Soundings... Eric Miller: 2016-02-28

Φοίνιξ

The Hart of the PhŒnix Nest:

SHAKESPEARE’S “The PhŒnix and the Turtle”

“io dirò cosa incredibile è vero”

Dante

The Phoenix Campaign (TPC)

Edward de Vere’s last and most famous version of his “Phoenix Code” poetry, was written in 1601, or not long after (so far as we know; he died in 1604). The title he gave to his “grand finale,” his last great appearance, in verse, as the Phoenix, was simply, “The Phoenix and the Turtle.” The “Turtle” refers to the Turtle Dove. It is a myth about a fabled love affair, between two birds. One was Great Phoenix and the other, an utterly humble, if not ragged, common little bird, a dove. It is a myth of eternal Love, of Death, and Dying, eternal rebirth and eternal death.

Since discovering the existence of the Phoenix cipher theme, a few months ago, related to the name of de Vere and/or “Shakespeare,” I have been posting sourced analytical research articles on FB and on my personal website, ericmillerworks.com, Blog, “Soundings. . All of them are copyrighted and part of this record, incorporated herein by reference.

The Beginning: 1591-2

Our work establishes something special must have happened in de Vere’s life, circa 1591-2, because at this time he wrote, and caused to be published, his first “coming-out” as the “Phoenix.” Indeed, we might well refer to this period as The Beginning of the “Phoenix Campaign” with The End perhaps coming with publication of Shakespeare’s “The Phoenix and the Turtle” in 1601. I use the term campaign advisedly. His “campaign” was to create a public persona of himself as the “Poet- Phoenix” for the Era—and to preserve for and into the future the truth of his life—because he was doomed to death, if he revealed his true self, and Phoenix nature to the world.

So, he created a code (perhaps even known to QE?) to hide yet preserve, in code, the truth of his identity. The reason de Vere had to conceal, hide, and “kill” his true name was because he “criminally” insulted the person of Queen Elizabeth. It was her sentence upon his life. This narrative is exactingly enacted in my historical drama, Ignoto’s Farewell, (2002).

One of the problems it appears, is that de Vere called QE “a common Whore!” or something much like that—so that to even refer to the charge is to repeat the airing of a gross offense—and QE was particularly sensitive to any suggestion against her personal honor—“maniacally” it is even reported (“methinks thou doth protest too much”?)

Here, it ought be noted, at the outset, that de Vere, confessed his “crime,” confessed his “sin,” and accepted his “extreme fate” by transmogrification, so to speak, via the Phoenix transformation, from its own ashes. In any case, de Vere wanted his “Phoenix-story” remembered and told—who he really was. He, it seems, almost desperately wanted it. In 1592 he published his first “coming-out” as the Phoenix, in a poem called “Love.” It is, to this poet’s ear, a great poem, a monumental poem—some of its poetry as good as it ever gets. It’s almost unbelievable, I didn’t know about it before.

The poem “Love” was a great success and a “best seller”—this despite the fact, that it was noted by many, that its intentions were purely literary, of highest quality, and obviously meant to be a contribution to the art of English poetry. Almost Immediately after “Love,” in 1593 (only a few months later), he published an entire work, rehearsing the same themes as those about the Phoenix in his poem, “Love.”

The Sign of the PhŒnix &

The Three Songs of Sorrow

On the Death of Sir Sidney

But, now another phase of the campaign went into effect—and for that he needed a vehicle, something to attract attention to itself, as a poem (wherein he implanted his identity code)—it needed popularity, to get out to the public—if there was any chance he could “breakthrough” to the cognizance of his identity, as he desired. The new phase, in 1593 was publication of The Phoenix Nest.

He needed the right “bait” for his poem, to have it looked at, talked about, discussed, “thought about”—and even to see who he was, in the cipher he planted in the Phoenix. I have already described, in detail, the exact cipher. Here, what needs be disclosed, and only touched on here, is that his main bait was three sweet songs of sorrow on the death of one of England’s most beloved heroes ever, Sir Philip Sidney (d. 1586).

