Podcasts about baconian

Choice Classic Radio presents Sherlock Holmes. Today we bring to you the episode titled “Baconian Cipher.”  Please consider supporting our show by becoming a patron at  http://choiceclassicradio.com We hope you enjoy the show!

This is the second of a series of posts about the literary alchemy of J. K. Rowling, a discussion jumpstarted by a post by ‘Iris' at a Strike fan website, an article that championed a Jungian perspective on this subject. The first post in this series, Literary Alchemy – A Primer for Those Interested in J. K. Rowling's Artistry, both explained what the ‘Iris' post asserted and reviewed much of the critical literature that the brevity of the S&E Files article prevented her from discussing. See that post for links to this material. The conversation between Nick Jeffery and John Granger above was recorded in the same spirit as the first post was written, namely, simultaneously a welcome to Strike fans and Rowling readers who have learned about literary alchemy only recently and an introduction to the work of the last twenty five years on this subject. Upcoming posts in the series will include a counter-point discussion in the debate Rowling is fostering about whether a psychological or spiritual perspective is better for understanding art and life and a review of the alchemical signatures that crowd Rowling-Galbraith's Hallmarked Man.This post is largely links to sources for points Nick and John discuss in their naturally enthusiastic and contrarian conversation, question by question. Enjoy!1. Welcome to the Conversation! (Nick) I just sent out an article about literary alchemy, John, in response to an article written by ‘Iris' and posted on the Strike-Ellacott Files website, a piece titled ‘What is Literary Alchemy? Spotting symbols that map Strike and Robin's growth.' What advice or guidance would you give to, say, Cormoran Strike readers who are brand new to the subject? * There are three types of alchemy and it is important to understand the common ground they share and the differences between them;* The first type is alchemy proper, which is to say ‘metallurgical alchemy,' the sacred science of purifying metals and the adept's soul via the creation of a Philosopher's Stone that will transform lead to gold and exude an elixir of life, the drinking of which will bestow immortality;* The second and third types of alchemy derive from interpretations of metallurgical alchemy's aims and the symbolic texts detailing the work in the hermetic laboratory;* Literary alchemy is the use of metallurgical alchemy's language, colors, sequences, and symbols in plays, poetry, and story to foster an edifying and transformative experience in the artist's theater or reading audience;* Psychological alchemy is Carl Jung's use of metallurgical alchemy's texts during and after WWII to illustrate his ideas of the integration of the conscious and unconscious aspects of the human mind;* Metallurgical alchemy was practiced in China, the Levant, India, and Europe within the revealed religious traditions of Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, and Christianity until its degeneration in the late Medieval period and eventual evolution into the strictly materialist chemistry we know today;* Literary alchemy has been a continuous stream in literature from Dante, Chaucer, Shakespeare, and the Metaphysical poets through to Dickens, Yeats, the Inklings, Joyce, Nabokov, and J. K. Rowling;* The academic study of “alchemy in literature” was the province of Baconian and allegorical readings of Shakespeare (cf., Beryl Pogson, Peter Dawkins, Martin Lings) until the late 20th Century and the advent of academic specialists in ‘Hermetic Studies,' e.g., Stanton Linden, Lyndy Abraham, and Charles Nicholl (cf., Cauda Pavonis: A Journal of Hermetic Studies, 1982-2000).* Jung and his followers used their psychological interpretations of metallurgical alchemy as allegories of the soul to interpret mythology (cf., Erich Neumann, Marie-Louise Von Franz, Robert Johnson);* Jungian analysis of story using Jung's ideas of subconscious archetypes within a collective unconscious was popularized by Joseph Campbell in his guides to Joyce's Ulysses and his more well known works on mythology (e.g., The Hero With a Thousand Faces);* ‘Isis' in her S&E Files article, ‘What is Literary Alchemy?,' suggests that Rowling-Galbraith is writing an allegory of soul transformation in the Cormoran Strike series using metallurgical alchemy's symbols and sequences as understood by Carl Jung and his disciples rather than as used by English writers since the 13th Century;* It's a challenging theory, the depth of which is hard to grasp without an appreciation of the types of alchemy, what they have in common, and their differences in approach and subject matter.2. The Lake: (John) What I found most fascinating in your post, Nick, was your best guesses about where Rowling would have learned about literary alchemy. She claimed in 1998 that she'd read a lot of alchemical texts from which she set the “magical parameters” of the Hogwarts Saga; if you had only three chances to name one of those books, what would you choose? * Charles Nicholl's The Chemical Theatre;* Titus Burckhardt's Alchemy: Science of the Cosmos, Science of the Soul (or Mirror of the Intellect: Essays on Traditional Acience and Sacred Art);* Lyndy Abraham Summerhaze's Marvell and Alchemy or her Dictionary of Alchemical Imagery;* Martin Lings' The Secret of Shakespeare3. Carl Jung, Alchemy: (Nick) I see you're chafing at the bit, John, with book titles I haven't mentioned so let me name-drop the author not on my list because, as you pointed out, he wasn't really a literary alchemist so much as a psychologist who discussed alchemy as a means of illustrating his own ideas about the ‘Great Work.' You've written, though, that literary alchemy as with metallurgical alchemy is a subset of soul-allegories or Psychomachia. Don't Jung's ideas jibe with that? * Yes and no!* Jung's ideas of the soul and archetypes (or archetypal forms) are based on late 19th Century Volkischer German ideas, which is to say, modern and materialist (some say ‘vitalist') premises. His hostility to Christianity and Judaism was grounded in his acceptance of Darwinian evolution and derived philosophically from Nietzsche (see Richard Noll's The Jung Cult and The Aryan Christ).* He conflates the spiritual with the psychological, consequently, and embraces integrated individual psychological health as the telos of human existence, none of which is consistent with traditional metallurgical or literary alchemy (see Titus Burckhardt's Mirror of the Intellect, Philip Sherrard's ‘An Introduction to the Religious Thought of C. G. Jung,' and Harry Oldmeadow's ‘C.G. Jung & Mircea Eliade: ‘Priests without Surplices'? Reflections on the Place of Myth, Religion and Science in Their Work.'* Psychological alchemy, insomuch as it is ‘Jungian,' is well removed from the other two types of alchemy. Which is not to say that Rowling is not a Jungian and hence a Jungian psychological alchemist.4. Back into the Lake: (John) You covered in your article, though, Nick, the several reasons to think it possible, even probable that the evidence from Rowling's life suggests she is using Jungian ideas in her literary alchemy. Iris over at S&E Files obviously thinks that is the case. What are the for and against ideas with respect to Rowling being a Jungian? There's Plenty of Evidence That Rowling IS a Jungian Writer:John Granger's discussion in Troubled Blood: A Jungian Reading* Robin's name-dropping Jung in conversation about astrology;* The Jungian notes sounded throughout Strike 5: Archetypes, Synchronicity, Persona;* The connection between Jung's illustrated ‘New Book' and Talbot's ‘True Book;' and* Pointers to Cupid-Psyche myth as understood by Jungians (see below)The Advent of Prudence Dunleavy, Jungian Psychologist, in Ink Black Heart* Hard to imagine a more sympathetic portrait of a Jungian than half-sister Prudence!