brother's untimely cutting off and my^ wrongfull part in his
tryale. O, had I then one thought of th' great change his
death would cause — how life's worth would shrinke, and this
world's little golden sunshine be but as collied night's swifte
lightning — this had never come as a hound of th' hunt to my
idle thoughts." Mrs. Gallup's claim to have discovered the ex-
istence of Francis Bacon's Biliteral Cipher in many of the works
of his time is one which, in view of the story deciphered, will, if
substantiated, oblige us to rewrite a page of history and to tear
a mask from many an idol before which we have bowed for
three centuries. We shall, therefore, require the most convinc-
ing proofs of the bona fides of the discovery. The discussion
of this question, however, we leave to a future article.
84
THE BACONIA:^ cipher— II.
By Fleming Eulchek.
Last week we reviewed the subject matter of "The Biliteral
Cipher of Sir Francis Bacon" by Mrs. Galhip. This week
we have to redeem the promise then made to discuss the claims
which the discovery embodied in it has on our credence. Let
us first clearly define what that discovery claims to be. It is
not that Francis Bacon invented a cipher which he calls
"Biliteral." That is a fact which has been known to the world
for three centuries. What the authoress claims to have dis-
covered is that this cipher is used in all the original editions
of Bacon's printed works, and that she has deciphered the
hidden story by means of it. If this claim can be substan-
tiated, it will decide once for all the Bacon v. Shakespeare
controversy in favor of the former, for in the deciphered story
Bacon claims the authorship of the Shakespeare plays and
poems, as well as of other works which we have been accus-
tomed to attribute, in some cases on little or no evidence, to
others of his "masques."
Some fifty years ago the theory was started, independently
on both sides of the Atlantic, that "Shakespeare" was in
reality only a pen-name of Francis Bacon, and that it is to
that great genius, not to the actor of Stratford-on-Avon, that
the world owes its finest dramas. A storm of derision, of
course, greeted the theory, as it does every theory that attacks
a generally accepted belief, however erroneous; and it was
only necessary to hold the theory to be at once classed with
the inmates of a lunatic asylum — though one would hardly
have supposed such an institution a suitable residence (exempli
gratia) for Lord Palmerston. Just such a storm of ridicule,
coupled with persecution, happily for "Baconians" impossible
in the nineteenth century, greeted Galileo's discovery that the
earth moves round the sun. "E puo si muove," and during
the past fifty years the Baconian theory, under the influence
of careful and patient investigation of internal and external
evidence, has been steadily gaining ground. A fair example
of the way in which the Baconian theory is met by its adver-
saries is the reply which was given to a friend of the present
85
writer by a well-known scholar and "Shakespearian" authority :
"If Shakespeare were to rise from the grave and tell me that
Bacon was the author of the plays, I would not believe him."
Take another typical specimen; it is a criticism (save the
mark!) on the work we are now considering that appeared
recently in a daily contemporary: — "A fresh campaign by
the Baconian zealots is threatened. Mrs. Elizabeth Wells
Gallup claims to have discovered and deciphered the mysteri-
ous secrets which Bacon, she would have us believe, buried in
his writings. In the 'Biliteral Cipher of Sir Francis Bacon,'
Greene, Peele, and Marlowe, as well as Shakespeare, all go
by the board; Sir Francis explains to Mrs. Gallup that their
dramatic works were written by him alone. The proofs, she
says, are 'overwhelming and irresistible.' The day will come
when Macaulay's New Zealander will debate whether Bacon
was a solar myth or a sort of Homer, who gathered together
all Elizabethan literature in a — cipher." But ridicule and
invective are not argument, prejudice is not proof. "Some
of our friends," we used to be told in our childhood, "are for
warning, others for example." Taking those we have quoted
for warning, let us give a fair and open-minded consideration
to Mrs. Gallup's claims.
To do this it will be necessary to describe Bacon's Biliteral
Cipher. His own description of it may be seen in any edition
of his De Augmentis. Its principle is extremely simple, being,
in fact, that of the Morse Code at present used in telegraphy —
namely, various combinations of two differences. Thus, if
we have two dissimilar things or sets of things, represented,
let us suppose, by a and b respectively, there are thirty-two
different ways in which we can arrange them in sets of five;
as, for example, aaaaa, aaaah, a a ah a, and so on. ( It
should be noted that in these groups a and h are merely used
as symbols to represent two differences which might be equally
well represented by dots and dashes or any other convenient
symbols.) Now, by using twenty- four such groups, out of
the possible thirty-two, and letting each stand for a different
letter of the alphabet (in Bacon's day I and J counted as one
letter, as did also U and V), we can communicate by means
of two differences with anyone who knows what letter each
group stands for. Bacon's method, the advantage of which
lies in being able to insert anything in anything — omnia per
omnia, as he says — is to have two complete sets, or "founts"
as they are called, of type, which he designates the a and h
fount respectively. All that is then necessary is to write out
the secret message in its biliteral form letter for letter over or
S6
under the matter to be printed, and, as each letter is required,
to take it from the a or b fount according as the one or the
other letter appears against it. For example, suppose the
words to be printed are "The Court Journal," and that we
want to "infold" in this the signature "Fr. B.," and suppose
our a fount to consist of Latin and our b fount of Italic letters.
Now, in Bacon's biliteral alphabet F is represented by a a b a b,
R by b a a a a, and B by a a a a b. Our MS. would, therefore,
appear thus :
THE COURT JOURNAL,
aab abbaa aaaaaab
In printing we should take the T and H from the a fount,
the E from the b fount, and so on. The words would then
appear thus :
TH£ COURT JOURNAL.
The decipherer would mark the letters according to their
respective founts, divide it into groups of five, and, knowing
what letter each group stands for, would read "Fr. B."
In these days of publicity we find it hard to accept any-
thing that savors of mystery, and tolerance of opinion and
freedom of speech have made it difficult to credit that a man
should have had motive sufficient for putting a cipher in his
books. Yet, at the present day all internal state correspond-
ence is carried on in cipher. Why? Because every other
state is a potential enemy. And this same reason made cipher
writing common among individuals in the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries, for in those days when "a man's head
stood tickle on his shoulders" every other individual, with
perhaps the exception of a few intimates, was a potential
enemy. But in the case of Francis Bacon there are special
reasons why we should not wonder at his putting a cipher,
and that his own Biliteral Cipher, into his published works ;
and we shall be able to show that so far from its being strange
that he should do so, it would be strange had he not. He
invented this cipher at the age of about sixteen or seventeen,
when he was in Paris. Nearly thirty years later, in 1605, he
published his great philosophical work Of the Advancement of
Learning. It is significant that he should have thought ciphers
of sufficient importance to be touched on in his work, and that
he should have alluded to this particular cipher as "the highest
degree of cyphers which is to write omnia per omnia,"
In 1623 he published a Latin version of The Advancement
under the title De Aiiguicntis Scientiarum. This is not even
a mere translation. The book has been entirely rewritten and
87
greatly enlarged, and is translated into Latin professedly
because he feared that the English language wanted stability,
while he believed that Latin would be the language of the
learned for all time. Surely now, after nearly two crowded
decades of Statecraft, of Law, of Philosophy, in which he has
"sounded all the depths and shoals of honour," the eminent
statesman, the learned lawyer, the profound philosopher will
find no room in his immortal work for what we are apt to
consider an ingenious amusement for a schoolboy. Far from
being omitted, however, the paragraph on ciphers is enlarged
to some pages, the greater part devoted to a detailed descrip-
tion and examples of the cipher alluded to by him nearly a
score of years before, invented by him nearly half a century
earlier. But before we can realize the full force of these facts
it will be necessary to glance at some of the leading traits of
Bacon's character. It is not too much to say that most peo-
ple's knowledge of this great man is derived — directly or indi-
rectly — almost exclusively from one essay and one line of
poetry; while few have read anything of his writings except
his essays. Macaulay's essay, as far as it deals with the moral
side of Bacon's character, is probably the greatest libel on a
great man that ever masqueraded in the "weed" of criticism,
and Pope's line is the text of Macaulay's essay in half a dozen
words. Both have painted as the portrait of Bacon a figure
impossible in human nature, "a vast idol," as Hepworth Dixon
well expresses it, "the head of gold and feet of clay." But
this writer and Spedding have dipped deep into the well of
Truth, and with her waters have washed away the mud which
had been flung by the envious hands of the pigmy contempor-
aries over whom Francis Bacon towered, and have shown the
whole figure to be sterling gold from head to foot. Even
Macaulay and Pope, however, while they mistake Bacon's
moral nature, acknowledge the vastness and exquisiteness of
his intellect, though again on this side they fail to appreciate
fully his "infinite capacity for taking pains." "His under-
standing," says the brilliant essayist, "with great minuteness
of observation had an aptitude of comprehension such as has
never yet been vouchsafed to any other human being. The
small fine mind of Labruyere had not a more delicate tact than
the large intellect of Bacon. * * '^ His understanding
resembled the tent which the fairy Paribanov gave to Prince
Ahmed. Fold it ; and it seemed a toy for the hand of a lady.
Spread it; and the armies of powerful Sultans might repose
beneath its shade."
Bacon's, then, was just such a temperament as would have
dehghted in the continual application of his cipher; one to
which the great labor involved — a labor which to most would
be insufferable drudgery — would have been a congenial exer-
cise or might have proved a welcome distraction from painful
memories. There is one more point which has an important
bearing in this connection. The guiding star of Bacon's life
was utility. Everything he studied — and what did he not
study ? — he studied with a view to the use that could be made
of it. And utility was_the mainspring of his least actions no
less than of his loftiest philosophy. If this be granted, and
we believe no one will for a moment dispute it, we have the
strongest probability, nay, the absolute certainty, that he used
the cipher which he invented and published. But where?
Only one answer is possible — "In his printed works." For
we have seen that it is to be performed by means of two founts
of type. One more question naturally suggests itself. "Had
he adequate motives for imposing on himself the labor which
the extensive use of the cipher involves?" This can only be
answered when the secret is no longer a secret, when the cipher
is deciphered. The story as deciphered by Mrs. Gallup gives
an emphatic answer in the affirmative. The statements
unfolded by her are such that, while their publication during
his lifetime would have been productive of no good, it would
have cost him his life. But in the interests of truth and for
his own justification he wished them to be given to a future
age. It was with this object that he began to use the cipher,
and he continued its use as a distraction from the agonies of
retrospection. We have now established, as we think, beyond
contradiction, the fact that so far from being incredulous as
to the existence of the biliteral cipher in Bacon's works, we
ought to expect it. How is it, then, the reader will say, that
it has remained undiscovered for so long? It is the old story
once more of Columbus and the egg, or, as Mrs. Gallup aptly
quotes from Bacon himself, "in which sort of things it is the
manner of men, first to wonder that such a thing should be
possible, and after it is found out, to wonder again how the
world should miss it so long,"
89
THE BACOmAl^ CIPHER.— III.
By Fleming Fulchee.
Our discussion o£ this question last week led us by a priori
argument to the conclusion that Francis Bacon had put a
cipher story into his printed works.
Now, either this long-neglected cipher has at last been
discovered and deciphered or it has not. That is a truism.
In the latter case two, and only two, hypotheses are possible;
if they can be shown to be false, the affirmative proposition is
established. These two hypotheses are — (i) that a deliberate
fraud is being perpetrated; (2) that with perfectly honest
intentions our authoress has, to use a familiar expression,
"cooked" the cipher, and consecjuently the story is in reality
the creation of her own brain. It would be a wonderful brain,
indeed, that could have devised and executed such a work.
The first supposition, we do not hesitate to say, will be at once
dismissed by anyone who has even a slight acquaintance with
the authoress. But as this is a privilege necessarily denied to
the great majority of our readers, let us examine the question
impersonally and impartially on its own merits. The "fraud"
hypothesis would mean this — that the author had deliberately
invented the whole story, and stated without the slightest
foundation in fact that when resolved into Francis Bacon's
biliteral alphabet it would be found to correspond, letter by
letter, with the two founts of Italic type which occur in such
profusion in the works deciphered' — for it is through the Italics
that the cipher runs. Of the existence of different founts of
Italic type in these works there is no cjuestion. It has long
been known, though never hitherto explained ; and anyone can
verify this assertion by a glance at the original editions, or at
the facsimiles in The Biliteral Cipher of Sir Francis Bacon.
Now, to ensure this correspondence between the cipher
story and the Italic print it would be necessary to count the
letters in the latter — in itself a task almost as great as the
genuine deciphering. And this would be but a small part of
the labor required. It would be far surpassed by the immense
amount of literary, linguistic, and historical knowledge and
research indispensable for the avoidance of errors which would
90
soon be detected by the critics, and which would at once expose
the fraud. Again, we might easily conceive that the author
of our hypothetical fraud would pretend to find a secret his-
tory of Bacon's time, with all its tragic interest, but it would
be hard indeed to imagine that the idea would suggest itself
of pretending to find summaries of and poetical translations
from the Iliad and the Odyssey, or that the author would be
capable of expressing them with such true Baconian intuition
and freedom as they display. Still less is it likely that the
author would run the risk of wearying his readers with direc-
tions for working out another cipher, which would also, pre-
sumably, be non-existent, or with frequent repetitions, which,
however, will be seen to be necessary if the cipher is genuine.
These considerations, we are aware, though they amount to
a moral certainty of the impossibility of the "fraud" hypothesis,
do not constitute a mathematical proof of it. There is, how-
ever, one which seems to us to do so. In the case of some of
the letters the differences between the two founts are so slight
that it would be difficult, without more study than most people
would be prepared to give, to pronounce with certainty to
which fount these letters belonged. "But, on the other hand,
in the case of many of the letters — most of the capitals and
some of the small letters — the differences are "so plaine as thou
canst not erre therein." Now, as these letters stand in fixed
places and must be marked always a or b according to their
respective founts, the fraud would at once be detected, for it
is a mathematical impossibility that the a's and b's of the bilit-
eral form of a story not composed with reference to the actual
letters could always fall in the right place. So much for the
fraud hypothesis. Tlie hypothesis of unintentional "cooking"
may be very briefly dismissed. We had intended tp give some
rough calculations which would have demonstrated the unten-
ability of this theory, but space and our readers' patience, or
rather the certain want of the one and the probable exhaustion
of the other, forbid. When, however, it is considered that
the cipher story has to be got out letter by letter from the
printed matter; that it takes five letters of the latter to make
one of the former; and that if one letter were got out it would
give no assistance in extracting the next ; unless there were a
cipher there, it will be seen that ^lo assistance would be obtained
from the doubtful letters, and that it would be impossible to
obtain any sense in this way. We have now fairly examined
the only two hypotheses on which it is possible that Mrs.
Oallup's claim can be a "bogus" one. and proved them false.
Thus we are driven by the inexorable force of logic to the only
91
remaining conclusion : That Francis Bacon did put a cipher
into his printed works ; that Mrs. Gallup has discovered it and
has translated it.
We had intended to produce much corroborative evidence
which, though we now find it superfluous, we believe would
have been interesting. The exigencies of space again prevent
us. One piece, however, is so curious that we feel sure our
readers will pardon us if we produce it. We can vouch for the
fact that it was unknown to our authoress when the statement
it corroborates was deciphered. In the north of London there
is still standing a square building of red brick, dating from
the reign of Henry VIII. , which is known as Canonbury
Tower. That in no history of the tower, nor in any life of
Bacon is mention made of its being connected with him, is only
one of the numerous instances of the mystery which always
meets us when we try to search deeper into the life of Francis
Bacon. Yet research at one of the public libraries has recently
elicited the fact that he took a lease of it for ninety-nine years,
that he lived there for some time, apparently in charge of the
Princes Henry and Charles, sons of James I., and that he was
actually living there at the time he received the seals.
Close under the ceiling, on the wall, in a dark corner of a
passage in the Tower, is painted an inscription consisting of
the Sovereigns of England from the Conquest. The names
are mostly abbreviated, and with one exception follow each
other in the recognized order. But between Elizabeth and
James stands, in the same way as the other abbreviations, Fr.
No explanation of this interpolation appeared until the
deciphered story brought to light the facts that Queen Eliza-
beth was secretly married to the Earl of Leicester, and that
the great man whom we have known as Francis Bacon was
in reality her first-born son, and therefore the true, though
unacknowledged, heir to the throne.
We must not conclude without a slight tribute, not the
less sincere that it must of necessity be brief, to the merits of
Mrs. Gallup's brilliant discovery, and the patient diligence
with which she has gradually unrolled the cerements and
brought to light one by one truths so long buried. We feel
almost tempted to envy the feelings which must have swept
over her as the first sentence came to light from its cipher
tomb. They must have been such as stirred the soul of
Columbus when, after the long night of impatient expecta-
tion, the light of morning broke and revealed to his triumphant
gaze the shores of the new continent. Let us fran'kly confess
92
our gratitude to our authoress, who has enabled us to feel
once more the "touch of a vanished hand," to hear once more
"the sound of a voice that is still" — a hand that was ever
stretched down from lofty height to help and raise humanity,
a voice that will ring trumpet-tongued through all ages — the
hand and voice of one who "had an aspect as if he pitied men."
The reference to Canonbury Tower, by Mr. Fulcher,
renders the following quotations from a late number of
"Baconiana" of especial interest, as tracing the history of
this ancient and historic pile. The building is in a good
state of preservation. The lines are in an obscure part of
the building but are plainly observable, as was verified by a
personal examination on the part of Mrs. Gallup, in Novem-
ber last. It is one of the interesting corroborations which
are accumulating, and now being understood in the light of
the cipher disclosures, going to show that Francis was
entitled to a place in the line of England's kings.
93
A ^"EW LIGHT.
O^ THE BACO^— SHAKESPEARE CYPHER.
The Nineteenth Century and After, — London.
Of all the critical paradoxes that have ever been seriously advo-
cated, few have been received with such general and derisive
indifference as that which declares Bacon to have been the
author of the dramas ascribed to Shakespeare, and which
couples this declaration with another — more startling still —
that these dramas are not dramas only, but are besides a series
of writings in cypher, whose inner meaning bears no relation
whatever to their ostensible meaning as dramas, but which con-
sist of memoranda or memoirs concerning Bacon himself, and
secrets of Queen Elizabeth. The mere theory that Bacon was
the real author of the plays, though the mass of Shakespeare's
readers still set it down as an illusion, does not, indeed, contain
anything essentially shocking to common sense. On the con-
trary, it is generally recognised that on purely a priori grounds
there is less to shock common sense in the idea that those won-
derful compositions were the work of a scholar, a philosopher,
a statesman, and a profound man of the world, than there is in
the idea that they were the work of a notoriously ill-educated
actor, who seems to have found some difficulty in signing his
own name. This latter idea, which is still generally accepted,
has little evidence to support it beyond tradition, which is strong,
and strong only, in the absence of evidence to the contrary ; and
were such evidence forthcoming, it would be impossible for the
candid mind to reject it on the grounds that it pointed to any
improbable conclusion.
But with regard to the theory of the cypher the case is dif-
ferent. This is generally rejected or neglected both by scholars
94
and the reading public, not on the ground that the evidence for
it is insufficient, but on the ground that it is in itself so unlikely,
so fantastic, so impossible that it is not worth a sane man's while
to consider the misguided ingenuities by which a few literary
monomaniacs have endeavoured to make it plausible How is
it possible, the ordinary man asks, to believe that the finest and
profoundest poetry in the world — that the verses which give us
in music the love of Romeo and Juliet, the torture of Hamlet's
philosophy, the majestic calm of Prospero's — was composed, or
rather constructed, as an elaborate verbal puzzle, the object of
which was to preserve for some future decipherer a collection of
political and mainly personal information, v;hich the author was
too timid to confide himself to his contemporaries ? We might
just as well believe that Paradise Lost is in reality a kind of
Pepys' Diary, in which the poet has recorded for posterity the
curtain-lectures of Mrs. Milton. Such is the argument which
the ordinary man uses ; and if he consents to consider the matter
a little farther, and finds, as he will find, that the advocates of
the cypher theory maintain that Bacon, in the Shakespearian
plays, has hidden away not one cypher but six, his dismissal of
their theory will be yet more curt and contemptuous. Of this
attitude of mind I am able to speak with sympathy, for the excel-
lent reason that it was till lately my own. A remarkable vol-
ume, however, known at present to surprisingly few readers, has
been recently published, dealing with the subject before us — a
volume which at first I glanced at with apathetic distrust, but
which has caused me, when I read it carefully, to reconsider the
question. The contents of this volume I shall here briefly sum-
marise, leaving the reader to escape from its conclusions if he
can. The volume is called The Bi-literal Cypher of Francis
Bacon. It was first, I believe, printed privately, less than two
years ago ; and a small second edition was issued last year to the
public. I will begin with describing its exact scope, which is
limited. Of the six Baconian cyphers alleged to exist in Shake-
speare, this volume deals only with one; and it is v/ith this one
only that I shall ask the reader to concern himself.
The biliteral cypher possesses two remarkable character-
istics, which it is desirable to mention at starting, because they
at once dispose of all those a priori objections which suggest
themselves, as we have just seen, against the cypher theory gen-
95
erally. In the first place this cypher, whether it exists in the
Shakespearian plays or not, is demonstrably not the invention
of any modern literary lunatic. It was invented by Bacon him-
self ; and an elaborate account of it, together with examples of its
use, is to be found, as will be shown presently, in one of his most
celebrated works. In the second place — and this is a point
which it is still more important to urge on the a priori sceptic —
the biliteral cypher has nothing whatever to do with the com-
position or the wording of the works into which it is introduced.
There might be a biliteral cypher in Hamlet from end to end,
without any thought of a cypher having been present to the
author when he was writing it. It is, in other words, altogether
a matter of typography. It depends not on what the author
writes, but on the manner in which he is printed. Accordingly,
v/hen what we may call the Baconian party informs the world
that they have discovered a biliteral cypher, of which the author
is Bacon, running through the plays of Shakespeare, they are
really indulging in a gross inaccuracy of language, which does
much to prevent a fair hearing being accorded to them. What
they really mean is that this biliteral cypher runs not through the
plays themselves, but through one particular edition of them —
that is to say, the celebrated first folio. This edition, as every
student knows, is remarkable for many extraordinary anomalies
in its typography. Of these anomalies an explanation is now for
the first time offered to us. They are presented to us — and it is
claimed that they are thus explained completely — as part and
parcel of the newly discovered typographical cypher. If we take
these devices away the cypher disappears with them. If we
resort, with the aid of the printer, to devices of the same kind, we
could embody the cypher anew, and every sentence that Bacon
committed to it, in any book we might choose to reprint, so far
as its length permitted — in Pickwick, in Vanity Fair, in Tup-
per's Proverbial Philosophy, in the Apocalypse of St. John, or in
the advertisement-sheet of the Times.
I will now proceed to describe what the nature of the cypher
is; and it shall first be introduced to the reader in the words of
Bacon himself. In the De Augmentis Scientiarum Bacon writes
thus :*
*The passage quoted is from the translation by Gilbert Wats, 1640, as
reproduced in The Bi-literal Cypher of Francis Bacon, at the end of Part I.
96
Let us come to Cyphars. Their kinds are many, as Cyphars simple.
Cyphars intermixt with Nulloes, or Non-significant characters ; Cyphars of
double letters under one character ; Wheele-cyphars, Kay-cyphars, Cyphars
of Words, Others. . . . But that jealousies may be taken away, we will
annexe one other invention, which, in truth, we devised in our own youth,
when we were in Paris : and it is a thing which yet seemeth to us not worthy
to be lost. It containeth the highest degree of Cypher, which is to signify
omnia per omnia, yet so as the writng infolding may bear a quintuple relation
to the writing infolded. No other condition or restriction whatsoever is
required. It shall be performed thus. First, let all the letters of the
alphabet, by transposition, be resolved into two letters onely ; for the trans-
position of two letters by five placings will be sufficient for thirty-two differ-
ences, much more for twenty-four, which is the number of the alphabet.
The example of such an alphabet is in this wise:
Aaaaaa 1 abaaa Rbaaaa
B aaaab Kabaab S baaab
C aaaba L ababa T baaba
D aaabb M ababb V baabb
Eaabaa N abbaa Wbabaa
F aabab O abbab X babab
G aabba P abbba Y babba
H aabbb Q abbbb Z babbb
. . . When you addresse yourself to write, resolve your inward infolded
letter into this Bi-literarie Alphabet. Say the interior letter be 'Fuge.'
Example of Solution
FUGE
aabab baabb aabba aabaa
Together with this you must have ready at hand a bi-formed Alphabet,
which may represent all the letters of the Common Alphabet, as well Capitall
Letters as the Smaller Characters, in a double forme ^ as may fit every man's
occasion.
( a b a b
a b a b
a b a b
a b a b
a b a b
a b a b
\ A Aa a
BBbb
CC c c
DDdd
EEee
FF/f
j a b a b
a b a b
a babab
a b a b
a b a b
a b a b
( GGgg
Hllh h
I li i j j
KKkk
LLll
M Mmm
( a b a b
a b a b
a b a b
a b a b
a b a b
a b a b
'/ NlStn n
OOoo
PPpp
QQ <I H
RRrr
SS s s
( a b a b
a babab
a b a b
a b a b
a b a b
a b a b
IT T t t
V Vv V u u
IV Www
XXxx
YYyy
ZZ z z
Now to the interior letter which is bi-literate, you shall fit a bi-formed
exterior letter, which shall answer the other, letter for letter, and after-
wards set it downe. Let the exterior example be, Manere te volo, donee
Venero.
An Exatnple of Accommodation .
FUGE
a abab .baabb. aabba. aabaa
M a n e r e t e v <> I o d o n e c v e n [ero]
97
From this short example Bacon then proceeds to a longer
one. He takes an entire page from one of Cicero's letters, and
so prints it in italics from two founts, similar to those in the
alphabet just given, that it infolds an interior letter from a
Spartan general, 'Sent once in a scytale, or round cypher'd
staffe.' The quotation from Cicero it is unnecessary to give
here. It is sufficient to say that, as printed by Bacon, the ordin-
ary reader would detect nothing out of the common in it; but
when once his eye is made alert by the knowledge that its char-
acters are drawn from two different founts of type, he can, by
the aid of the alphabets supplied by Bacon, easily decipher for
himself the Spartan message infolded in it.
It is the above passage, occurring in Bacon's own work,
which has led to the alleged discovery set forth in the volume
with which we are now dealing ; and the history of the discovery,
as we there find it, is curious. For a considerable time an
American student, Dr. Owen, had been working at the elucida-
tion of another cypher altogether, also alleged to be Bacon's, and
to exist in the Shakespearian plays. This is the word-cypher.
With its details we need not here concern ourselves. It is
enough to say that an American lady, Mrs. Gallup, was his
assistant. The above passage from Bacon arrested her atten-
tion, and she became convinced that the Bi-literal Cypher had
been described by its inventor with special ulterior purpose and
might possibly be found co-existing in Shakespearian plays with
the others. She was fortified in this idea by the well known
and unexplained peculiarities in the printing of the first folio to
which I have already alluded, and she claims that on examining
this volume she found her suspicions correct. The result has
been the book under review. After its publication Mrs. Gallup
came to England, her sole object being to examine certain rare
old books which could not be procured in America and find if
possible the first inception of the cypher writings, and in this she
claims to have been successful.* Before going farther I will
direct the reader's attention once again to the bi-literal cypher
itself, and endeavor to make the nature of it clearer to him
than it will probably have been made by Bacon's own, somewhat
clumsy, exposition of it.
*Published, since this article was written, in the Third Edition of
Bacon's Bi-literal Cypher.
98
In the first place it should be observed that Bacon's own
name for it — 'bi-literal' — is essentially inaccurate and mislead-
ing. He means by the word 'bi-literal' that the letters of his
second alphabet are all formed out of two — that is to say, 'a' and
'b,' by arranging them variously in so many groups of five.
But the letters *a' and 'b/ when used for this purpose, are prop-
erly speaking not letters at all. They have no phonetic value,
they are simply arbitrary signs. Their function would be ful-
filled equally well or better by dots and dashes ( . and — ), or
else by the longs and shorts (- and o) which are familiar to
every schoolboy as symbols of prosodical quantity. The cypher
is a cypher of two signs, not of two letters. It is, in fact, merely
a species of Morse Code. Let the reader look back to the bi-
literal code or alphabet, as formulated by Bacon himself; and.
for an example, let him take four letters — a, b, e, and 1 — which
I choose merely because several different words can be spelt with
them. He will see that for 'a' the symbol is five Vs (a a a a a),
for 'b' four 'a's and a 'b' (a a a a b), for '€ two 'a's, a *b', and
two 'a's (a a b a a), and for T two consecutive 'a b's and one V
(a b a b a). Let him rid himself of these *a's and 'b's, and sub-
stitute dots and dashes ; let every 'b' be a dash, and every 'a' a
dot. The result will be just the same, and his mind will most
likely be clearer. His code signs for these four letters will be as
follows : A ;B.... — ;E.. — ..;L. — . — . Now let
him write, in this code, 'ale,' 'all,' 'ball,' 'bell,' 'Abel. No exer-
cise could be easier. 'Ale' will be — . — . . . — . . ; 'All'
will be — . — . . — . — . ; 'Ball' will be . . . . —
. — . — . . — . — .; 'Bell' will be . . . .— . . — . . . — . — .
. — . — . ; and 'Abel' will be — . . — . . . — . — .
Now we come to the next part of our problem. Having writ-
ten 'ale,' 'all,' 'ball,' 'bell,' and 'Abel' in dots and dashes —
which constitutes, we will suppose, some message which we wish
to convey — our next task is to hide this in a series of words with
which, seemingly, our message shall have no connection. For
the moment, instead of adopting the precise method of Bacon,
let us take a much cruder one, which will be at once grasped by
everybody. Let us make every capital letter signify a dot in our
code, and every small letter a dash ; and let us arrange the code
symbols of our five words in a line, thus :
99
We have here a series of ninety dots and dashes, and all we
need now do is to take any sentence we please — any chance
fragment, whether of prose or poetry — which contains not less
than ninety letters, and ignoring the ordinary use of small letters
and capitals, write it in such a way as to put a capital for every
dot and a small letter for every dash. Let us take, for example,
the first verses of Gray's 'Elegy,' and write it in this manner.
What we shall get is as follows :
THECU RfEwT OLIST HEKNE UOfP ArTiN GDAYt
HELOW InGhE RdWiN DSSLo WLyOE RtHeL EaThE
PLOUG HMANh OMeWA RdPlO &c.
All the five words with which we started are here contained
in our cypher; and the decipherer has only to perform the
childishly simple task of putting a dot under each capital and a
dash under each small letter, and he has them back again in the
form given above. To illustrate the complete independence of
what Bacon calls the 'infolding' document from the 'infolded,'
let us set, one under the other, one of Gray's lines, and some dif-
ferent sets of words altogether.
THECU RfEwT OUST HEKNE LlOfP ArTiN GDAY
OFMAN SfIrS TDiSO BEDIE NcEaN DtHeF RUIT
SINGA SoNgO FSiXP ENCEA BaBfU LlOfR YEFO (ur)&c.
Every one of these lines, when resolved into dots and dashes.
will be the same, and will read thus :
a
V (b) &c./
(b) &c.