Some of the scholars don’t pay enough attention to dates—especially if they think it is outside their specific area of interest. Here dates are crucial.

The Phoenix Nest (TPN), Huge Success! 1593

First the reader must know that in de Vere’s “The Phoenix Nest,” the first three poems are all on the death of Sir Philip Sidney, who died, by the way, in battle, in 1586! Six years before. So, one naturally wonders, when the three poems in TPN were written? By whom,? When? We have no answers to these questions, other than what can be deduced from the historical record. These records, it is averred here, indicate, Edward de Vere was behind it all—whoever published it, by name.

As to the names of the authors of the poems in TPN, none are given. About 1/3 of the poems do have initials. One of them is “E.O.” for, we are told, under authority of Rollins, meant to indicate, “Earl Oxford.” We know that, at least for one, if not two, of the poems—from the same poems published later in England’s Helicon (1600), that it was by “Edwarde Oxforde,”—so there is proof-positive that de Vere is in the mix, unquestionably.

Indeed, it is clear, from this analysis that there is not a question but that Edward de Vere wrote the first three poems of the entire book, The Phoenix Nest, all on the death of Sir Philip Sidney, consisting of an “Elegy” and two “Epitaphs.” Sidney was personal friend and rival of Lord Oxford’s!

The Three Poems Needed/3 Songs of Sorrow

In 1595, the same three poems on the death of Sidney were published in Edmund Spenser’s, Astrophel—but, as the last three poems at the end of the book, rather than the beginning three poems, as true of TPN. [with some interesting textual variants, as discussed in previously posted articles].

Edmund Spenser jumped into the publishing arena of the very same poems, over and over again, first in 1595, and then again in 1597. Then there was another publication, Arbor of amorous devices—(1594) which also used the “Elegy” to Sidney, stanza’s from “Love” and, also, issued the same songs of sorrow on the death of Sidney—those anonymous poems! In no edition, had they a credited author. Arbor of Amorous Devices, was published in Jan. 7, 1594. This matter is discussed in my various essays.

In short, however, I think it may be said, once one understands the identity cipher, they will see it is not needed any longer—this is so because the cipher merely leads one to the story which the author wants known—the simple story which explains why the “PhOEnix” (“Shakespeare” to everyone educated enough to know it, in the time) conceals his the true names of E.O. or in anagram, O.E.—it will be recalled that “E.O.” was Lord Oxford’s first known pen-name- (A Paradyce of Dainty Devices, 1576)) the anagram for which is, OE. Of course, we have dealt with the matter in previous articles, as said supra, quite thoroughly, it doeth seem.

This writer is of the firm belief, that one would look high and low for another such example in the history of literary publications—where competitive publishers, publish within months of each other the same songs of sorrow on long-dead Sidney’s death. And this by some anonymous poet! We must remember, the very story EO/OE tells us, is the very reason we don’t know who he is!

Chronology Fix: Beginning & End “Phoenix Campaign”

1592: Published “Love” – first self-allegory of Phoenix Campaign

1593: Published “The Phoenix Nest” – 3 Songs of Sorrow Sidney

1594: Published “Arbor or amorous devices” – Sidney Songs

1595: Published “Astrophel” – 3 Songs of Sorrow Sidney

1597: Published “Astrophel” – 3 Songs of Sorrow Sidney

1601: Published “The Phoenix and the Turtle”

The First Comes Last

Until a couple days ago, after all the above related research efforts were accomplished and memorialized. I did not even turn to the most famous of all poems by Shakespeare and the one at the heart of this work—i.e., Shakespeare’s “The Phoenix and the Turtle.” Why didn’t I deal with it right away—as soon as the first tip of the Phoenix’s wing appeared on the horizon? Fear and restraint.