* She clearly was the genius behind the Rokeby reconciliation in Hallmarked ManThe Cupid and Psyche myth underpinning the Strike series* A Mythological Key to Cormoran Strike? The Myth of Eros, Psyche, and Venus (note the discussion here of the Jungian understanding of this specific myth)* Ink Black Heart: Strike as Zeus to Robin's Leda and as Cupid to Mads' Psyche* ‘Rowling Points to Myth of Cupid and Psyche in order to Console Strike Fans Disappointed with Hallmarked Man‘* The Hallmarked Man‘s Mythological Template (Nick Jeffery, John Granger)Anything Else? Oh, yeah —* Rowling studied mythology in her ‘Classical Studies' program at UExeter and almost certainly encountered Jungian interpretation of myths there (e.g. the work of Neumann, Johnson, Campbell).* Rowling told Val McDermid if she had not become a successful writer she would have sought training and certification as a psychologist. * Her work reflects a broad reading in psychology (cf., Louise Freeman Davis' ‘J. K. Rowling and the Phantoms in the Brain,' ‘Cormoran Strike and the Itch that Cannot Be Scratched') and it is likely that she has read her fair share of Jung and Jungian authors during her studies.* Rowling benefited from psychological therapy and exercises herself when suffering from depression, the experience of and recovery from which she depicted in story via the Azkaban Dementors and Robin Ellacott's treatment for PTSD in Lethal White.And There is Plenty of Evidence That Rowling Is NOT a Jungian Writer:* Rowling has never been asked or revealed how she learned about literary alchemy; this includes, of course, any reference to Carl Jung, whose work was not focused on literary alchemy per se but a psychological interpretation or explanation of metallurgical alchemy's symbolism.* All that Rowling has revealed about her experiences as a patient seeking help with depression are about Cognitive Behavior Therapy (CBT), which treatment modality owes nothing to Jung or to Jung's students.* It is possible that Rowling encountered esoteric metallurgical alchemy, the precursor to literary alchemy, in her study of astrology, the complementary traditional sacred science to alchemy, a skill-set with which we know she was accomplished. That route to alchemy would have led her to Perennialist interpretations of alchemy, most notably Titus Burckhardt‘s Alchemy, Science of the Cosmos, Science of the Soul; the paperback cover of the Penguin Metaphysical Library edition of that book (1974) features an androgynous giant named REBIS standing on a dragon and a winged golden sphere (i.e., Rubeus, Norbert, Snitch).* As mentioned above, it is more likely that she encountered literary alchemy in her study of Shakespeare. The year she was studying for her A Levels, she traveled to see a production of King Lear which has prompted the idea that it was on her list of texts to prepare for her tests. The most challenging interpretation of Lear then in print was Charles Nicholl's The Chemical Theatre (1980), a book that explains almost every scene in perhaps Shakespeare's greatest tragedy as a parallel step in the Great Work of alchemy. If the budding astrologer was fascinated by this allegorical interpretation of the Bard, the most popular work in print at that time that championed reading Shakespeare as the author of soul allegories was Perennialist Martin Lings‘ The Secret of Shakespeare (1984).* Literary Alchemy is a tool set employed not only by Shakespeare but by a host of Rowling favorite authors to include Dickens, Nabokov, Lewis, and Tolkien. This view of alchemy, that is, as an allegorical depiction of the soul's transformation that affects that same cathartic experience in its theater or reading audiences, is the one found in Rowling's work, which is well removed from psychological alchemy, an analytic art which, though it springs from metallurgical alchemical texts, does not aim at the transformation at work in the sacred art or the science of traditional alchemy. * Rowling's use of chiastic structures and psychomachian allegory, tools that complement literary alchemy in spiritual perspective and aim, make a Jungian rather than a literary and Perennialist view of alchemy seem unlikely.* Alchemy: Jung, Burckhardt, or Maclean? John Granger, April 2007* Rowling's Soul Triptych Psychomachia: Is It From Shakespeare's ‘Macbeth'? John Granger, September 20245. The Debate at King's Cross: (Nick) So, John, you've mentioned Jung quite a few times in your posts about the Mythological framework of the Strike series and even written about the Jungian ideas of animus and anima with respect to Cormoran and Robin's relationship. You seem fairly confident, though, that Rowling is writing from the traditional esoteric ideas of alchemy a la Shakespeare rather than Jung's. Why is that? * Everything you just said!* As noted, Jung's ideas are modern and psychological while the stream of literary alchemy in English Literature is almost exclusively more Medieval and pointedly spiritual;* The Most Notable Exception: Angela Carter's The Passion of the New Eve (1977), that reads like a Jungian ‘Red Book' slide-show (think Bombyx Mori) or a transgender Odyssey written for feminists. Rowling has never mentioned her to my knowledge but it would be surprising if she hadn't read this book more than once. What Alana Bolton Cooke wrote about Carter's Passion could be said about Rowling's literary alchemy if she is a Jungian writer (or about Galbraith's fictional Elizabeth Tassel?):Angela Carter in The Passion of New Eve (1977) uses the exoteric phases of alchemy and Carl G. Jung's theory of esoteric alchemy as a means of demonstrating allegorically the idea ofrebirth and renewal. The purpose of this allegorical method is to produce an 'alchemical' change of thought in the reader about sexuality and gender associated with women's repression and liberation. In the novel Carter develops themes and ideas explored in her essay, The Sadeian Woman: An Exercise in Cultural History (1979), an analysis of the Marquis de Sade's pornography and its affect on the roles of men and women in society. The clash of opposites involved in combining alchemical symbolism, feminism and pornography within the fiction can be seen as representative of the state of chaos present in alchemy before the beginning of change. The circular narrative and alchemical structure of the fiction creates a literary version of the alchemical process as it brings together opposites involved in chaos, represented by events and characterisation that the protagonist, Evelyn/Eve, experiences, until, in the manner of alchemy, harmony is reached. The harmony created represents women's empowerment. Carter uses Evelyn's individuation process to encourage growth within the reader by altering patterns of thought to bring about change through self-confrontation and self-knowledge. The structure of Carter's fiction, thus, corresponds to the process of esoteric alchemy contained within the structure, imagery and symbolism of exoteric alchemy. The fiction is designed to stimulate the unconscious of the reader and make conscious hitherto unknown and repressed thoughts about gender and sexuality to bring about change in the lives of men and women.* I think what Rowling said she was trying to do with Harry Potter's meeting with Dumbledore at the dream-like King's Cross strongly suggests she is aware of the two approaches and wants readers to discuss them – but that she has made her own choice, however conflicted she may be.* In her 2008 interview with Adeel Amini, Rowling said that her hope for Harry's post-mortem conversation with Dumbledore at King's Cross was to stimulate “a debate” among readers about whether it was a psychological moment, that is, a fantasy in which Harry understands what he's been missing all along, or a spiritual event in which he is actually speaking with the late Headmaster:Enough Potter-plot, I think. Moving on to a slightly more contentious issue, Rowling has categorically said that she does believe in a higher power, a statement reinforced by her childhood church-going (“Till I was 17,” she clarifies). It must be difficult to reconcile her religious beliefs with those that denounce Harry Potter as anti-Christian, I wonder aloud. Rowling's expression does not change a fraction. “There was a Christian commentator who said, which I thought was very interesting, that Harry Potter had been the Christian church's biggest missed opportunity. And I thought, there's someone who actually has their eyes open.