Bacon's system differs from this merely in the fact that,
instead of using the capitals and the small letters of one ordinary
alphabet as the equivalents respectively of his 'a's and 'b's — that
is to say, of his dots and dashes — he uses two italic alphabets, of
capitals and small letters, complete; both the capitals and small
letters of one meaning dots or 'a's, and the capitals and small
100
letters of the other meaning dashes or 'b's. Let us now proceed
to adopt his system a little more nearly ourselves, diverging
from it only in the fact that our two complete alphabets, instead
of being two slightly different varieties of italics, shall consist,
the one of italics and the other of ordinary type, the italics rep-
resenting the 'a's or dots, the ordinary letters the 'b's or dashes ;
and we will, as preliminary examples, imagine two cases, parallel
to that which is alleged to be Bacon's own. The following lines
are Byron's, which I quote from memory ; and they are printed
in accordance with the principles just laid down :
Saint Fcter sat at the celestial gate;
The keys vver^ rusty, and the lock was dull,
So little trouble had been given of late.
Not that the place by any means was iull,
But since the Gallic era Ktghty-eight
The devils had ta'en a longer, stronger pull,
And a pull all together, as they say
At ^ea, whz'ch drew most souls the other way.
The angels all were singing out of tune.
And hoarse with haz/ing little else to do,
Eyicepting to wind up the sun and moon,
And cwrb o runaway young sta[r or two, &c.]
To this passage, before examining it, let us add some others
from Milton, printed in the same manner; and let us imagine,
for reasons which will appear presently, that we have an edition
of Milton in which certain passages, and certain passages only —
those which we shall quote being among them — are printed in
these two characters, and are consequently at once distinguish-
able from the rest of the text.
Of man's first disobedience, and the fruit
Of that forhidaen tree, whos^ mortal taste
Brought death into the wot Id and all our wo<?.
With loss of Eden, till on<r greater man
Restore us, and regain those blissful seats,
Sing Heavenly Muse.
A little onward lend thy guiding hand
To these dark steps — a little farther on,
For yonder bank has choice oi sun and shade.
The SUM to me is dark
And silent as the moon
When she deserts the night.
Hid in h^r vacant interlunar cave.
101
Yet once more, oh ye laurels, and once mor^
Ye myrtles hrowti, and it'y yiev^r sere,
I come to pluck your berries Aarjh and crude,
And with forced fingers rude
Shatter your leaves, &c., &c.
Now in the above passages, if we except only the fact that
the dots and dashes of the cypher are represented in these by
italics and ordinary letters, whereas Bacon employs two slightly
different forms of italics, we have the biliteral cypher exempli-
fied completely, though with extreme simplicity. But we have
not this only. As the reader will see presently, we have exem-
plified in them also another of the claims now made for Bacon
in relation to works published under another name. It may
amuse some readers to extract the cypher in these passages for
themselves. They will begin thus, putting dots under the italics
and dashes under the ordinary letters :
Sz.int F ete r s Q.t at.
They will then divide these dots and dashes into groups of
five, thus : . — ..., — . — ..,. — ...; and on turning to Bacon's
code, already given, they will find that these three groups mean
I. W. I. Pursuing this method, they will find that in the passage
from Byron the following meaning is 'infolded :'
'I, William Wordsworth, am the author of the Byron poems.
Don Juan contains my private prayers.'
In the passages from Milton, the 'infolded' meaning is this :
'I, S. Pepys, in this and oth'r poems [Now to my Sams'n]
hide my secret frailties [Now to Lycidas] lest my wife, poor
fool, should know.'
The reader will see from these examples how easily, if it
were not for the existence of copyright, any author might repub-
lish the works of any other, introducing a cypher into them, in
which he claimed them as his own composition, and deposited
in them any secrets which he wished both to record and hide.
The passages taken from Milton illustrate certain farther points.
" The bi-literal cypher of Bacon exists, it is alleged, in the first
folio of Shakespeare, in those parts only which are printed in
italics, the end of one fragment of the secret writing often
breaking off in the middle of a letter, which is completed at the
beginning of another italic passage farther on, and sometimes
102
in another play,; and parentheses occur like those in our imagined
cypher by Pepys, directing the decipherer where to look for the
continuations.
The general character, then, of this biliteral cypher, and the
manner in which it is alleged to have been inserted in one edition
of the Shakespearian plays, must now be perfectly clear to even
the most careless reader; and we may therefore pass on to
another portion of our subject; for the claim of the Baconian
theorists does not by any means end with what they declare they
have proved with regard to the first folio of Shakespeare. They
claim that the same cypher has been introduced by Bacon into
early or first editions of a number of other works, some bearing
his own name, and admittedly written by himself, others bearing
the name of well known persons, his contemporaries. These
include his own Advancement of Learning, 1605, his Novum
Organum, 1620, and his History of Henry VH., 1622 ; the Com-
plaints, 1 591, and the Colin Clout, 1595, published under the
name of Spenser, and the edition of the Faerie Queen, 1596 ; cer-
tain editions of certain plays ascribed to the four dramatists,
Peele, Greene, Marlowe, and Ben Jonson ; and the edition pub-
lished in 1628 of The Anatomy of Melancholy. Some of these
works, in spite of the presence of the cypher in them, it is nor
even claimed that Bacon wrote himself. For example, so we are
told, he expressly says in his cypher that he used certam plays of
Ben Jonson, with Ben Jonson's own permission, as a vehicle for
his secret writing, having had, with the exception of a few short
masques, no part in the composition of any of them. Bacon does
claim, however, unless his cypher is altogether an illusion, that
of many of the works into which the cypher was printed, he was
himself the actual author — notably The Anatomy of Melan-
choly, and the whole of the plays called Shakespeare's. On this
latter point he insists over and over again, declaring that he
borrowed Shakespeare's name as a pseudonym, and describing
him as being nothing more than the most accomplished actor of
his time. ^
I say this, let me repeat, on the supposition that the cypher is
not altogether an illusion. Before considering whether this sup-
position is correct, let us accept it for the moment as being so,
and see what are the conclusions which it forces on us. Of the
four hundred and fifty pages of which Mrs. Gallup's volume,
103
The Bi-literal Cypher of Francis Bacon, consists, about three
hundred and fifty are occupied with what purport to be secret
writings of Bacon's, deciphered letter by letter, from the pas-
sages printed in italics, in certain specified editions of certain
works, some published under other names, some admittedly his
own. Of these three hundred and fifty pages of secret writings,
about fifteen have been extracted from Spenser, Greene, Peele,
and Marlowe, and twenty-three from Ben Jonson; about a
hundred and twenty-five from writings admittedly his own,
such as the Novum Organum and The New Atlantis, more than
ninety from Burton, and more than fifty from the first folio of
Shakespeare. Much more, however, it is averred, remains to be
deciphered still.
And now let us ask what, continuing to suppose them
genuine, these secret writings contain, and why the authoi
wrote them in such a way. Described generally, they are a
species of diary, comparable to that of Pepys, also written in
cypher — a diary to which the author confides thoughts and
hopes and feelings too intimate to be revealed to contemporaries,
and secrets the mere hinting of which would have placed his life
in danger. Of these it is enough for our present purpose to
mention a few.
Bacon declares in his cypher over and over again that he was
not what he appeared to be. He was not, as the world supposed,
the son of Sir Nicholas Bacon, but the son of the Queen of
England by a private marriage with Leicester — her eldest son
and rightful heir to the throne. He was ignorant of the fact till
he reached his sixteenth year, when he heard the story hinted by
one of the ladies of the Court. The Queen, in a fit of anger,
admitted to him that it was true, the marriage having taken
place secretly in the Tower of London, when the Queen, before
her accession, and Leicester were both confined there. For
political reasons it was necessary to keep this a profound secret,
and the child was confided to Anne and Nicholas Bacon, to be
brought up as their own and educated as a private person, the
Queen being determined never, under any circumstances, to
acknowledge him. To reveal the truth himself would, he
believed, be to forfeit his fife; and hence, smarting under an
obstinate sense of wrong, he confided his history to the keeping
of elaborate cyphers, trusting that future students would unravel
104
them for a future age. The moment the Queen found that the
boy had discovered his parentage he was sent to France under
the care of Sir Amyas Paulet, and did not come back to England
till the death of his foster-father. When in France he conceived
an absorbing and romantic passion for Marguerite, wife of
Henry of Navarre, who returned or pretended to return it.
Expectations were rife at the time that she and her husband were
to be divorced ; and Sir Amyas Paulet attempted to arrange with
Queen Elizabeth that, should the divorce take place, Marguerite
and Bacon should be married. The divorce, however, was not
obtained, nor would Queen Elizabeth listen to the proposal.
This early romance made a profound impression on Bacon, and
he wrote, long afterwards, Romeo and Juliet in commemoration
of it.
Another part of the story which he tells is this. He was not,
he says, the Queen's only child by Leicester. He had a brother,
and this brother was Essex; and of all the incidents of his life
with regard to which he is most anxious to set forth the truth and
with regard to which he fears that his memory is most likely to
be wronged, those connected with his conduct towards his unfor-
tunate brother stand foremost.
That he does not venture openly to give even a hint of the
truth with regard to this matter, or his parentage and rightful
position, he declares with an almost wearisome and not very
dignified persistence; and he is, he says, driven to hide himself
in tortuous cyphers, which will keep him safe as a coney hiding
in a valley of rocks.
On the contents of the biliteral cypher, considered under
their more general aspect, we need not dwell longer. Enough
has been said to show that, if it be a genuine document, the
author had intelligible reasons for embodying it in this singular
form. What mainly concerns us here is its purely literary sig-
nificance, especially as regards the authorship of the so-called
p^ays of Shakespeare. The mere fact that this biliteral Baconian
cypher is incorporated in the first collected edition of these plays
does not in itself prove, as we have seen already, that Bacon was
the author of King John and Romeo and Jidiet, any more than
it proves that he was the author of The Fox, which, though the
same cypher occurs in it, is admitted to be Ben Jonson's. The
only evidence as to this point with which the biliteral cypher
105
supplies us consists not in its existence in an edition of Shake-
speare's plays, but solely in the assertions which it contains that
Bacon did actually write them, coupled with further statements
relating to other cyphers — the word-cypher more particularly,
also alleged to be contained in them. So far as concerns the
biliteral cypher itself, the mere assertions as to authorship whicli
Bacon makes by means of it have as much or as little value as
they would have had had he made them openly. Their value
depends on the value we are inclined to attach to his word,
coupled with the probabilities of the case as estimated by the
- critic and the historian. The word-cypher, however, stands on
a different footing. It depends on the text itself, not on the man-
ner in which the text is printed ; and the author of this cypher
must necessarily have been the author of the plays. Now the
biliteral cypher contains, if it really be a genuine document,
elaborate instructions as to the word-cypher, and directions as to
the method of unravelling it. That such instructions should be
given if the word-cypher is a mere illusion, we need hardly say
is incredible. Hence, according to all rules of common sense,
our belief in the former carries with it a belief in the latter ; and
a belief in the latter — the word-cypher — also carries v/ith it the
further belief that Bacon actually was the author of the Shake-
spearian plays.
Whether such be the case or no, it is not my purpose to
inquire. All that at this moment I am anxious to impress upon
the reader is the fact that, in taking their stand on this new
alleged discovery — this discovery of a cypher heretofore not
dreamed of — a typographical cypher depending on the use of
two printer's alphabets, nearly alike but yet ascertainably dif-
ferent, the Baconians have shifted this controversy to wholly
novel ground. The word-cypher is a cypher which, even those
who believe in it admit, requires for its interpretation a certain
amount of conjecture; but the biliteral cypher, if it exists at all
can be proved to exist, or, in the opposite case, it can be proved
to be a mere hallucination, by the aid of a magnifying-glass
applied to certain printed pages. There is no occasion here for
any abstruse literary reasoning. There is no occasion for any
literary reasoning at all. Either certain editions of the various
books in question — the first folio of Shakespeare being the most
important and the most famous of them — are, in so far as the
106
italicised portions of them are concerned, systematically printed
in letters from two different founts of type, or they are not. If,
as is absolutely indisputable, two different founts are used, the
letters from these founts are used in such a manner that, when
separated into groups of five, and expressed as dots and dashes,
each of these groups will denote a single letter, in accordance
with the code set forth by Bacon himself ; or else they wdll not do
this, or will do so only by accident, most of the groups having no
meaning whatsoever. And lastly, if these groups do assume a
consecutive meaning, and actually give us a series of single let-
ters, the letters will form words and intelligible sentences, or
they will not. The whole case is one for simple ocular demon-
stration.
To make this demonstration conclusive in the eyes of the
world generally would, no doubt, demand some time and labour.
The question is, are there sufficient prima facie grounds for sup-
posing that possibly the Baconian theory is true, to make it
worth while for sceptics to undertake the inquiry ? For my own
part, unhesitatingly I venture to say that there are. In the first
place, this cypher, as no one can deny, was familiar to Bacon,
who claims to have himself invented it. He has himself admit-
tedly supplied us with our specimen page of it, a passage from
Cicero, reproduced by Mrs. Gallup in photographic facsimile,
together with a companion page, in which Bacon has placed side
by side the two alphabets employed, so that the differences
between their respective letters may be more easily realised.
Thus the biliteral cypher exists in one page of Bacon's works at
all events. There is nothing, therefore, fantastic in the idea
that it may exist elsewhere. The only possibility of any doubt
with regard to the question is due altogether to a purely physical
circumstance. The types employed in printing the specimen
passage from Cicero were designedly made of such a size, and
the differences between the two alphabets were accentuated in
such a manner, that the ordinary eye could readily learn to dis-
tinguish the letters that stand for dashes from, those that stand
ior dots. Even here, however, the differences are for the mosf
part so small and delicate that, in order to perceive them, we
must scrutinise the page attentively ; and an hour of such atten-
tion may elapse before we cease to be puzzled. But in the first
folio of Shakespeare, as in most of the other volumes in which it
107
is contended that the same type occurs, the type is much smaller.
Although even the naked eye can be soon trained to perceive
that in many cases the letters belong to different founts, yet these
differences are of so minute a kind that in other cases they elude
the eye without the aid of a magnifying-glass ; and even with the
aid of a magnifying-glass — I say this from experience — the eye
of the amateur, at all events, remains doubtful, and unable to
assign the letters to this alphabet or to that. The majority of edu-
cated persons, therefore, in the present state of the controversy,
if they give to the italicised passages of the first Shakespearian
folio and the other books in question only so much time and
attention as may be expected from interested amateurs, may
reasonably, if not rightly, entertain the opinion that the larger
part of the differences alleged to exist between the italic letters
employed are entirely imaginary, since their eyes are unable to
detect them ; that the supposed cypher is altogether a delusion,
and has been read into the texts, not out of them, by Mrs. Gal-
lup and her coadjutors.
On the other hand, the fact that the amateur finds himself,
after weeks of study, still completely bewildered in his attempt
to allocate the various letters to two different founts of type, in
such a way as to elicit a sentence or even a word in groups of
dots and dashes, according to the Baconian code, must not be
taken too hastily as a proof that the alleged cypher is imagin-
ary. Mrs. Gallup has done much, though not so much as she
might have done, to enable her readers to settle this point for
themselves. She has reproduced in facsimile from the original
editions Bacon's preface to the Novum Organum, 1620; and the
Epistle Dedicatory of the so-called Spenser's Complaints, 1591,
in both of which it is contended that the Baconian cypher occurs.
She gives similar facsimiles also of the Epistle Dedicatory, and
the Commendatory Verses prefixed to the first folio of Shake-
speare. She gives also an enlarged diagram of the different
forms of italics used by Bacon in the printing of the Novum
Organum; and of his preface to that work, and of the Epistle
Dedicatory of Spenser's Complaints, she gives the cypher mean-
ing extracted letter by letter, each italic being thus allocated to
its own alleged fount. Is this allocation merely fanciful or not?
I have studied for some weeks Mrs. Gallup's facsimilies my-
self, and I give my experience, purely as that of an amateur.
108
for what it is worth. When I examined the facsimiles first I
could make nothing out of them ; and of those from the first folio
I can make very little still. All the letters seemed too much
alike to allow of my separating- them systematically into two
founts of type. Differences which I thought I had discovered
at one moment altogether vanished the next, and gave place to
others, which soon, in their turn, escaped me. But with regard
to the facsimiles from the Novum Organum and Spenser's Com-
plaints the case was otherwise, and for a very simple reason. In
the facsimiles from the folio the type is extremely small, the
original page having been reduced so as to accommodate it to an
octavo volume. But in the Bacon and Spenser facsimiles the
type is of the size of the original. It is comparatively large, and
a study of it is proportionately easier. In these pages I was very
soon able to distmguish the different founts to which several of
the letters belong. I could presently do the same with regard
to several letters more ; and at last I was more or less master of
two-thirds of the alphabet in such a way that I was able, with
some confidence, to translate them, when in one form into a dot.
and when in another form into a dash. I have tried this experi-
ment with a large number of passages, and, comparing my inter-
pretations with that of Mrs. Gallup herself, I have found that i:
coincides with hers, sometimes in four cases out of seven, and
not infrequently in five. Many of the letters still continued to
baffie me; but with regard to some I found myself always right ;
and the dots or dashes into which I had resolved these have
invariably coincided with the requirements of the cypher, as
Mrs. Gallup interprets it. It appears to me to be almost incon-
ceivable that multiplied coincidences such as these can be the
work of chance, or that they can originate otherwise than in the
fact that in these pages at all events — the preface to the Novum
Organum, printed in 1620, and in the Dedication of Spenser's
Complaints, printed in 1591 — a biliteral cypher exists, in both
cases the work of Bacon; and if such a cypher really exists
here, the probabilities are overwhelming that Mrs. Gallup is
right, and that we shall find it existing in the first folio of
Shakespeare also.
It is unfortunate that Mrs. Gallup, whilst giving us the fac-
similes already mentioned, has not given us any from the Shake-
spearian plays themselves, together with specimens of the cypher
109
in them, interpreted letter by letter, I doubt, however, if such
facsimiles would be conclusive if the page of the original folio
were reduced to the size of an octavo. The process which ought
to be adopted is one entirely the reverse of this. Passages from
the first folio should be given not in a reduced but in an en-
larged facsimile, so that the letters should, if possible, be some-
thing like half an inch high. Copies, moreover, of the letters,
in all the forms in which they occur, should be arranged side by
side in alphabets, according to the founts to which they belong ;
and a very few passages, if enlarged and illustrated thus, would
be sufficient to show whether the admitted peculiarities of the
type are merely accidental, as has vaguely been assumed hitherto,
or are really the vehicle of an elaborately arranged cypher.
In order to show the reader that Bacon's biliteral cypher can
easily be printed in such a way that the inexperienced eye would
wholly fail to detect it, and the uninstructed critic would reject
its existence as a myth, I subjoin a passage taken from Bacon's
own chapter on cyphers :
Neither is it a small thing these cyplier characters have, and may ferforme.
For by this Art a ivay is opened whereby a man may expresse and signifie
the intentions of his niinde at any distance of place, by objects which may be
presented to his eye ande accommodated to the eare provided those objects be
capable of a twofold difference only, as by bells, by trumpets, by lights, by
torches, by the report of muskets, and by any instruments of like nature. But
to pursue our enterprise when ....
Into this passage I have printed the following lines in
cypher :
The star of Shakespeare pales ; but, brighter far,
Burns, through the dusk he leaves, an ampler star.
Founts of italic type might be found the differences between
which would be much more minute than those existing between
the two used here, but which would yet be visible to the trained
eye of a printer's reader, and by means of which a cypher might
be printed quite legible to the expert, but undistinguishable for
all the world besides. If, therefore, a biliteral Bacon's cypher
does really exist in the first folio of Shakespeare, we must be pre-
pared to find that the unravelling of it is a matter of considerable
difficulty, and that the ocular evidences of its existence are a long
time in becoming plain to us.
110
I must now draw attention to another aspect of the question.
If the cypher does not really exist, the entire matter, amounting
to between three and four hundred pages, which Mrs. Gallup
professes to have deciphered, is an elaborate literary forgery.
I recommend the reader to study these pages, and ask if their
character is such as to suggest this conclusion. I can here quote
one passage only, which is alleged to liave been printed, not
into the Shakespearian folio, but into the Neia Atlantis. It
refers to the writer's supposed early love affair. If it be a for-
gery, it is one of extraordinary ingenuity; so full does it seem
to me of pathetic and dignified beauty, and so strongly does it
bear the marks of genuine and acute sincerity.
Th' fame of th' gay French Court had come to me even then, and it was
flattering to th' youthfull and most natural! love o' th' affaires taking us from
my native land, insomuch as th' secret commission had been entrusted to me,
which required most true wisdome for safer, speedier conduct then 'twould
have if left to th' common course of businesse. Soe with much interessed,
though sometimes apprehensive minde, I made myself ready to accompany
Sir Amyias to that sunny land o' th' South I learned so supremely to love,
that afterwards I would have left England and every hope of advancement,
to remain my whole life there. Nor yet could this be due to th' delight of
th' country by itselfe ; for love o' sweete Marguerite, th' beautifull young
sister o' th' king (married to gallant Henry th' King o' Navarre) did make
it Eden to my innocent heart; and even when I learned her perfidie, love did
keepe her like th' angels in my thoughts half o' th' time — as to th' other
half she was devilish, and I myselfe was plung'd into hell. This lasted
duri'g many yeares, and, not until four decades or eight lustres o' my life
were outliv'd, did I take any other to my sore heart. Then I married th'
woman who hath put Marguerite from my memorie — rather I should say
hath banished her portrait to th' walles of memorie only, where it doth hang
in th' pure undimmed beauty of those early dayes.
W. H. MaIvLock.
Ill
THE NEW SHAKESPEARE-BACON CONTROVERSY.
By Gaekett p. Sekviss.
The Cosmopolitan, New Yokk, March, 1902.
That smoldering question which nothing seems able to
extinguish, "Did Shakespeare write the Shakespeare plays ?"
and the related question, "Is there a cipher hidden in those
plays, which not only reveals their real authorship but betrays
important state secrets of the time of Queen Elizabeth ?" have
just been brought before the public mind in a new and start-
ling aspect.
And this time the problem is presented in a form which
renders it capable of being submitted to something like a scien-
tific test. It is, in fact, put upon a mechanical basis, so that
it becomes a mere question of distinguishing between different
shapes of printers' types.
Mrs. Elizabeth W. Gallup, of Detroit, Michigan, avers
that while engaged in an examination of old editions of the
works of Francis Bacon, trying to trace there a "Cipher Story,"
the key to which was discovered by Dr. O. W. Owen, to whom
she was acting as an assistant, she became convinced that the
careful explanation which Bacon has given in his celebrated
work, De Augmentis Scientiariim, of a species of secret writ-
ing, invented by him, and which lie calls a "Bi-literal Cipher,"
was intended to serve some other purpose besides that of a
mere treatise on the subject.
This Cipher is based upon the use of two slightly different
fonts of type and, as we shall presently see, has nothing what-
ever to do with the literary form or sense of the books in which
it is alleged to be concealed.
Remembering those puzzling italicized passages that occur
in the First Folio edition of Shakespeare's Plays, published in
1623, and for which no satisfactory explanation has ever been
112
offered, Mrs, Gallup immediately examined them to see if,
perchance, the bi-literal cipher described by Bacon might not
be found in them. Apparently she was not confident of suc-
cess, but, to her great surprise, as she affirms, the cipher was
there !
She began to read it out, and if the story of what she says
she found is true, nobody can wonder that she felt she had
made the literary discovery of the age.
Let us say at once that it is not only in the Shakespeare
Plays that the alleged cipher is hidden, but it appears also in
the works that were published under Bacon's own name, being
confined, as in the plays, to the italicized portions — italicized
for no discoverable reason — and also, surprising to relate, in
a variety of other books of the Elizabethan period, such as
Spenser's Shepherd's Calendar and Faerie Queene, Burton's
Anatomy oi Melancholy, the plays of Peele, Greene and
Marlowe, and even some parts of the plays of Ben Jonson.
Through all of these works, according to Mrs. Gallup,
who has just filled a large octavo volume with her asserted
revelations, runs a story, composed by Francis Bacon, and
repeated over and over again, in varying, but never contra-
dictory, forms, in which he affirms that he was the son of
Queen Elizabeth by Robert Dudley, the Earl of Leicester, to
whom she was secretly married in the Tower of London when
before her accession to the throne, both she and the Earl were
imprisoned there; that, in order to keep his birth secret, he
was given, while a child, to Sir ISTicholas Bacon and his wife
Anne, who brought him up as if he were their own son; that
he did not discover the truth about his birth until he was six-
teen years old, when an intimation of it reached his ears
through the indiscretion of a lady of the court, and then his
mother, the Queen, in a fit of passion, confessed the truth to
him, and immediately afterward sent him away to France in
charge of Sir Amyas Paulet ; and that while he was in soutliern
France he fell in love with Marguerite, the beautiful wife of
King Henry of iSTavarre, and the play of Romeo and Juliet
was afterward based upon this romantic episode in bis life.
In other parts of the story Bacon is represented as affirming
that Queen Elizabeth had another son from her secret union
113
with the Earl of Leicester, this being no less a person than the
Earl of Essex, who was afterward executed for high treason
by his mother's command. Essex was thus, according to the
story. Bacon's younger brother, and, in the Cipher, Bacon
appears as constantly lamenting the share which he unwill-
ingly had in the tragic fate of his brother.
This story, whether it truly exists in the alleged Cipher
or is the product of imagination, cannot fail to hold the
reader's attention, but before pursuing it farther let us see
wdiat the Bi-literal Cipher is.
In his work, De Augmentis Scientiarum, Bacon first
shows that a cipher alphabet can be formed by various trans-
positions of the two leading letters of the ordinarj^ alphabet,
a and h, in sets of five, each set representing one letter of the
Cipher, thus:
Such an alphabet in itself would be of no use for secret
writing. For instance, let us print the word ''Bacon" in it.
It would run: aaaab, aaaaa, aaaba, abbab, abbaa. If a series
of sentences were written, or printed, in that manner it is
evident that the merest tyro would quickly discover the key
and decipher the message.
Bacon's next step, then, is to contrive a way in which the
alphabet above described can be "infolded" in a printed book
so that each set of five successive letters composing the words
of the book, without changing their order and without refer-
ence to the meaning that they convey to the ordinary reader,
shall represent one of the letters of the hidden Cipher. For
this purpose it is necessary to employ two fonts of type, in
which the forms of the letters slightlv differ. Call one the
"a font" and the other the "b font;" then every letter in the
"a font" will stand for "a" in making up the sets of fiv(|
a's and b's that compose the letters of the cipher alphabet, and
similarly every letter of the b-font will stand for ''b."
Note: An exten'icd illustration of the zuorking out of the cipher is
omitted here, the manner of it being fully illustrated in two other
parts of the volume.
114
Thus, by simply printing three sentences, containing one
hundred and twenty-five letters in two kinds of type, another
entirely different sentence, containing only twenty-five letters,
is inclosed in them, and can be read only by one who holds
the clue to the double system of types, which Bacon calls a
Bi literal Cipher. It is not necessary in any manner to inter-
fere with the order of the words in the original work, and any
book in existence could be made to hold a cipher of this kind.
The only restriction upon the proceedings of the person who
inserts the cipher is imposed by the necessity of using up
five letters of the original for every one letter of his inclosed
cipher.
In Bacon's alleged use of the Cipher he is said to have
included it only in the italicized portions of the books wherein
it is found, using two fonts of Italic letters.
Now, even if the existence of such a Cipher in the Folio
Edition of Shakespeare's Plays, whose typographical eccen-
tricities have long been a puzzle, can be established, that fact
would not in itself affect the question of the authorship of
the Plays. Being simply a matter of the types employed, any
printer, if he had the opportunity — not to speak of a suffi-
cient motive — could have inserted the story which Mrs. Gallup
professes to have extracted.
Of course Bacon himself could thus have inserted it with-
out having had anything to do with the original composition
of the Plays. In fact, however, he claims in the alleged Cipher
Story that he was the real author of those immortal composi-
tions, as well as of other books, such as Spenser's Faerie
Queene and Marlowe's plays.
But the reader is likely to say: "This is so simple a
matter that it should have been cleared up long ago. If there
are two kinds of type used in the Folio Edition of Shake-
speare's Plays, and if all the italicized portions are printed
in that manner, and filled with a secret story, it ought to be
the easiest thing in the world to establish the fact by simple
examination," So it would be if the fonts of type alleged to
have been employed by Bacon were as clearly distinguished
from one another as are those which he used in illustratine:
the principle of the Bi-literal Cipher in his De Augmentis, or
115
those which we have selected for a similar purpose. But, in
fact, there is no such clear distinction. It may indeed be said
that Bacon would have defeated his own end by making the
differences of type manifest at the first glance. He had to
choose letters w^hich should be so nearly alike that they would
pass under the ordinary reader's eyes without exciting suspi-
cion, and yet should be sufficiently varied to be distinguished
without too great difficulty when at last the key was discovered
and the deciphering begun.
]^ot only are the differences admitted by Mrs. Gallup,
especially in the case of the small characters, to be so slight
that very close examination is required to preceive them, but
she avers that Bacon was not satisfied with using only two
fonts; he employed many different fonts, and sometimes
changed the order of their distribution among the ^'A's" and
"B's," apparently for the purpose of more surely concealing
his cipher, for he is represented as saying that his life would
be in danger if the fact became known that he was using this
method of handing down to posterity secrets concerning the
highest personages in the State which the few who were ac-
quainted with them dared not whisper above their breath.
As Mr. Mallock has suggested, the thing to do is not to
photograph the pages said to contain the cipher down to the
dimensions of an octavo, as has been done, but to magnify
them, in order that the typographical variations may be made
more evident. By adopting that plan it may be possible to
submit the whole question to a decisive test. At any rate, it
is a question that can be tested by a mechanical examination,
and there certainly seems to be no occasion for the display of
heat and bad temper that has been called forth in some quarters
by the discussion. On the contrary, it is fvdl of interest, which-
ever way it may be decided.
Returning to the revelations which Mrs. Gallup assures
us have been extracted from the books named with the aid of
the Bi-literal Cipher, we come upon another point more sur-
prising still. The Bi-literal Cipher is believed by her to have
been intended as a key to other, more difficult, forms of cipher
embedded by Bacon in his various works. The most im-
portant of these is described as a "word-cipher," the transla-
tion of which does not depend upon the use of any special
116
type, but is to be effected by means of certain key-words and
directions given in the Bi-literal Cipher. This Word-Cipher,
if it exists, could not have been inserted in a work originally
composed without reference to it, but could only be worked
into the web and woof of the composition by the original
author, and to assert, as the story does, that Bacon was able
to compose the finest plays that we know under the name of
Shakespeare merely as cloaks for other hidden plays and nar-
ratives is indeed to tax credulity to its limit.
It will be observed that the "word-cipher" does not
admit of any such mechanical test as can be applied to the
Bi-literal Cipher, but is a subject for choice, judgment and
ingenuity in interpretation, so that, to anybody not predis-
posed to accept it, it can never appeal with convincing force,
as the Bi-literal would do if once the typographical differences
on which it is based could be completely established. Let the
Bi-literal Cipher's presence be demonstrated beyond a perad-
venture, and then the word-cipher would stand a better chance
of acceptance, because the other asserts its existence. The
word-cipher compels those who accept it to believe that the
person, who put the ciphers in Shakespeare's plays and Bacon's
learned treatises and the poems and dramatic compositions of
Marlowe, Spenser, Peele and Greene and the Anatomy of
Melancholy called Burton's, actually produced all of those
works.