But fear assisted with good reason. Chronology was my first concern; I have isolated the time period, stated above, and published, in several of my writings, including this one. As can easily be seen, I have a beginning, when the Phoenix Campaign began, in 1592, as said, with the poem, “Love.” If there is earlier of an actual campaign, I’ve not found it.

Edward Oxford hides in lOvE the dOvE,

And Then Reveals The PhŒnix (in Greek)

Φοίνιξ

[Reader, take note of the Greek word above for “Phoenix”—the first and last letters, in particular. I the point an anagram “cipher” can be seen, depending on whether the person, seeing and hearing it in Latin/English, will visualize the word in Greek, from whence the word derived.]

With publication of “Love” (1592)—Lord Oxford featured the Phoenix myth, and keys his cipher code/anagram, lOvE, to the story of the Phoenix and the dOvE. I have previous published more detailed commentary on “Love.” Here I will just quote the central “myth” that is at the heart of Lord Oxford’s campaign to get his “message out.” The excerpt is:

“From “LOVE” (called “Countess of Pembroke Love”)

ADDITIONAL EXCERPTS (1592)

Some say sweete loue, there is a Phoenix birde,

Of which there was, is, nor will be but one:

Which Phoenix sure, I thinke is but a worde,

For such a birde, I thinke is surely none:

But that it doeth, in figure onelie tuch,

Some heauenly thing; on earth was neuer such.

[Above we see “one”, he is “one” “OnE”—he reminds us Phoenix is “but a word” for a mythical bird, but as a “figure” a “cipher” if you will, which is what he means here, and he goes through his, by long familiar, routine of the “one” and “none” and “never” and “ever”—its really just to “touch” matters regarding “heauenly things.”]

For why the birde, is saied to bee alone,

And thou didst male, and femall all create:

And as for birdes were neuer two in one,

That euer trueth in reason did relate:

No, no, the figure surely doeth intende,

More then the world can easily comprehend.

[And again, the reader sees repetition of the same theme, playing off his name, “ever” and trueth, “veritas” But, he tells us there is a “figure” surely intended that most people in the world will not easily comprehend. The “never” “two in one” and all that business is right here. We developed every detail before finding this poem “Love” and was shocked to see, all the elements brought together!]”

The Phoenix Nest (1593)

In 1593 came publication of The Phoenix Nest, which features the full three songs of sorrow for Sidney, by an “Unknown Gentleman.” A few months after The Phoenix Nest, “Shakespeare” suddenly first appears on the scene, as author of Venus and Adonis. (Adonis is “Englished,” the Italian for “Adonis” is AdOnE). Lucrece is published under “Shakespeare,” in 1594. The that same year, just a few months, after already being published, The Sidney “Epitaph” was published again in

Arbor of Amorous Devices (1594),

This book, is said to have been published (containing the “Phoenix Cipher”, OE) in the same “Epitaph” as in The Phoenix Nest. As said, it was a great success. We are told that it was a book intended, not for a commercial market, for a purely literary marked. The highly competitive publisher of The Arbor, was said to have been (by Rollins) so jealous of the success of it, he published The Arbor only a few months later—with some of the same poems as his competitor used!

Edmund Spenser’s “Astrophel” (1595)

Now, strangely, the first three poems in the book The Phoenix Nest, all to do with the death of Sidney—called here the 3 Songs of Sorrow for Sidney—are published all over again, in Spenser’s book, but not at the beginning, but at the very end of the volume. If memory serves, Spenser’s book was reissued in 1597.

[I would expect the informed reader would see I have set up a reference frame-work for an analytical examination of those various texts to determine, if, in fact, all can be by the same writer! There is nothing to preclude that determination. But, I call for more than that “it can’t be ruled out.” I would want to know why it cannot be ruled out. This is a due diligence challenge to another due diligence professional. More on this another time.]