“I think he said it before the publication of the seventh book, and with the publication of the seventh book I think that clarified a lot of people's view on where I was standing. But I should emphasise that I am not pushing a specifically Christian agenda, and indeed till the very last moment in book seven, one can interpret what happens to Harry after he presents himself with death as him going into an unconscious state in which his subconscious reveals to him what he already knew.” I hum in faux-comprehension of what she's referring to; luckily my clued-in companion is nodding wildly. Proceed. “Any re-reading of Chapter 35 will show you that there's nothing that the Dumbledore he sees tells him that he couldn't have guessed for himself or already realised, and of course there's a key piece of information that Dumbledore doesn't articulate that Harry has realised. So you can deliberately interpret it that way, or you can say that he did go into a state of limbo beyond which there was another life, and that idea was expressed repeatedly, and most explicitly at the end of book five, Order of the Phoenix, where Harry understands that there is an ‘on', that you do go on. “I wanted there to be a debate there, so of my three main characters - when they come into the room which examines death at the Ministry of Magic - Hermione, the ultimate sceptic and a hyperrational person, hears nothing behind the veil and is scared of it. Ron is just uneasy; Ron is someone who does not grapple with anything deeper than beer, if he can avoid it. Harry's drawn to it, and therein lies Harry's slightly reckless, almost morbid streak, because Harry does have a hint of that dangerous adolescent trait which is the attraction to death.” Heavy. Obviously with this ambiguity, you do get a fair degree of misinterpretation as well; there is a certain section that does dislike Harry Potter intensely. “Oh, vehemently,” says Rowling, before muttering under her breath “…and they send death threats.”* I think that “debate” she's trying to foster is between the psychological, call it ‘Jungian' “just inside your head” subconscious perspective, and the authentically spiritual view of her work (well, of art and human existence, too, of course). And that this debate is one she has had for most of her life. Check out her comments about the “greatest missed opportunity” and explain to me how that doesn't line up with her preferring the spiritual, albeit “not explicitly Christian,” to the psychological and humanist. 7. Jungian Readings of Rowling's Work: (Nick) John, you're familiar with what has been written by Potter Pundits because of your PhD critical literature surveys; what are the better ones about Rowling and Jungian psychology and what do they emphasize? Here are seven off the top of my head (and Thesis ‘Works Cited' drafts):* Grynbaum, G.A. (2000). The Secrets of Harry Potter. The San Francisco Jung Institute Library Journal: Reviews From a Jungian Perspective of Books, Films and Culture, [online] 19 (4) pp. 17-48* Patrick, Christopher and Sarah (2007), ‘Exploring the Dark Side: Harry Potter and the Psychology of Evil,' in Mulholland (ed.), The Psychology of Harry Potter, BenBella Books, pp 221-232* Gerhold, C. (2011). The Hero's Journey Through Adolescence: A Jungian Archetypal Analysis of “Harry Potter.” PsyD. The Chicago School of Professional Psychology. * Rectenwald, Bob (2019). ‘Carl Jung's Impact on the Work of J. K. Rowling' * Skipper, Alicia and Kate Fulton (2021) ‘Out from the Shadows into the Light: Persona and Shadow in Harry Potter‘ in Anne Mamary (ed.) The Alchemical Harry Potter: Essays on Transfiguration in J. K. Rowling's Novels, McFarland, Jefferson, NC, 2021, pp 79-96* The Unfolding Journey, Jung's Shadow Self in Harry Potter: Confronting the Darkness Within (YouTube video)* My own Troubled Blood: A Jungian ReadingBob Rectenwald's piece is the best of the six I didn't write but it shares the several faults all the Jungian pieces make:* the first failing of even the best Jungian readers is the assumption that Rowling is a Jungian, which is an open question;* the next is that Jung's ideas (and Joseph Campbell's) are indisputably true; and* the last is, when alchemy is mentioned, the critics do not clarify either the commonalities of or the differences between literary alchemy, psychological alchemy, and Jungian analytic psychology. * Note, though, that Rowling, while aware of such Jungian tropes as the Hero's Journey, tweeks it shamelessly, adding a symbol of Christ and resurrection scene in every Potter story (cf., How Harry Cast His Spell, ‘The Harry's Journey,' pp 21-28).* Read her brief PotterMore piece on alchemy and note that it is written in such a way that it can be read as confirmation of either a psychological or spiritual perspective on alchemy and art:One interpretation of the ‘instructions' left by the alchemists is that they are symbolic of a spiritual journey, leading the alchemist from ignorance (base metal) to enlightenment (gold). There seems to have been a mystical element to the work the alchemist was engaged upon, which set it apart from chemistry (of which it was undoubtedly both an offshoot and forerunner).This “original writing” by Rowling, especially the words “spiritual” and “mystical,” suggests that she is a Perennialist rather than a Jungian, at least with respect to her understanding of alchemy. But the debate is still possible with Jungians who read those words as cyphers for the subsconscious contact they hold we have with archetypes.8. Back to the Alchemy: (John) I think the real question of whether Rowling's literary alchemy is predominantly literary and spiritual or psychological in orientation comes down to the postmodern confusion about the immaterial aspects of the human person, which is to say, the soul (or mind, psyche) and the spirit. Rowling's recent work may seem prosaic or secular to a casual reader who compares it to the relatively otherworldly and “obviously” symbolic Potter books, but she loads each Strike book with Shakespearean romance of soul and spirit, i.e., alchemical dramas, and hermetic tropes. I'm writing a piece now about the lions, dogs, incest, and the red man and white woman in Hallmarked Man, each of which are touchstones of alchemy. I think, though, that your work with Rowling's favorite books and her epigraph sources, Nick, point to a strong spiritual rather than psychological foundation in Rowling's work —* Louisa May Alcott, Little Women* Dodie Smith, I Capture the Castle* The Victorian Women Poets in Running Grave* Elizabeth Barrett Browning, Aurora Leigh* Robert Browning, The Ring and the Book* The Jungian love of the I Ching, Running Grave's epigraph source9. Jung in Running Grave: (Nick) Rowling's favorite writers, from Shakespeare and Nabokov to C. S. Lewis and Victorian Women poets, all clearly believe in a world-transcending spiritual realm. Given the quantity of the Jungian scholarship in Rowling Studies that Iris referred to and you've mentioned, it's curious -- if Rowling is aware of it and is resistant to it -- that she doesn't push back against it explicitly in her work. Can you think of a character that seems something like Jung in the books, someone as bad as Prudence Dunleavey is good? I can think of three:* United Humanitarian Church's guru Jonathan Wace in Running Grave: his “psychologizing of religion,” the comparative religion avenue to denial of any true faith, the psychological critical analysis of a patient using mythological tropes (”Artemis”), the cult leader, and the abuser of women and children -- he's a ringer for Jung! * Paul Satchwell, one-eyed serpent with a one-track mind, in Leamington Spa, a true Jungian artist working psycho-sexual motifs graphically on canvas:Naked figures twisted and cavorted in scenes from Greek mythology. Persephone struggled in the arms of Hades as he carried her down into the underworld; Andromeda strained against chains binding her to rock as a dragonish creature rose from the waves to devour her; Leda lay supine in bulrushes as Zeus, in the form of a swan, impregnated her.Two lines of Joni Mitchell floated back to Robin as she looked at the paintings: “When I first saw your gallery, I liked the ones of ladies…”Except that Robin wasn't sure she liked the paintings. The female figures were all black-haired, olive-skinned, heavy-breasted and partially or entirely naked. The paintings were accomplished, but Robin found them slightly lascivious. Each of the women wore a similar expression of vacant abandon, and Satchwell seemed to have a definite preference for those myths that featured