Using the Word-Cipher, and following the clues accorded
by the Bi-literal, Mrs. Gallup has recently deciphered, as she
avers, one of the concealed tragedies of Bacon. It is called
The Tragedy of Anne Boleyn, and is made up of bits from
many of Shakespeare's plays, matched together. For in-
stance, we find Romeo's words put into the mouth of King
Henry VIII, and applied by him to Anne Boleyn:
"O she doth teach the torches to burn bright!
It seems she hangs upon the cheek of night
As a rich jewel In an Ethiop's ear;
Beauty too rich for use, for earth too dear!"
All this is well calculated to repel dispassionate investi-
gation of Mrs. Gallup's claims because it so far offends tho
common sense and judgment of the reader that he must be
117
tempted to throw the whole thing overboard at once. If the
alleged discovery can ever be rendered acceptable to unpreju-
diced investigation, it must be on the basis of the Bi-literal
Cipher alone. Let Mrs. Gallup successfully meet Mr. Mal-
lock's challenge by taking, as he suggests, the epistle from
Macbeth to Lady Macbeth (Macbeth, Act. I, Scene 5), which
is one of the passages in the first Folio printed in Italics, and
indicating under each letter the font to which, according to
her interpretation, it belongs. Then let Mr. Mallock have the
passage photographically enlarged, so that the dullest eye
can detect the smallest differences in the letters, and when
the result is printed the public will have a fair chance to judge
for itself.
But, whatever the outcome of the discussion aroused by
Mrs. Gallup's book may be, the story that Francis Bacon
appears to tell in its pages does not fail in interest. The well-
known fact that historical rumor has long whispered hints
touching many of his alleged revelations serves to draw atten-
tion to them. Some of Mrs. Gallup's critics intimate that those
rumors may really be the sole foundation of her decipherings.
But they do not accuse her of wilful invention, and if she has
dreamed these things it must be admitted that she dreams
interestingly.
Listen to Bacon's complaint of the injustice done him,
as Mrs. Gallup says she reads it in the double types of the
Advancement of Learning" :
"Queen Elizabeth, the late soveraigne, wedded, secretly,
th' Earle, my father, at th' Tower of London, and afterwards
at th' house of Lord P this ceremony was repeated, but
not with any of the pompe and ceremonie that sorteth wel
with queenly espousals, yet with a sufficient number of
witnesses.
"I therfore, being the first borne sonne of this union
should sit upon the throne, ruling the people over whom the
Supreame Soveraigne doth shewe my right, as hath beene said,
whilst suff'ring others to keepe the royall power.
"A foxe, seen oft at our Court in th' forme and outward
appearance of a man, named Robert Cecill — the hunchback —
must answer at th' Divine Araignment to my charge agains'
118
him, for he despoyled me ruthlessly. Th' Queene, mj mother,
might in course of events which foUow'd their revelations
regarding my birth and parentage, without doubt having some
naturall pride in her offspring, often have shewne us no little
attenntion had not the crafty foxe aroused in that tiger-like
spiritt th' jealousy that did so tormente the Queene [that]
neyther night nor day brought her respite from such suggestio's
about my hope that I might bee England's King.
"He told her my endeavours were all for sov'raigntie and
honour, a perpetuall intending and constant hourlie practising
some one thing urged or imposed, it should seeme, by that
absolute, inhere't, honorably deriv'd necessitie of a conserva-
tion of roiail dignity.
''He bade her observe the strength, breadth and com-
passe, at an early age, of th' intellectual powers I displaied,
and ev'n deprecated th' gen'rous disposition or graces of speech
which wonne me manie friends, implying that my gifts would
thus, no doubt, uproot her, because I would, like Absalom,
steale awaie th' people's harts and usurp the throne whilst my
mother was yet alive."
Bacon appears also as frequently lamenting the tragic
death of his (alleged) brother Robert, Earl of Essex, and in
King Lear Mrs. Gallup reads from the Bi-literal Cipher a
Btatement that Essex's life might have been saved if a signet-
ring that he desired to have presented to his mother had reached
her: "As hee had beene led to bel'eve he had but to send the
ring to her and th' same would at a mome't's warni'g bring
rescue or reliefe, he reived vainly, alas ! on this promis'd ayde.
... It shal bee well depicted in a play, and you wil be in-
structted to discypher it fully."
In Ben Jonson's Masques, Mrs. Gallup says, she finds
among other things this statement in Bacon's Bi-literal Cipher:
"The next volume will be under W. Shakespeare's name.
As some which have now been produced have borne upon the
title-page his name though all arc my owne work, I have
allow'd it to stand on manie others which I myself e regard
as equal in merite. When I have assum'd men's names, th'
next step is to create for each a stile naturall to th' man that
119
yet should [let] my owne bee seene, as a thrid o' warpe in
my entire fabricke soe that it may be all mine."
In the same work Bacon is represented as saying that
Spenser, Greene, Peele and Marlowe have sold him their
names. This, it would appear, was not the case with Ben
Jonson, of whom he speaks as his friend, and the implication
is that Jonson knew what Bacon was doing with regard to
the others.
Several times Bacon is made to refer to the murder of
Amy Eobsart, the Earl of Leicester's wife, of whom he inti-
mates, as rumor has long done, that the Earl wished to rid
himself in order to marry Elizabeth.
The stories of his royal birth, of his love for Marguerite
of Navarre, and all the rest of the tale are repeated again and
again from the various books in whicli the Cipher is said to
lie. Frequently Bacon appeals to the unknown decipherer
whom he trusts some future time to produce, urging him to
spare no pains to unearth the hidden things and promising
him undying fame for his labor.
Among other things alleged to be contained in Bacon's
Ciphers are translations of Homer and of Virgil, part of
which, in resounding blank verse, Mrs. Gallup publishes in her
book. And some of her critics aver that it bears evidence of
having been based upon Pope's translation of the Iliad,
because it contains names and descriptions that Pope intro-
duced without any warrant from Homer.
It is strongly urged by some of Mrs. Gallup's critics that
if Bacon wished to tell such a story as is here put in his mouth
he would never have done it in so cumbrous a fashion, but
would simply have written it down and placed it under seal,
in trustworthy hands, to be opened and read by posterity.
But if, in spite of such objections, the existence of the Cipher
should be proved, the question would then arise: "Who did
put it there, if Bacon didn't, and for what end ?"
120
PROS AND CONS OF THE CONTROVERSY
THE BI-LITERAL CYPHER OE SIR FRAXCIS BACOK
Baconiana, London.
Elizabeth Wells Gallup.
Editor Baconiania:
From reading the January number of the Magazine, it
would seem that I had at least furnished a new topic for
discussion, and given a new impetus to the study of things
Baconian, in the discovery that the Bi-literal Cipher of Francis
Bacon was incorporated in the printing of his works, and that
a secret story of the great Author was hidden in them. This
in itself is a distinct gain for the study had seemed to lan-
guish for material upon which to feed until the opening of
new channels of thought and research and comparison of ideas
upon the new discovery. The object of the Society is investi-
gation. First: of Bacon's authorship of a much wider range
of literature than has been accredited to him upon the title
pages of the books of his time. Secondly: many have believed
that Ciphers would be found that would present new phases
of his life history which has seemed so mysterious, if only
the right ''key" could be touched. The limits of novelty in
the discussion of all these things seemed to have been reached,
however. Paralellisms in philosophy, language and thought
bad been urged until variety of phrases had been exhausted
in comparing them, yet all arguments, while morally conclu-
sive to the party urging them, were tinged with inconclusive-
ness in the lack of physical demonstration. The Ciphers
found furnish the missing links which explain much, if not all.
Naturally the Ciphers and what they tell invite investi-
gation and the pages of Baconiania would seem a not inap-
propriate forum for their discussion.
The understandings of different individuals concerning
the same subject are almost as varied as the individuals them-
selves, hence we must expect a variety of opinions. Con-
122
course of words has such different meanings to different people
that we are compelled to believe that the brain is like a plastic
matter of varying degrees of hardness, receiving but the faintest
impression, or none, of some things, while others are deeply
imprinted upon the recording tablets of memory. Then, too,
the sources of information are so varied that the results of
studying them are like looking through glasses of differing color
and focus, and the individual receives and describes the im-
pression from their own particular lense and confidently asserts
that to be the only truth, hence investigation, comparison and
discussion are needful in the clarifying process.
Investigation, however, does not mean rejection of that
which is new or unpleasant or not in accord with our precon-
<3eived ideas, else my own labors upon old books would have
stopped years ago, and I should not now be engaged in explain-
ing what I have found, and the old beliefs would not have
suffered the jar of a ''Cipher discovery".
Fully conscious of the absolute veracity of the work I
have done, and my responsibility in the expression, I knoiu
that the Bi-literal Cipher exists in the printing of Bacon's
works: I knov that others can follow over the same course,
if they have the aptitude and patience for it, and can reach
no other correct results. To those who have availed themselves
of the opportunity carefully to study and follow my work, no
argument is needed to convince them of my assertion. Doubts
and objections come from those who have not had that oppor-
tunity or have given the work but slight attention.
There are those who seem to think the deciphered work
as published is a creation of my own, — or that I am self-
deceived. Thev do me too much honor, — or too little. It is
an honor to be thought capabk' of such a production, through
the gathering of historical facts, aided by a romantic imagina-
tion, and the power to express it all in the pure old English
language of Francis Bacon. T^i<l I possess such creative powers
I would have devoted them to some more popular theme and
spared eyes and brain from the nervous exhaustion of exam-
ining seven thousand pages of olrl English printing for the
peculiarities of the Italic letters in them. I cannot aspire to
the honor of such a "creation."
On the other hand, it is not complimentary to mj judg-
ment, or that of my publishers, that I, or they, should go
through the constant researches of the last seven years in
libraries so widely scattered, — seK deceived as to the resulting
work, expending so much of time and strength and substance
in developing something that was non-existent; — or if not
that — and the Cipher has no reason for existence — what shall
be said of so stupendous and brain-racking effort to deceive
my readers with so purj)0seless a production.
It is urged that the Cipher disclosures do not accord with
history. This is a field for the investigators. I can only record
what I find as I find it. "The facts of history" is an elastic
term and the deductions drawn from public records of the
earlier ages vary greatly. The conviction is growing that much
of interest was not recorded and it is certain that sources of
information are too diverse and greatly scattered to be all
brought together into an exact statement of facts. If the
Cipher had a purpose, it was to record that which was being"^
suppressed. It would have been a work of supererogation to
put into Cipher the open records of the day.
Many inquiries have reached me asking "How is the
Cipher worked ?" and expressing disappointment that the
writer had been unable after some hours of study, to grasp the
system or its application.
It would be difficult, and hardly to be expected that an
understanding of Greek or Sanscrit could be reached with the
aid of a few written lines or with a few hours study. It is
equally so with the Cipher. Deciphering the Bi-literal Cipher
as it appears in Bacon's works will be impossible to those who
are not possessed of an eyesight of the keenest and perfect
accuracy of vision in distinguishing minute differences in
form, lines, angles and curves in the printed letters. Other
things absolutely essential are unlimited time and patience,
and aptitude, love for overcoming puzzling difficulties and,
I sometimes think, inspiration. As not every one can be a
poet, an artist, an astronomer or adept in other branches re-
quiring special aptitude, so, and for the same reasons, not every
one will be able to master the intricacies of the Cipher, for,
in many ways it is most intricate and puzzling, not in the
124
system itself, but in its application, as it is found in the old
books. It must not be made too plain, lest it be discovered
too quickly, nor bid too deep lest it never see the light of day,
is the substance of the thought of the inventor, many times
repeated in the work. The system has been recognized since
the first publication of De Augmentis, but the ages since have
waited to learn of its application to Bacon's works ; and yet the
idea seems to be prevalent that "any one" should be able to
do the work, once the bi-literal alphabet is known. This is
as great a mistake as it would be to reject the translations of
the character writings and hieroglyphics of older times which
have been deciphered because we could not in a few hours
master them ourselves. Ciphers are used to hide things, not to
make them clear.
125
BI-LITEKAL CYPHER OF FRANCIS BACOE".
A REPLY TO CERTAIN CRITICS.
by elizabeth wells gallup.
Pall Mall Magazine, May, 1902.
To the March number of the Pall Mall Magazine Mrs. Gallup con-
tribute\i a preliminary paper on the controversy which has so stirred
the literary world. We now place before our readers a second article
in which Mrs. Gallup deals specifically with a number of points which
have been raised by certain individual writers during the progress of
the controversy. This Mrs. Gallup has not been able to do before,
because, as we have already stated, the criticisms were not in her pos-
session when her iirst contribution left America. In sending us her
second contribution Mrs. Gallup wishes us to point out that the art-
icles to which she is now replying occupied considerable space in the
magazines publishing them, and the answers, to be at all full and cor-
respondingly valuable, require much greater space than zvas placed at
her disposal by the Pall Mall Magazine. In fairness to Mrs. Gallup
we think it right to precede her paper zvith this explanation.
Ed. p. M. M.
I gladly avail myself of the opportunity of replying to some
of my critics in the Pall Mall Magazine, as discussions in
the daily press sometimes become acrimonious and detrimental
to real study and calm judgment, while a presentation of the
subject in the pages of a fireside companion can be enjoyed in
the hours of leisure and recreation.
In view of the remarkable expressions in the Times and
other papers, and in two or three magazines in England, I
should perhaps regard myself fortunate that there is now no In-
quisition to compel a discoverer to recant, under penalty of the
rack; and I can already sympathise with a contemporary of
Bacon who, when forced publicly to deny what he knew to be
truth, was said to have muttered, as he withdrew, "E pur si
muove !"
The torrent of questions, objections, suggestions, inferen-
ces, and imaginings that have overwhelmed the press over
Bacon's Bi-literal Cypher, has shown an astonishing interest in
126
the subject, and I may congratulate myself, at any rate, upon
being the innocent cause of what somebody has called a "tremen-
dous propulsion of thought currents." Much of this energy
has been expended along lines in no way relating to me or the
validity of my work, but we may suppose there is "no exercise
of brain force without its value," and in the swirl there may be
others who will say with me, "the world does move."
I had expected, if not hoped, that with the aids I had set out,
some adept in ciphers — sufficiently curious to enjoy solving
Sphinxlike riddles — would have followed, and so proved my
work. I have been surprised to find how few have been able to
grasp the system of its application, and how much defective
vision affects the judgment. I also regret very seriously the
superficiality of most of the investigations. I am therefore
obliged to go into details, when I had expected eager research by
others would have made it a fascinating race to forestall me in
deciphering the old books I was unable to obtain.
Tex Objections in the "Times."
"A Correspondent," in the Times, fully discusses and sets
out objections, summarising them finally under the following
ten heads:
1. "There are discernible distinct differences of form in
certain individual Italic letters used by printers of tlie period."
This is an important admission of one important fact.
Less careful investigators have directly, or by inference, denied
that any such discernible differences exist at all. In the Bi-
literal Cypher, p. 310, Bacon says : "Where, by a slighte altera-
tion of the common Italicke letters, the alphabets of a bi-literate
cypher having the two forms are readily obtain'd," etc., which
states clearly enough that he had few changes to make to secure
his double alphabet.
It is admitted also that the full explanation of the bi-literal
cipher is given in De Augmentis Scientiarum. Gilbert Wats's
translation says: "Together with this, you must have ready at
hand a Bi-formed Alphabet, which may represent all the Letters
of the common Alphabet, as well Capitall Letters as the Smaller
Characters in double forme, as may fit every man's occasion."
He also says : "Certainly it is an Art which requires great paines
and a good witt, and is consecrate to the Counsels of Princes."
127
So we have, in analysing this first objection, made good
progress when we have learned — (1) the admitted differences
in the types; (2) from Bacon himself of the use of bi-formed
alphabets; (3) the clear and full explanation of the cipher
itself, which can be applied to these differences; (4) his state-
ment that it is an art which requires great pains and a good wit
(and good vision as well) ; (5) that its importance is so great
that it is consecrate to the counsels of princes. This really
leaves but one question: did Bacon print this particular cipher
into his books ? I answer from a study of months and years
that he did, and that I have correctly transcribed it.
2, The correspondent says : "These differences were by no
means confined to the period when Bacon lived, or to the books
in which Mrs. Gallup alleges a secret cypher — in fact, they are
to be detected in similar profusion in books published thirty-
five years after Bacon's death — notably in the third folio of
Shakespeare, 1661."
I replied to this in a former communication to the Times,
stating that in some old books of the period similar founts of
type in two or more forms are used ; that I have endeavoured
to find the cipher in some of these, but found the forms were
used promiscuously, without method, and the differences could
not be classified to produce, when separated into "groups of
five," words and sentences in the bi-literal cipher. But this has
no direct bearing on the subject. As Bacon's invention con-
sisted in making use (by slight alteration) of varieties and
forms of type then, as now, in common use, he would have
nothing to do with the introduction of the forms, their general
use, or continuance. He employed a method by which two
forms were arranged in a definite way, to serve his purpose in
his own publications, while the method would be absolutely be-
yond discovery without the key. This key he withheld until
1623. We now know that Bacon used this method from 1579
to the end of his career, and that Rawley employed it until
1635 for cipher purposes. How much later it was used I have
been unable to learn, that being the latest date of my decipher-
ing.
128
"Confi2n'ed to Few Types."
3. "These differences, in so far as they are well marked,
uniform, and coherent, appear to be confined to very few types
— in the case of Shakespeare's plays (first, second, and third
folios, 1623, 1632, 1661) to some ten or twelve at most of the
capital letters."
This is incorrect, as I have observed in replying to Objec-
tion 1. But starting with twelve capitals, there is half that
alphabet. The others can be found by closer observation. Many
of the small letters are as well marked in some of the types,
not only in the First Folio, but especially in the Historie of the
Raigne of King Henry the Seventh (1622), and in the first
edition oi De Augmentis Scientiaruni (1623).
Differences Due to Various Causes.
4. He states: "Apart from such well-defined differences,
there are to be observed in the Italic types of the period in-
numerable and unclassifiable differences of form, due, it would
seem, to many contributory causes, such as defective manufac-
ture, broken face, careless locking of formes (involving bad
alignment or improper inclination of individual letters), bad
ink, bad paper, and the great age of the impression."
It is true there are differences that are not the distinctive
differences governing- their use, but it is very rarely indeed that
a letter is found that is not paired with another, which, though
like in some respects, is unlike in certain definite features. It
involves no more difficulty to find how a number of letters
similar, yet with certain distinctive differences, are to be sep-
arated into two classes, than to distinguish in the same way a
number of letters in entirely different forms. Bacon himself
speaks of the multi- or bi-formed type. We have difficulties
arising from very natural causes, but there are none that cannot
be overcome with time and patient study.
Me. Mallock's Examples.
5. "Mrs. Gallup's manipulation of these minor differences
follows no clear and consistent rule or rules ; so that types of
many differing characteristics are classed by her as belonging to
129
one fount, while others closely resembling each other are classed
by her as belonging to two different founts on different oc-
casions."
This is erroneous. There is no "manipulation," and the
rules are consistent. In a few instances the same kinds of
letters are wrongly marked as a and h because of printers'
errors, which are detected by methods elsewhere more specifical-
ly set out, or they may be changed in value by a peculiar mark,
as explained on the first page of the deciphered work from
Henry Seventh. Printers' errors are not infrequent in the
works. They are found in Bacon's own illustration in De Aug-
mentis Scientiarum (1624), e.g. In conquiesti, line 5, and in
quos, line 10, the letter q is from the "h fount." It should be an
"Vfount" letter, and was so printed in the first or "London
edition" (1623). An I in line 12, and another in line 14, is
from the wrong fount. There is also an error in grouping in
the 1624 edition, which does not occur in the 1623.
As it happened, similar printers' errors occurred in one of
Mr. Mallock's examples in the Nineteenth Century — the passage
from De Augmentis in which he concealed his own couplet:
"The star of Shakespeare, etc." — and that work was done by
twentieth-century printers, of Mr. Mallock's own selection.
The passage he quotes, printed in the two forms of types, can-
not be deciphered as printed on account of an error in the tenth
group, and a few letters used from wrong founts. I have sent
Mr. Mallock the correction; but I have been wondering since
whether it were not incorporated intentionally, to test my
powers of observation, for after the tenth group the rest of the
passage is simply impossible to read in bi-literal cipher, until
the short group is detected and a new division made. I cannot
think Mr. Mallock made these mistakes in marking his MS.
Some errors exist in our own work, which have been dis-
covered since publication, and may quite possibly be found
by those who study the book.
Printers and "Digraphs."
6. "In the period when the writings under discussion
were published, printers made a liberal use of digraphs, such
as 'ft,' 'fh,' 'ct,' 'fl,' etc. (In one page of 24 lines, from which
130
Mrs. Gallup derives her cipher narrative, there are 26
digraphs. ) With regard to the deciphering of these, Mrs. Gallup
suggests no rules and obeys no laws."
Again this is erroneous in the last clause. I quote from a
preceding paragraph of this correspondent's own article, re-
garding Bacon's treatment of the digraph, as follows: "In the
example which he gave of the enfolding of such a cipher in a
portion of one of Cicero's letters, he printed an se (diphthong),
occuring in the Latin word 'cseteris,' not as a diphthong at all,
but as two separate letters — ae. Similarly, he caused the ordin-
ary digraph 'ct,' invariably printed in one type in those days, to
be printed as two separate letters — ct, showing, I think con-
clusively, that in his cipher, as applied to printing, digraphs
must be — treated separately. Our "Correspondent" says "di-
graphs must be kept out of the print," but it is a wrong infer-
ence. These diphthongs and digraphs must be compared with
one another, not with single letters, but the parts are to be con-
sidered separately. They will each be found to have distinctive
features, and a decipherer who has become at all expert will at
once determine their proper classification.
Roman Types.
7. "In certain specific instances, Mrs. Gallup's decipher-
ing is arithmetically incorrect, or must be helped out with the
help of an arbitrary employment of Roman types — on occasion
even this device will not avail to produce the requisite number
of letters for her alleged cipher message."
For the specific instances where Roman type is used,
Bacon's instructions are found on pp. 66-67 of the Bi-literal
Cypher, which "Correspondent" has evidently overlooked. I
have used this passage on another occasion, but will quote again,
as others have stumbled over the same difficulty :
"In order to conceale my Cypher more perfectly, I am pre-
paring for th' purpose a sette of alphabets in th' Latine tipe,
not for use in th' greatest or lengthy story or epistle, but as
another disguise, for, in ensample, a prologue, pra^fatio, the
epilogues, and headlines attracted too much notice. ISToe othe'
waie of diverting th' curious could be used where th' exterior
131
epistle is but briefe, however it will not thus turne aside my
decipherer, for his eye is too well practised in artes that easily
misleade others who enquire th' waye."
I found Roman type used in such places, and the differ-
ences in the letters are quite distinct, but no use was made of
this new device, so far as I have found, until 1623, when it ap-
peared in the First Folio, and in Vitae et Mortis.
An incident, for the moment mortifying, occurred in Bos-
ton, by which I discovered an error of our printers in the first
edition issued. Those having copies of the first edition will
notice the word "Baron" is left out of the signature, which
reads in the later edition Francis, Baron of Verulam (p. 166),
deciphered from the short poem signed "I. M." in the Shake-
speare Folio. When I visited Boston to continue my researches,
friends previously interested in my work mentioned the diffi-
culty they had in trying to decipher, as I did, this portion. I
remarked the Roman letters must be used; to which they re-
plied the number of Italic letters corresponded with the number
of groups required, but the groups would not "read," Upon
deciphering it again, in the presence of these people, I found
the word Baron had been dropped out in the printing, and the
error was corrected in the second edition.
The answers already given meet the summarised objection
of the correspondent's eighth and ninth paragraphs.
The Deciphering Workroom.
10. "The nature of the Cipher is such, being in fact en-
tirely dependent upon the presence and position of a certain
number of ^'s, that, given a framework of such determining
factors (which might easily be supplied by the acknowledged
differences in a few letters), a misdirected ingenuity could with
patience supply all that a preconceived notion could possibly
demand."
The cipher alphabet Bacon illustrates in De Augmentis
Scientiarum contains 68 as and 52 h's. The proportion in
general use was found to be about 5 to 3. Perhaps I cannot do
better to clear myself from the aspersions here intimated than
to explain the methods of the workroom by which the larger
part of the deciphering was actually done. A type-writing
132
macliine was changed in its mechanism to space automatically
after each group of five letters. The operator alone copied every
Italic letter, and the sheets came to me with the letters already
grouped. The different forms of letters in the book to be de-
ciphered were then made a study, the peculiarities of each fount
classified and sketched in an enlarged and accentuated form
upon a small chart, and the 'h fount' (being the fewer) was
thoroughly learned. The chart was always before me for use
upon doubtful letters. I marked upon the sheet on which the
letters had been grouped only those that I found to be of the
'h fount.' An assistant marked the as and transcribed the
result, when I knew for the first time the reading of the deci-
phered product. It was thus impossible for me to "preconceive"
it, and no amount of "ingenuity, misdirected" or otherwise,
could have developed the hundreds of pages of MS. of these con-
secutive letters into anything except what the cipher letters
would spell out.
The Operator and the Errors.
Excepting, of course, occasional corrections of the errors
of the operator in copying, or myself in determining the proper
fount, the work stands exactly as it left the assistant's hands.
The original sheets are unchanged and in my possession. Er-
rors occurred in the work as it progressed, but they were so
guarded against by the system itself that the deciphering was
quickly brought to a stop until they were corrected. Coming
from the assistant, the words were without capitals, or punctua-
tion, as would be the case by any method of deciphering a
cipher. The work of capitalization and punctuation, in the
book, is my own, and in this alone was choice permitted me.
The difficulty with "A Correspondent," as with many ob-
servers, is that he jumps at once to conclusions from very super-
ficial and limited examination, as well as unfamiliarity with the
principles wliich underlie the work; and while his keenness of
observation is greater than some evince, he has not, by any
means, given the matter sufficient study to become an expert,
or to warrant him in expressing a critical judgment. He would
not expect to learn Greek in a day, nor to deciplier hieroglyphics
on an obelisk upon a first attempt. There are in the Plays five
pairs of alphabets of twenty- four letters each (capital and
133
small) in the different styles and sizes of Italic type. In other
words, four hundred and eighty different letters have to be
compared with their fellows to determine the classification. It
is not, then, the work of a day or a week to enable one to pass
an opinion upon the Folio as a whole, and yet that is what he
attempts to do.
The "Times" Facsimiles.
The Times reproduces a page of facsimiles and an illus-
tration taken from Spenser's Complamts, and has also arranged
in enlarged form some small letters. In fairness the captials
should have appeared as well. In the processes necessary for
reproduction, upon newspaper of coarse fibre and uneven surface
with the speed of a modern press, many distinctive features
of the letters have been lost or distorted to the skilled eye, and
the unskilled should not be asked to form a judgment of the
integrity of a difficult cipher from such utterly untrustworthy
reproductions.
As explained in the Introduction to the second edition of
my book, the facsimiles were not satisfactory. The difficulties
arising from age, unequal absorption of ink, poor paper, and
poor printing in the old books, cause some features to be ex-
aggerated, while others disappear; and on account of unavoid-
able inaccuracies, they were omitted from the third edition.
Inspiration.
It is strange how an inadvertent word or phrase, in the
hands of those who choose to pervert, will return to plague one.
In an article in Baconiana, I enumerated the requirements for
the work of deciphering as "eyesight of the keenest and perfect
accuracy of vision in distinguishing minute differences in form,
lines, angles, and curves of the printed letters unlimited
time and patience, persistency and aptitude, love for over-
coming puzzling difficulties, and I sometimes think inspiration."
Any one who .has worked long in an absorbing and difficult
field, will know that the word in this connection meant only
the light that breaks upon one's mind, in the solution of some
difficulty as the result of earnest effort ; and for a critic to make
from this a charge that I allege the cipher work to be one of
inspiration on my part is such a misuse of terms as to be wholly
134
unjustifiable. I think I have the right to complain Avhen the
word so used is made the basis of sneering attack through the
public press. The word was used by me in no other connection,
and as my critics must know, in no other than this very harmless
and allowable sense. This is particularly in reply to a lengthy
editorial in the Times, which assumed that I made claims to
''inspiration."
Those who have read my book carefully will recall some of
the difficulties recounted on page 11 of the Introduction, re-
lating to a subject that has puzzled many students — i.e., the
wrong paging of the Folio and some of the other old books.
It is told in few^ words in the book, but they are totally inade-
quate to describe the strain upon eyes and nerves in those days
of alternating struggle and elation as one by one the difficulties
were overcome. I think my readers will pardon a careless, per-
haps irrevelant use of the term, "I sometimes think inspiration"
— may have prompted me to make one more trial.
Mr. Laxg axd Mrs. Gallup.
I am also desired to refer to the writings of Mr. Lang,
who, on several occasions, has made the Bi-literal Cypher the
theme of much ironical pleasantry, more especially in the
Monthly Review. Mr. Lang is one of those happy individuals
possessed of a large vocabulary and of a vivid imagination that
like Tennyson's babbling brook "goes on for ever," but he pre-
fers the interrogation to the period — questions more than he
asserts.
In the Monthly Review he cites again, from his Morning
Post article (August 1901), some of the reasons for considering
Bacon a lunatic. He has, how^ever, omitted one query then made
regarding "the new Atlantis men sought beyond the western
sea:" "Was Bacon ignorant of the fact that America was dis-
covered ?" The question was not repeated after I called at-
tention to the fact that in New Atlantis Bacon said, "Wee
sailed from Peru."
The Alpha and Omega of his article — since it appears on
the first page and the last — is Mr. Sidney Lee's declaration
that the cipher cannot exist in the books in which I knoiv it
does exist. I pointed out in a recent communication to the
135
Times that Mr. Lee had not even understood the elementary
principles of the cipher. This is betrayed in his statement:
"Italic and Roman types were never intermingled in the man-
ner which would be essential if the words embodied Bacon's
biliteral cipher" — for that is not the manner of its incorpora-
tion. Mr. Lang goes no farther than this very arbitrary decision
in his examination of the cipher itself.
He says: "The consistency of Mrs. Gallup next amazes
us. Greene, Peele, Marlowe, and Shakespeare, resemble each
other in style (or so she says), because 'one hand wrote them
air (i., p. 3). But Bacon (deciphered) avers, 'I varied my
style to suit different men, since no two show the same taste and
like imagination.' (i., p. 34).... Bacon 'let his own [style]
be seen.' " Mr. Lang should have quoted an additional line —
"yet should [let] my owne bee seene, as a third o' warpe in
my entire fabricke," and it would explain why there are both
resemblances and differences in the style of those dramatic
works, which have been commented upon by numberless writers
as giving evidence of collaboration or of plagiarism.
The Wifehood aistd Motherhood of Elizabeth.
Mr. Lang thinks the idea of the wifehood and motherhood
of Elizabeth originated in Mr. Lee's articles in the Dictionary
of National Biography cited as corroborating the cipher. The
facts set forth in Mr. Lee's work are very good circumstantial
evidence. Assuredly the statments in the word-cipher and in the
bi-literal should accord, for in Bacon's design the principal use
of the one was to teach, and assist in deciphering, the others'
Mr. Lang quotes: "He learned from the interview and subse-
quent occurrences," and exclaims, " how Elizabethan is the
style !"