Let us now turn to Shakespeare’s “The Phoenix and the Turtle” as a poem—and first ask a pertinent question—what do well-qualified literati think of this poem, and what it is all about?

AMERICA’S POET, EMERSON:

On Shakespeare’s “The Phoenix and the Turtle,

1601

The great American literati, critic, and poet, Ralph Waldo Emerson, was so profoundly impressed by the beauty and genius of the poem The Phoenix and the Turtle, by Shakespeare, that he felt compelled to declare it such a work of poetic genius as to sometimes seem to leave, even the plays, by comparison, “touched with mortality”:

“The Phoenix and the Turtle is mysterious, but it is crystal-clear. . .It would not be easy to say with confidence what the Phoenix and the Turtle is about. On the face of it, it is a requiem over the death of a phoenix and a turtle-dove, who are the symbols of a love made perfect by refinement from all earthly passion and become virginal. . .”

“For reasons which evade expression in ordinary speech, The Phoenix and the Turtle is the most perfect short poem in any language. It is pure poetry in the loftiest and most abstract meaning of the words: that is to say, it gives us the highest experience which it is possible for poetry to give, and it gives it without intermission. . . for a moment he reveals himself as an inhabitant of a strange kingdom wherein he moves serene and with mastery. Beside the unearthly purity, the unfaltering calm of this poem, even the most wonderful poetry of his dramas sometimes appear to us as “stained with mortality.’”

The words are worth repeating, regarding this poem and its “logic” of “most abstract meanings of words.” Indeed, we may say, this rarified meaning is not only intimately expressed, but it is intrinsic to the poem itself and that “strange kingdom wherein he moves with mastery.”

Grossart, quotes EMERSON

Dr. A. Grossart, the eminent Elizabethan scholar, in his Introduction to Chester’s Martyr, which first contained the Shakespeare “Turtle” poem, observes:

“Our interpretation of Chester's 'Phoenix* and 'Turtle Dove' is the more weighty and important, in that it for the first time enables us to understand Shakespeare's priceless and unique ' Phoenix and Turtle ' — originally attached to Loves Martyr. Perhaps Emerson's words on Shakespeare's poem, as well represents its sphinx-character even to the most capable critics, as any. They are as follow in his preface (pp. v, vi) to his charming Parnassus (1875). Quoting Emerson from his Parnassus:

"Of Shakespeare what can we say, but that he is and remains an exceptional mind in the world; that a universal poetry began and ended with him. . .This poem [i.e., Shakespeare’s, The Phoenix and the Turtle], if published for the first time, and without a known author's name, would find no general reception. Only the poets would save it."

“Perchance there is truth in the close of this penetrative bit of criticism; but to myself the ' Phoenix and Turtle ' has universal elements in it at once of thinking, emotion and form. Its very concinnity and restraint, e.g. — compared with the fecundity of Venus and Adonis and Lucrece — differentiate it from all other of Shakespeare's writings. I discern a sense of personal heart-ache and loss in these sifted and attuned stanzas, unutterably precious.

To unassisted readers, it would appear to be a lament on the death of a poet, and of his poetic mistress.

But the poem is so quaint, and charming in diction, tone, and allusions, and in its perfect metre and harmony, that I would gladly have the fullest illustration yet attainable. I consider this piece a good example of the rule, that there is a poetry for bards proper, as well as a poetry for the world of readers. . .

Above from “Introduction, by A. Grossart, Chester’s Love’s Martyrs, Intro p. xvl, etc. (1879)

The Modern Muddle of Shakespeare Scholarship

Turning to more recent scholarship on the same subject of “The Phoenix and the Turtle,” in the Yale Shakespeare series, 1927, for The Poetry of Shakespeare, at the discussion of “The Phoenix and the Turtle,” I noted, for other purposes, the following:

“Notes to The Phoenix and the Turtle, 37-40 Property. . .called. Property is a Latinism, ‘proprietas,’ peculiar or essential quality. CF. Richard ll, lll. Ii. . . ‘Property’ was appalled to find out that personality had been destroyed, since each lover’s identity was merged into the other’s, and was no longer itself.”