bondage, rape or abduction. (Troubled Blood, 542)* And then there are the Masons, kind of an old school Jungian cult in Hallmarked Man. Like the UHC and “harmless” fraternal and charitable group with Christian touches but which doesn't change a man or human nature per Hardacre (and which harbors the rich and powerful like Lord Branfoot). * Coupled with Prudence, the Front of Jungian Beliefs, we get the front and back of Jung in Rowling's work, a characteristic touch of Rowling nuance as she did with Islam in Hallmarked Man.10. Conclusion: (John) I'm obviously not a Jung fan and I don't think Rowling is writing Jungian psychomachia in alchemical symbols a la Angela Carter, but I see how people would come to a contrary conclusion; Rowling's ‘spiritual not religious' public statements and political positions with respect to Same Sex Attraction and abortion line up much more easily with New Age and Jungian types than with any kind of orthodox Christianity. The great thing about essays like Isis' at S&E Files is that it brings more people into the conversation of what literary alchemy is and the various approaches to it. You've been reading about literary alchemy for several years now, Nick; what do you think the person whose first encounter with the subject was the S&E Files article do to hone their alchemy detection skills? * “Read your books and online talks, John!”* How Metallurgical Alchemy Worked and How it Became Literary Alchemy (from Deathly Hallows Lectures, Chapter 1):Alchemy, in a nutshell, was the science for the perfection or sanctification of the alchemist's soul. This heroic venture I need to say straight off is all but impossible today because the way we look at reality, at ‘things' per se makes the Great Work itself almost an absurdity. Unlike the medieval alchemists, we moderns and postmoderns see things with a clear subject/object distinction, that is, we believe that you and I and that table are entirely different things and between them is there is no connection or relation. The knowing subject is one thing and the observed object is completely ‘other.'To the alchemist that is not the case. His efforts in changing lead to gold are based on the premise that he as the subject will go through the same types of changes and purifications as the materials he is working with. In sympathy with these metallurgical transitions and resolutions of contraries, his soul will be purified in correspondence as long as he is working in a prayerful state within the Mysteries (sacraments) of his revealed tradition.Now, historically there was an Arabic alchemy, a Chinese alchemy, a Kabbalistic, as well as a Christian alchemy; each differs superficially with respect to their spiritual traditions but in every one, the alchemist was working with a sacred natural science or physics to advance his spiritual purification. This was only possible because he looked at the metal he was working with as something with which he was not ‘other' but with which he was in relationship, artifex and artifact in sacred art imitating and accelerating the work of the Creator creating a bridge, so that, as lead changes to gold or material perfection, his soul was going through similar transformations and purifications.The common ground is the logos in every created thing, to include persons (cf. John 1:9), which are all continuous with the Logos fabric of reality. As much as the alchemist identifies with this metaphysical ground, purifying himself of the ‘old man' or ego-driven individual and identifying himself with the spiritual Heart or light within him, that light will become his dominant quality, hence his “illumination” or “enlightenment”. And lead or solid darkness turning into gold, hard light.How does this edifying magic become the scaffolding for Harry's adventures? Largely through the genius of William Shakespeare. Hermetic wisdom and alchemical efforts were such commonplaces in Elizabethan England that Shakespeare and his contemporaries recognized, I think. that the magic of staged drama is essentially alchemical. If we groundlings are all watching what's going on up on the stage and everything is working the way it's supposed to, the subject-object distinction dissolves inasmuch as we identify with the characters and their agonies through our logos-imaginations. As they go through their changes, like the metals in a crucible, we identify with them and pass through the same cathartic moment.As the great dramatists of that period realized, “if what we're doing is alchemical, why don't we use alchemical imagery and language, too?” And, voila, literary alchemy is born. This stream of English literature in which narrator or characters and the reader or audience in correspondence pass through the stages of the alchemical work, the black the white and the red (basically dissolution, purification, and then perfection) runs through the next five centuries of poetry, stage work, stories and novels. You may not have recognized it, but its a big part of things you have read.* Literary Alchemy: Sacred Science, Sacred Art, and ‘The Alembic of Story':A Perennialist Explanation of J. K. Rowling's Signature Hermetic Symbolism This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hogwartsprofessor.substack.com/subscribe

What a pleasure it was to talk to Ruth Scurr, author of John Aubrey: My Own Life, about the great man himself, who was born four hundred years ago this month. Aubrey is best know for his splendid Brief Lives but he preserved a huge amount of knowledge which historians still rely on. There are many things we only know because of Aubrey—things about people Hobbes and Hooke, Stonehenge, architectural history. We also talked about Janet Malcom, the genre of biography, and modern fiction.HENRY OLIVER: Today I'm talking to Ruth Scurr. Ruth is a fellow of Gonville and Caius College in the University of Cambridge, where she specializes in the history of political thought. But more importantly, she is the biographer of John Aubrey, one of my favorite writers, who is celebrating 400 years of his birth this year. Ruth, hello.RUTH SCURR: Hi, Henry.OLIVER: Can you begin by giving us a brief life of John Aubrey?SCURR: So born in 1626, 17th-century antiquarian, collector, early fellow at the Royal Society. Well connected to scientific and the literary circles of his day. Someone who sees himself more as a whetstone: a person who could help sharpen other people's ideas. As a recorder, someone who treasured the details, the minutiae of the lives he encountered, and pass those details on to posterity.He's nonjudgmental, witty, kind, inventive. Very, very sociable. Very good friend. But he's hopeless at self-advancement. Begins his life as a gentleman, but he inherits debts from his father and he can never really achieve financial stability.Never marries, ends up homeless and worried about being arrested for his debts. And he has to sell his precious collection of books periodically through his life to raise some much-needed cash, but he keeps his manuscripts safe. And he does this at the end of his life by putting them into the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford, afterwards known as the Bodleian, and where they still are today.OLIVER: So how many manuscripts did he save for us?SCURR: Of his own manuscripts or other people's manuscripts?OLIVER: Other people's. Because he was collecting all sorts of precious things.SCURR: Oh, absolutely. He was the person who, when someone died, would go round if he could to their house and ask what was happening about the manuscripts. He's particularly concerned, obviously, with his friends. So he had a close relationship with Robert Hooke and he wanted to make sure that Hooke's many inventions and scientific contributions were recorded.And he has this wonderful line in the life of Hooke where he says, “It's so hard to get people to do right by themselves.” And in his childhood, he had seen the fallout from the dissolution of the monasteries. He'd become very troubled by the habit of using manuscript pages which had been displaced in the dissolution. He saw them being used in schools to cover textbooks. He saw them being used to—or he heard about them at least being used—to wrap up gloves or to create stoppers in bottles. And this really troubled him from, from a very early age.And I think he has another beautiful line where he says after