In Love's Labour's Lost (Act II., Sc. i.) he may read:
at which interview
All liberall reason would I yeeld unto.
In Troilus and Cressida (Act I., Sc. iii.) we find:
To their subsequent volumes.
And in Henry the Fifth (V. Prol.) is the line:
Omit all the occurrences.
This is where Mr. Lang should exclaim again, "How Eliza-
bethan the style !"
136
My critics would find it interesting and profitable to learn
how many expressions, thouglit to be modern, are to be seen
in the original works. They would be surprised — agreeably or
otherwise — at the long list.
''TiDDEk" ok BAC02f.
The next point is this: "His name, 'Fr. Bacon,' is his
only 'by adoption/ " and in a footnote Mr. Lang quotes : " 'My
name is Tidder, yet men speak of me as Bacon.' " In Bacon's
Historie of the Baigne of King Henry the Seventh (p. 151),
we find the name of the first reigning Tudor spelled Tidder.
The assertion "We be Tudor" merely shows that he belonged to
the Royal house. It was certainly not from Robert Dudley that
he claimed a title to the throne. I myself asked, "Why Erancis
I. ?" when this passage was deciphered ; and the answer is per-
haps in this — as Elizabeth was "Queene of England, Eraunce,
and Ireland, and of Virginia," her son as king would be Erancis
III. of Erance and Erancis I. of England, as James VI. of
Scotland became James I. of England. The right to the Erench
title is questionable, of course; but when the play of Edward
the Third has been deciphered we shall know how Bacon re-
garded it.
In the expression, "our law giveth to the first-borne of the
royall house the title of the Prince of Wales," Bacon did not
intend to say "the statute giveth." Had he used custom no one
would have cavilled, but custom is defined in law as "long-es-
tablished practice, or usage, considered as unwritten laiu, and
resting for authority on long consent," and, even at that time,
it had long been customary to invest the eldest son of the sov-
reign with this title. In the Historie of Henry the Seventh (p.
207), speaking of the time when "Henry, Duke of Yorke, was
created Prince of Wales, and Earle of Chester and Flint," he
added, "For the Dukedom of Cornewall devolved to him by
statute." We see per contra that in this place he did not mean
by custom.
Bacon and the Small Poems.
As evidence of the superficiality of Mr. Lang's knowledge
of the book he attempts to criticise, I quote: "In 1596, in his
'Faerie Queene,' Bacon grew wilder, in saying 'Wc were in good
137
hope that when our divers small poemes might bee seene in
printed forme, th' approval o' Lord Leicester might be gain'd !'
The earliest of the small Bacon-Spenser works used here, by
Mrs. Gallup, is of 1591. Leicester died in 1588. Only a
raving maniac like Mrs. Gallup's Bacon could hope to please
Leicester, who died in 1588, by ^small poemes' printed in 1591,
if he means that."
Has Mr. Lang read so carelessly that he thinks "he means
that" ? Does he really not preceive that Bacon was speaking of
the small poems appearing between 1579 and 1588 — Shep-
heards' Calender in several editions, Virgil's Gnat nearly ready
for the printer and suggestively dedicated to the Earl of Leices-
ter ? If a careless reading, it discredits his criticism ; if a
wilful perversion, it is unworthy and without justification.
This is much like his remarkable statement in Longman s
Magazine regarding the Argument of the Iliad: "The right
course with Mrs. Gallup is to ask her to explain why or how
Bacon stole from Pope's Homer. . . .and how he could be (as
he certainly was) ignorant of facts of his own time These
circumstances make it certain that, though the cipher may be a
very nice cipher, Mrs. Gallup must have interpreted it all
wrong. She will see that, she would have seen it long ago, if
she had read Pope's Homer and had known anything about
Elizabethan history."
We all know what this impossible charge — that "Bacon
stole from Pope's Homer," and also the insinuation regard-
ing Melville — covertly asserts. I have fully set out in another
article the answer to this baseless accusation of Mr. Marston;
but I will here repeat that any statement that I copied from
Pope, or from any other source whatever, in obtaining the mat-
ter put forth as deciphered from Bacon's works, is false in every
particular.
Bacon and Elizabeth's Marriage.
Mr. Lang, and others, have asserted that Bacon refers to
the first Lord Burghley as Robert. This is incorrect. Bacon
says Robert Cecil when he means Robert Cecil, and at no other
time. Robert is not only named, but described unmistakably.
Mr. Lang says, "Robert Cecil was born in 1563, or thereabout,
was younger than Bacon," consequently could not have incited
138
the Queen against him, etc., and devotes a page to mis-statements
and sarcasms. Here again is he ignorant, or indulges in wilful
perversion. The encyclopaedias say, "Eobert Cecil was born in
1550." He was therefore eleven years older than Bacon, and
twenty-seven years of age w^hen the incident referred to oc-
curred. We learn also from the same source: "Of his cousin,
Francis Bacon, he appears to have been jealous." The "blunder"
is Mr. Lang's, not Bacon's, and it is not an evidence that "either
an ignorant American wrote all this, or Bacon was an idiot."
In speaking of Elizabeth^s marriage, Mr. Lang says, "The
second was 'after her ascent to royal power' (1558). Any one
but Bacon would have said, 'after the death of Dudley's first
wife,' because only after that death could the marriage be
legal."
What Bacon really said is this : "Af te' her ascent to royale
power, before my birth, a second nuptiall rite duly witness'd
was observed, soe that I was borne in holy wedlocke" (p. 154),
Mr. Lang's opinion of what any other man might have said is
quite immaterial.
A question of Bacon's legitimacy would, without a doubt,
have been raised ; and as Leicester favoured his second son,
Essex, this may account for the express wish to have the story
openly told. Such questions were debated concerning more
than one royal title in those days, but Bacon believed his birth
in holy wedlock was sufficient legitimation. The mere fact
that both Mary and Elizabeth succeeded to the throne, although
one or the other was not strictly legitimate, would confirm this
opinion, and the history of the founding of the line of Tudor
involved the same question.
I regret that lack of space prevents a reference to some of
Mr. Lang's other remarks, which are equally subject to criti-
cism and correction. Brander Matthews, in Pen and Ink,
formulates "Twelve Eules for Reviewers," that will, I am very
sure, commend themselves to those who desire to make criticism
of value. Had Mr. Lang followed any of these rules he would
have written in a different manner and more to his own credit.
Mr. ScirooLiNG and the Cipher.
I can only say that with regard to Mr. Scliooling as with
thousands of others, defective vision or superficial examination
139
is responsible for his criticism, for it culminates in the asser-
tion, merely, that different founts of Italic type are not used
in the books referred to, and that the work "^can be regarded only
as a phantasy of my imagining, wholly unworthy of credence."
I again assert, with that degree of positiveness which comes
from a study of years, that the Italic types are from different
founts and are used in the manner I have set forth. There is
no room whatever for imagination in the work.
Mr. Schooling enters into particulars, and reports upon
o's, ns,, and p's in a few lines of small letters, and says "they
are from the same fount, and the cipher, therefore, non-ex-
istent." In this he is absolutely wrong. He makes no mention
of the marked differences in the capitals, and, too, he should
have studied the originals on many pages, as I have done, for in
the photographic facsimiles of the book some of the distinctive
features are lost. It is difficult to describe in words the par-
ticular lines in a drawing, and equally so those in several forms
of type, but I will attempt to make the differences clear.
The Italics in Spenser.
Extending these examples of Mr. Schooling, take for illus-
tration the Italics in the first lines of the selection from Spenser.
The type is large and clear, and there are several letters so
close together that comparisons can easily be made.
full Ladie the La Marie.
There are two captial Us. The serif of the first is curved,
of 'lio second straight. At the bottom, the horizontal of the
first gradually thickens, and the small line at the end is nearly
vertical, while the horizontal of the second is of even thickness
and the small line slanting.
There are three small a's. The oval of the first is narrow
and pointed at the top, those of the other two are broad at the
top. The small line at the bottom of the first is long and strong,
of the other two short and weak.
There are three small e's. The ovals of the first two are
broad, the letters themselves narrow; the oval of the last is
longer and more pointed, but the letter itself is wide.
The two small %s do not stand at the same degree of in-
clination, and the dot of the first is slightly to the left.
140
v/
The capital M is a striking form, and the plain M of that
size of type must be familiar to Mr. Schooling and others.
Taking the next Italic line, the small ns are from different
founts. The inclination of the second is greater than that of
the first. The stem of the first n (in Honourable) is straight,
that of the second (in and) is slightly curved. The small line
at the bottom of the first stands well under the downward
stroke, that of the second freely leaves the dowmward stroke.
In the next line, the difference in the small ^'s is very
marked, and one is much longer than the other.
In the line below, an e from the "b fount" and one from
the '^a fount" stand together in the word bee. These can easily
be discriminated, but the characteristics of the e in this size of
type are the reverse of the same in the large size above.
The in long is a wider oval than the o from the "a
fount" in bountifull. It has already been pointed out why the
ns in both words are "a-fount" letters, although the one in long
is not a perfect letter — the lower part of the last stroke being
blotted — but, as I have said on other occasions, where broken
or blotted letters or errors of the printer occur in the original,
the context will unmistakably indicate what they are.
The "Novum Organum."
In the Praefatio of Novum Organum, the first letter con-
sidered is the small o, and of this two examples given by Mr.
Schooling are in the second line — in explorata and pronuntiare.
The longest diameter produced until it intersects the line of
writing does not make so large an angle in the first as in the
second. The oval is much narrower in the first. The descrip-
tion of these two will suffice for all others not changed by a
mark, unless a printer's error occurs.
The two p's in propria arc most easily compared, as the
first is from the "a fount" and the second is from the "b fount."
The stem of the first is not quite so long as that of the second ;
and, in the first, the oval is somewhat angular on the right side
at the top, in the second this angularity is seen at the bottom.
The same rule applies to other cases. Of the half-dozen cited
by Mr. Schooling, I have merely chosen two that stand close
together. He would find as great difficulty in the differentia-
141
!
r
tion of the o's and c's of any two founts of modern Italic type,
as in these he points out, for the differences are often as minute.
Bacon and the Compositor.
Mr. Schooling says, "Mrs. Gallup does not tell us how
Lord Bacon managed to get his work set up by the compositor."
Any printer will tell him, if he will inquire, that it is not
more difficult to take certain letters that have been marked on
the MS. from one case of Italic type, and certain other letters,
not marked, from another case of Italic, than to take Roman
from one case and Italic from another in ordinary composition.
The system has the advantage that the printer, in following
copy, could not know the cipher without the key, wdiicli in
Bacon's case was withheld until 1623 — forty-four years after
the cipher was invented and first used.
The Powers of Imagination.
Perhaps I should thank Mr. Schooling for the implied
compliment to my abilities in the realm of creation; for if
not a deciphering, what is the alternative ? I must first have
conceived the plot of the entire fabric of 380 pages, its histor-
ical points, statements of facts not recorded in history — which
in some particulars conflict with, in others supplement, the
records. I must have imagined the meanings of remorse over
the tragedy of Essex ; the discovery of the motherhood of Eliza-
beth ; guessed at the broadened field of Bacon's literary powers
to take in all the works which are disclosed as coming from
his hand ; the directions for writing out the word-cipher ; the
argument of the Tragedy of Anne Boleyn; the epitome of the
Iliad and of the Odyssey ; the explanatory letters of Dr. Rawley
and Ben Jonson that are found in the cipher; the flights of
fancy which occasionally appear in the deciphered work, and
all the rest. This must all have been written out in the old
English spelling and in the language of Bacon's time; this
previously written plot and story in the main narration must
have been fitted to the exact number of Italic letters, and so
arranged that the forms of the capital letters and those whose
differences are easily perceived, must in every case fit into
place as an a or a h, so that those letters, at least, should con-
sistently follow Bacon's biliteral cipher. The simple enumer-
142
ation, with all that these things imply, carries the refutation
of the possibility of such a manner of production, to say noth-
ing of the absurdity of attempting it. Had it been undertaken,
it would have been along lines that were better known, and
statments of facts would have been in accord with the records.
Historical romance would never so far have transcended the
beliefs of the world, nor subverted all previous ideas concern-
ing authorship of literature which will be immortal. The only
reason for the book's existence is that it is the transcription
of a cipher placed in the works for the purposes disclosed by
its decipherment.
143
BACOX— SHAKESPEARE.
The Times, London^ Eng., Jan. 27, 1902.
To THE Editor of the Times:
Sir, — Your issues of December 19, 20, and 21 have been
forwarded to me bj Messrs. Gay and Bird, and, while regret-
ting that distance will cause much time to elapse between
the issues and the time this can reach London, I yet desire
space to reply to the communications of Mr. Marston and Mr.
Lee concerning myself, and the book recently given to the pub-
lic, "The Bi-literal Cypher of Francis Bacon." I trust I
may not be refused because of lapse of time, or for any other
reason.
I hope the gentlemen do not mean to be rude or do me an
injustice, and I do not think they can persist in the character-
ization which their words imply.
The assertion that Mr. Mallock has become ''addlepated,"
because of thinking there may be something in the cipher, must
be something of a shock to his friends.
Mr. Marston did me the honour of two favourable notices,
in succeeding issues of the Publishers' Circular. I was about
to thank him for numbers sent to me when I learned that he
had prepared and published an elaborate article attempting to
discredit the entire work, because of doubts arising in his mind
upon a single point. He does not base his disbelief upon any
investigation he has made of the cipher itself, but because a
fragment which forms a part of Bacon's "Argument" or
epitome (but not the full translation) of the Iliad, in that por-
tion which catalogues the ships and the troops they transported,
is similar — "nearly like" — Pope's translation of the same pas-
sages, ergo, it must be that I paraphrased Pope, and hence that
the whole cipher fabric is tumbled into dust. Because of this
similarity he takes Mr. Mallock to task for considering my
work seriously, and declares that, as I have, as he thinks, copied
Pope in this, the results of my four years' research in America
144
and in England, set down on 385 printed pages, must be pure
invention, and Mr. Mallock a poor deluded mortal to have gone
into the cipher at all. The statement of the case exhibits the
value of the conclusion.
It does not appear just how much variation Mr. Marston
would have between the translations of the identical Greek
text, describing definite things, to prove which was the correct
one, and which the copy. It will also be noted that this is not
one of the portions of Homer's wondrous story where imagina-
tion may run riot, and imagery and poetic license add lustre to
the original.
The claim of identities set me to wondering whom else
I might have paraphrased, or if it was not possible that Pope
had copied from some one other than Bacon. An examination
of six different English translations and one Latin shows me
such substantial accord, that either of them could be called
with equal justice a paraphrase of Pope, or that Pope had
copied from the others.
In phrasing no two translations of the Iliad entirely agree,
but are we to conclude that, because the translations of the same
text are in substantial agreement (though not exact), that one
of the two most nearly alike must be a paraphrase? The
trifling additions showing some exterior knowledge of persons
and places may be found in Bacon's other works.
It will be observed by readers of the "Bi-literal Cypher"
that the fragment of the Eourth Book of the Iliad which is
injected by Bacon into the "Argument" is for illustration
merely, and is clearly stated to be only " a supreme effort of
memory" of the fuller translation which he had previously
embedded as a part of the mosaic in his works, to be extracted
and reconstructed through the methods of another cipher.
Surely there can be no more distressing condition than
when critics refuse to know all the facts, and are guilty of
drawing conclusions without them. Bacon, who knew human
nature, has described this class of minds most precisely in his
aphorisms, and it would almost seem he had this controversy
145
in view, or at least a permonition of it, when he says, in
]SJ'umber xxxiii : —
"This must be plainly avowed; no judgment can be rightly
formed either of my method or of the discoveries to which it leads
by means of anticipations. .. .since I cannot be called upon to abide
by the sentence of a tribunal which is itself on its trial."
"One method of delivery alone remains to us:.... we must lead
men to the particulars themselves and their series and order; while
men on their side must force themselves for awhile to lay their
notions by and begin to familiarize themselves with facts." (XXXVI.)
Mr. Lee, too, bases his disbelief on most inconclusive
grounds. The witty author of "Democritus to the Reader"
said that any one who sought what he did not want, or that
would do him harm when found, wanted wisdom. To he exact,
it was expressed less euphemistically, "He is a fool that seeks
what he does not want."
Mr. Lee insists that, because he has collated 25 copies of
the plays, during which time he was not looking for a cipher,
none exists. As well say that the stars of late discovery which
are as yet unknown to any but the most skilled eye of the
astronomer do not exist because Mr. Lee, with his unskilled
eye, has not discovered them while looking for something else.
Mr. Sinnett, in the same issue of The Times, states the
case fairly in the remark that there are two schools of thinkers
on the subject — those who have studied the matter, and those
who have not — and he illustrates the feelings of a surprisingly
large class by the repetition of the remark of a friend, who,
when asked if he had seriously considered certain points (of the
Baconians), replied: "I would rather hang myself than con-
sider anything so atrocious." I have no doubt Mr. Lee would
sympathize with, if not echo, this sentiment.
I wish politely, and with all due deference, to assert, with
a positiveness as emphatic as that of Mr. Lee, that the cipher
does exist in the typography of the Plays, and in the ''Anatomy
of Melancholy" and in the other works which I have deci-
phered. The difference between us is that I found what I was
looking for (and much besides), while Mr. Lee did not find
what he was not looking for.
146
Another aphorism, iN'iimber xxxviii., would apply here : —
"The idols and false notions which are now in possession of the
human understanding, and have taken deep root therein, so beset
men's minds that truth can hardly find entrance."
And again, in Number xlvi: —
"The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion
(either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself)
draws all things else to support and agree with it. And though there
be a greater weight of instances to be found on the other side, yet
these it either neglects and despises, or else by some distinction
sets aside and rejects, in order that by this great and pernicious
predetermination the authority of its former conclusions may remain
inviolate."
If Mr. Lee has a vision sufficiently accurate to discrimi-
nate in form, and will spend as much time as I have spent
upon the typography of the old books, he will find the letters
can be classified, and starting from the proper points and plac-
ing in "groups of five" the Bi-literal Cipher Avill read as I have
written, and will not read anything else.
Sincerely yours,
Elizabeth Wells Gallup.
Detroit, January 9.
P. S. Jan. 11. — Copies of your issue of December 26
and 27 have just reached me.
The articles on the "Bacon Bi-literal Cypher" show that
The Times is not averse to whatever aids in elucidation of this
new phase of the Bacon-Shakespeare question.
I am glad to note that "A Correspondent" has taken
some of the preliminary steps to an actual examination of the
cipher and apparently has the perception required to reach
conclusions that Mr. Mallock and Mr. Sinnett have also reached
as to distinctive variations in the forms of letters used in the
old books. This denotes real progress in the investigation, and
I think the gentleman, with patience, would easily become a
decipherer. The peculiarities of the type are clear to the skilled
artist or engraver, but they are not so quickly apparent to those
less fitted for the closest observation.
Some of the difficulties encountered by the novice are
explained by Mr. Sinnett in the issue of the 27th. I shall be
greatly pleased to clear up some of this correspondent's diffi-
147
culties, in anotlier communication, but will only note in this
two paragraphs. One difficulty he mentions is that in certain
passages he does not find sufficient Italic letters to make up
the extracted sentences. He had overlooked the application
of the passage in the book, on pp. 66-67 : —
"In order to conceale my Cypher more perfectly I am preparing
for th' purpose a sette of alphabets in th' Latine tipe not for use
in th' greatest or lengthy story or epistle, but as another disguise,
for, in ensample, a prologue, praefatio, the epilogues, and head lines
attracted too much notice. I, therefore, have given much trouble to
mine ayders by making two kinds or formes of these letters. These
be not designed for other use than hath but now beene explain'd, nor
must you looke to see them employ'd if a reason for th' change
appeare, but there will be warning given you for your instruction or
guidance. Noe othe' waie of diverting th' curious could be used where
th' exteriour epistle is but briefe. however it will not thus turn aside
my decipherer, for his eye is too well practs'd in artes that easily
misleade others who enquire of th' waie."
There are a very few dedications, commendatory poems,
headings, etc., in which Roman letters were used by Bacon.
These are in his later printings.
Another thing this correspondent makes note of is that
many of the old books of the Elizabethan period have the same
differences. I have examined many of these, beside those
belonging to Bacon in which differences occur. In some of
them I was led to think the cipher might be found, but on
examination it was seen that the different forms were used
promiscuously, without method, and could not be grouped in
fives to read in the bi-literal.
Replying to Mr. Lee's communication in the issue of the
27th, I quote this extraordinary extract:
"I should like to state unmistakably that I hold there to be
not the smallest jot of even prima facie justification.... in the text
of the First Folio for the belief that a cipher is concealed in that
volume. I write with a fine copy on my desk Italic and Roman
type appear in the preliminary pages. .. .they are never intermingled
in the manner which would be essential if the words embodied Bacon's
bi-literal cipher."
His idea of the intermingling of the Roman and Italic
type as an essential is entirely wrong. If he had read my
book understandingly, he would have known the different
founts used by Bacon were in the differing forms of Italic type,
not the Roman, except in the very few instances noted above.
The ciplier letters are not produced by intermingling Roman
148
and Italic type in the Plays. He will find on every page of
the Plays more than one fount or form of these Italic letters,
and that not proper names only, but much besides was printed
in them. See especially pp. 42-43, Merry Wives of Windsor.
Quoting again from Mr. Lee : — "To assert that a bi-literal
cipher can or does appear in a text printed as the First Folio is
printed is a bold denial of plain facts." I wish to repeat, with
tequal earnestness and entire certainty, that to assert that the
cipher cannot and does not exist in the text is a denial of a
fact which I have demonstrated.
He mistakenly says, "The proper names figuring in the
text of the plays alone appear in a different type." To these
must be added the abbreviated names of the speakers, the run-
ning titles, etc., and all other words in Italic type, which
together make up when deciphered over 50 pages of my book
that are extracted from the folio.
What shall we say of this quotation from Mr. Lee ?
"Ignorance, vanity, inability to test evidence, lacli of scholarly
habits of mind are in each of these instances found to be the main
causes predisposing half-educated members of the public to the ac-
ceptance of the delusion (!). And when any of the deluded victims
have been narrowly examined they have invariably exhibited a tend-
ency to monomania. .. .May a second Hogarth deal as effectually
with Mrs. Gallup and Mr. Mallock, and their feeble-witted followers."
Mr. Mallock "addlepated !" and "half -educated!" Lord
Palmerston "feeble-witted" — "with a tendency to monomania !"
Is this temperate discussion of a new discovery ? Is true criti-
cism of this subject and its believers reduced to vituperation,
and this the end of the argument ?
The public will refuse to accept Mr. Lee's dictum as
having any weight at all over against the examination made,
and being made, by Mr. Mallock, Mr. Sinnett, and many others.
I must assume them to be the peers of !Mr. Lee in intelligence
and discrimination, for he is most surely wrong and refuses
knowledge, while they are willing to study the subject with
patience and candour.
149
LITERAEY WORLD.
London.
To The Editor.
Sir: — There is a sense of relief after the worst has been
said, in the assurance that nothing more dreadful can be ex-
pected. Since the "critic" of the Literary World has consigned
me to that Avernus whose horrors all good people hope to es-
cape, I should be beyond attack, as none would willingly follow
me into the infernal regions.
After reading the article entitled Galluping in Avernum,
my eyes fell upon a clipping in which George Brandes is named
as the "famous Danish critic, and the greatest of living Shake-
spearean commentators." It says: "He dismisses the whole
'Baconian Craze' with the remark that it is on the one hand a
piece of weak and inartistic feminine criticism, and on the
other an Americanism and therefore lacking in spiritual del-
icacy."
The criticism in the Literary World of Bacon's Bi-literal
Cypher and of the Tragedy of Anne Boleyn is not, I think,
feminine nor American, but somehow the quality of spiritual
delicacy seems lacking, and it can hardly be called artistic.
It is only recently that I have noticed — this rule has not
reached America — that some writers apparently think it is
good form to pun, or play, upon another's surname. If the
name is not pleasing to the ear, the mortal who bears it has
perhaps a lifelong affliction, yet it is certainly a misfortune
rather than a fault. Xor did I suppose, until I saw the articles
of a large number of reviewers, that any — except writers more
intent on filling space than careful of the value of the matter —
rushed into print before the subject discussed, or book reviewed
was half read. And yet it is this critic's own confession, re-
garding the Bi-literal Cypher, that he has read but "half the
book, and a few scattered sentences of the rest." From this
admittedly superficial reading he concludes a "Phantom per-
150
sonating Bacon claims to have written all the plays" etc. — the
literature throughout which the ciphers have with infinite pains
been traced, and the principles upon which they are based,
the keys and directions for their decipherment, ascertained
and set out in the work he attempts to criticise.
After quoting the statement that Elizabeth and Dudley
were honorably married, and that Bacon and Essex were the
issue of this union, our critic asks, "when were Elizabeth and
Leicester again married?" This is answered in the Bi-literal
Cypher (p. 154).
A little farther on critic says: "// there had been a mar-
riage, which there wasn't, sometime in the four months between
Lady Dudley's (Amy Robsart's) death and (the supposed)
Bacon's birth, it would have legitimated Bacon ; but then he
would not have been a Tudor but a Dudley."
Bacon evidently considered himself legitimated by "this
second nuptial rite," and when he wrote, probably knew quite
as much of the law, and of the time the marriage took place,
as our critic. It was not descent from Dudley that made him
prince. Long-established custom w^as the law that gave "to
the first borne of the sovereign the title of Prince of Wales."
Our critic makes a point of the use and spelling of Brittain
and of the expression Hn the throne,' quoting: "Ended now
is my great desire to sit in the British throne."
In the Advancement of Learning (1605) he may read:
"Queene Elizabeth, your immediate Predecessor in this part of
Brittaine (B. 1, p. 36) ; while in Shakespeare he will find:
"Shall see me rising /;( my throne," R. II. 3-2;
"When I do rouse me in my throne," H. V. 1-2;
"But one Imperious /;/ another's throne," 1 H. VI. 3-1;
"In that throne
"Vhich now the house of Lancaster usurps,". .. .3 H. VI. 1-1;
' nd shall I stand, and thou sit ;;; my throne?". .3 H. VI. 1-1;
"And see him seated in the regal throne," 3 H. VI. 4-3;
"Once more we sit in England's royal throne, "..3 H. VI. 5-7;
"And plant your joys in living Edward's throne, "..R. III. 2-2;
"We will plant some other in the throne," R. III. 3-7;
"You are but newly planted in your throne," T. A. 1-1;
"My bosom's lord sits lightly in his throne," R, & J. 5-1
Our critic has not read his Shakespeare well, if he thinks
the term unusual in Bacon's tiiiio.
151
He also objects to the phrase, '^Every land in which the
English language hath a place." Bacon wrote his cipher his-
tory to be read, when deciphered, in all parts of the world.
The reference to our colonies, etc., was a prophecy more than
half realized even then, and he claimed for Elizabeth command
of the sea which he called a "universal monarchy."
Critic again quotes: "We spent our greatest labours in
making cyphares' (a noble occupation!)" Certainly, and a
natural one when seeking means of communicating important
matters. Some one has suggested that instead of committing
his secret history to ciphers, he should have written it out and
confided the papers to the keeping of trusted literary execu-
tors. But that would have been the action of mature years,
or of one who believed he was about to leave this life. Bacon
then was an eager youth, hardly yet upon the threshold of
manhood, and he believed his claims would ultimately be ac-
knowledged. As to the nobleness of the occupation, Bacon
says of it: "These Arts (cyphers) being here placed with the
principal and supreame Sciences, seeme petty thinges: yet to
such as have chosen them to spende their labours studies in
them, they seem great Matters" — Adv. of Learn. B. 2, p. 61.
(1605).
Our critic states: "To the real Bacon Elizabeth's move-
ments in January 1560-1 would have been known."
To an infant of days? That is very good. These things
hecame known to him in the way he states.
Again, "Robert Cecil, at the period referred to, was about
fourteen years of age." Critic must have copied this from
Mr. Andrew Lang who makes the same mistake. The encyclo-
^ paedias give the date of Robert Cecil's birth as 1550. He was
therefore eleven years older than Bacon and about twenty-seven
years of age when. Bacon says, he caused the tempestuous scene
that resulted in the disclosure to Francis that he was the son
of the Queen.
Then, "Hamlet was not in 1611 a new play."
Could Bacon record in the types of a play then appearing
for the first time, that it had "breasted the wave gallantly ?"
Whatever the play or whenever it was "new," it could not be
the 1611 edition of Hamlet.
152
The critic further says: "For Bacon's style we know — com-
pact, well-built, grammatical, lucid; no feeble tautology, dilu-
tions, or repetitions ; harmonious, and satisfying to the ear ;
pregnant with meaning, and grateful to the intellect. But what
about the Phantoms ? Here we find clumsy and sprawling
sentences of half a page, or nearly, with shambling subordinate
clauses 'spatch-cocked' in between brackets or dashes" etc.
Refer again to the Advancement of Learning (1605) :
''Antonius Pius, who succeeded him, was a Prince ex-
cellently learned ; and had the Patient and subtile witte of a
Schoole man: insomuch as in common speech, (which leaves
no vertue untaxed) hee was called Cymini Sector, a carver, or
a divider of Comine seede, which is one of the least seedes :
such a patience hee had and setled spirite, to enter into the
least and most exact differences of causes; a fruit no doubt of
the exceeding tranquillitie, and serenitie of his minde: which
being no wayes charged or incombred, either with feares, re-
morses, or scruples, but having been noted for a man of the
purest goodnesse without all fiction or affectation, that raigned
or lived: made his minde continually present and entier: he
likewise approached a degree neerer unto Cliristianitie, and
became as Agrippa sayd unto S. Paule, Halfe a Christian;
holding their Religion and Law in good opinion: and not only
ceasing persecution, but giving way to the advancement of
Christians." (B. 1, p. 35).
"Compact, well-built, lucid," "satisfying to the ear," "not
clumsy, sprawling sentences of half a page" — and yet here is
nearly a page before Bacon completed his period, and what
about unity of subject?
And again from the same work:
"In which kind I cannot but mencion Honoris causa your
Maiesties exellent book touching the duty of a king: a woorke
ritchlye compounded of Divinity Morality and Policy, with
great aspersion of all other artes: & being in myne opinion
one of the moste sound & healthful writings that I have read:
not distempered in the heat of invention nor in the Couldnes
of negligence : not sick of Dusinesse as those are who leese them-
selves in their order ; nor of Convulsions as those which Crampe
in matters impertinent ; not savoring of perfumes & paintings
as those doe who seek to please the Reader more than Nature
153
beareth, and chiefelye wel disposed in the spirits thereof,
beeing agreeable to truth, and apt for action: and farre re-
mooved from that Xatural infirmity, whereunto I noted those,
that write in their own professions to be subject, which is, that
they exalt it above measure." (B. 1, 2d p. 69).