“There were two names to what was in reality one person; therefore it could neither be said that they were two, since their nature was the same, nor that they were one, for in fact there were two distinct persons.” [underline added]

Indeed, from every point of view, publication of Chester’s Martyr, with its supplemental poems on “The Phoenix and the Turtle,” was a highly “promoted” affair. The book featured famous writers of the day, in its added-on “Diverse Poetical Essays,” including Ignoto, Shakespeare, Ben Jonson, and Chapman. The Yale Shakespeare notes state that “Ignoto insisted upon the denouement, which he summed up in the final verse: One Phoenix borne, another Phoenix burne.” And the Yale editor goes one to comment:

“Shakespeare alone of all the contributors does not seem to have clearly understood—and he cannot be blamed—the real meaning of the allegory. He evidently did not discover that the Phoenix and the Turtle were consumed, only in a metaphorical sense, in the flames of their own love, and they lived again in the person of a beautiful offspring. He made the two birds die “leaving no posterite,” and described their obsequies, conducted in the presence of the Eagle, the Swan and the Crow, as mourners.”

(Yale Shakespeare series, 1927 p. 182)

Shakespeare’s Phoenix, Treasure or Trash?

The great Ralph Waldo Emerson’s view, that “The Phoenix and the Turtle” is one of the greatest short poems ever written, if true, must be, according to the Yale scholar, wholly the result of an accidental misunderstanding! Yes, according to him Shakespeare’s didn’t even understand the “allegory” of the Phoenix and the Dove, in the first place! Is it just possible, our esteemed Yale scholar just didn’t “get” the poem himself, at all? Are we really to just suppose, because he says so, that Shakespeare “got it wrong” didn’t understand the allegory, and so botched the job—as he would inform us?

So, opinions vary. The 1927, Yale Shakespeare editor’s that the Bard simply didn’t “get it.” And so wrote a confused, inferior product, and gave birth to a muddled poem. This is the same poem which Emerson thought near miraculous. So, depending on the opinion of a poet/literary critic/philosopher, Emerson, or the Yale Shakespeare scholar—we have either miracle or merd.

Yale Shakespeare, however, did note one thing of worth, which may help us:

Sir Sidney Lee, on the other hand, finds a close affinity with the “imagery of Matthew Roydon’s elegy on Sir Philip Sidney, where the turtle-dove and phoenix meet the swan and eagle at the dead hero’s funeral and there play roles somewhat similar to those which Shakespeare assigns the bird in his poetical essaie.” P. 184

As shall be demonstrated, the “Elegy” to which Sir Sidney Lee refers is not, we challenge, by Mathew Roydon, it is by Edward de Vere. But, here I am interested in showing that (regardless who wrote it) more than one scholar (I provide 3 examples herein) has seen a singular connection between The Sidney “Elegy,” poem and the style of Shakespeare’s “The Phoenix and the Turtle,” of 1601. The “Elegy for Sir Sidney” was first published in The Phoenix Nest of 1593. In the Appendix, further citations are given regarding the singular similarity between the Sidney “Elegy” and Shakespeare’s “The Phoenix and the Turtle.”

What is the Shakespeare’s Phoenix poem all about? We shall now turn to that.

IGNOTO Before EO or OE

In the book Chester’s Martyr , to which is attached, after numerous types of poems and a series by apparently the main group for a “Chorus Vatus,” the writers for which were apparently the features writers: Ignoto, Shakespeare, Ben Jonson and Chapman.

The Yale editor stated that Ignoto reserved for himself the “denouement which he summed up in the final verse: “One Phoenix borne, another Phoenix burne.” Again, ignorant presumption on the editor’s part; he had no way of knowing that. But, that Ignoto, was before Shakespeare, is entirely another matter, in this writer’s judgment, and it is consonant with my entire historical/chronological/literary integration of the record.