the dissolution of the monasteries, whereas these manuscripts had been kept safe, they flew around like butterflies. And he wanted to catch them and preserve them and to stop people letting the papers and the precious manuscripts of their relatives do the same. So he was very instrumental in rescuing manuscripts, other people's manuscripts. And then fortunately with his own, he knew Ashmole and they had the shared astrology interest.Ashmole was a very different sort of person who basically said to Oxford, look, I'll give you my collections, but there has to be a museum for them. And luckily Aubrey was able to use that museum as a safe place for his own manuscripts.OLIVER: So we know things about Robert Hooke and Thomas Hobbes and all these other luminaries of the 17th century, thanks to Aubrey. What else do we know, thanks to him?SCURR: We know what Stonehenge looked like in his day because he was a very good draftsman. He drew pictures of Stonehenge. He'd grown up in Wiltshire, he'd known those stones from childhood. He understood that Avebury nearby was a comparable monument, and he took Charles II to see it, and persuaded the king to get the locals to stop breaking up the stones, to reuse the stones, which was the practice.He also made drawings of windows because he was possibly the first person as a historian of architecture to realize that you could date buildings by the style of their windows. So we have those drawings. He was also interested in the history of costume. He did a survey of Surrey, of Wiltshire.So these are all sort of focuses in his manuscripts and people who've used them come to really appreciate how pioneering Aubrey was. But of course he doesn't finish them. He doesn't publish those manuscripts. So it's very easy really to overlook the innovation and the contribution and the wonderful imagination that he had.OLIVER: You mean if he'd published a book, he would have a much bigger reputation?SCURR: Well, I think there's two things. Yes, but in a sense, you know, the Brief Lives have been published after his death in various forms. But I think one of the most engaging things about Aubrey is that he's a modest and self-effacing person. And I already mentioned the idea he had of himself as a whetstone to other people's talents.There aren't that many people—certainly not in my life, maybe there are in yours—but who would effortlessly describe themselves as a whetstone to other people's talents. Most people want to be at the center. They're happy to have clever and literary friends, but they want a place there at the table as well.And Aubrey really was very, very invested in helping other people to do right by themselves, as he said about Hooke. And he very movingly—this is one of the inspirations really for my book that I wrote about him—he spent all that time collating the information about other people's lives. And for his own life, he puts down a few lines, a couple of facts and everything.He says, well, this could be used as the binding of a book. You know, it's sort of waste paper really. So he doesn't write his own life. Other people's lives he's going to convey to posterity. He doesn't see his own life as really being at that level of needing the attention that he gave, for example, to Milton or to Harvey or Hobbes, as you mentioned.OLIVER: He's born the year after Charles I comes to the throne. So he obviously lives through a fairly terrible period of history and very tumultuous, changeable in lots of different ways. The new world, the new learning, new religion, new politics, everything is changing. And he's obsessed with the old ways. How did these historical events—is he reacting against his time? Is he just born in a lucky time in a way?SCURR: So he was a student in Oxford during the Civil War. And you are right. The upheaval is very disturbing for his generation. It means he gets called back from Oxford by his father because it's dangerous to be there. And he's really, really upset by that because, it's like us, when we were students or our students today. You finally get away from your family and there you are in this place with all these exciting peers and access to books that you've never had before or at least to that extent, libraries, et cetera.And suddenly there's a war on and you've got to go home. So there's that disturbance. Then there is the fact that actually he was close to Hobbes. Hobbes actually was a Malmesbury man, so Wiltshire, very near Aubrey. And had come back to visit the school where Hobbes had been, which was where Aubrey was at school. And so they had met in Aubrey's childhood, and then he would've been aware of Hobbes having to go into exile. And then Hobbes coming back, of course. And that's a very important time in his life.And it's not an accident that Hobbes asks Aubrey to write his life because Hobbes knows how careful Aubrey is. And he knows that Aubrey has information that he can convey in the life. So that is really the first life that he writes. And it's different from the others. There's a different sort of origin. And it's after he's done that, that he starts to think, well, actually, you know, I can think of at least 50, 55 other people's lives. And now I've got my hand in, I might start on those as well.So in that period of upheaval there are wonderful stories. Maybe we'll look at some of the Brief Lives, but there's this amazing story that he captures in the life of William Harvey, which is a description of Harvey having been at the battlefield in Edgehill and recording one of the people who had been fighting and wounded, surviving by having the good sense to pull a dead body on top of himself, to keep himself warm on the battlefield. Things like that, which make the war very much alive. This is brutal, this civil war. It's a long time ago and we think we passed over it, but the really brutal reality of war is captured in the Brief Lives through the anecdotes and the stories of that generation that Aubrey preserves.OLIVER: How English is he?SCURR: Well, as opposed to what?OLIVER: Welsh.SCURR: Okay. Well he goes to Wales often and is very interested in Wales. I think he sees himself as English. I think he's very invested in English customs and stories and people. He's not nationalistic in any sense like that. What he's interested in is the inherited ways of living.And he's very interested in language and different dialects. That's one of the other things; he starts to collect different words. He was very aware of the Cornish dialect, for example. So I'd say it's a very decentered England that's rooted in customs, traditions, inherited stories.And there's a big place there for both the future and the past. Huge excitement about The Royal Society, English science, what can be achieved through the sharing of knowledge. But again, Aubrey's not an insular person in that respect. So, he wished he could go on the Grand Tour when he was a student. He would really have loved to have done that. It's one of the things that he actually talked to Harvey about, going and traveling as his contemporaries, for example, John Evelyn did.But Aubrey actually says—this is very typical of Aubrey—that his mother persuaded him out of it. His mother didn't want him going off on the Grand Tour. She was afraid for him. And he regretted it later in life. But it's so typical of Aubrey that he would pay attention to his mother and her anxieties.OLIVER: This interest in the present and the past—so he loves all the history, but he's in the Royal Society. One thing I like in your book is the way he talks about, oh, my grandfather still dresses in the old ways, like he's an Elizabethan, but at the same time he's doing a very sort of Baconian project. He's influenced by Bacon. Is Aubrey a sort of paradox? Does this make sense in a way?SCURR: Only in so far as lots of other people are as well. I was just looking at the Harvey life, and there's a story there about how when Harvey was a student he was meant to be setting sail with some friends. And he's stopped and told, “No, you can't get on this boat. You have to wait.” And he says, “Well, what have I done wrong? Why can't I get on this boat?” He said, “No, honestly, we need to have a word with you. You are not going on the boat.” And then the boat sinks, everyone dies. And this is apparently because the guy who stopped him had a dream that he needed to stop Harvey going. Harvey