I quote again:
'This kinde of degenerate learning did chiefely raigne
amongst the Schoole-men, who having sharpe and stronge wits,
and aboundance of leasure, and smal varietie of reading; but
their with being shut up in the Cels of a few Authors (chiefely
Aristotle their Dictator) as their persons were shut up in the
Cells of Monasteries and Colledges, and knowing little Historic,
either of Xature or time, did out of no great quantitie of mat-
ter, and infinite agitation of wit, spin out unto us those labori-
ous webbes of Learning which are extant in their Bookes,"
(B. 1, 2d p. 18).
In eleven lines we are told that 'this kind of learning did
reign among schoolmen who did spin out to us those webs of
learning extant in their books.'
Many such examples could be quoted, but these will suffice
to show that this critic has not read Bacon well even in modern
editions, and not at all in the old English of the original edi-
tions. So slightly familiar is he with the great author, that
he has failed to discriminate betwen the compact, forceful
style of the Essays and Apothegms and the "clumsy, sprawling
sentences," of his scientific works — a variation in the manner
of writing so marked that one might think these were not
from the same pen.
Mr. Candler has kindly replied to the objection to the
sentence, "Such things doth burn," but I will add other in-
stances : "Which Religion and the holy faith doth conduct men
unto" (A. of L. B. 2, 4th p. 69) ; "which the example and
countenance of twoo so learned Princes. . . .hath wrought"
(A. of L. B. 1, p. 11) ; "like Ants which is a wise creature for
itself" (B. 2, St p. 93).
Our critic next quotes : " 'Whilst writing these interior
works these keies and joining words did deter [it means retardi
th' advancement' (pretty, to see keys and words writing)."
On page 26 of the Advancement of Learning Bacon says:
"For I am not ignorant howe much that diverteth and in-
154
iterruptetli the prosecution and advancement of knowledge" ;
and on page 27, "which hath not onely given impediment to
the proficience of Learning."
Preceding examples have shown want of unity in the sub-
ject, but I will give an additional illustration to follow "whilst
writing these interior works" etc. It is this: "Hearing that
jou are at leisure to peruse Stories a desire took me to make an
Experiment, (Letter to the King).
A little farther on the critic states: "Especially careful
is the real Bacon in the use of the present conditional, (if, lest,
tho') it he, &c. ; but here we sometimes find may stuck in, —
""Dread lest our secret history may be found out' ; 'ere the pleas-
ure jnay disappear, ' " &c.
In a letter to Essex (1598) the critic will find: "If the
main conditions may be good."
And again: "Sometimes a future indicative, 'If it shall
not be (for he not) found.' "
In a letter to the King we have : "If it sliall he deprived" ;
in A. of L. (p. 5) "if any man shall thinke."
Again: "Many of the Phantom's tautologies are positively
imbecile, e.g.: 'Frequently, aye many a time' ; 'a narrative of
a story' ; 'the play previously named or mentioned' ; 'very pleas-
ing to such a degree' ; 'a most cleare playne ensample' ; 'fidmin'd
lightning' ; 'a coming people in the future' ; and the like."
In the History of Henry the Seventh is the peculiar com-
bination, "then a young Youth" (p. 247) ; and in the Ad-
vancement of Learning (1605) these lines: 'True hounds and
limitations, whereby humane knowledge is confined, and rir-
-cumscrihed: and yet without any such contraction or coarcta-
tion" ; 'being steeped and infused in the humors of the affec-
tions"; "not referred to the good of Men and Mankind" (p.
5) ; 'let men endeavour an endlesse progresse or proficience in
botli . . . and again that they doe not imwisely mingle or con
found these learnings together" (p. 6) ; "the accuse.r of Socrates
layd it as an Article of charge & accusation against him" ; "and
to suppresse truth by force of elociuence and speech"; "there
hath beene a meeting, and concurrence" (p. 7) ; 'the modern
loosenes or negligence;" 'it is a thing personall and individ-
ual" ; 'have an infuence and operation" (p. 13) ; 'to pierce
and penetrate" (p. 15); "fit and proper for"; "can fnxe or
155
condemmc" (1st p. 16) ; 'iiave sought to vaile over and con-
ceale" (p. 22) ; "Man's owne individuall Mature (B. 2, p. 56) ;
"which cannot but cease and stoppe all progression. For no
perfect discoverie can bee made uppon a flatte, or a levell"
(p. 34) ; "which hath been likewise handled. But howe ? rather
in a satyre & Cinicaly, then seriously & wisely for men
have rather sought by wit to deride and traduce (B. 2, 1st p.
77) ; "being set doivne and strongly planted doth judge and
determine most of the Controversies" (B. 2, p. 72) ; "For
Narrations and Relations" (B. 2, p. 14) ; also "But as for the
Narrations .... they are either not true, or not Naturall ; and
therefore impertinent for the Storie of I^ature" (B, 2, 2d p. 6).
Again "The real Bacon, as a pretty good classic, could not
have spelt lUiad, spirrit, Brittain, Citty, instructted Szc, with
doubled consonants; or comon, sufer'd, &c., with a single one;
and rarely, if ever, did he adopt that curious growth of the
old genitive suffix {-es') — is into the detached possessive his
(in imitation of which, her came to be similarly used) ; yet in
the Phantom's twaddle instances abound — 'Essex his plea' ; 'the
author his poems' ; 'the Queen her crown' ; &;c., &c."
In Love's Labour's Lost (5-2) Illion; in Troilus and
Cressida (1-2) Illium; in All's Well (3-5) Citty; in Ad-
vancement of Learning (B. 2, p. 32) Brittaine; Book 2, (p.
18) maner, comonly ; (p. 36) canot; (p. 74) amogst, comand;
(p. 74) comoly ; (p. 87) ivisedom; and on page 92 circurence
(circumference) .
In printing the deciphered work, similar elisions when
they occurred were marked with an apostrophe, the modern ab-
breviation, rather than mar the page with such seeming errors.
I have already given six examples from the History of
Henry the Seventh of the detached possessive his, and many
others could be cited. "A thing familiar in my Mistris her
times" occurs in a letter to !N"orthumberland ; "I. S. his day is
past and well past" — Letter to the King (29th of April, 1615).
"It needeth no proof of the fact that" is characterized as
modern padding, but in Advancement of Learning we read^
"where there is assurance and cleere evidence of the fact."
Most, if not all the so-called modern expressions that have
been criticized — including some noted by another critic — are
156
found (mildly, exciting, headings), and in 2 R. IV. (1-1) is
the line, "You cast the event of war."
A prominent assertion is that concerning repetitions:.
Most overlook the fact that the cipher narrative was placed
in a large number of books and at different dates. The contents
of the Bi-literal Cypher of Francis Bacon were deciphered from
fifty-five works, some of them subdivided into many separate
parts, as in the Shakespeare First Folio and Ben Jonson's
Folio. Bacon declares his reason for reiteration was that he
could not know in which book the cipher would be discovered,
nor could he suppose that it would be followed through all
the works.
The article concludes with a promise of more to follow —
then I trust I may be granted space for further reply.
Yours very sincerely,
Elizabeth Wells Gallup.
REPLY II.
To THE Editor of the Liteeaey World:
Sir: — It is unnecessary to explain again the principles of
the cipher I have set forth. Mr. Fulcher, Mr. Sinnett, Mr.
Mallock, Mr. John Holt Schooling, the critic of the Literary
Wo7id, and others, have done this with sufiicient elaboration.
Then, too, in De Augmentis Scientiarum they are fully illus-
trated and clearly taught by the great inventor himself.
Few realize that Bacon's own explanation was withheld
until the very last of his career. Without the key, the cipher
could not have been discovered, and in that lay his safety. In
that, too, the importance of the cipher was shown, for in stat-
ing that he invented it in his youth, and explaining the same
in his age, he set his seal upon it, so to speak, as something
useful and worthy of preservation.
And again, there is that very marked reference to this
cipher in the 1605 edition of the Advancement of Learning —
that "quintuple proportion" required in no other" — so that a
summary gives us: Invented 1579, mentioned 1605, illustrated
1623, employed a lifetime before it was explained, as I have
now proved true by actual decipherment from fifty-five different
books.
157
The critic states: "With respect to the Shakespeare Folio
of 1623, Mr. Sidney Lee, the final authority, declares that no
cipher exists in it. On this point, having examined a large
number of detached passages up and down the volume, we can
bear subsidiary testimony. Not but what there are many in-
dividual non-normal letters," etc.
These 'individual non-normal letters' can be separated
into two distinct classes. The practical application of Bacon's
invention was merely a selection of the different forms as far
as they existed, and the production of others where there was a
lack. In the cipher, this is clearly stated. There was no im-
propriety in such an adaptation — of forms already existing —
so long as in their use there was uniformity throughout each
work.
Our critic says, "IS^othing is more frequent than such mix-
tures in books," but there should also be added, what I have
learned to be true, that in Bacon's works the different founts
were used with a system, have a rational dependence and con-
nection, demonstrating the incorporation of the bi-literal cipher.
He admits there was a careless use of the initial and interior
forms, especially of the small v and w.
This very fact assured Bacon that their methodical em-
ployment would pass unnoticed. One form is consistently
used as an ""a fount' letter, and the other as b, unless there be a
printer's error, in which case it is easily corrected by the
context.
Our critic further states : "The book contains nearly 400
pages. . .wdiich must equal more than three million cipher let-
ters, distributed it is asserted, over numerous old books printed
in different years, by different printers," etc., and that "to
deal reliably with the supposed 'normal' and 'twin' fonts re-
quires a special training and experience."
His estimate is approximately correct. Having examined
with the care that was requisite — usually with a magnifying
glass — every letter in that 'three million,' may I not say I am
"fitted by experience" to differentiate the forms, and that I
Arwow whereof I speak ?
I make no claim to genius but the 'genius of hard work,'
nor to inspiration except that coming from success which gave
me courage to persevere.
158
There has been a slight misunderstanding regarding the
method of deciphering. Both ways suggested by the critic were
tried in the beginning, as well as other methods, but the one
finally adopted w^as found to be most expeditious. I have many
times given this in detail, perhaps to some of your readers.
The Italic letters of a page or two of the text were first
copied in consecutive order by an operator using a typewriting
machine that, arranged to space after each fifth letter, auto-
matically formed the requisite cipher groups. When sufficient
study had made me familiar with the forms and classificaiion
of letters in the book — sometimes a matter of days and (,'von
weeks — I placed a mark under the copied letters indicating the
fount to which each Italic letter belonged. Tentative divisions
were required to ascertain the correct grouping, and to deter-
mine the starting point, but when these had been unmistakably
found, the copying would be resumed and the sheets containing
the transcribed Italics thus properly grouped — but always in
their consecutive order as they stand in the books — would be
brought to me.
Having in the meantime memorized the alphabets, I noted
each 'b fount' letter and placed a stroke ( / ) under the cor-
responding letter on the typewritten sheet. All the others, be-
longing to the "^a fount,' were marked witli a short dash under-
neath, by an assistant, and the resulting bi-literal letter was then
set down. This was the MS. to which I referred, and it is of
this that "critic" facetiously asks: "What need of MSS. if the
cypher was already embodied in the printed texts ?"
Had he been at all familiar with ciphers he would have
known they are not to be read at a glance. They are purposely
made obscure, and are designed to be impossible to decipher
by those not possessing the key, and difficult in any case.
Before reviewers cite Mr. Lee as authority upon the
cipher, they should know whether or not his premises are
correct. Mr. Lee says: "Italic and Roman types are never in-
termingled in the manner that would be essential if the words
embodied Bacon's bi-literal cypher." — this shows, as I have
before pointed out, in print and otherwise, that Mr. Lee misap-
prehends the essentials. The Koman and Italic types are
not intermingled to form bi-literal letters. From 1570 to
1623, a period of forty-four years, no Roman type was employ-
159
ed for cipher purposes. On pages 66-67 of the Bi-literal Cypher
reference is made to their use in a few short passages, only, of
the later publications — the preliminary pages of the First Folio,
and of Vitae et Mortis, etc. Mr. Lee is, therefore, not good
authority, because he does not understand the principles of
the cipher, and, drawing his conclusion from false premises,
declares the cipher non-existent that I know does exist.
My critic says: "Just as in the Spenserian passage, the
Gallupian 5-type has been somehow introduced into the repro-
duced text [of the Novum Organum^ so as to give the desired
cipher-groups : but how, and by whom ?"
If he refers to the '6 type' of the photographic facsimiles,
it is a frank acknowledgment that he can see the differences in
the types. He could, therefore, become a cipher expert if he
chose. The "^S-type' was introduced when the originals were
printed, the one in 1620, the other in 1591.
If the reference is to the passages that were set up in
modern type by our printers, for the purpose of illustrating
the method of deciphering, the answer is in the statement it-
self. The two founts were purposely selected with differences
sufficiently marked to be apparent to the dullest vision
The facsimiles were omitted from the third edition of the
book, not because they proved too much but too little. In spite
of the care taken to secure accuracy, some distinctive differ-
ences were lost, and, as a consequence, deciphering from the
reproductions, was much more difficult than from the originals,
. therefore not suited to novices in the art.
Our critic makes a misstatement in saying that one section
of the book "purports to be a translation of Homer's Iliad made
by Bacon and buried in cipher in Burton's 'Anatomy of Melan-
choly.' "
This section is fully explained to be but an epitome —
argument. Bacon calls it — of the chief events, with the names
of the principal characters, to be used as a guide and frame-
work of the fuller translation. The complete poem is embodied
in the .works and is to be extracted by means of the word-
cipher, a very different method. Our critic also repeats the
baseless aspersion made by Mr. Marston that the Argument is
a prose paraphrase of Pope's translation. I have, in replying
160
to Mr. Marston's criticism of my work, fully refuted this
charge, and I repeat that it is wholly without foundation.
That our critic understands little of the books he reviews,
is apparent in his reference to the method of constructing the
Tragedy of Anne Boleyn, and this requires that I again ex-
plain the difference of method in the two ciphers. The bi-
literal is in the Italic letters of the original volumes — in two
founts or forms of type — and has been extracted letter by letter,
separated into cipher groups of five, and the result set down.
The word-cipher is much more elaborate, and consists in a
reconstructing of the history, poem, or drama that had been
disseminated through the works. Words, phrases, and passages,
pertaining to the same subject, are brought together by the
keys and joining-words, and in this new sequence relate an
entirely different story. Yet this interior history is the origi-
nal. If our critic had thoroughly read the introductory
pages of the Tragedy of Anne Boleyn, he would have under-
stood that the lines were taken bodily from Henry VIII —
and the 107 other works — in accordance with this clear and
definite plan. The "argument" or synopsis, 'framework' if he
pleases, of this Tragedy of Anne Boleyn, is given in the Bi-
literal Cypher to aid in collecting the scattered passages, as the
Argument of the Iliad is given to aid in gathering the scattered
fragments of the fuller translation of the great Greek poem.
Some of the fragments of this work are in the text of the
Anatomy of Melancholy, but it is seldom that many consecu-
tive lines are found there. The following will however be
recognized : — "Pandarus, Lvcaon's son, when he shot at Mene-
laus the Grecian with a strong arm and deadly arrow, Pallas
as a good mother keeps flies from her child's face asleep,
turned by the shaft, and made it hit on the buckle of his girdle."
— Part, ii. Sect, iii, Mem. iii. Many of the proper names are
also found in the Anatomy of Melancholy. These fragments
of the Iliad are scattered throughout all the works, but the
largest portions are to be found in Greene's prose. I am ex-
plicit regarding this because so few understand that Bacon re-
fers to the poem in the word-cipher, when he mentions works
that contain portions of Homer.
Some writers, too, wlio have become acquainted with
Bacon's bi-literal cipher, are not equally familiar with the
161
v/
word-cipher, although it is mentioned in the Advancement of
Learning (1605) in the first lines of the paragraph on ciphers:
"For Cyphers they are commonly in Letters or Alphabets but
may be in Wordes." Bacon chose an epistle of Cicero for the
illustration of the bi-literal, and it appears that it was in that
philosopher's writings that he found the suggestion of the word-
cipher plan, for he says: "And Cicero himself e being broken
unto it by great experience, delivereth it plainely ; That whatso-
ever a man shall have occasion to speak of, (if he will take the
paines) he may have it in effect premediate, and handled in
these. So that when hee commeth to a particular, he shall have
nothing to doe but to put too Xames, and times, and places ;
and such other Circumstances of individuals."
Bacon saw how the lines of history, or drama, or trans-
lation could be separated and used in more than one place,
and his invention consisted in the use of certain key-words that
marked the passages belonging together. By making use of
these in the original works, and taking the work apart by the-
same keys that must be used in reassembling the portions, his
idea was successfully carried out. To guard against mistakes,
and to make the work less laborious to the decipherer, he gave
short "arguments" of the hidden work, as well as the keys, in
this auxiliary bi-literal cipher.
It is an error, then, to suppose that the sections are not
brought together "in any rational order."
It would of course be possible to give the entire interior
play or poem in a single work, but this was not Bacon's plan;
and he adopted a very ingenious manner of directing the deciph-
erer by guide-words to the different works, containing the scat-
tered sections.
This disseminating of the original work that was to be
brought together again by this cipher, caused the anachronisms
in the plays — the dispersing of the Armada in King John,
Cleopatra's billiards, artillery before it was in use, etc. — but it
enabled him to hide his principal and dangerous history, as
well as other important writings, to be collected again at a safe
distance of time and place, and the end justified the means.
Elizabeth Wells Gallup.
162
MR. DANA AND "MATTOIDS."
Ed. N. Y. Times, Saturday Review:
Under the caption, ''Shakespeare and Bacon. Writers
about them are not exactly lunatics — their cypher essentially a
mattoid product." — Mr. Charles L. Dana gives what purports
to be a review of a book recently published, "The Bi-literal
Cypher of Francis Bacon." *
This cipher I had the fortune to discover, as it exists in
the original editions of the works of that great author, and I
have deciphered and given to the public what is contained in
the volume referred to, hence come under the classification
which the gentleman seems to impose upon a very considerable
number of students and fellow-writers.
I hope Mr. Dana does not intend to be rude, but it seems
to me that he has unnecessarily gone out of his way in applying
epithets to people who differ from him in certain literary con-
clusions, and as the class, which he condemns for such differing
opinion, is a large and growing one, and embraces names and
persons even in his own city — judges, lawyers, newspaper men,
etc. — the peers of Mr, Dana in intelligence, whom he would not
dare personally to face with such aspersions as he indulges in
print, he shows himself inconsistent as well as reckless. As a
specimen of inconsistency, I quote from his opening paragraph :
"The question (Bacon vs. Shakespeare), however, continued to
be agitated or, rather, advocated, because few scholars regarded
it seriously. Some men of note, if not of learning, took it up,
and Lord Palmerston is said to have been a convert." Certainly
this is eminently respectable company.
Near the close of the article, speaking of those who believe
that Sir Francis Bacon produced a much larger part of the
literature of the world than is accredited to him, and dare offer
evidence of it, he says : "They are not exactly lunatics, for the
characteristic of lunacy is weakness." I suppose we should be
thankful, therefore, that, by the gentleman's saving grace, we
are not "lunatics, characterized by weakness."
163
Mr. Dana goes on to say: "Such people have received the
scientific name of mattoids" — a word apparently borrowed from
the Italian alienist, Lombroso, as it is not found in many dic-
tionaries or encyclopedias. If euphemistic, a critic like Mr.
risk, uses the expression "eccentric" ; if addicted to slang,
another would say, "cranks." The use made, in the article, of
this term "mattoids," is to designate those who have "obses-
sions" — doing things "under the domination of an idea, which
is, as a rule, foolish" — in Mr. Dana's estimation.
There can hardly be an "obsession" greater than to declare
things do not exist, because the individual is unable to com-
prehend their presentation.
"Your opinion, my opinion, any man's opinion, is the
measure of his knowledge." If a man's knowledge is ample
and accurate, his opinions are entitled to consideration. Mr.
Dana's knowledge of the bi-literal cipher is evidently neither
ample nor accurate. The fact is that the presentation in the
book he criticises is by fac-simile pages from the original
Latin edition of De Augmentis Scientarium, published by
Bacon in 1624, and by a verbatim reproduction of the first
English translation of the work, published in 1640. This
cipher is explained for the first time in 1623 Latin edition,
though invented by Bacon in 1579, and used during the re-
mainder of his life. The explanation is Bacon's own, and this
cipher has been the basis of the most important cipher systems
that are in use in the world today.
Another thing that strikes me as inconsistent in the
writer, and that lays his article open to his own characteriza-
tion of "weak logic, stupendous misrepresentation, and erratic
conduct," is this: The value of a critique is in telling some-
thing of the subject criticised that will be of value to readers.
Mr. Dana fails to make a single quotation, controvert a single
proposition which the book contains or give a special reason
for disbelief in the historical facts that have come to light
through the Cipher. It is simply his ipse dixit that the Cipher
does not exist except in the imagination of the decipherer.
Is it profound criticism which exhausts itself in hurling
anathemas and vituperation ? The creed of space writers in
the newspapers, when attacking things Baconian, seems to be
that, as with the first man, Adam, sin came upon all mankind,
164
the insanity of Delia Bacon, who was the first Baconian, was
transmitted to all her successors, and that is the end of the
argument.
I think it only fair to the readers of the Times that
something should be said on the subject, and of the book itself,
which has led to the discovery of "mattoids" among the authors
of things not to Mr. Dana's taste, first saying that, personally,
I have to confess to mature years, and no little experience in
educational work, preliminary and preparatory to which was
quite a thorough course of educational training in our own
country, supplemented by a considerable period of study, in
France and Germany.
Long before I had more than a passing and superficial
knowledge of Bacon's Bi-literal Cipher, I had observed what
all careful students of Elizabethan literature have noted and
remarked upon in the original editions, that the Italic letters
in some of the books were in two or more forms. Later, when
an original De Augmentis came into my hands, I saw there
a clear explanation and elaborate illustration of a cipher that
required simply a biformed alphabet. Bacon there speaks of
the time of its invention as in his youthful days while in Paris.
It is first mentioned in his Advancement of Learning, pub-
lished in 1605, with a hint of its importance. This was
twenty-five years after its invention. Eighteen years later
still, in 1623, we find it fully elaborated, at no small cost
and pains, this still further emphasizing its value after forty-
three years of time. These facts, in themselves, would sug-
gest that the originator had tested its practicability. The
discovery of its application to the Italic letters in differing
forms in the original editions of Bacon's works, has proved
that it was made the medium (in no "spiritualistic" way) for
the transmission of those secrets concerning Bacon, without
the revelation of which many things in his life seemed obscure
and paradoxical.
Seven years of time have I given to the study of Bacon
and his ciphers — not as a dilettante, desultorily, as a means
of recreation or use of spare moments — but as a student in
the hardest, most conscientious sense of the word. A study
which has been a weariness to the brain and destructive to
165
eyesight. Has Mr. Dana given seven days, or even hours,
to real research ?
As Bacon said in his History of King Henry VII,
"We shall make our judgment upon the things themselves, as
they give light one to another, and (as we can) dig truth out
of the mine."
Spurred on by the fascination of an important discovery,
and by its development, as the concealed story was unfolded,
letter by letter, word by word, revealing the hidden life, the
secret thoughts and emotions of that great mind and person-
ality, concerning which but the half has been known, I have
examined over seven thousand pages of rare and priceless old
original editions, placed at my disposal by the courtesy of
private collectors in this country and in England, or found
in our public libraries, and in that greatest of all receptacles
of literary treasures, the British Museum. Every Italic letter
on those seven thousand pages has been set down in its proper
group, classified according to the rules of the Cipher, and the
peculiar characteristics of each letter studied until they became
as familiar as the face of a friend. The results of the
deciphering so far published fill three hundred and sixty-eight
pages of the book under discussion. It would be a vivid imag-
ination, indeed, that could create an historical narrative such
as the Cipher reveals. I have earned the right to speak with
confidence of what this research has brought to light. I here
repeat a paragraph of the personal preface to the First
Edition :
I appreciate what it means to ask strong minds to change
long-standing literary convictions, and of such I venture to
ask the withholding of judgment until study shall have made
the new matter familiar, with the assurance meanwhile, upon
my part, of the absolute veracity of the work which is here
presented. ... I would beg that the readers of this book shall
bring to the consideration of the work, minds free from preju-
dice, judging of it with the same intelligence and impartiality
they would themselves desire if the presentation were their
own. Otherwise the work will, indeed, be a thankless task.
In conclusion, and I speak from knowledge gained at
fearful cost, I say with the utmost positiveness, that there is
no more doubt as to the existence of both the Word Cypher,
166
and the Bi-literal Cypher, in the works of Francis Bacon, nor
as to his authorship of the Shakespeare Plays, and certain
other works accredited to other names, than there is as to the
existence of stars which only students of astronomy have
known.
So long as the "Baconian theory" remained a matter of
literary opinion merely, all had a right to their own, but no
one has the right to place his prepossessions against facts which
he has not properly investigated, and then charge that the
result of the careful investigations of others leads to "stupen-
dous misrepresentations" and to "mattoidal products."
Elizabeth W. Gallup.
167
CORRESPONDENCE IN THE -TIMES'^
COMMUXICATIOXS TO THE -TIMES."
LoNDOisr.
BACOX— SHAKESPEAEE.
To THE Editor of the Times :
Sir : — Many of the writers who, in your own columns and
elsewhere, have been lately expressing their views with re-
gard to the bi-literal Cipher alleged to exist in the First Folio of
Shakespeare have spoken of me as a convert to Mrs. Gallup's
theory. I am not so. I am a convert only to the view that her
theory is sufficiently plausible to deserve to have its truth
tested. Regarded as a subject of inquiry, its great merit lies
in the fact that its truth or falsehood can be ascertained bv
purely mechanical means, such as photographic enlargements
of the text, coupled with a systematic examination of them.
I stated this opinion in my article in the Nineteenth Century.
Pending such an examination, which I intend to undertake
myself, other arguments appear to me a waste of time. They
are like arguments as to whether a piece of plate has been
hidden in a locked-up cupboard, when the sensible course to
pursue is to pick the lock and see. Mr. Sidney Lee's letters
seem to me to contain little but statements — no doubt true —
as to the extent of his own learning, and urbane intimations
that all persons who differ from him are half-witted mono-
maniacs. With regard to the general question of the author-
ship of the Shakespeare Plays the monomaniacs are those who
consider any doubt of Shakespeare's authorship unreasonable.
The main grounds on which, so far as I know, a doubt of his
authorship rests are grounds which suggest themselves to the
common sense of an ordinary man of the world, and arise
from the few details ascertainable with regard to Sbakespeare's
life, as put before us by writers like Mr. Lee liimself. The
mere genius displayed in the Plays offers no difficulty. The
difficulty consists in the kind of knowledge displayed in them.
This simple fact ^fr. Lee seems wholly unable to appreciate,
as the illustrations he adduces in your issue of December 27
169
show. He says that to doubt that Shakespeare wrote the Plays
ascribed to him is like entertaining a similar doubt with regard
to Keats or Dickens, because both these writers, like Shake-
speare, the butcher's son, were also born in comparatively hum-
ble circumstances. The whole point of the question escapes
Mr. Lee altogether. The poetry of Keats displays no knowl-
edge whatever the possession of which would be singular in a
person situated as he was, and having similar tastes ; whilst
the knowledge displayed in the works of Dickens is not only
not inconsistent with what we know of his life, but is, alike
in its extent and its limitations, an accurate reflection of his
opportunities for observation, and of his experiences. It is
precisely because the case of Shakespeare, in this respect,
instead of being parallel to that of Keats and Dickens, as
Mr. Lee supposes, is in striking contrast to it that a doubt as
to the possibility of his having written the works ascribed to
him has arisen ; and if Mr. Lee does not understand this
initial fact — as it would seem he does not — he is, as yet,
despite all his scholarship, hardly in a position to describe the
doubts of those who differ from him as groundless. It is
perfectly true that the question has another side. Mr. Lee's
error lies in his assumption that it has only one side.
With regard to his boast that he has collated 25 copies
of the First Folio, this fact is altogether irrelevant unless he
has collated them with a view to examining the forms of the
Italic letters used, with a view to testing the truth of Mrs.
Gallup's theory. This, I gather, he has not done, for the simple
reason that he does not seem to have taken the trouble to inform
himself accurately what her theory is. He tells us that the
Roman type employed in the First Folio is all from one fount,
as if this fact touched the position of Mrs. Gallup ; whereas
what Mrs. Gallup alleges is that the Cipher is confined en-
tirely to the Italic portions of the text, and that the other por-
tions have nothing whatever to do with it. If he had said
that he thought the question not worth inquiring into, his
position would have been quite intelligible; but to express, as
he has done, a vehement opinion with regard to it, without
having given it more than a passing and prejudiced attention,
is not a course which reflects much credit on his critical
judgment.
170
Eor myself, I should be prepared to accept one solution
of the problem or the other with the same equanimity. Either,
in its own way, would be equally interesting. If Mrs. Gallup's
theory is altogether false, the manner in which it has been
elaborated will form a curious incident in literary history.
Should it prove true, it will be more curious still. But what
strikes me principally in this controversy is the odd senti-
mental acerbity with which the upholders of Shakespeare's
authorship receive the arguments of those who presume to
entertain a doubt of it. Shakespeare is a figure of interest to
us only because we assume him to have written the works that
bear his name. What we know of him otherwise tends to
quench interest rather than arouse it. What reason is there,
other than the most foolish form of school-girl sentiment, for
resenting the idea of a transference of our admiration of the
author of the Plays from a man who is personally a complete
stranger to us — or at best a not very reputable acquaintance —
to a man who is universally admitted to be one of the greatest
geniuses who have ever appeared at any period of the world's
history ?
I am. Sir, your obedient servant,
W. H. Mallock.
171
THE BACON-SHAKESPEARE CYPHER.
To THE Editor of the Times:
Sir: — Since jou have allowed a critic of Mrs. Gallup's
interpretation of the ^'Bi-literal Cipher" to cast discredit on the
whole of her work on the strength of having discovered (what
he thinks) one flaw in it, surely you will allow a believer in
"the Bacon-Shakespeare craze" to put forward a few words
in reference to the "Shakespeare-Stratford superstition."
There are two schools of thinkers in reference to that
superstition, those who have studied the matter and those who
have not. The former are Baconians. Talking recently with a
devotee of the superstition, I said : "Surely, if you say that,
you cannot have seriously considered . . . such and such
points." His answer was, "I would rather hang myself than
seriously consider anything so atrocious." That is a common
attitude of mind, and the reason why, as yet, only a minority
of Englishmen possessing an unusual degree of culture are
fully aware of the fact that Francis Bacon wrote the Plays
published under the name of Shakespeare. The argument
derived from the contents of the Promus containing 1,700
private memoranda in Bacon's handwriting, all of which are
used up by him later on in the Plays, the argument derived
from the manner in which the Plays, in the order of their
appearance, reflect the incidents of Bacon's life, the little
circumstance that 11 of the best known Plays were never
acted, published, or heard of till seven years after Shake-
speare's death are a few of the reasons which influence the
belief of those attached to "the craze." A few of the reasons
why the superstition appears so comically absurd to them have
reference to the fact that there is no shadow of reason for sup-
posing that the Stratford boy — apprenticed to his father as a
butcher at 14 — ever acquired the art, then very unusual among
people in his rank of life — the art of writing, l^either his
parents nor his children ever learned to write. He learned
172
in later life to scrawl something resembling a signature, not
the bad writing of a literary man, but the hesitating, vague
scratching of one who hardly knew how to hold the pen. After
a few years spent as tradesman's assistant in a vortex of ignor-
ance, the boy ran away to London and, according to the super-
stition, immediately wrote Loves Labour s Lost, The Taming
of the Shrew, and The Two Gentlemen of Verona, which were
brought out the year he came to London. The ridiculous
sonifies of imagination presented to the world by the orthodox
biographers of Shakespeare are all based upon the authors'
theories as to what "probably took place" or what "must have
happened" because Shakespeare wrote the Plays.