It is a matter of record that this writer established the identity of Ignoto as Lord Oxford, some 15 years ago— a fact further confirmed with additional new evidence freshly published.

THE PHŒNIX AND THE TURTLE, 1601

Now to get to the matter at hand, we turn to the “Shakespeare” group of poets, as said, which begins with an an introduction by Ignoto, and continues, in the original publication, with Shakespeare’s own poem, “The Phoenix and the Turtle.” . First we read “The First”:

The first

The silver Vault of heaven, hath but one Eie,

And that's the sunne: the foule-maskt-Ladie, Night

(Which blots the Cloudes, the white Booke of the Skie,)

But one sicke Phoebe, fever-shaking Light:

The heart, one string: so, thus in single turnes,

The world one Phoenix, till another burnes.

The burning.

Suppose there burnes this wonder of a breath,

In righteous flames, and holy-heated fires:

(Like Musicke which doth rapt it selfe to death,

Sweet'ning the inward roome of mans Desires;)

So she wast's both her wings in piteous strife;

"The flame that eate her, feedes the others life:

Her rare-dead ashes, fill a rare-live urne:

"One Phoenix born, another Phoenix burne.

Ignoto.

Additional Remarks by Donke

Below, I will now quote Donke, who selected, as he states, the “Elegy” poem to Sir Philip Sidney, which became a center piece for the element of the entire cipher. This poem, we have identified as being by Edward de Vere, along with the two Epitaph poems to Sir Sidney which are also published with it—giving us, as previously established, three sources from which to derive the entire story. It is remarkable this is the poem, supposedly by “Roydon”—but actually by de Vere—is used as the best way to introduce the Shakespeare poem, “The Phoenix and the Turtle” to the reader:

“Closest to Shakespeare, however, both in time and in poetic diction, is a poem which has often been mentioned in more recent discussion of The Phoenix and the Turtle, Matthew Roydon's Elegie in The Phoenix Nest, published in 1593, upon Sidney's death. Once again it is the birds who celebrate the Requiem, this time for a human being. This is not only to say that the whole of "kinde' is united in mourning a poet's death (a theme that spans from Moschus' lament for Bion to Lycidas), but that emblematically the birds can give an exemplum of love, and an insight into the death and immortality, which has a purity and self-sufficiency beyond what human images of grief could convey:

[NOTE BELOW EXCERPTED POEM IS BY LORD OXFORD IS THE SIR SIDNEY ELIGIE, WHICH IS ONE OF HIS “THREE SONGS OF SORROW FOR SIDNEY” AS I CALL THEM; TEXT BELOW AS GIVEN BY DONKE]

The skie bred Egel roiall bird,

Percht ther upon an oke above,

The turtle by mind never stired,

Example of immortall love.

The swan that sings about do dy,

Leaving Meander stood thereby. . .

The swan that was in presence heere,

Began his funerall dirge to sing. . .

This mortall life as death is tride,

And death gives gives life, and so he di'de.

The generall sorrow that was made,

Among the creatures of kind,

Fired the Phoenix where she laide,

Hir ashes flying with the winde,

So as I might with reason see

That such a Phoenix nere should bee. (14)

“The stage is now set for a rehearsal, a first provisional reading, of Shakespeare’s poem.”

[All of the above, including quoted poem, by Dronke, p.207]

SHAKESPEARE’S

“The Phoenix and the Turtle”

[spelled original 1601 Old Style; underline letters or words added]

Let the bird of loudest lay

On the sole Arabian tree

Herald sad and trumpet be,

To whose sound chaste wings obey.

But thou shrieking harbinger,

Foul precurrer of the fiend, [precurrer=forerunner]

Augur of the fever's end,

To this troop come thou not near.

