Bacon's Signature Ciphers in Shakespeare -90- Coincidences?

-90-

I started this paper stating that “The findings in this paper, all together, and some in particular, seem to me beyond chance and exhibiting some intentional design…” Opponents of this evidence may argue that each case is one of simple coincidence and they are all just a collection of simple coincidences. If so, then we might also expect simple coincidences and seeming ciphers for Marlowe, Oxford, Neville, Sidney and others mentioned as possibly the ‘real’ Shakespeare. And if it’s argued that they all add up to what could only be a remarkable set of coincidences then they venture into the landmine of statistical improbability. I don’t know how much statistical probability can be applied to many of the signature cipher candidates here and especially to the many seeming allusions or correspondences. But keep in mind that the Friedmans also said, on page 148 of their book, that:

 “There are limits even to coincidence; if the mathematical probability is very small indeed, and we take other factors of the situation into account, it often becomes unreasonable to maintain that what happens is the result of accident. If a man continues to throw seven after seven at dice, and this happens again and again, it would be absurd not to think that the dice were loaded.”

Also keep in mind that the first and last names of Francis Bacon, or their similitudes, along with numerical equivalents were regularly found throughout the works with similarly attention-getting or advertising words such as ‘cipher’, ‘figure’, ‘count’ as well as “What’s your name”, and on their own significantly numbered pages.

The cipher candidates described above have special advantages:

1.     Five of the cipher candidates use cryptological terminology of either “cipher” or “unfold”.

2.     Nine of the cipher candidates occur with either the word “count” or “figure”.

3.     Eleven supposed errors in the Shakespeare works are provided with rational explanations based on Baconian authorship theory:

a.  10)  19 zodiacs vs. 14 years

b.  18) missing pages 47-48 enabling several page correspondences, especially page 53

c.  24) missing page 157;

d.  25) missing page 282;

e.  26) page 259 instead of 279;

f.   29) Last line of pg 170 repeated on 171 enabling “quick, draw the curtain strait”

g.  30) George to Francis Sea-coal;

h.  35) “L” in “lost” not capitalized;

i.   37) Missing comma between “two tree”

j.   45) Sonnet 76 “sel” instead of “tell”.

k.  51) Mispage of 993 instead of 399.

Plus the seeming error in Bacon’s Advancement-- 45) “Wats” with one “T” = 259. Also in 23)  we have a rational explanation for the capitalized ‘I’ amongst the lower case vowels.