It is impossible to deal intelligently with the cipher story
till one has first of all escaped from the trammels of the super-
stition. Let people new to the subject be assured ,to begin with,
that, without touching a scrap of evidence having to do with
ciphers, those who "seriously consider" the question approach
the discussion of ciphers from the point of view of knowing
that the Shakespeare idea is pure, idiotic nonsense, and that
Bacon, of course, wrote the Plays. Then, as regards Mrs.
Gallup's Cipher, the (picstion is simply this: Has she built
up the whole of this long story out of her own head as a con-
scious literary fraud, or, "errors and omissions excepted," is
it to be accepted as genuine ? There is no halting-place between
those two views. Xow Mrs. Gallup did not work alone. She
was assisted by quite a group of people of unequivocal posi-
tion and respectability, she was eager to invite the observa-
tion of witnesses while engagd for six months at the British
Museum deciphering the present story, and the fraud hypothe-
sis becomes, for those who will take the trouble to make them-
selves acquainted even in an elementary way witli tlic facts,
utterly untenable. The way to deal with it is to check Mrs.
Gallup's work. If the Cipher is verifiable to any appreciable
degTee — as Mr. Marston even seems to admit, as Mr. Mallock
has definitely stated — its verification by a responsible commit-
tee will displace the whole sul)joct from the region of contro-
versy and put "tlie Bacon-Shakespeare craze" on a level with
that wliich brouglit Galileo into so much bad odour with ortho-
doxy when he maintained that the earth went round the siiu.
173
As for the curious flaw Mr. Marston lias detected in the
Iliad translation, we can afford to wait for Mrs. Gallup's expla-
nation. If the whole problem rested on Mrs. Gallup's good
faith, the flaw might seem supicious, but it rests on the shape
of letters in books at the British Museum. In itself it is the
biggest literary problem ever set before the world; the prima
facie case is overwhelming, as every one who has studied the
question knows full well. How is it possible that a dreary,
senseless old prejudice should be allowed to stand in the way
of the truth ? Who among those in a position to do this effect-
ively will undertake the duty of organizing a really competent
committee (including some persons, at all events, who have
studied the subject) to determine once for all to what author-
ship the greatest writings in the English language are to be
assigned? As for little difficulties about dates, they will have
to give way if the cipher story is verified.
A. P. SiNNETT.
27, Leinster-gardens, W., Dec. 20, 1901.
174
BACONIAN CYPHER.
To THE Editor of the Times:
Sir: — Prompted by Mr. Marston's letter, one of your
leader writers makes an insinuation against Mrs. Gallup
"which gallantry forbids us to state."
The lady, unlike R. L. Stevenson, is alive and able to
deal with innuendos of this sort.
That Pope had access to the MS. of Lord Bacon's version
is not unlikely, or that he saw an earlier deciphering from the
Anatomy. Both Rawley and Ben Jonson were alive in 1628
and wrote the Cipher.
Apart from this, the phrases in the passage in question
which are common to both poets were not new at the date
Pope wrote.
"Silver fountain" is in the Shakespeare Play of
Richard II., Act 5, Sc. 3 ; "hoary-headed' in Midsummer
Night's Dream, Act 2, Sc. 1 ; and "Titan rays" in Titus
Andronicus, Act 1, Sc. 2.
May I humbly correct your "leader" ?
The Cipher not only mentions a marriage ceremony in
the Tower, but a ceremony in September after the death of
Dudley's wife, at a time when, according to Mother Dowe, of
Brentwood (see "Calendar of State Papers for August, 1560"),
marriage was very necessary.
The Cipher does not say it took Francis four decades of
interval to get over his affection for Margaret of Navarre, but
that : "Not until four decades or eight lustres o' life were out-
lived did I take any other to my sore heart. Then I married"
— that is to say, did not marry until after his 40th year.
If Mr. Marston had imitated the caution of Mr. W. H.
Mallock, instead of rushing into print directly he believed him-
self in a position to impugn Mrs. Gallup's hona fides, your
leader writer would have been less fluttered.
Yours obediently,
Parker Woodward.
King-street, Nottingham.
17S
FRANCIS BACON AND THE CIPHER.
To THE EdITOE of THE TiMES :
Sir: — ^We may hope that the truth in this matter may
be established now that The Times is seriously facing the
j)roblem, even though at first your sympathies lean heavily
against what Baconians conceive to be the truth.
May I ask your contributor who has been investigating
the Cipher whether, apart from defects and irregularities in
Mrs. Gallup's interpretation, he has found any fairly consid-
erable number of cipher words to correspond with her inter-
pretation. No one could weave the cipher into a mass of print
without making a multitude of mistakes. In ordinary hand-
writing we most of us slur over scores of the letters we intend
to form legibly, but if our readers can read the majority and
see what we mean they do not reject the whole because of the
defective bits. Of course the double types confuse the perfec-
tion of the Cipher, but Bacon seems to have deliberately aimed
at confusion, fearing premature discovery. Thus some cipher
students tell me that after eettinc; on fairlv well for a time,
they will suddenly find that, though the two kinds of type still
appear, there is no sense to be made of them, until they dis-
cover that, from the appearance of a particular mark until its
reappearance, the significance of the a and h founts is reversed.
With this clue, that which was at first confusion becomes lumi-
nous with sense again. But, though no newcomer to the work
can hope to read the Cipher successfully throughout, if a new-
comer finds, for example, that he can identify four or five out
of every dozen words that Mrs. Gallup can identify, surely
that will dismiss the theory that such identities can be acci-
dental to the region in which chances are expressed by millions
to one against accident. For the rest, of course, Mrs. Gallup
may have arbitrarily interpreted diphthongs and double types
to suit the sense of the passage, as any one in dealing with writ-
ing would interpret a scrawl at the end of a word as sometimes
meaning "ing," sometimes "ly," according to sense. Or wlion
176
she has found a long word like (say) "interpretation" to come
out — i, n, then a group of five letters you can make nothing of,
then r, p, and the rest of the word right, of course she puts
down the whole word "interpretation." Or perhaps the latter
half of the word will come out right only by curtailing some
previous group of some of its proper letters; then, of course,
the sensible thing to do is to curtail them accordingly. That
is the principle to be adopted if we want to get at truth; and
if we find i, n, right and p, r, e, t, a, t, i, o, n right, it would
surely be silly to cavil at the absence of the t, e, r, or at any
sort of confusion in the beginning j
"Apart from the Cipher," there are floods of reasons for
disbelieving that Shakespeare could have written the Plays.
Genius, alowing that hypothesis, might have given him lofty
and beautiful thoughts, but no genius would have given him
detailed familiarity with Chancery law and foreign languages,
nor with the contents of Bacon's commonplace book, which
must have been in the possession of the author of the Plays,
But it is miserably unjust to the arguments on the Baconian
side to hint at them in such few words as these. The "ignor-
ance" in this connection is to be found rather amongst those
who idly accept the old tradition than in the camp of those who
are endeavouring to clear from foul slanders the memory of
one whom they regard as the greatest Englishman who ever
lived and the rightful sovereign of our literary allegiance. We
make a formidable claim on such men as Mr. Sidney Lee when
we ask them to abandon a tradition around which they have
woven a gi'eat mass of ingenious imagination in the effort to
account for that which Emerson found unaccountable — the
contrast between the little that is actually known of Shake-
speare and the works assigned to him. "Other admirable men
have led lives in some sort of keeping with their- thought, but
this man in wide contrast.' But the glory of leading the homage
that has so long been misdirected to the right shrine will
surely be worth the sacrifice.
A. P. SiNNETT.
27, Leinster-gardens, W., Dec. 26, 1901.
ir?
FRANCIS BACON'S BI-LITERAL CYPHER.
Surprise has been expressed that I have not more fully
replied to the many severe and unjust criticisms of my work —
the discovery and publication of the Bi-literal Cypher of Francis
Bacon. On account of great distance causing lapse of time,
the torrent of communications, v^^hich deluged the Times and
other papers and miagazines in London, had somewhat sub-
sided before my replies to any could be returned to England,
but the delay, although by no fault of ours and unavoidable,
has not been due to distance alone.
The Times published two short letters with fair promptness.
The Literary World gave space to two others, replying to
articles appearing in its own columns ; and the Daily Nezvs,
of April 30, contained a part of my answer to Sir Henry
Irving. An article in reply to some of the critics, prepared for
the Pall Mall Magazine, could not, from prearrangement of
space, appear until May — a rather late date. The delay was
the more regretted because the article on the general subject,
published in the March number of the same magazine, was
prepared and sent forward before the criticisms of the latter
part of December and January had reached me, and, though
following shortly after, was in no way a reply.
In the January number of the Nineteenth Century and
After, there appeared two articles of attack upon the Cypher,
one by Mr. Candler, and one by Mr. R. B. Marston. Mr.
Marston, I understand, is a member of the firm publishing the
magazine. His article was a continuation of the unfounded
and libelous charges appearing in the Publishers' Circular and
in the Times concerning myself and my work. T replied at
length and forwarded the articles to Messrs. Gay & Bird, under
date of February 5th, desiring that the denial of these charges
should be given equal prominence. Electrotype plates were
forwarded for illustration of the technical portions. Plates for
179
fac-simile pages from the two editions of De Auguientis,
affording most interesting illustration of the method of the
cipher and of the differences between the editions of 1623
and 1624, were also furnished. I am now advised by Messrs.
Gay & Bird that the Nineteenth Century, the Contemporary
Review, and the Times, have declined to publish any part of
these articles.
This must be my apology for now issuing in pamphlet form
what was prepared for the public periodicals and should have
appeared months ago as part of the discussion of the subject
that is of interest to a large number of readers. The reluctance
of the press in general, to print anything Baconian is well illus-
trated in this refusal of my critics to give place to my replies.
I do not think it should be considered a waste of space ^o
discuss discoveries that correct history in important particulars.
The cipher is a fact, and cannot be ignored. It is neither
imagination nor creation of mine. It is a part of the history
of England, and effort should be directed to further investiga-
tions along the lines it indicates — to search among old MSS.,
in the museums and libraries and in the archives of the gfov-
ernment, for other facts which in the light of the cipher revela-
tions will be better understood than they have been in the past.
Concerning my reply to Mr. Marston's charges, I am in
receipt of the Literary World of May 2nd, which over his
name has the following :
"Dear Sir : — I will not waste your space replying
at length to Mrs. Gallup, except to ask her where she
has replied to my article in The Nineteenth Century
for January, and to my letters in The Times?
"In your columns and in the May number of The
Pall Mall Magazine Mrs. Gallup says she has elsezvhere
replied to my request for an explanation of the fact
that many passages in what she says is Bacon's transla-
tion of Homer are identical with Pope's Homer pub-
lished more than 200 years afterward! ....
"In a letter in The Times Mrs. Gallup did suggest
that Bacon and Pope had used some edition of Homer
unknown to any one else."
In the above we note the strange inconsistency of Mr.
Marston, for my letter published in the Times did not "sug-
gest" or even refer to any edition of Homer whatever. His
180
reference is to a paragraph in my reply (printed herewith) to
his baseless aspersions, and shows conclusively that he had
read my refutation, and knew that in the article submitted to
his magazine and rejected I had "elsewhere replied" to his
request.
In the article next preceding Mr. Marston's letter, "Re-
viewer" also states : "Now as to Homer, I have read Mrs.
Gallup's 'answer' to Mr. Marston," etc.
This indicates that both Mr. Marston and "Reviev/er" had
examined my article, and they comment upon specific portions
of it before it has been published; while ordinary courtesy
should have withheld criticism, at least until the article had
appeared in print.
It may not be inopportune to report at this time the results
of researches made for me at the British Museum and else-
where, since Mr. Marston's malicious charge of "paraphrasing
Pope's translation of the Iliad" was made. Fourteen transla-
tions in Latin, French, German, Italian and English, pub-
lished before 1620, were carefully examined for the reading in
the disputed passages. Bacon's "impatient arrow" is "eager
shaft" in Chapman's translation, and "long distance shots" is
rendered "his hitting so far off," the Greek words conveying
the same idea to these two minds. Mr. Marston matched
Bacon's "cold Dodona" against Pope's "cold Dodona," but
Hobbes has "Dodona cold," and a modern Greek scholar ren-
ders it "chilly Dodona." He also pairs "rocky Aulis" with the
same in Pope, but gives it as the literal translation also; and
he places Bacon's "he leapt to the ground" opposite Pope's
"leaps upon the ground," while it is more like the line of
Hobbes, "he leapt to land." Another renders this "he leap'd
to the land," and still another, "he leaped upon the earth."
The examination also developed the fact that Pope's orig-
inal MSS., preserved at the Museum, have closer resemblances
to Bacon's Argument of the Iliad than are found in Pope's
published work. This is very significant, and in itself refutes
the charge, as I have never seen the MSS., and the first edition
of my book containing the Argument of the Iliad was pub-
lished the year before I went to England to pursue the work
at the British Museum.
181
In Bacon's Argument we find :
"Pciieleus, Leitus, Prothoenor, joyned with Arcesilaus and
bold Clonius, equall in arms and in command, led Boeotia's
hosts."
This in his fuller poem appears :
"Peneleus, Leitus, and Prothoenor,
Join'd with Arcesilaus and hold Glomus —
Two equal men in arms and in command —
Led forth Boeotia's hosts."
Pope's MS. at the British Museum reads :
"The hardy warriors whom Boeotia bred
Bold Clonius Leitus and Peneleus led."
But these were afterward emended to suit his verse, and
the printed lines are:
"The hardy warriors whom Boeotia bred,
Penelius, Leitus, Prothoenor led :
With these Arcesilaus and Clonius stand
Equal in arms and equal in command."
:,; By these comparisons we see that, in the printed poem,
Clonius has lost his boldness and Peneleus has changed the
spelling of his name.
Again in the original MS. we find :
"When first I led my troops to Phaea's wall
And heard fair Jordan's silver waters fall."
But in Pope's printed poem it reads :
"When fierce in war, where Jordan's waters fall,
I led my troops to Phea's trembling wall."
In this place Bacon omits all mention of the Jardan, but in
the catalogue of the ships he says, "Phaestus, by the silver Jar-
dan." Chapman gives the name of the river, Jardanus, an-
other translator speaks of the Jardan, but Mr. Marston, I
notice, writes the word lardus.
In his MS. Pope had "hilly Eteon" ; Bacon wrote "hillie
Eteon" ; but Pope's printed work has "Eteon's hills."
It is conceded that Pope followed Ogilby very closely.
There may be some interesting developments in the history of
the latter. We know that he was much employed about Gray's
Inn, and that he was afterward taught Greek and Latin by the
Oxford students to enable him to translate Homer and Virgil.
182
One thing needs no demonstration, that there was nothing in
Bacon's Homer that made it necessary to keep it concealed
before or after it was put in cipher. Upon that point he says
that cipher writing became so much a habit, and pastime, that
he embodied many things in it not necessarily secret. I
quote :
"And yet I have also emploied my cyphers for other then
secret matters in many of my later bookes, because it hath
now becorne so much an act of habite, I am at a losse at this
present having less dificile labour, now, then in former times
in Her Ma.'s service." — Bi-literal Cypher, p. 66. ^
In the matter of criticism and expression of individual
opinion, we might quote from Bacon's Essay of Custom and
Education : "Men's thoughts are much according to their
inclination ; their discourse and speeches according to their
learning and infused opinions, but their deeds are after as they
have been accustomed.
EuzABETH WEiviyS Gallup.
Detroit, Mich., May 15, 1902.
18?
REPLIES TO CRITICISMS.
Elizabeth Wells Gallup.
In presenting the results of my work in deciphering the bi-
literal cypher, I expected criticism, but it has taken on some
features that have been quite surprising to me.
To answer fittingly all the questions raised would be to
write a book. Some are relevant, many not ; some are prompted
by desire for knowledge, others by a desire to check what they
regard as a heresy; most show unfamiliarity with the subject,
and not a few are mistaken in their statements of facts.
REPLY TO MR. CANDLER.
Mr. Candler, in the January number of the Nineteenth
Century, republishes modified portions of an article that
appeared in Baconiana to which I replied some time since, send-
ing a copy of my article to him and to that magazine.
Mr. Candler makes his objections under the heads : His-
tory, Language, Arithmetical Puzzles, Geography, Proper
Names, and Bacon's Poetry.
HISTORY.
As to History, I can only say, if the decipherings had been
my own invention, I should have had them in substantial accord
with such records as exist, defective as they now appear. Had
I "followed" accepted history, and prevailing ideas, and
found in the cipher confirmation of what people wish to have
true, I should have received encomiums due to an important
discovery, and commendation for great skill and industry in
working it out.
It was my misfortune that the cipher would not read that
way, and no preconceived notions of my own could affect it.
As I have elsewhere said "the facts of history" is an elastic
term, and means to the individual that portion which the indi-
vidual has learned. The records are by no means in accord,
and discrepancies may well be left to the investigators, whose
184
revisions from data they may hereafter be able to collect may
greatly change existing ideas. The decipherer is in no way
responsible for the disclosures of the cipher, nor allowed specu-
lation as to the probabilities in the case. One question only is
admissible — what does the cipher tell ?
LANGUAGE.
Under Language, Mr. Candler makes five subdivisions.
1. "It was the English custom to use his in connection with
inanimate objects where we now use its. This custom died out
about 1670."
This first objection is answered by himself, but in this con-
nection he states :
"Its (or earlier, it's) began to creep into literature about the
end of the sixteenth century, though doubtless it was used col-
loquially at an earlier date."
As to his other deductions on this point, I cannot speak from
knowledge, but whoever put out the First Folio was certainly
not averse to the use of its. In my former paper in Baconiana
I gave from the Shakespeare folio ten examples of the use of the
word. As there is no punctuation in the cipher, I am unable to
determine which form Bacon used, it's or its, but that he used
the word frequently in some parts of the cipher and not at all
in others, any reader may easily see. Thereof, of which Mr.
Candler speaks, though more rarely found was occasionally
used. — (See Bi-literal Cypher, p. 30, 1. 4; p. 61, 1. 24.)
2. "From the date 1000 or earlier, we find many instances
of his used instead of s in the possessive case, and similarly, for
the sake of uniformity, of her and their. . . . But in
Bacon, after a diligent collation of a great many pages, I find
the general use of .? without an apostrophe for the possessive
case both for singular and plural, and no use of his, her, or their
in this sense. When a noun ends with an .f sound. Bacon joins
the two words without a connecting s. Thus : 'Venus
minion,' 'St. Ambrose learning,' and the curious form 'Achille's
fortune,' which may be a printer's error, as the apostrophe here
is in the wrong place. All these come from 1640 edition of the
Advancement of Learning, Books i, 2."
In a footnote Mr. Candler speaks of the seven instances sent
him of the disputed form, but I wish to give them here. Henry
186
Seventh, (1622), "King Henry his quarrell," p. 24; the Con-
spiratours their intentions," p. 124; "King Edward Sixt his
time," p. 145 ; "King Henrie the Eight his resolution of a
Divorce," p. 196 ; "King James his Death," p. 208. Also in
Advancement of Learning (1605), Book i, "Socrates his
ironicall doubting," p. 26; and one may see, "Didymus his
Freedman." in the Tacitus. How many instances does he
"^Sfl?
Mr. Candler further says : "Anti now for the 'Bacon' of
Mrs. Gallup. Turning casually over the leaves of her story I
find 'Solomon, his temple,' p. 24; 'England, her inheritance,'
p. 2j; 'man, his right,' p. 23 and p. 24: 'my dear lord, his
misdeeds,' p. 43; 'the roial soveraigne, ais eies,' p. 59; 'Cor-
nelia, her example ;' 'the sturdy yeouien, their support ;' 'a
mother, her hopes;' 'woman, her spirit;' and, curiously enough,
where we might have expected an Elizabethan to have employed
his 'Achilles' mind,' p. 302."
Aside from the apostrophe, which could not of course be
placed in cipher in the one case- — suggested as a printer's error
in the other — the forms "Achilles fortune" and "Achilles mind"
are the same. We have the following examples and many
others of the first form also in the Bi-literal Cypher, (omitting
apostrophes,) "Elizabeths raigne." p. 4; "Kings daughter,"
ibid. ; "loves first blossom," "lifes girlod," p. 5 ; "stones
throw," "Edwards sire," p. 6 ; "lions whelp," p. 7, etc., etc., etc.,
and we see that both forms are used in the published works and
in cipher.
3. Mr. Candler says ; "It was the custom to finish the verb
with s after plural nouns, as if it were the third person singular,"
but complains that I do not recognize this in the deciphered
work.
In two plays fifteen instances were found, seven of which are
with the verb is or the abbreviation 's. In the Bi-literal Cypher,
p. 177, 1. 9, Bacon speaks of "Illes which is laid by for the good
opportunitie." There are undoubtedly other examples.
4. "Mrs. Gallup's 'Bacon' is repeatedly quoting from his
own published works and from the plays of Shakespeare."
A reason is given for this, in the Bi-literal Cypher, p. 25.
There are many examples also in Bacon's open works, e. g.,
186
■"Females of Seditions" is found in Henry Seventh, p. 137,
while in Essay, Seditions and Troubles, it appears in this form :
"Seditious tumults and seditious fames differ no more but as
brother and sister, masculine and feminine."
From the Shakespeare plays we have,
-"we see
The waters swell before a boyst'rous storme." — Rich. III.
This occurs again as follows : "And as there are cer-
tain hollow blasts of wind and secret swellings of seas before a
tempest." — Ess. Seditions and Troubles. Also this : "Times
answerable, like waters after a tempest, full of working and
swelling." — Avdt. of L. (1605), Book 2, p. 13.
A like recurrence is found in these : "And as in the Tides of
People once up there want not commonly stirring winds to
make them rough." — Henry Seventh, p. 164; "For as the aun-
ciente in politiques in popular Estates were woont to Compare
the people to the sea, and the Orators to the winds because as
the sea would of itselfe be caulm and quiet, if the windes did
not moove and trouble it ; so the people would be peaceable and
tractable if the seditious orators did not set them in working
and agitation." — Advt. of L. (1605), Book 2, 2nd p. yy.
Many of the culled expressions in Bacon's Promus are
employed in the cipher, as I have already found. When the
same incidents are related in the word-cipher that are given in
the biliteral. large passages must appear in both the Bi-literal
Cypher and Bacon's open works.
■5. Mr. Candler makes a series of verbal distinctions, as
follows : "There are, I think, words used in the cipher story
in quite a wrong sense. I will give instances : 'Gems rare and
costive.' Murray gives no example of costive meaning costly.
'I am innocuous of any ill to Elizabeth.' Neither Murray
nor Webster gives any example of 'innocuous of,' i. e., 'inno-
cent of,' though innocuous may mean innocent. Shakespeare
does not use the word.
'Surcease' is a good enough word, but 'surcease of sorrow'
is used by Poe, an American author; and the use of the phrase
by Mrs. Gallup's 'Bacon' makes, one wonder whether he had
ever read The Raven.
187
'Cognomen,' p. 29. No instance given in Murray earlier
than 1809. 'Desiderata/ p. 161. No instance of 'desideratum"
earlier than 1652.
'Hand and glove,' p. 359. Earliest instance in Murray, 1680.
'Cognizante' adj. Earliest example in Murray, 1820. Mur-
ray says, 'Apparently of modern introduction; not in diction-
aries of the eighteenth century ;' , . . (cognisance is quite
early, both as a law term and in literary use.)"
These are refinements beyond reason. Bacon added thou-
sands of new words and new uses of words to the language.
There is something applicable to the case in the Advancejnent of
Learning ( 1605).
"I desire it may bee conceived that I use the word in a differ-
ing sense from that that is receyved,"and"I sometimes alter the
uses and definitions." — Book 2, pp. 24-25.
Had the word costive occurred but once I should have con-
sidered it intended for costlye as we find it in Bacon. He may
have used a v where y was intended.
It is true innocuous, from the Latin innocuus, in the diction-
aries is used only of things, but Bacon evidently employed it
differently, and wrote "innocuous of ill" as he would have
written "not guilty of crime." In Anatomy of Melancholy
(1621) we find "Northerne men, innocuous, free from riot'*
(p. 82), and "The patient innocuous man."
Surcease is used in the Shakespeare plays — Cor., Act 3 ;
Rom. & Jul., Act 4; Macb., Act i. It is in Lucrece, and also
occurs in Bacon's acknoweldged works. He had, perhaps, as
good reason as Poe to desire 'surcease of sorrow.'
Certainly, Bacon had a right to use words existing in any
language. We know that he anglicized many from the Latin
and the French. Cognomen is of course from the Latin ; desi-
derata, Mr. Candler admits, was used in 1652; cognizante — or
as it is elsewhere spelled in the cipher, cognisant — might be
allowed him on the ground that cognisances was certainly in
use. — Henry Seventh, p. 211 ; i Hen. VI., Act 2; Jul. Csesar,
Act 2; Cym., Act 2.
ARITHMETICAL PUZZLES,
Mr. Candler is also inaccurate in his arithmetic. He has not
carefully read pp. 66 and 67, where it is explained that Latin
letters, called by us Roman, were used in a few dedications,.
188
prologues, etc. I did not find these employed until the publica-
tions of 1623 — in the folio and Vitae et Mortis. I have also
shown elsewhere that, at the end of short sections that did not
join with other works, there were occasionally a few letters
more in the exterior passage than were required for the enfolded
portion. These are nulls and not used. Mr. Candler gives
the number of letters in the catalogue of the plays as 850 and
says the portion extracted required 860. Both numbers are
wrong. The cipher enfolded required 855 letters, and that is
the exact number of letters in the catalogue when the Roman
type is included and the diphthongs and digraphs are regarded
as separate letters.
GEOGRAPHY.
Just what Mr. Candler would have us understand by refer-
ring to the incorrect geography in the plays is not quite cleai.
It has no relevance to the cipher nor does it determine whether
Bacon or Shakespeare would suffer most from the criticism.
The same may be said of the next paragraph under "Proper
Names," for it was, and is, at least poetic license to change the
pronunciation in that manner; and as to the spelling of Iliad
on page 176 of the Bi-literal, we have in Troilus and Cressida
a parallel in, " as they passe toward Illium." Neither spelling
nor pronunciation were well defined arts in Bacon's day or in
Bacon's books.
bacon's poetry.
The quoted verse of this "concealed poet" speaks for itself,
and on this point I may well be silent, except to say the partic-
ular poetry Mr. Candler condemns is said to have been written
on a sick bed at the age of sixty-two.
It is amusing to see how many plans are made for Bacon by
these critics, how many things are pointed out that he might,
or should have done. Their long experience in surmising
what Shakespeare may, can, must, might, could, would, or
should have done in order to reconcile asserted facts has given
them the habit of "guessing."
Mr. Candler adds some footnotes, in one of which he quotes :
" 'Mrs. Gallup, when challenged, failed to point out the cipher,
an easy matter if it really existed ; and now avows that without
extraordinary faculties and a kind of "inspiration," none, save
189
herself, need expect to perceive it.' " And adds, "It should
be understood that the President and Council of the Baconian
Society enter a formal caveat that nothing- in Mrs. Gallup's
interpretation can be said to have been satisfactorily proved."
I remember very well the evening to which the extract from
Baconiana refers, when, upon the invitation of a member of the
legal profession, my sister and myself explained to two prom-
inent Baconians the method and scope of our work. In theory,
they accepted — or seemed to accept — what is unmistakably true,
that for different sizes of type, — pica, small pica, English, etc.
Bacon arranged different alphabets. It was shown that one
size of ornamental capitals belonged to the 'a fount,' in another
size the ornamental letters belonged to the 'b fount.' This was
admitted as very possible, even probable,; yet when this was
applied to practical demonstration of what Bacon did, they
exclaimed : "Impossible ! !" "Bacon never would have done
that! etc., etc." This could not be thought a receptive frame
of mind, and just how they knew what Bacon would not have
done I cannot tell.
Afterward I showed them which letters belonged to the 'b
fount.' in a number of lines of the Dedicatory Epistle of Spen-
ser's Complaints, in no single instance varying from the marking
of the manuscript from which my book was printed. This was
candidly admitted, yet, when this interview was reported, it
read as above quoted.
When I first put out the cipher, I thought any one who would
take the time could decipher all that I have done, but when I
found people who could not distinguish between this % and t»
to say nothing of obscure o's and ^'s, I despaired of their be-
coming decipherers. There are, of course, many who have a
correct eye for form, who will be able in time to overcome the
difficulties this study presents, but I wish to ask Mr. Candler
if he does not think the small as, c's, etc., of the Latin illus-
tration in De Augmentis Scientiarmn, which he says a child
could manage, quite as bewildering as any of the Italic letters
elsewhere ?
At the close of Mr. Candler's article he desires that I "get
together a few men who know something about books, and add
to them a printer or two, familiar with types, new and old;
190
between them if they extract a consecutive narrative
there is nothing more to be said." I have extended this invita-
tion many times, only to have it poHtely declined. The Editor
of the Times refused, more than a year ago, to consider this
request. Now, having practically lost the use of my eyes for
such close work as this entails, I shall be obliged to forego, for
a time at least, until a greater degree of strength has returned,
the satisfaction it would be to point out in detail to a committee
the various differences, though it seems to me they should be
readily observable without my aid. In the meantime I rest in
confidence that it will be correctly done by some one, somewhere
and sometime.
191
REPLY TO MR, MARSTON.
It seems rather infantile to call attention to the spelling, but
as Mr. Marston deems it of sufficient importance to draw from
it the following inference, he must think it serious. I quote
from the Times of January 3 : "The whole thing is so trans-
parently a concoction that a school boy who was reading this
deciphered Tragedy asks: 'Was Bacon a Yankee? He spells
words like "labour" and "honour" without the "u".' "
I would reply that he was the same person that wrote the
Shakespeare plays. The folio shows both ways of spelling.
But all the word-cipher productions were printed according to
modern American usage, as in this Tragedy of Anne Boleyn.
Mr. Marston emphasizes the matter by a second allusion to
this peculiarity as discrediting my work, in the following
words : "And Mrs. Gallup asks the world to believe Bacon
wrote this 'new drama' in order to vindicate the 'honor' of his
grandmother."
A few minutes' examination shows, in the first four plays of
Shakespeare, forty- four instances of the spelling of honor, with-
out the u, against twenty-five occurrences of the word with the
u. For the spelling of labor, I will take time and space to quote
only a single line from the first folio :
"There be some Sports are painfull and their labor — "
Tern. 3-1-1.
These words occur in the cipher story, as in the plays, spelled
both ways.*
This suggests one thing of value to present day readers of
the plays who do not know, or do not stop to consider, that
modern editions differ greatly, and in important particulars,
from the original editions, both spelling and grammar having
been modified, while in some parts, whole paragraphs of the
text are omitted to meet the ideas of what the particular editor
thought the author should have said.