From this session interdict

Every fowl of tyrant wing,

Save the eagle, feather'd king;

Keep the obsequy so strict.

Let the priest in surplice white,

That defunctive music can, [defunctive = funeral]

Be the death-divining swan,

Lest the requiem lack his right.

And thou treble-dated crow, [treble-dated=lives 3 lives]

That thy sable gender mak'st

With the breath thou giv'st and tak'st,

'Mongst our mourners shalt thou go.

Here the anthem doth commence:

Love and constancy is dead;

Phoenix and the Turtle fled

In a mutual flame from hence.

So they lov'd, as love in twain

Had the essence but in one;

Two distincts, division none: [distincts= distinctions]

Number there in love was slain.

Hearts remote, yet not asunder;

Distance and no space was seen

'Twixt this Turtle and his queen:

But in them it were a wonder.

So between them love did shine

That the Turtle saw his right

Flaming in the Phoenix' sight:

Either was the other's mine. [same as “two are one”]

Property was thus appalled [“Property”=essential quality]

That the self was not the same;

Single nature's double name

Neither two nor one was called. [Phoenix live and die, of itself]

Reason, in itself confounded,

Saw division grow together,

To themselves yet either neither,

Simple were so well compounded; [well-compounded]

That it cried, "How true a twain

Seemeth this concordant one!

Love has reason, reason none,

If what parts can so remain."

Whereupon it made this threne [=dirge]

To the Phoenix and the Dove,

Co-supremes and stars of love,

As chorus to their tragic scene:

threnos [= Dirge]

Beauty, truth, and rarity,

Grace in all simplicity,

Here enclos'd, in cinders lie.

Death is now the Phoenix' nest,

And the Turtle's loyal breast

To eternity doth rest,

Leaving no posterity:

'Twas not their infirmity,

It was married chastity.

Truth may seem but cannot be;

Beauty brag but 'tis not she;

Truth and beauty buried be.

To this urn let those repair

That are either true or fair;

For these dead birds sigh a prayer.

Finis

CONFIRMATIONS & CONCLUSIONS

Just as this piece is being concluded, I couldn’t help thinking of the poet Emerson’s remarks quoted above on Shakespeare’s “The PhŒnix and the Turtle”: “I discern a sense of personal heart-ache and loss in these sifted and attuned stanzas, unutterably precious.” And I thought to myself, I think most everyone would agree with that, being a Bard myself. So, I took to immediately reading all the correspondence by Lord Oxford for this exact time period of 1601 plus/minus a couple years. Consulting, Fowler’s Shakespeare Revealed in Oxford’s Letters, 1986. All of the remarks on Fowler were written after the entire article was completed.

There is no question that Lord Oxford was feeling a “sense of personal heart-ache” and “loss.” Indeed, in this very period he expressed the fear that the Queen was intentionally “mocking” him

In his dealings with her. He fears the time he has spent on a legal proceedings to acquire certain assets giving him to “thinking therein my time lost more previous than the suit itself .”(and that’s even if its granted!). But, I was amazed to find the following:

AN IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTION

OF WILLIAM PLUMBER FOWLER:

Discovers the lOvE = dOvE = OE Anagram

In the PhŒnix and the Turtle.

From Shakespeare Revealed in Lord Oxford’s Letters, Fowler, Peter Randall Publishing, 1986, p. 705). Note Jan., 1602, was actually in 1601 then Old Time.