told Aubrey that story.Harvey also is—as Aubrey sort of slightly inaccurately puts it, is the inventor of the circulation of the blood. And you think, well, that's going a little bit far, perhaps not actually the inventor, but certainly the first person to discover, to understand about circulating blood.So there's another example of someone's life includes, I wouldn't be alive unless somebody had had this premonition and dream that I was about to die. Which is from a completely different world, from the rational, scientific understanding of the body or the other scientific advances that are going on at the time.OLIVER: And Aubrey's happy to just sort of coexist with both of those because of his interest in astrology?SCURR: And not just astrology. He's very interested in astrology and nativities, as he called it. In some of the Brief Lives, you see the sort of recording of the information that would be needed to cast an astrological shape for the life.But he is also interested in the fact that people believe in fairies and ghosts. He doesn't look down on those beliefs. Nor does he say that he necessarily believes in the presence of fairies or the interventions of the supernatural. But he's got a very open mind in relation to that. And certainly being simultaneously interested in early astronomy and astrology together is, to us, very striking. But then I think it was much more normal.OLIVER: Why do you think he resisted ordination?SCURR: Because he said the cassock stinks. He considered ordination several times because he knew it would be a living, it would be a way of being able to have some income, probably not very onerous duties. Some of his friends say to him, “Come on, Aubrey, it really won't be that much work. You'll just get a curate who'll do it all, and you'll get the living, and then you won't have to be worrying all the time about your paycheck. You haven't got a paycheck. It would be a living coming to you.”And on one occasion, one of the reasons he gives for not doing that is he thinks well, what if there's another religious upheaval and I have to change sides again? What if Roman Catholicism comes back and I ended up on the wrong side of it?And, again, would it really have been that difficult to go with the flow? But I think, in his own way, he had found his way of living, which was intensely sociable. And perhaps he didn't want that constraint of being a member of the clergy around him.OLIVER: Do you think he was a nonbeliever?SCURR: Well. I don't know the answer to that. I don't think so at all. I think he probably was a straightforward Christian believer. I think perhaps he'd seen enough of the religious conflicts and wars to be afraid of fanaticism on both sides. And that would fit certainly with his relationship with Hobbes.I don't have any reason to think he's an atheist. He's got a beautiful way of writing about death and there's this wonderful line he has when he says, “God bless you and me in our in and out world.” So the fact that we refer to his works as the Brief Lives because they're short, but everybody's life is brief.And even those who live, as he did, into his 70s, it feels brief. And there's these very moving descriptions of him at funerals. I was thinking about this the other day because he often records where someone's buried. And I recently wrote my first entry for the Dictionary of National Biography. I did the one for Hilary Mantel, which was a great honor and extremely interesting.And when I came back to the Brief Lives, I thought, gosh, I wish I'd put at the end of that DNB entry where she's actually buried, that would've made sense to do that. And I didn't do it because the DNB is quite formalized; they've got their formula and you need to stick to it.But maybe I'll add it in. Because it seems to me very moving to record where people are actually buried. That would fit I think with her religious sensibility, with a regard for the afterlife, and with the rites of passage at the end of life.OLIVER: What is it that makes Aubrey such a good biographer?SCURR: So I think the modesty that is in his spirit, the noticing, the minutiae that he both notices and values and his wit. He has a sensitivity to these funny and revealing quirky stories about the people that he knows. Or he finds them in the stories he's told by people who did know them.There's an eyewitness account aspect to it as well. Or at least it's an oral history. “I was told this by . . .” He's extremely precise. He'll try to assemble the facts so far as he can, and then he'll tell you what people's close friends said about them, and he will do so very, very carefully so that you know this is a story that he's been told that he's passing on.And then he doesn't pass moral judgment. He doesn't adjudicate. And finally, he thinks of himself as doing all of this for posterity and that posterity, i.e. us or the people who come after us, will find things there and he's not going to tell them what to find. He's not going to shape the life and say, this is what you should think about it.He will give you the raw materials, he'll give you the stories, he'll give you a flavor of the details of the life, and then posterity can look there and can see, for example, the disagreements between Hobbes and Isaac Newton. There are people who've written lives of Hooke and Newton. And there are people who've written lives and you can be team Newton or team Hooke. Interestingly, Aubrey is team Hooke. He doesn't write a life of Newton. And he wants, as I said, to do well by Hooke. But his way of doing that isn't to say Mr.Hooke was fantastic and Newton robbed him of lots of his ideas. He says, let me show you, let me assemble and make a catalog, if I can, of all these hundreds of contributions that Hooke made.OLIVER: When did you discover Aubrey?SCURR: So I discovered Aubrey because I was reviewing for the LRB, The Biographer's Tale, and I had come across a really interesting—and it's still in the introduction to my book—a really interesting reflection on the difference between Aubrey and Lytton Strachey, a reflection made by Anthony Powell, and I had quoted it or alluded to it in my review. And I had gone and started to read Aubrey as a result of that. So I was led to it through reviewing, via Anthony Powell, and then into the Brief Lives.But then another very strange thing happened, which is I met for the very first time, Janet Malcolm, who is someone who became very important in my life. And because she knew or had been told that I'd written this review, she read the review before we met. And she said to me, she said, “Ruth, I read your review”—and I doubt Janet Malcolm was a massive fan of A.S. Byatt, to be absolutely honest. We never really discussed that further, but she said, “I read your review and I was really interested in this Aubrey. I was so interested in what you quoted about Aubrey and the difference between his biographical approach and Lytton Strachey.”And then it sort of stuck in my mind and suddenly as I was coming toward the end of my first book, which was a totally different book on Robespierre and the French Revolution, I just knew I wanted to write about Aubrey. And I think at the time my then-husband really thought I'd gone mad actually, because you're not supposed to do that, are you?I mean, you're supposed to stick in your period and certainly build on it. So, you know, a book on Marra or even Napoleon would've been okay, that would've made sense. But to circle back to the 17th century and write about Aubrey seemed extremely eccentric.OLIVER: Well, what was Janet Malcolm like?SCURR: Oh, Janet was absolutely wonderful. She has this reputation of being sort of terrifying. And, of course, I was extremely interested in her forensic examination of biography which we had very interesting conversations about. She was a deeply kind person, extremely nurturing of younger writers, and extremely funny as well.That's the other thing that you don't associate with her sometimes from this sort of public image of a very austere interviewer, The Journalist and the Murderer, In the Freud Archives, et cetera. Actually, she was a really warm and extremely witty person.OLIVER: A lot of historians don't think biography is real history. Why do you take biography seriously?SCURR: Well, Michael Holroyd writes Works on Paper—and I love Michael Holroyd so much. And he has this wonderful