Mr. Marston, in theNineteenth Century, continues an argu-
ment first put forth in the Times, and further illustrated in the
Publishers' Circidar, attempting to prove that, because certain
fragments of the Iliad, in the Bi-literal Cypher, deciphered from
*Even present day London writers are not in accord in the use of "u,"
for I find in the Times, "font of type." Mr. Marston and others write
fount." . .Are the writings of "A Correspondent" in the Times to be dis-
credited for following the American method?
192
the Anatomy of Melancholy of 1628, are similar to Pope's ver-
sion of the same passages, the whole long story comprising
385 pages — about 300 of which relate to matters entirely
foreign to the Iliad — must be a conscious fraud, and that "bold
lie" is the key to the whole matter. It was hardly a courteous
expression, and I have every confidence that Mr. Marston will,
after more careful investigation, retract it.
Any statement that I copied from Pope, or from any source
whatever, the matter put forth as deciphered from Bacon's
works, is false in every particidar.
It will be noted that Mr. Marston makes no attempt to prove
the cipher, but bases his convictions regarding the book upon
this one point of similarity, in an insignificant portion of it,
to Pope's translation of the Iliad.
As it chanced, I had read Pope to some extent in the rhetori-
cal studies of my school days, but had never re-read his Homer
until Mr. Marston called attention to it. I now see a similarity
in some expressions, and in the arrangement of names, in that
portion devoted to the catalogue of the ships. Bacon's direc-
tions for writing out the Iliad (by the word-cipher, p. 170), sug-
gest that at that time he had not made as full preparation for
writing out the catalogue as for the remainder of the work,
and this seems significant.
I do not find any striking resemblances in the other parts,
and, as I stated in a recent communication to the Times, in
an examination of six English translations and one Latin, I
found that each might with equal justice be considered a para-
phrase of Pope, or that he had copied his predecessors. Why,
among several translations of the same Greek text, two having
both resemblances and dififerences should be classed together,
and one should necessarily be a copy of the other, is not clear to
me. Knowing that Pope's was considered the least correct of
several of the English translations, yet, perhaps, the best
known for its poetic grace, it is hardly reasonable to suppose
that I should have copied his, had I been dependent upon any
translation for the deciphered matter.
Bacon says his earliest work upon the Iliad was done under
instructors. There were Latin translations extant in his day,
which were equally accessible to Pope a century later. A simi-
193
larity might have arisen from a study by both of the same
Latin text. George Chapman, in 1598, complained vigorously
that some one had charged him with translating his Iliad from
the Latin, and abusively replied. Theodore Alois Buckley, in
his introduction to Pope's Iliad, says he was "not a Grecian"
and that he doubtless formed his poem upon Ogilby's transla-
tion, besides consulting friends who were better classical schol-
ars than himself.
But all this is of small importance, for it is inconclusive. The
question is, did I find this argument of the Iliad in differing
founts of Italic type in the text of the Anatomy of Melancholy f
I have had set up by our printers from my MS. two sections
of the Anatomy of Melancholy^ from which were taken some
passages Mr. Marston quotes. Modern Italic type has to be
used, of course, and the two founts will be easily distinguish-
able. They are so marked as unmistakably to indicate how the
differing forms are used. A reference to an original copy of
the Anatomy of Melancholy (1628), which may be seen in the
British Museum, or in the fine library of Sir Edwin Durning-
Lawrence, will quickly show whether or not I have used all
the Italic letters in the text, whether they are of differing
forms as marked in this, whether they have been properly
grouped, and, when the bi-literal cipher is applied, whether they
produce the results I have printed. If the types are of differing
forms, are properly grouped, and produce, by the bi-literal
method, the results printed, the question of identities or simili-
tudes is eliminated from the discussion.
I am aware that in offering this evidence in this way, I am
at a serious disadvantage. The true classification of the
types was determined after days of examination and compari-
son of hundreds of the old letters, until every shade, and line,
and curve of those I marked was familiar, and as thoroughly
impressed upon my memory as the features of a friend, while
to those making this comparison the letters themselves will be
new, the number examined probably limited to those in a few
sentences, and by eyes entirely unskilled in this kind of exam-
ination.
Mr. Marston refers to my use of an edition of the Anatomy
of Melancholy, published after Bacon's death, as evidence that
194
I may be wrong. The edition I used was that of 1628, pub-
lished by Dr. William Rawley. Concerning this and Rawley's
work, I had found in deciphering Sylva Sylvarum, the follow-
ing statement from Rawley himself:
"When, however, you find this change .... where I beganne th'
worke, you shall pause awhile, then use the alphabet as it is heerein
employ'd and as explain'd in my preceding epistle. It will thus be like a
new alphabet and doubtlesse will bee troublesome, yet can bee conn'd while
some had to be discover'd ; but in respect of a probable familiaritie with
th' worke, and the severall diverse methods employed oft by his lordship,
this may by no meanes be requir'd, since th' wit that could penetrate such
mysteries surely needeth no setti'g forth and enlarging of mine.
Ere the whole question be dropt, however, let me bid you go on to my
larger and fully arranged table where th' storie, or epistle, is finish'd as it
should have beene had his lordship lived to compleat it, since my part was
but that of th' hand, and I did write only that portion which was not us'd
at th' time. All this was duely composed and written out by his hand, and
may bee cherish'd.
From his penne, too, works which now bear th' name Burton ....
make useful those portions which could by noe means bee adapted to
dramaticall writings. If you do not use them as you decypher th' interiour
epistles, so conceal'd, your story shall not be compleat.
Th' workes are in three divisio's, entitled Melancholy, its Anatomy.
Additons to this booke have beene by direction of Lord Verullam, himselfe,
often by his hand, whilst th' interiour letter, carried in a number of
ingenious cyphers mentioned above, is from his pen, and is the same in
every case that he would have used in these workes, for his is, in verie truth,
worke cut short by th' sickel of Death."
This edition of Burton was the only old book in hand at the
time of its deciphering, and, having found the cipher in it, I
continued work upon it, though its contents were a serious dis-
appointment, and I have since greatly regretted the time and
strength spent upon what was of so little value, and of no
interest historically as relating to the personality of Bacon or
the times in which he lived. Has it been noted by Mr. Marston, ")
or by others who have been incredulous about this book, that
Burton in the appendix to his will does not include the Anatomy
of Melancholy in "such books as are written with mine own
hands" ? While this might not be conclusive, it is, in the light
of the cipher revelations, a very significant omission. I add here
that the first edition was published in the name of T. Bright,
under the title of A Treatise of Melancholy, in 1586, when
Burton was ten years old and Bacon twenty-five. As the
Anatomy of Melancholy, it was issued in Rawley's lifetime,
in several editions under dates of 1621, 1624, 1628, 1632, 1638,
1 65 1 -2, 1660, 1676. The edition of 1676 was a reprint of
an earlier edition and was issued after Rawley's death. Bur-
ton died in 1640.
195
One of the passages which Mr. Marston quotes in proof of
a paraphrase of Pope's translation is the expression, "HilHe
Eteon, or the waterie plains of Hyrie." On referring to my
MS. of the deciphering from Democritus to the Reader, p. 73,
I. 24, Anat. of Mel., I find the phrase was extracted from the
words, which are here set up in two founts of modern type.
No one should pass judgment upon the Bi-literal Cypher who
cannot, at sight, assign these letters to their respective founts,
for it is much less difficult in these diagrams than in the old
books themselves.
FOUNTS USED
j a b a b
\aA aa
a b a b
a b ab
a b a b
a b a b
a b ab
BBhb
CCcc
DDdd
EEee
FFff
j a b a b
\OGgg
a b a b
a babab
a b a b
a b ab
a b a b
HHhh
1 1 it j j
KKkk
LLll
MMm m
f a b a b
\N Nn n
a b a b
a b a b
a b a b
a b a b
a b ab
OOoo
PPpP
QQqq
BRrr
SSss
1 a b ab
a b a b a
b
a b a b
a b a b
a b a b
a b a b
\TTtt
V Vv V uu
WWwzv
XXxx
YYyy
ZZzz
Passage to be deciphered.
vitiis Crhnine Nemo caret Netno mrte sua vivlt contentus Nemo in amove
sapit, Nemo bonus, Netno sapiens, Nemo, est ex omni parte beatus dr.
Nicholas Nemo, No body quid valeat Nemo, Nemo referre potest mr sapit
qui pauca loquitur
Grouping in fives as the words stand, we have:
vitij sCrim ineNe mo car etNetn osort esuav ivitc
a a 6 a a b b b a b a a a a b a b a a b ab a a b a aa aa b a a a a b a a b a
E B K K A R T
on ten tusNe
a b a a a b a a a b
I S
The first group forms the biliteral letter e, but the next has
two 'b fount' letters at the commencement. There is no letter
in the biliteral alphabet commencing hh, but there is a pos-
sibility of a printer's error, and it is necessary to examine the
following groups. Each forms a bi-literal letter, but they are a
jumble and cannot be set off, or divided into words.
Another attempt is necessary to pick up the cipher thread.
Omitting one letter at the beginning, the grouping is :
itij s Crimi neNem ocare tNemo sorte suavi vitco
a b a a b b b a b a a a a b a b a a b a b a a b a a a a a b a a a a b a a h a a
K C T T B B E .
71 tent u s N e ni
b it a (i b a ti a b b
S D
196
Here, again, bb comes at the beginning of a group, but going
on with the remainder of the Hne the resulting letters are again
impossible to separate into any intelligible words.
Omitting another letter we have :
i ij s C rim in eNemo caret Nemos ortes uaviv it con
b 11. a b b b a b a a a a b a b a a b a b a a b a a a a a b a a a a b a a b a a b
UWFFEOCK
tentu s N e mo inamo re sap it Ne m
a a a b a aabbababba a a b b a b b a a a
C Q Y a
Another trial commences with the fourth letter, and the
groups are:
ijsCr inline Nemoc aretN emoso rtesu avivi tcont
a a b b b a 6 a a a a b a b a a b a b a a b a a a a a b a a a ab a a b a a b a
HI L L I E E T
entus Netnoi nam. or esapi t Neino bonus Nemos apt en
a a b a a a b b a b a b b a a a b b a b b a a a a b a a b a a a b b b a a b a a
EONO RT HE
sNemo est ex omnip art eh eatus &cNic hoi as NeinoN
b a b a a a aa a a b u a b a a ab a » b a a a a a b a a a a a b a a a b b b <i
W A T E R I E P
obody quidv aleat NemoN emore ferre potes tvirs
a b a b a a a a a a a b a a a a b b a a b a a a b a b b a b a a b a. b a ii b b b
LAI N S O F H
apitq uipau caloq uitur
b a b b a b a a a a ab a a a a a b a a
Y R I E
DECIPHERED PASSAGE
None of these groups begins with two b's, and the resulting
letters spell out the line quoted.
hillieeteonorthewaterieplainsofhyrie
Hillie Eteon or the waterie plains of Hyrie.
The capitalization and punctuation are suggested by the
rules of literary construction. There are four possible wrong
groupings, but this illustration required only the trial of three
to find the correct one. Should there be obscure, or doubtful,
letters in the text that make the resulting letters of a group
uncertain, pass the whole group by until those are marked which
are certain. There are always a sufficient number of &'s to indi-
cate what the word really is in the groups preceding and follow-
ing. In the resulting phrase above, a number of the letters might
be passed over as abbreviations and yet the sense could hardly
be mistaken even in this short and disconnected line, while with
the context it would be made perfectly clear.
197
Mr. Marston quotes another passage as evidence that I have
"copied Pope" :
"Hee was th' first of th' Greekes who boldlie sprang to th'
shore when Troy was reach'd, and fell beneath a Phrygian
lance."
Referring to my MS., I find this comes from page 38, Anat.
of Mel., commencing in line 11. I have had this printed, also,
and grouped for the resulting bi-literal letters that form the
deciphered passage, and I think it well to use this because it
illustrates one of the points that should be clearlv understood.
Anatomy of Melancholy, p. 38, 1. 11 [ iidition 1628 ).
Claiulinus Hippocrates Paracelsus Non est reludanduni aim iJeo Her-
cules Olympicks, lupiter Jupiter Hercules Nil iuvat iiimiensos Cratero
•promittere monies we must submit ourselues vnder the mkihty hand of God
vna eademq manus vulnus opemq feret Achilles A Digression of the valine
of Spirits^ dad Angels or Divels, and how they cause Melandu ly.
Postellus, full of controversie and ambiguity fateor excedere vires intentioms
meae Austin finitum de infinito non potest slatuere Ads Sadducees Galen
Feripateticks Aristotle Pomponatius Scaliger Dandinus com in lib de
audin us Hi 2) pocra tesPa race I susNo nestr eluct
a a b b b a a b a a a a b a a b n b a a a a a a n. b a d a. b b a a b a u a b b b
andunt cumDe oHerc ulesO lympi ckslu piter lupit
a a b a 6 a i a a a b a a a u b a a a b b a a b a a b b a b a a h a b b a a b ii
er Her cut es N il iu vatim men so s Cr at e r o pr o m i 1 1
a a. b b b a a b b a b a a a a a a b a a a a b a a a b a a b a a b a a b a a u b
eremo nte sw eniust sub mi tours e lue s vnder them i
b a b a a a a b b b a b b a b a a a a b a b b a b a b a b a a a a b b a b a u a
g h tyh and of G odvn ae a d e mqman usvul mi sop e m qfe
a b a a a a a b a a b a a a b a b b b a b a a a a a a a a a a b b a a a a b b a
retAc hille sADig ressi onoft henat ureof Spiri
b a a b a a b b a b b a a b a a a b b b b a a a b a a b b b a b b a b b a a a a
tsbad Angel sorDi velsa ndhow theyc auseM elanc
aa b a a b a b a a aa b b b a a b a a a b b a a b a a b a b a a a a a b b a b
holyP ostel lusfit llofc ontro versi eanda mbigit
i a b b a b a baa a a a a a b aa a b b a a a a a a b a a a a a a a a a a b a
%tyfa teore xcede re fir esint entio nisme acAus
a a b b b a a a b b a a a a a a b b a a a a a b b a a b a b a a b a a a b a b a
t i nf i 7iitutn deinf in ito nonpo tests t atue reAct
a b a b a a a a a b a a b a a a b b a a a a b a a a a a a a b a a b a a a b b h
sSadd ucees Galen Perip ateti cksAr is tot lePom
a a a a a a b b b a a a b b b b a a a a b a b b a a b b a a a b a a a a a a a a
ponat iusSc a I i g e r Dan d inus c ominl
a b b a a a b a b a a a a a a. a b b a a a a a b a a a b a a
DECIPHERED PASSAGE
Hee was th' first of th' Greekes who boldlie sprang to th' shore
when Troy was reach'd, and fell beneath a Phrygian lance.
198
In the word Phrygian, the fifth group which should make
the letter g, aabba, really is n, abbaa, probably Rawley's mis-
take, for the printer should not answer to every charge. The
two b's stand together, as they should, but are one point re-
moved to the left.
Every page of the book was worked out in the manner illus-
trated, every Italic letter classified and the result set down, nor
could any "imagination or predetermination" change the re-
sult.
In this connection as few of your readers have opportunity to
examine the old books I will reproduce the Cicero Epistle con-
taining the Spartan dispatch from each of the 1623 and 1624
editions of De Aiigmentis, showing the differences and the
errors in the second which like those occurring in the text of
the old books have to be corrected if the work goes on.
199
De Augmentis Scientiarinn. London Edition, 162^.
Plate i.
Liber Sextos.
Excmplum aJl^haheti ^ilueranj..
J <i ^ C , Q
CTr
^
jLiaaci aaaav laavz ac^abo a<daA aaba^
acLPba . (KLohb ' aoaaa avdaj) dpata ■ afafl>
^ Q 0, '3b S
q* V w o(i> y ^■
fiuifii. fiKifl- icXcui ' iaSab. babbci . babbb'
Ncquc Iciic quiddam obitcn hoc modo. pcrfc(Sliirn
eft. Etcnlrncxhoc ipfopacct Modus, quo ad omncm
Loci DiClaaciam, per Obic(^a, quz vd Vifai vdAudi
tuifubi)ci poflinr, Scnfa Animi profcrrc, &: Hgnificarc
liccac, fimodoObicclaiila, duplicis tamum Diffcrcn-
nx capacia funt , vduti per Campaiias, per Buccinas,
per Flainmcos^pcr SonuusTormenrorum, t: alia qu.c-
cunquc Vcrumvr Incoepcum perfcquamur, cum ad
ScnbcnJum accingcns, EpiAolam Inreriorcm in Alpha-
bcuim hoc Dtlitcranum folucs. Sic Epiftola interior ;
Exemplum Solutiom,
ff V. g. ^.
Jidfd^^ Uaff. CLdhbd. (Ldbcia
Prxfto
2-9
200
Plate ii.
280
!D(f Augmentit, ScientiarunL->
Pr^llo fimul fit aliud Alphabetum Biforme, nimirum ,
quod fingulas Alpbabeti Communu Litcras, tarn Capica-
Ics.quamminorcs, duplici Forma, prout cuicjuc com-
modum (itj cihiHcac.
Exemplum ^Iphabeti 'B'tformii,
a. f.a.f. a. D .€L.D.(L. i.a£ <v, p.d.b.
a. l.a.t, <t. p . A.h. A. p, a. p. (t, pci.h.
a. p. CLP. a, p. c i. a, 6. a. p. <t. p.ci.b,
<t. P. c^'P,a^. b-a^p.a^. f.£L.f.(t. P. <t.A^.
XM.iv.m 0. 0.o.o^^jj. Q_Q^jM. 1L
«. f. a-.f. a., f. <c.t. a,.h.<iS.<t.^.<t.(.
201
"Plate iii.
JLl B E K S £ X T V S. 281
TumdemumEpiftolcElntcnon.iam ^cXt B/!ircratx^
Epillolam Exteriorcm 5//^r»7^w, hrcradm acconuno-
dabis, & poftca licfcnbcs. Sit Ep.llola Exrcnor;
Manere te 'voh donee '^encro.
Exemplum ^ccommodatiom,
^// ^// 4/ f
d ab dP.p • dd p D (Ld b b a dd b ad.
.Jjllcuttcrt tc viyio diXiicc tcmfo'
Appofuimus ctiam Exemplum aliud largias ciufdem
Q\^\vi3i^Scribendi0mniaper Omnia.
Epiftola Interior, ad quam delegi-
/nus Epiftolam Spartananr^ miflam
ohm in Scy rale.
I-crditac J(e/, Minaanu cecmtjPbfife/-
cjurtunt ulemt nine nos txtncarcmmc
fiLC diufius inaTurc tossumi^ .
Epiftola Exterior, fumpta ex Bfijiola
Prima Ctcgronu,in qu^EpifioIa Spar-
tana inuotuicur.
Go
202
Plate iv.
zt^^(^ (Jinnv dmcu^, acvotiwstidtiJbiemiitc;
ctua^nt'Scutishicio • jM/nlil' ts^emtn.iricumtz
tudotiumim crjuimc mtT^rwn;i>i'audnU
f{^ c^o, anin non idem vn tncL ca^usa ifpcuf,
intdVfi mm cm (iccriimipitim . Jnccutz
jd kd'io Hint: JUmmomtu w(c^u y^/iiiiy
afctkvccitnia^Tin'OVpimat. js^^Loitur
^cr cosdtvi wtdihref-.^er au^^ cam^fa^aaci
aui dclvni^ (jtiitau ci sunt entries a^dzBm^v:
viin rem dtfarivolurit. Ocnat^ z^t^z
ai^Tiu ccdumnuim^ tu>n i^iufwnt^sedTn^;^
Icuo Untidy li iluas £\e^tac ^^rgimUf-
203
De Augmentis Scientiarum. Paris Edition, 162^.
366 De^dugmemu Scientiarum.
tunimodo Litcras fojuantur ,; per Tranfpofitioncm
.carum. Nam Tranfpofitio duarum Literarum , per
Locprquinquc, Differemiis.triginca duabus, multo
magis viginti quatuor ( qui dk Numerus Jlpha^
^mapudnos ) lufHciet. Huius Alfhaicti Excmplanx
tale eft,
Excmplum x^l^habetiTiUtenrpj^
m
^£ o ^ (h ^ S
c.ppaa.awap ^appf(^ MPPPpSaaaciJaaap-
^ V W 00 y ^
SaaSar.paaPP.paSaa 'PoSapJah^a.^aSSf
Neque leucquiddam obiter hocmodo perfedum
cftlEtcnimexhocipfopacecModus , quoadoiTineni
Loci Difl:antiam,per ObiedajqusE vcl Vifui,vcl Audi-
tui fubijci poflint,Scnfa Animi proferre, & fignificare
liceat : fi modo Obicda illa,duplicis tantum DifFeren-
ti^capaciafunt, vclutiperCampanas , per Buccinas>
per Flainmeos,pet SonitusTormentorum,&: alia qu^-
cunque. Verumvtincceptumperfequamur, cum ad
Scribendum accingoris , Epiftolam intcriorem m^lr
^hahemmhoc'SHuerAmm rolues. Sit cpiftolaiiitcriori
204
Liber Sextu^\ 507
Exeinplunl SolmionU,
JLdl^d* hcLCLPD^ CidLupd* Hdbaa^
Praefto fimul fit aliud Jphabetum Btforme, nimirutru
quodfingulas j^lpbalpeti Communis Litcr^s ^um Capi-
talcs.quatm minores^duplici Forma , prout cuiq; com-
inodam,fit cxhibear,
Exemplum jilp^ahtiBiformiSo
JfL(Ln^r% ie ^crlo ciantc ven£W
Turn demiim Epiftolac Interiorly iam fa6l« Biliterat^,
Epiftolam Extcviorcm BiforKtemy literatim accommo-
dabis,& pofteadefcribes. Sit Epiftola Exteriori
ManeYc te "volo donee 'Ve)iero*
Exemplum yiccommodationis,
^ . CP^ Q- ^ S
albaa.. avUt> . Mpa.ampJaaa(l.Pcui(iP
Appofuimus ctiam Excmplurh aliud largius eiuf^
dem Ciphrx , Scrlhendi Omnia per Omnia,
Epiftola Interior , ad quam dolegimus Epifiolam
Spananam , mifTam olimin Scytalc,
VerdiU ^JR^s. Q:PifCindarm cecidit <^:^tlites eju-
riurjt. !N^qHt hincnos extricare, neque
hie dmtim m^ncrepojjumtis.
Q^r, ii
205
loS De lAugyntmls Sctemldrmi,
^. /-^.A ^« b * i^,p^ <i. p. a^P a. Lc^D-
,^ <^Z'
EpiftoIaExtcrior ^ fumpta ex Epiftola Prima Cfccrom^y
^ in qui Efiftola Sfartana inuolui tur.
206
LihrSext^, 3 op
^ffc mnx efjtcio, acjotmjukU ei^a,tB;
dulwsa,iufaao- ^cinfdtstenimmajiii-
tudo iwrru-Wr era^ mt miniurwn,vi-jtiim\-
am iw, nisipstpctlre, dtmmon amjiitcs-
ferecsasnt crcdiivres perauifs, cum hi adtz
iwti rem /^m vomnt Senahs ^^
^tontJ" caktmniain non iKLmonc^ si(tmA=i
kuoliniuL limius l/\e'ruu\itsifioriu
207
In the 1624 edition the second d in oMcio is changed by the
lawoftied letters ;the second ii in nunquam has positioner angle
of inclination, to make it an 'a fount' letter ; q in conquiesti is
from the wrong fount, and the u has features of both founts but
is clear in one distinctive difference — the width at the top ; the
q in quia is reversed by a mark; the as in the first causa are
formed like 'h fount' letters but are taller, ; the q of quos is from
,^e wrong fount ; the second a in aderas is reversed being a tied
letter ; / in velint is from the wrong fount, also the p of parati,
che / of calumniani and the / of religione.
In line twelve 'pauci sunt' in 1623 ed. is 'parati sunt' in the
1624 ed. The correct grouping is ntqui velin tquip rails untom
nesad, the first a in 'parati' must be omitted to read diutius
according to the Spartan dispatch. Otherwise the groups
would be arati siinto mnesa. The m and n are both 'b fount,'
thus bringing two b's at the beginning of this last group, indi-
cating at once a mistake for no letter in the bi-literal alphabet
begins with two b's and wherever encountered may be known to
indicate either a wrong fount letter or a wrong grouping. It is
one of the guards against error. To continue the groups after
the one last given several would be found to commence with bb,
and the resulting letters would not "read."
Here, too, is an example of diphthongs, digraphs, and double
letters, which are troublesome to "A Correspondent." The
diphthong se of "cseteris," the digraph ct in perfectare, and the
double ^'s and pp's are shown as separate letters and must be
treated as such in deciphering Italics.
A very important feature, that most seem to forget, is that
ciphers are made to hide things, not to make them plain or
easy to decipher. They are constructed to be misleading, mys-
terious, and purposely made difficult except to those possessing
the key. Seekers after knowledge through them must not
abandon the hunt, upon encountering the first difficulty, im-
probability, inaccuracy, or stumbling block set for their confu-
sion.
Were the confirmation of this cipher of importance to the
government — a matter of life or death to an official, or likely
to concern the strategic movement of an army — the energies of
many minds would be centered upon deciphering it. But it
208
would appear from the writings we have recently seen, the
greatest effort is to prevent its development or acceptance —
that the ideas of a lifetime be not overturned, and the satisfac-
tion remain that the individual has already compassed the limits
of information. It is so much pleasanter to be satisfied
with what we have than to delve for things we do not want to
know.
Personally, it is a matter of no vital importance to me
whether the cipher is accepted or not. I have put my best efforts
into its discovery and elucidation. I know that I have accomp-
lished what others have failed to do, and I can look on with
equanimity as the world wrestles with the evidences, and finally
comes, as it will, to the conclusion I have reached.
The impetus given the movement by this discussion will
result in important research, and other discoveries concerning
Bacon that I am unable to make, will, with the light that has
now been thrown upon the subject, confirm what has been set
forth and much more besides. As I write, an article in
Baconiana makes a suggestion which should be acted upon at
once:
"Our attention has also been called to a sealed hag of papers
at the Record office. It was, it is said, sealed at the death of
Queen Elizabeth, and to be opened only by joint consent of the
reigning Sovereign, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Lord
Chancellor. Is not the time come when we may fitly memorial-
ize His Majesty, King Edward, to command or sanction the
opening and revelation ?"
209
>
REPLY TO SIR HENRY IRVING.
THE PRINCETON ADDRESS.
In an address at Princeton on the Shakespeare-Bacon con-
troversy, Sir Henry Irving did me the honor of mention,
although in rather a disparaging way, as "constructing a won-
derful cipher out of the higgledy-piggledy lettering" of the
First Folio and other Elizabethan books in which irregular
lettering is found.
As comparatively few will recognize from the terms Sir
Henry used, the actual meaning of this characterization of the
peculiar printing, I beg leave to say that he refers to the two
or more forms of Italic letters the printers of that day employed
in the same text of many books, and that I have discovered
that their use in a large number was for the purpose of em-
bodying the biliteral cipher invented by Bacon. Much of this
work has been deciphered and published as the Bi-literal
Cypher of Francis Bacon, and no doubt the recent discussion
of this book in England, — and the echoes, on this side, of the
controversy, — was the suggestion, at least, of the theme of the
Princeton address.
Sir Henry points out that by "this wondrous cipher Bacon
is alleged to have written in addition to Shakespeare and
Greene, the works of Ben Jonson and Marlowe, Spenser's
Faerie Queene and Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy/' but
says "its chief business is to stagger us with the revelation
that Bacon was the 'legitimate son of Queen Elizabeth.' "
It is not my purpose at this time to discourse upon the dis-
coveries I have made, which, among a great deal else equally
important, most certainly reveal all that Sir Henry mentions —
except that Bacon lays no claim to the greater part of Ben
Jonson's works — but I wish to throw additional light upon cer-
tain passages in the address that are presented as facts irrec-
oncilable with the cipher disclosures. These "facts" are sup-
posed to show that it is not in the realm of possibility that
Bacon could have written the plays.
210
In the opening sentences, Sir Henry refers to some words
of his own used as a fitting conclusion to a treatise on the
Bacon-Shakespeare Question by Judge Allen of Boston. T
quote : "When the Baconians can show that Ben Jonson was
either a fool or a knave, or that the whole world of players and
playwrights at that time was in a conspiracy to palm off on
the ages the most astounding cheat in history, they will be
worthy of serious attention."
If Sir Henry Irving to-day appeared in a new play,
and at the same time claimed that it was the work of his hand,
it would not, probably, require "a conspiracy of the whole
world of players and playwrights to palm it off" on the present
age to say nothing of the future.
The writers who refer so confidently to Ben Jonson's praise
of Shakespeare, do not observe that he says:
"he seemes to shake a Lance,
As brandisht at the eyes of Ignorance."
They are blind, also, to the significance of the lines :
"From thence to Honour thee, I would not seeke
For names; but call forth thund'ring ^Eschilus,
Euripides, and Sophocles to us,
Paccuvius, Accius, him of Cordova dead,
To life againe, to heare thy Buskin tread,
And shake a Stage: Or, when thy Sockes were on,
Leave thee alone for the comparison
Of all, that insolent Greece, or haughtie Rome
Sent forth, or since did from their ashes come.
The '])uskin' signified tragedy, 'socks' comedy, and it was
as an actor, not as an author, that Jonson would compare
Shakespeare with both ancient and modern Greece and Rome.
His name was in the list of actors of some of Jonson's plays,
as well as of "Shakespeare's." Beeston says, "he did act exceed-
ingly well," and we are indebted to Mr. Sidney Lee's Shake-
speare in Oral Tradition for a revival of "the exciting discov-
ery some actors made" of Shakespeare's brother Gilbert whose
memory "only enabled him to recall his brother's performance
of Adam in his( ?) comedy of As yon like it."
It is true that Shakespeare was lauded for the literary work
supposed to be his, yet in the article just cited we observe also
that "Shakespeare's extraordinary rapidity of composition was
an especially frequent topic of contemporary debate." There
were men even then who realized that these things were not
possible to their Shakespeare.
211
In the Advancement of Learning we read ; "He is the
greater and deeper pollitique, that can make other men the
Instruments of his will and endes, and yet never acquaint them
with his purpose : So that they shall doe it, and yet not know
what they doe, then hee that imparteth his meaning to those
he employeth." B. 2., ist p. 33.
This would suggest that Bacon did not impart his pur-
poses to his "masques." Ignorant of the fact that Shake-
speare's name was being employed as was his own, Greene
exclaimed, "An upstart crow beautified with our feathers!"
The similarity of expression was apparent to him, as to stu-
dents of the present day, and the charge of plagiarism was
very natural.
Sir Henry points out that although Bacon "was the legiti-
mate son of Oueen Elizabeth, his unnatural mother showed not
the smallest desire to advance his interests." But what shall
be said of Sir Nicholas Bacon's failure to make provision for
Francis ? The cipher history makes that point quite clear. He
made provision for his own sons, and in a certain sense Eliza-
beth provided for hers, although she did not give them public
recognition nor show the elder any marked favor.
Sir Henry asks : "What did Bacon know about the stage ?"