The below comments by Fowler are commentary on the last sentence of Lord Oxfords said letter. The letter “was penned after the Essex Rebellion of February 8, 1601, and less than a year from the date of this letter and published in Robert Chester’s Love Martyr in 1602” [sic. 1601?] Below, Fowler is explicating the last line of that letter which is:

“Neither will I conceive otherwise of your virtue and affection towards me now at the end, that I apprehended al good hope and kindness from you in the beginning, thus with a lame hand I write I take my leave, but with a mind well disposed to hope the best of my friends, till otherwise I find them, which I fear nothing at all , assuring myself your words and deeds dwell not asunder. Your Loving Brother in law, EDWARD OXENFORD”

Fowler then proceeds with his comment, on above passage:

“69. Finally, our literary Earl’s concluding words [to letter of Jan., 1602], “dwell not asunder,” definitely dwell not asunder from passages in two of Shakespeare’s plays and one poem viz.

a. With impressive similarity in Henry VI, Part I (II, 2, 31) when Burgundy, before his defection to the French side, tells Bedford—in a passage anticipatory of The Phoenix and the Turtle:--how, upon the capture of the city of Orleans by the English, he had seen the Dauphin and Joan La Pucelle escaping,

When arm in arm they both came swiftly running,

Like to a pair of loving turtle doves

That could not live asunder day or night.

b. In Cymbeline (lll, 2, 32) when Imogen, before opening the letter to her from Posthumus, prays the gods that they may,

Let what is here contain’d relish of love,

Of my lord’s health, of his content, yet not

That we two are asunder.

c. And significantly in the eighth stanza of The Phoenix and the Turtle (29)—“Shake-speare’s” swan song—with “hearts” in place of the Earl’s “words and deed,” but with his distinctive phrase “Not asunder” running out at the end of a line as here:

Hearts remote, yet not asunder:

Distance and no space was seen

“Twixt the turtle and his Queen

But in them it were a wonder.

“—Yes. A veritable wonder: Shake-speare, Oxford—“not asunder”—any more than the hearts of the turtle dove and his Queen. And do not overlook that fact that “Phoenix,” as indicated in this eighth stanza was a then-accepted Elizabethan designation for Queen Elizabeth, and “turtle” for a turtle DOVE, an anagram of the initials Edward de Vere Oxford”—alias Edward Oxenford,” the signer of this letter.

[i.e., letter of Jan., 1602, Fowler, pg. 705-6)

It is not quite clear why Fowler put in “de Vere” at all, the signed named goes directly to the heart, simply “Eward Oxford.” He appears not to even seen the OE in Phoenix, nor makes reference to a cipher, per se, associated with the anagram, nor the fact that simply “E.O.” was his official pen-name. But, he did catch the link with the poem at issue—“Shakespeare’s The Phoenix and the Turtle.”

ELM

POST SCRIPT

Final Note On Ignoto’s Appearance:

Introducing “Shakespeare’s “The PhŒnix and the Turtle”

It was in 1589, as best we can tell, that Lord Oxford, adopted the name of “Ignoto”—and used that name to serve as virtual Poet Laureate of England. It is a fact that he “presided” as “Ignoto” over the honors paid Edmund Spenser in QE’s court ceremony for publication of his “The Farie Queene,” in 1590, and in 1589 he published The Art of English Poise. That, Ignoto, shows up as the “opening act” before Shakespeare’s famous “The Phoenix and the Turtle” is most interesting—especially in the light of this writer’s previous publications establishing that “Ignoto” was besides the name of “Shakespeare” the most famous poet of the Elizabethan era.

Here, it is claimed, whether by terms of cryptography, or merely qualitative deductive reasoning—that there is a True cipher developed for the anagram of OE for EO’s (Earl Oxford) name—and, in the anagram we see, even the two letters disappear—into a diphthong, Œ, or on the tips of the wings of the Greek word for Phoenix:

Φοίνιξ

From one immortal horizon to another,

The tips of your glorious-spread wings,

Spell your nameless, magical, wonder,

Something beyond mer-mortal beings,

It certainly doeth seem—yes, incredible!

Love of Great Phoenix, for dove, humble!

OE!

IO!

EO!

OI!

Œ!

ELM

Soundings... Eric Miller

Saturday, March 5, 2016

Deciphering Shakespeare's "Turtle"

Friday, March 4, 2016

THE HART OF THE PHOENIX NEXT