line—I won't remember it exactly—but it's about biography being the b*****d offspring of history and the novel, and both are ashamed of it.And I think some of those distinctions actually have broken down. I know lots of historians who are very interested in biographical writing. I think it depends. There are certain historical schools that maybe are not so interested in lives.And to be fair, the history of ideas is—which I belong to, and in a sense I'm a rebel from—is one of those. I remember there coming a point where I had spent so much time thinking about the constitutional ideas for the representative republic in the middle of the French Revolution, that actually the French Revolution could have been happening on Mars for all it mattered about the actual sequence of events. What mattered was the structure of the ideas.And it's difficult because the school I belong to in Cambridge wants to put the ideas into context all the time. But again, by context you don't really mean people's lives; more the discourses and the conversations and the ideas of the time that are the landscape, the intellectual landscape, if you like.So I rebelled at a certain point and I was like, well, you know, I'm actually going to go through the revolution day by day because that period is short. And I think it really matters, the lived experience there. I think many, many history books quote Aubrey with enormous respect and say, “as Aubrey says,” or, “according to Aubrey,” and pull those details forwards.I suppose some history is quite instrumental in its use of biography, so it wants to draw the reader in with a few anecdotes and a little bit of what does somebody wear on their head? And who was their first love, that kind of thing. But it's perhaps not very engaged with the real work of trying to capture the shape or the feel of a life.OLIVER: And of a temperament, right? I think one thing biography gives us is that sense that a lot of these big decisions or events in history are quite temperamental. As well as being based in ideas and events.SCURR: Oh, yeah. Absolutely.OLIVER: Your life of Aubrey, at one point you tried to write as a novel.SCURR: Yeah. I had to stop that quite fast.OLIVER: Why?SCURR: Because Aubrey is too important. I didn't want to make up things for him. As someone who's come right up to that line of the history and the novel, I do think it's very clear to be on one side or the other. And again, going back to Hilary Mantel, she wrote those wonderful Reith Lectures on historical fiction.And, like her, I think that it's not about ignoring the facts or embellishing the facts. It is about the gaps. It's about imagining what isn't in the record and should have been, and trying to reconstruct that inside the novel. But at the time, I felt that the gaps with Aubrey didn't actually matter that much.There was so much there that I could pull together to give a sense of him and his sensibility. Now actually, scholars in this field will all be very, very keen to advance our knowledge of those gaps. And that's wonderful. You know, what exactly was Aubrey doing when he visited France? You know, at the time I wrote my book that seemed very unclear.I think my colleague in Oxford, Kate Bennett, knows that now and will write her own biography. And she will fill in many of these gaps that I sort of happily included in the form that I'd found for his life because giving him that first person voice, I was able to focus on the evidence that I thought had been very underused at that point.OLIVER: Now Kate Bennett did a wonderful edition of the Brief Lives with lots of excellent footnotes and investigations. And you wrote that it gave us a new understanding of Aubrey.SCURR: Absolutely. And of the lives themselves. And Kate and I got to know each other and became friends while we were both writing our books. And people we knew before we met were very keen to sort of set us against each other. So they would wind us up. I would meet someone and they'd say, “Ruth, there you are. You've written a book about the French Revolution and now you are going to write a book about Aubrey. But don't you know there is a scholar in Oxford who spent her entire academic life working on Aubrey?” And it built up a picture of fear that you shouldn't trespass on somebody else's ground.And then people would do a sort of reverse thing to her that they would say, “Oh, Kate, gosh, you've been working a long time on Aubrey and where is your Clarendon edition after all? And did you know there's somebody in Cambridge who's going to write this popular book about Aubrey?”Anyway, finally we met at a conference and we really actually just liked each other and we decided it's fine. I was doing my thing. She's doing something very different. And we became friends, and I see that as a triumph over a sort of more traditional, maybe even dare I say, male and territorial approach to academic life and to knowledge in general actually.OLIVER: Yeah. Because the two books are great complements to each other. They're not rivalrous in that sense.SCURR: Absolutely not. Kate's book, it's not just an addition. It's as much as you can ever do. It's a reconstruction of the manuscript as Aubrey left it and intended it with all the gaps and the notes to himself to fill this in. And his changes of mind and his deletions and all of that. And so it's an astonishing thing. Because it's not just a copy of it. It takes you in, it helps you understand what he was intending with those collections, as you called them, my pretty collections.And so that edition that she had been working on for a very long time came out in 2015, the same year as my book came out. And it felt like an amazing year for Aubrey. And now, we'll be celebrating the 400th anniversary of his birth. But that year, 2015, was a very special, obviously for us, but I think for Aubrey more broadly.OLIVER: How much of an influence has Aubrey had on English biography?SCURR: As we know, there's the huge influence in terms of “Aubrey says.” Open any book on the 17th century, and it will be “Aubrey says,” “according to Aubrey,” et cetera. So a huge influence in that respect. With regard to the actual form, I think it's very, very pervasive and important, and we have to look at it very carefully.I mentioned earlier the very important difference between what Aubrey does and what Lytton Strachey did. There are some similarities in so far as Strachey will go for the vivid detail. He give you these powerful anecdotes. But actually he spins them as well.And that's what Anthony Powell so brilliantly showed. And the example was of Francis Bacon, the life of Francis Bacon who Aubrey has a description of Bacon right at the end of his life, the circumstances leading up to Bacon's death where he is on Highgate Hill and he decides to conduct an experiment to see if snow will preserve a chicken or a hen as well as salt. So he is stuffing this carcass of the hen with snow. Catches a cold, ends up having to stay with a friend, sleeps in a bed that hasn't been aired for a long time, and dies. And that's the end of Lord Bacon.So Aubrey gives us all this, and then along comes Lytton Strachey. And he takes it, and he says an old man disgraced, shattered, alone on Highgate Hill, stuffing a dead foul with snow, which makes it sound like he's lost his mind at the end of his life. And then Anthony Powell examined that and he said, look, the story of stuffing the hen with snow is Aubrey's.Bacon was certainly an old man at the time of the incident. He was disgraced. He may have been shattered. No doubt at times he was alone. But Aubrey's story of stuffing the foul on Highgate Hill shows Bacon accompanied by the king's physician, conducting a serious experiment to test the preservative properties of snow and, on becoming indisposed, finding accommodation in the house of the Earl of Arundel.And so you take that same story and, as Anthony Powell says, you combine the story, the fragment preserved by Aubrey with some epithets, and you convey an oblique point. It's a biographical method for actually building up a picture of the person. And it really matters what you do with those fragments.So I think the fact that Aubrey is pretty pure about this, he gives you the fragments and another biographer might come along and think, okay, what's going on here with Venetia Stanley and dying in her bed after drinking Viper wine? Let's