What did he not know about the stage? A few random quo-
tations will best answer these questions :
"In the plays of this philosophical theatre you may observe
the same thing which is found in the theatre of the poets, that
stories invented for the stage are more compact and elegant,
and more as one would wish them to be, than true stories out
of history." Nov. Or., p. 90.
"Representative [poetry] is as a visible history, and is an
image of actions as if they were present, as history is of actions
in nature as they are (that is) past." Adv. of L., p. 204.
"In whose time also began that great alteration in the state
ecclesiastical, an action which seldom comcth upon the stage."
Adv. of L., p. 193.
"As if he were conscient to himself that he had played his
part well upon the stage." Adv. of L., p. 362.
"But it is not good to stay too long in the theatre." Adv.
of L., p. 206.
212
"But men must know, that in this theatre of man's life it is
reserved only for God and the angels to be lookers on." De
Aug., p. 198.
"As it is used in some Comedies of Errors, wherein the mis-
tress and the maid change habits. Adv. of L., p. 315, De
Aug., p. 199.
"What more unseemly than to be always playing a part?"
Adv. of L., p. 349-
"And then what is more uncomely than to bring the man-
ners of the stage into the business of life?" De Aug., p. 235.
"Besides it is unseemly for judicial proceedings to borrow
anything from the stage.'' De Aug., p. 340.
"But the best provision and material for this treatise is to
be gained from the wiser sort of historians, not only from the
commemorations which they commonly add on recording the
deaths of illustrious persons, but much more from the entire
body of history as often as such a person enters upon the stage;
for a character so worked into the narrative gives a better idea
of the man, than any formal criticism and review can." Dc
Aug., p. 21 J.
"This was one of the longest plays of that kind that hath
been in memory." History of Henry the Seventh, p. 304.
"Therefore now like the end of a play, a great number came
upon the stage at once." History of Henry the Seventh, p. 287.
"But from his first appearance upon the stage." H. VH.,
p. 291.
"He had contrived with himself a vast and tragical plot."
H. VH., p. 302.
"As to the stage, love is ever matter of comedies and now
and then of tragedies." Essays, p. 95.
The stage and stage plays were constantly in Bacon's mind.
The point is not well taken that Bacon could not have written
tlic plays from lack of familiarity with the stage, from lack of
the old plays that were the basis of some, from the impossibility
of altering the plays extant, or of collaborating with other
writers in the historical dramas. Bacon had access to all sort.s
and conditions of men. to all varieties of literature, but the
proofs of collaboration are entirely wanting.
Again, Sir Henry states: "His [Shakespeare's] knowl-
edge of law was supposed to be wonderful by Lord Campbell
but does not commend itself to Judge Allen."
213
This is the opinion of one man opposed to that of another.
Warner, in speaking of the chorus in Act i., Sc. ii., H. V ., says :
"It reads like the result of a lawyer's struggle to embalm his
brief in blank verse."
A little further on in Sir Henry's speech we find an allusion
to 'Shakespeare's careless notions about law, geography, and
historical accuracy.'
When the great German Schlegel wrote, "I undertake to
prove that Shakespeare's anachronisms are for the most part
committed purposely and after great consideration," the truism
was more far-reaching than he knew. The double purpose that
many lines and often whole passages serve, was the real cause
of the anachronisms, and want of historical accuracy. In
Richard the Second the pathetic scene of the queen's interview
with the dethroned Richard as he is being led to the Tower,
is "both historically inaccurate and psychologically impossible.
The king and queen did not meet again at all after their parting
when Richard set out for Ireland, and Queen Isabel was a
child." — Warner's Hist. Nearly the entire scene is a part of
the hidden cipher drama, The White Rose of Britain, and is the
parting of the pretended Richard, Duke of York, — Warbeck,
named by the Duchess of Burgundy the White Rose, — from his
faithful wife, Katharine, to whom the title was afterward
given.
"Qu. This way the King will come : this is the way
To Julius Cccsar's ill-erected Tower:
To whose flint bosome, my condemned Lord
Is doom'd a Prisoner, by prowd
Here let us rest, if this rebellious earth
Have any resting for her true King's Queene.
ENTER RICHARD AND GUARD.
But soft, but see, or rather do not see
My fair Rose wither: yet look up; behold,
That you in pittie may dissolve to dew,
And wash him fresh again in true-love Teares.
Ah thou, the Modell where old Troy did stand,
Thou Mappe of Honor, thou King Richard's Tombe,
And not King Richard: thou most beauteous Inne,
Why should hard-favor'd Griefe be lodged in thee,
When Triumph is become an ale-house guest?
Rich. Joyne not with griefe faire Woman, do not so,
To make my end too sudden : learne good Soule,
To thinke our former State a happie Dreame,
From which awak'd, the truth of what we are,
Shewes us but this. I am sworne Brother (Sweet)
To grim Necessitie ; and hee and I
Will keepe a League till Death," etc.— i?. //., Act. v., Sc. i.
214
Again in Henry the Sixth, see all the conversation regard-
ing the marriage of Edward the Fourth : A note on the
play says "nothing is historically certain concerning the episode
except that Edward married the Lady Elizabeth Grey." It is a
part of another cipher drama, the Tragedy of Anne Boleyn,
where some were bold enough to challenge the right of the mar-
riage of Henry the Eighth with the beautiful Anne Boleyn :
"Lady. My lords, before it pleas'd his Majestic
To rayse my State to Title of a Queene,
Doe me but right, and you must all confesse,
That I was not ignoble of Descent,
And meaner than mysclfe have had like fortune.
But as this Title honors me and mine,
So your dislikes, to whom I would be pleasing,
Doth cloud my joyes with danger, and with sorrow.
King. My Love, forbeare to fawne upon their frownes :
What danger, or what sorrow can befall thee,
So long as is thy constant friend.
And their true Soveraigne, whom they must obey?
Nay, whom they shall obey, and love thee too,
Unlesse they seeke for hatred at my hands:
Which if they doe, yet will I keep thee safe,
And they shall feele the vengeance of my wralh.'
H. VI., Act iv., Sc. i.
Critics trace the marked anti-papal spirit of King John to
'Henry the Eighth's revolt from the Roman obedience,' and
these passages are indeed a part of Henry's speech, in the
Tragedy of Anne Boleyn:
"What earthie name to Interrogatories
Can tast the free breath of a sacred King?
But as we, under heaven are supreame head,
So under him that great supremacy
Where we doe reigne, we will alone uphold
Without th' assistance of a mortall hand :
For he that holds his Kingdome, holds the law."
And again :
"Yet I alone, alone doe me oppose
Against the Pope, and count his friends my foes."
K. J., Act iii., Sc. i.
The following lines arc a part of the cipher poem, the
Spanish Armada:
"So by a roaring Tempest on the flood,
A whole Armado of convicted saile
Is scattered and dis-joyn'd from fellowship."
K. /., Act iii., Sc. iii.
A part of Cranmer's prophetic speech at Elizabeth's chris-
tening has reference to Francis himself:
215
"So shall she leave her Blessednesse to One
(When Heaven shall call her from this clowd of darknes)
Who, from the sacred Ashes of her Honour
Shall Star-like rise, as great in fame as she was.
And so stand fix'd."— H. P'lIL, Act v., Sc. iv.
The mention of quoting Marlowe sometimes with acknowl-
edgment — sometimes omitting the acknowledgment — shows
that Sir Henry does not concede that the plays of Marlowe
were from the same pen as the plays of Shakespeare, but he
admits that 'Marlowe was Shakespeare's model in several
ways,' and in making this admission he reveals a recognition of
similarity that he can in no way account for until he accepts the
very natural 'cause of this effect' made known in the cipher.
Next w^e find : "Shakespeare had an immeasurable recep-
tivity of all that concerned human character."
This is, of course, an inference drawn from the plays. It is
well known to all close students of that marvelous literature
that its author discerned ever}^ type of human character, un-
derstood the influence of environment upon men and women,
and had a wide and deep knowledge of the spirit of the times,
in different ages and in many countries. We do not differ in
opinion there, but Sir Henry speaks of the author by his
pseudonym, I by the name his foster father gave him.
Tennyson is quoted to show Bacon's opinion of love: "The
philosopher who in his essay on 'Love' described it as a 'weak
passion' fit only for stage comedies, and deplored and despised
its influence over the world's noted men, could never have writ-
ten 'Romeo and Juliet'."
In the Advancement of Learning, Bacon says : "Love
teacheth a man tO' carry himself to prize and govern him-
self onely Love doth exalt the mind and neverthelesse at
the same instant doth settle and compose it." The play of
Romeo and Jidiet was the story of the love of Bacon's youth
and early manhood, and the score of years between the time
of writing the play and publishing the essay had filled his life
with other things, yet those who have read the cipher story
know that an inner chamber of his heart enshrined a memory
of Marguerite.
I quote again from the address : "Still more noteworthy is
the absence of any plausible excuse for Bacon's fond preserva-
tion of hi? worthless rhymes and his neglect of the master-
pieces that went by Shakespeare's name. He gave the most
minute directions for the publication of his literary remains.
216
His secretary, Dr. Rawley, was entrusted with this responsi-
bility and faithfully discharged it."
Bacon's MSS. were given to two literary executors, not to
Rawley alone, and a part was taken to Holland, Rawley con-
tinued the publication of Bacon's works after 1626, publishing-
all those that were left in his care. Without these, a large
number of the interior works would have been incomplete and
the work in the word-cipher interrupted.
Sir Henry's assertion, "nothing could be easier than to
make an equally impressive cipher which would show that Dar-
win wrote Tennyson," etc., needs no refutation. Bacon does
not say that it was exceedingly difficult to "make" the biliteral
cipher.
Again we find : "It would be more to the purpose it the
Baconians would tell us why on earth Bacon could not let the
world know in his lifetime that he had written Shakespeare."
The principal reason was because the history of his life
was largely given in those plays, not alone in the biliteral, but
in the word-cipher, and the revelation of that in the lifetime
of Queen Elizabeth would have cost his own life. He hoped
against hope to the very day of the queen's death, that she
would relent and proclaim him heir to the throne. But he
states that the witnesses were then dead, and the papers that
would authenticate his claims destroyed. What could he do?
Simply what he did.
In the peroration we find : "I fear that the desire to drag
down Shakespeare from his pedestal, and to treat the testimony
of his personal friends as that of lying rogues is due to that
antipathy to the actor's calling which has its eccentric mani-
festations even to this day."
This cannot in any way refer to my book, for the very
nature of this work eliminates personal thoughts and wishes or
preconceived ideas. It is as mechanical as the reading of hiero-
glyphics, as naming perfectly well-known objects, as discrimin-
ating the clicks of the telegraph. And as far as Bacon was
concerned he desired only his right.
It is by its great men in every age of the world that the
actor's calling is dignified, but the genius of the man of the
stage is not necessarily the genius of the man who wrote the
greatest plays that time through all the centuries has produced.
Elizabeth Wells Gallup.
217
!
THE BI-LITERAL CIPHER 11^^ HEIsTRY VII.
Baconiana, London, July 1905.
It lias been suggested to me that I should give some of the
results of my examination of Mrs. Wells Gallup's work on
Bacon's Henry VII. I was not in England when Mrs. Gallup's
MSS. arrived from America, in the early part of 1904. On
my return to London in June of that year, I heard that two
or three members of our Society had been trying to work tlie
cipher, but on comparing notes found that the various copies
of the 1622 edition did not agree in some of the forms of Hic
Italic letters. Only one member seemed inclined to devote the
time and patience to investigate the matter at all thoroughly.
That member, I understand, with much patience devoted one
whole week to the study of the italic letters. His very able re-
port against the cipher made me wish to look into the matter
still more thoroughly myself. This may appear presumptuoll^
as I was not one of the committee appointed to enquire into the
subject. But I had had the advantage of many conversations
with Mrs. Gallup, when she first presented her work to the
public five years ago, and saw her and her sister. Miss Wells,
at work on a book they found in my house not before decipher-
ed by them. I was busy with other literary work during the
summer of 1904, but in the autumn made up my mind to send
my own copy of the 1622 edition of Henry VII. to the Howard
Publishing Company, in America, for examination. I was anx-
ious to know if it was a safe copy on which I might commence
my work. It was returned to me by Mr. Moore in January,
1905, with one or two pencilled corrections written by Mrs.
Gallup in the margin. Mrs. Gallup, in her letter to me, said.
''Your copy and ours are the same, except in, a very few places."
In that letter, and in others since, she answered several of my
questions, and they have materially helped me. I worked dili-
gently for three months, often eight and ten hours a day.
My studies have been confined to the first fifty pages only
of the medium Italic type. I find in these fifty pages 10,058,
21»
Italic letters. Of these, 1,319 are capitals. For the present I
shall confine my remarks to the capitals only. In these fifty
pages only twenty-two letters of the alphabet are used. I have
completed my studies on thirteen of these letters. They re-
present 704 letters used for the two founts ; and with very few
exceptions I find them correctly so used in Mrs. Gallup's MSS.
sent to us for examination. I have not yet completed my studies
on the remaining nine letters of the alphabet, representing 615
letters. I am, however, finding the majority of these correctly
used also. I am a slow worker, but each day's work is bringing
out better results on these nine more difficult letters. I give
below a table of all the letters in the order in which I found
them easiest to read, with the columns of figures divided into
''a's" and '^b's.
Totals.
"a"
u^„
A.
61
25
36
E.
78
58
20
I. J. ...
51
49
2
¥.
49
41
8
K
42
32
10
U.V. . .
11
9
2
Q.
13
2
11
P.
163
119
44
E.
41
8
33
S.
93
62
31
w.
19
11
8
T.
70
39
31
T.
13
7
6
K.
71
37
34
L.
68
46
22
F.
78
47
31
B.
99
65
34
D.
74
. 47
27
H.
24
12
12
0.
24
17
7
G.
25
18
7
C.
152
100
52
1,319
851
468
219
V
It was suggested to me, by a member who disliked the facts re-
vealed in the cipher story, that even if I found the 1,319 capi-
tals correctly used, that would not be sufficient to prove the
existence of the cipher, unless I could also find that the small
letters were correctly used by Mrs, Gallup. This made me leave
the capitals for a time. I have since studied all the small let-
ters of the medium italic type in those first fifty pages. But
as they represent 8,739 letters, for the present I can only say
I have finished my studies on three of the letters, namely, "k,"
"p," "w," and with only one or two exceptions I find them cor-
rectly used.
If my figures are correct, and I am prepared for the
severest examination on these facts, can it be chance that those
letters are correctly used in Mrs. Gallup's MSS. ?
I would like to say here, that were it actually the caso
that only two forms of letters are used, the deciphering of over
10,000 letters w^ould have been a comparatively easy work. But
in some of the letters there are many variations, and these again
must be paired. And yet in all these pairings there is system
and order, and a method in all the seeming madness.
My work would have progressed much more rapidly had
two or three others worked with me. For those who have the
leisure and much patience I can recommend this interesting
study. I am willing and in a position to give them many short
cuts, and they, in their turn, could, I have no doubt, help to
finish the work I have commenced, that is, simply to verify the
working of Mrs. Gallup's MSS. on this Henry VII. Those
Baconians who have never very seriously tried to work at the
cipher, and are more concerned in refusing to accept the rather
unpleasant historical facts revealed, I would ask to suspend
their judgment, and to allow others, who may be honestly and
seriously trying to arrive at the truth, still to be allow^ed to ex-
amine the work submitted by Mrs. Gallup at the request of
some of the members of our Society. The more I, as an
amateur, study this technical part of our work, the more
convinced I feel that Bacon did use his famous bi-literal cipher
in his own prose history of Henry VII. A ncAv discovery has
been placed before us, and by experts ; why should we discredit
their labours, and refuse to give an equal amount of time and
patience in examining their work ?
220
I would like here to bring forward some curious facts
connected with the printing of the 1622 edition of Henry VII.
I have before me six copies — one belonging to Mrs. Pott, an-
other to Mrs. Payne, and four of my own. Mrs. Payne's copy
is similar to the copy collated for me by Mrs. Gallup. Mrs.
Pott's copy has many differences in it — not in the words and
matter, but in the use of the two founts of the Italic type. Two
of my own copies are similar to Mrs. Pott's copy. My fourth
copy, again, is quite different to all the others. Why should
there be these differences in the various copies of the same edi-
tion ? Why should type once set up have been altered ? And,
when altered, why should these changes be carried through with
system and order in other copies ? Before closing this paper,
I would like to remind Baconians that Bacon, in writing to
Tobie Mathew in 1609, uses these words: ''I have sent you some
copies of my book of the Advancement which you desired; and
a little work of my recreation which you desired not. My In-
stauration I reserve for our conference ; it sleeps not. Those
works of the alphabet are in my opinion of less use to you now
than at Paris. . . . But in regard that some friends of yours
have still insisted here, I send them to you, and for my part
I value your own reading more than your publishing them to
others" (Spedding, vol. iv., p. 134). Spedding, in criticising
this letter, says, "What these 'Works of the Alphabet' may have
been I cannot guess, unless they related to Bacon's cipher."
Spedding then proceeds again to explain this cipher.
Archbishop Tenison in 1679 was evidently aware that
Bacon had used his Bi-literal Cipher in the 1623 folio of the
'^De Augmentis" for he especially recommends that "accurate"
edition to those who wish to understand the Lord Bacon's
Cipher (Baconian a, 1679, p. 28). I myself have very little
doubt but that Tenison used the same cipher all through his
Baconian A. " I only wish I were an expert, and could decipher
what he says.
D. J. KiNDERSLEY.
221
HENRY VII.
A Reply to the Repoet of Me. Bompas.
Baconiana, London^ Oct. 1905.
I am grateful for the opportunity to reply to the article
of the late Mr. Bompas in the July number of Baconiana.
I am also grateful to Mr. Cunningham for his prefatory
remarks and footnotes, and I wish to say that his regret is
my own as well, that Mr, Bompas did not discuss the paper
with members of the Society better advised than was he, and
that the MS. of the article had not been submitted to me
while Mr. Bompas was still with us, or at least before publi-
cation, for some, if not all, the erroneous conclusions drawn
could have been dissipated before they took form. The expla-
nations would have given that gentleman and his readers a
more comprehensive view, a different view point, and greater
light upon the subject.
It is rare that an article appearing in public print carries
upon analysis its own evidences of error, and in the next
preceding pages finds so complete a refutation as does this in
the article of Mrs. Kindersley.
In his opening statement Mr. Bompas says: "The copies
of Henry VII. which have been examined do not exactly cor-
respond. . . . The form of many of the capitals also differs
in the different copies. . . . Mr. Cuningham's copy differs
widely from the others. . . . Either each copy contains a
different cipher story, which is absurd, or the decipherer hap-
pened by chance to light on the only correct copy, which is
equally absurd." Then Mr. Bompas proceeds to build an
argument upon the fact that the copy of my MS., furnished
to the Society, did not correspond with some copy of
Henry VII. with which he compared it, concluding, there-
fore, that the cipher system must be a myth, and Mrs. Gallup
a visionary or a fraud.
•222
Any comparison to establish the correctness of my work
must be made either with the copy I used or one identical with
it. That Mr. Bompas used some copy not identical, but one
printed differently, is substantiated by Mrs. Kindersley,
v/hose three months' work on an identical copy — as against
one week Mr. Bompas spent on a different printing — resulted
in her verification of nearly all the letters studied. It is still
more forcibly proved by the table of headings Mr. Bompas
13rints, the Italics in which do not at all correspond in the
different forms with the book I used. It therefore follows that
the entire argument, from pages 169 to and including part
of 176, so far as relates to Henry VII., is founded upon a
false premise and falls to the ground.
Mr. Bompas says, "Either each copy contains a different
cipher, which is absurd," &c.
On the contrary, that is just what occurs in unlike copies.
Those widely differing belong to different editions, although
published in the same year, as I have found to be true, and
stated in my article in Baconiana published in 1901. Two
issues of the Treatise of Melancholy appeared in 1586 with
differing Italic printing. I have deciphered both. One ends
with an incomplete cipher word, which is completed in the
other where the narrative is continued, and the book ends
with the signature of Bacon on the last page. I have also
found that in two editions of Bacon's acknowledged works one
had the cipher and one had not. The peculiar Italicizing and
the same forms of letters were in both. In one the arrange-
ment of the letters followed the cipher system, in the otlier no
amount of study could make them "read." Bacon refers in
the cipher to some false and surreptitious copies issued with-
out his authority. -^
The differences in print of Henry VII. first came to
light, apparently, through the comparisons made with my
MS. in London, and the report of it was a great surprise to
me. Mrs. Kindersley was kind enough to send me one of her
copies, and, as before stated, this was found to be identical
witli the one I used except that three or four typographical
errors in her copy were corrected in mine, and one in mine did
not occur in hers, bnt in no case was a verbal change made and
only one orthographical.
223
About the same time it chanced that a copy of the work
— a recent importation from London — was sent me from
Chicago for examination. This I found quite different in
the use of Italics. I did not decipher the work, but became
convinced that it either contained another cipher story, or
was one of the "false and surreptitious copies" before re-
ferred to.
In addition to the criticism of Henry VII., Mr. Bompas
refers to some typographical errors making slight differenceri
in our own editions of the Bi-literal Cipher, and to the exam-
ples in the editions of De Augmentis of 1623 and 1624.
I have to admit there are some printers' errors in my
book that escaped the closest proof reading, much to my regret.
The proof reading was extremely difficult because of the care
required to keep the unusual spelling and occasional abbrevia-
tions. Some errors were corrected in the third edition. Mr.
Bompas found two or three — probably not all. I have had
no opportunity to note the errata in a later publication. I
can, however, make the broad assertion that in no single in-
stance has any of these slight technical errors changed the
meaning of a phrase, or made it obscure, or been of sufficient
importance to affect in the least the overwhelming evidences
of the existence of the system of the cipher and the correctness
of its deciphering.
Manifest errors occurred in the text of the old books,
which were corrected in the deciphering, but they were so few
and so evident as to prove rather than to disprove the system.
They occur mostly in long groups, as in the example of the
cipher in De Augmentis, occasionally a short group of four
letters, once in a while a wrong font letter, but the meaning
of the context was always sufficiently clear in itself to correct
the error. I cannot better illustrate this than by quoting from
my "Replies to Criticisms," issued in pamphlet form, but
which has not appeared in public print. The explanation
covers explicitly a number of points raised by Mr. Bompas,
and being an analysis of Bacon's own illustration of the cipher
in the 1624 De Augmentis, has the weight of the author's own
methods of correction, and the suggestion, at least, that the
errors were purposely made to educate the decipherer as to
224
what would be encountered in the books; also the manner of
overcoming the difficulties as they should arise.
"In the 1624 edition the second i in officio is changed
by the law of tied letters; the second u in nunquam has posi-
tion or angle of inclination, to make it an 'a fount' letter;
q in conquiesti is from the wrong fount, and the u has features
of both founts but is clear in one distinctive difference — the
width at the top; the q in quia is reversed by a mark; the a's
in the first causa are formed like 'b fount' letters but are
taller; the q of quos is from the wrong fount; the second a
in aderas is reversed, being a tied letter; I in velint is from
the wrong fount, also the p of parati, the I of calumniam and
the I of religione.
"In line twelve 'pauci sunt' in 1623 ed. is 'parati sunt'
in the 1624 ed. The correct grouping is ntqui velin tquip
ratis untom nesad, the first a in 'parati' must be omitted to read
diutius according to the Spartan dispatch. Otherwise the
groups would be arati sunto mnesa. The m and n are both
'b fount,' thus bringing two h's at the beginning of this last
group, indicating at once a mistake, for no letter in the bi-lit-
eral alphabet begins with two b's and wherever encountered
may be known to indicate either a wrong fount letter or a
wrong grouping. It is one of the guards against error. To
continue the groups after the one last given several would be
found to commence with bb, and the resulting letters would
not 'read.'
"Here, too, is an example of diphthongs, digraphs, and
double letters, which are troublesome to 'A Correspondent.'
The diphthong se of 'cseteris,' the digraph ct in perfectare,
and the double ^'s and pp's, are shown as separate letters and
must be treated as such in deciphering Italics.
"A very important feature, that most seem to forget, is
that ciphers are made to hide things, not to make them plain
or easy to decipher. They are constructed to be misleading,
mysterious, and purposely made difficult except to those pos-
sessing the key. Seekers after knowledge through them must
not abandon the hunt upon encountering the first difficulty,
improbability, inaccuracy, or stumbling block set for their
confusion."
225
The article says : "The plain inference is that the Cipher
and Cipher story are imaginary."
Well, this is at least complimentary, but I doubt whether
Mr. Bompas stopped to think what that statement would mean
with all that it implies. I do not think he would, on reflec-
tion, give me credit for a genius so broad, for it would be equal
to the production of the plays themselves.
Were I the possessor of an imagination so boundless, I
would certainly not have spent it upon a production fore-
doomed to be unpopular, or have subjected myself to the strain
upon nerves and eyesight of six years' hard study of old books
and their typographical peculiarities for a Baconian cloak to
hide the brilliancy of that imagination. Yet if the material
for the three hundred and ninety pages of my book were not
found in Cipher in the old originals, then it must be the con-
ception of my own brain. First, the plot of each story worked
out; the account of Bacon's discovery of his parentage; the
variations from historic records ; the death of Amy Kobsart ;
the tragedy of Essex, and that of Mary, Queen of Scots, and
other scraps of added history ; the love of Bacon for Margaret,
and all the rest. All this thought out, in diction, much of it,
of the highest order, in the old English spelling and phrase-
ology of the 16th century and fitted with such nice exactness
to the Italic letters of the old books, "separated into groups
of five" — letters that even the sceptics admit the capitals at
least agree with the alleged system — the study of months in
the British Museum ; the explanations and demonstrations to
numberless people — all to hide a genius so magnificent ! In
the language of Mr. Bompas, "Absurd !" And yet, I repeat,
if not Cipher it must be my own production.
It is useless to discuss the probability of Bacon's commit-
ting State secrets to such a Cipher. It is not a time to ask
the question, "Is it likely?" The Cipher is there, and it only
remains to master its intricacies and search out what it has
to reveal.
Elizabeth Wells Gallup.
226
A WORD OR TWO 0:N^ CANONBURY TOWER.
Baconiana, London.
There are several suggestive points of connection to be
noted between the old conventual buildings of Canonbury and
our Francis St. Alban. There are also obscure particulars
well worthy of inquiry.
Originally the property of the Knights of St. John of
Jerusalem, Canonbury House is generally supposed to have
been built in 1362, ten years after Edward III. had exempted
the Priory of St. Bartholomew from the payment of subsidies,
in consequence of their great outlay in charity. Stow says
that William Bolton (Prior from 1509 to 1532) rebuilt the
house, and probably erected the fine square tower of brick.
Nichol, in his "History of Canonbury," mentions that Bolton's
rebus of a bolt in a tun was -still to be seen, cut in stone, in two
places on the outside facing Wells' Row. The original house
covered the whole space now called Canonbury Place, and had
a small park, with garden and offices. Prior Bolton either
built or repaired the Priory and beautiful Church of St. Bar-
tholomew, but at his death the connection between Canonbury
and monasticism ceased.*
The Tower House was now given by Henry VHI. to John
Dudley, Earl of Northumberland, afterwards Viscount Lisle,
father of Rcjbert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, whose history has
lately risen into fresh and startling importance in consequence
of certain deciphered history to be submitted to- the world's
judgment. John Dudley was executed as a traitor when Mary
was prDclaimed Queen in 1553. The Tower then again became
Crown proi)erty, and Queen Mary gave it to "Rich Spencer."
the magnificent alderman of whom history speaks so fully,
giving us even that which it denied us with regard to Francis
St. Alban — details of his funeral obsequies. It is from this
Sir John Sjiencer (father-in-law of Lord Compton) that Sir
Francis "Racon." when Attorney-General (1616), leased
Canonburv Manor. t
*See "Old and' New London," Vol. II.. p. 269.
tSir John Spencer's daughter and heiress Elizabeth, married Lord
William Compton (created Earl of Northampton), eloping with him from
Canonbury Manor in a baker's basket. (As I am a man, there was one con-
veyed out of my house yesterday in this basket. — Merry Wives of W. Act
IV., sc. ii.)
227
The internal arrangements and decorations of Canonbury
House are commented on in detail by Lewis, who describes
the elaborate ornamental carving, emblematic figures and
devices, ships, flowers, foliage, and other objects which Bacon-
ians have learnt to associate with the symbolic method
of teaching of the Renaissance, and pre-eminently of the
"Great Master" himself, but which in the regulation literature
of our day are described as "specimens of taste for ornamental
carving and stucco work that prevailed about the time of
Elizabeth." There are also medallions of three great men
who seem to have been in a way models to our Francis — types
of the nobler Pioneer, the mighty Conqueror, the Master
Builder, Alexander the Great, namely Julius Caesar, Titus
Vespasian. Then with the arms of the Dudleys may be seen
the arms of Queen Elizabeth in several places, and her initials,
"E. R." with the date — 1599, at which time the premises were
fitted up by Sir John Spencer.
"On the white wall of the staircase, near the top of the
Tower, are some Latin hexameter verses comprising the ab-
breviated names of the Kings of England from William the
Conquerer to Charles L, painted in Roman character an inch
in length, but almost obliterated. The lines were most prob-
ably the effusion of some poetical inhabitant of an upper apart-
ment in the building during the time of the monarch last named^
such persons having frequently been residents of the place."
Thomas Tomlins, in his "History of Islington," writes
thus :
"The Earl and Countess, by description Lord and Lady
Compton, by indenture 15th February, Jac. 1616, let to the
Right Hon. Francis Lord Verulam, Visct. St. Albans, by the
name of Sir Francis Bacon Knight,* His Majs. Attorney Gen-
eral, all that mansion and garden belonging to what is called
Canonbury House, in the Parish of Islington * * >i< for
40 years from Lady-day, 161 7."
With regard to the Tower, the same writer states :
"The great Sir Francis Bacon resided here from February,
1616; as also at the time of his receiving the Great Seal, on 7th
Jan., 1 61 8, and for some time afterwards. f
"After the decease of Henry Prince of Wales (in 161 2) the
Manor of Newington Barrowe was, with other portion of land,
on loth January, 14 Jac, granted upon lease for 99 years to
^Created Baron Verulam of Verulam 12th of July, 1618, and Visct. St.
Alban Feb. 3rd, 1619.
fThe acreage of various "closes" is here given.
228
Sir Francis Bacon, Knt., at that time the King's Attorney Gen-
eral, and also Chancellor to Charles Prince of Wales, after-
wards Charles L, and others, his law officers and ministers in
trust for him, which lease, upon his accession, became merged
in the Crown." — Dated at Canonbury, 15th Sept., 1629.
In connection with recent statements concerning the par-
entage of Francis St. Alban, it will be observed that in Nelson's
"History of Islington" the writer states that Queen Elizabeth
was at Canonbury Tower in the year 1561, and that she had a
"lodge" or summer-house looking into Canonbury Fields. It
bore her arms and initials, with the date 1595. "The Tower
was encompassed by pleasant fields and gardens, and a salubri-
ous air."
229
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY
Los Angeles
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below.
APR 4 198!
APR 2:^0
IpARGE-URt
IVIAY
■-. I 1
10^
V!^S^
V?.
iqo'^>
REC'D I n IIRC
10
■4^
3 1
58 00675 6315
UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY
AA 000 370 227
Wl