build up a story about that. And there was a rumor at the time that her husband had murdered her, et cetera. Aubrey doesn't comment. He just gives you the fragment. And I think afterwards, people have not only used the fragments in their own work, but they've also developed a technique of working up those fragments into whatever picture you decide as a biographer you are going to draw.OLIVER: Now as well as a historian, you are a literary critic. You review novels. You are a Hilary Mantel admirer. Who else among the modern fiction writers do you admire?SCURR: Amongst the modern fiction writers? I'm getting quite old, Henry. Lots of my people are dead now. Alice Monroe is someone I'm extremely interested in. Hilary Manel, obviously, Beryl Bainbridge, Penelope Fitzgerald. And I love the fact Penelope Fitzgerald was a biographer simultaneously with becoming a novelist.And I was thinking back to this actually, that Charlotte Mew and Her Friends—that's the title. And then the Anthony Powell is John Aubrey and His Friends. And I was thinking, is there something about these people who have a lot of friends and the biographical genre? It's interesting.In terms of younger people writing, I just read a wonderful short story by Gwendoline Riley in the latest Paris Review. “A–Z” it's called—very disturbing. Very, very good story. And Gwendoline has a novel coming out later this year, which I shall read with enormous interest. It's going to be called Palm House. I absolutely revered George Saunders, although I haven't yet read Vigil. I'm only on Substack for George Saunders and you Henry. That's it, basically.OLIVER: That shows very good taste.SCURR: Very good taste. Yeah. And a couple of others. My friend Danielle Allen's The Renovator, I also subscribe to, but very few. But George Saunders wrote a wonderful post on his Substack about maybe a year and a half, maybe more even ago, about how he found the solution to the beginning of Lincoln in the Bardo. And he wanted to find a way to tell the story of the death of Lincoln's son. It's so typical of him—and I love this—he said he didn't want the ghosts. He knew it was going to be narrated by the ghosts in the morgue. And he couldn't have them coming home one evening saying, “Oh, you know, I just popped over the wall and had a look in through the White House window. And guess what I saw?” So how was he going to get the voices in?And then he said he'd got these extracts from the letters and from the literature that he needed. And he ended up putting them all on the floor and thinking, what order shall I put them in? And that reminded me of when I was struggling to find a way to write about Aubrey. I suddenly had the idea that I could just put them as diary entries without comment.I would sort of curate these entries and things like that. So, that was a very interesting moment for me about sort of the construction and the choices that go in both to writing a novel and to writing, in my case, a sort of experimental biography.OLIVER: So Hilary Mantel, Lincoln in the Bardo, Penelope Fitzgerald, Beryl Bainbridge—there's a lot of historical fiction here. This is the genre you most enjoy. It's been a sort of golden age for historical fiction.SCURR: But those people aren't just historical fiction writers. It's very important. They have all written historical fiction, but actually they write other novels as well. It doesn't matter the order in their careers, they go in and out of it. So I would say that actually it's those people as writers and sensibilities that attract me.Anita Brookner is another example. I love Anita Brookner's novels. I also love her book on David, the revolutionary painter, that she wrote—Jacques-Louis David—that's a fantastic book. So there's a sense in which I see them as writers and the genre of historical fiction, you are right, it does cut across, but I don't think that's what I'm following. I think I'm following what I find on the page from a particular sensibility and of course a command of language, which is in all of those cases, absolutely extraordinary.OLIVER: Because they're all quite innovative as historical novelists as well. And it's not the main part of what is recognized as their achievement in a way.SCURR: No, no.OLIVER: It's been quietly a second great period of the historical novel. It seems crazy to say Hilary Mantel is our Walter Scott, but that is quite high praise.SCURR: So I think you deal much more definitely than I do with these sort of epoch-defining ideas. I think I'm just more intermittently focused on particular things that I like. I used to do an enormous amount of reviewing. I've had to stop it because—talk about being the whetstone.I was constantly reviewing when I was in my 30s and much of my 40s actually. And I don't regret it in the least. And one of the reasons I don't regret it, especially with novels, was because I would never have read all those novels if I hadn't been reviewing them.And even some of the nonfiction, I wouldn't. But here's an example: Because I'd been reviewing so much, I ended up quite early 2007, becoming a Booker judge. And part of that process is that anyone who's been on the list before they automatically get entered by the publisher—McEwen and Barnes, et cetera. Fine.And then the publisher can put forward two books they choose and they can be anything. And then they assemble a list of so-called call-ins. And those are the books where the publisher says, “Oh, please, please call this in. I mean, we didn't make it one of our two, but we think it's absolutely amazing and you must read it.” And you think, well, if it's so amazing, what were you doing not making it one of your two. But anyway, whatever, we call it in. And on that call-in list there was actually, Anne Enright's novel, The Gathering, and that ended up winning the year I was a judge.And I knew Anne Enright's writing because I had reviewed several of her earlier books, especially one called What Are You Like?, which is quite obscure. It's not the book people think of when they think about Anne Enright. But I knew because I'd done all that time in the reviewing trenches, as it were, how extraordinary Anne Enright is as a writer. And we were able to say, well, absolutely go ahead and call this in. And then sure enough it won.OLIVER: What about biography? Modern biography? You like Michael Holroyd?SCURR: Well, we've already talked about Janet Malcolm. She's a sort of anti-biographer in some respect, sort of subversive of the entire genre. I very much like and respect Antonia Fraser's historical biographies and especially her one of Marie Antoinette which, again, came out very close to when my Robespierre book came out. And it's like seeing the other side of the story and that was absolutely extraordinary.And one of the biographies I go back to over and over again I'm extremely interested in Virginia Woolf. You are obviously a fan with The Common Reader. I was looking at it, preparing for this, that she's got this absolutely hilarious short biography of John Evelyn, and it is called Rambling Round Evelyn. Do you know it?OLIVER: Yes.SCURR: It's so beautifully constructed. It's got the butterflies landing on the dahlias pretty much throughout the actual text of the short biography. But then it's got this brilliant bit where she sort of makes fun of John Evelyn. And she says, the difference between then and now is, if we saw a red admiral, we would admire it, but we wouldn't—and this is very mean of her—we wouldn't rush into the kitchen and get a kitchen knife in order to dissect the red admiral's head. Right? It's so ridiculous and it so makes fun of Evelyn.I was listening to the podcast you made with Hermione Lee. And Hermione was saying that she thought what made Woolf such a good critic was that she was very empathetic. But I also think she's capable of that kind of sharp, wicked distance as well, where she goes, I see you, John Evelyn, you are so proud of your garden, and you're actually—looked at from my point of view—a bit of an idiot in some respects as well.OLIVER: I like her because she's so judgmental, which is not a very popular thing to say, but she is. She is really capable of saying that, you know, as long as prose will be read, Addison will be read. But on the other hand, he's boring and rambling and not very good in many ways. Absolutely cutting.SCURR: No, totally, totally. Yeah.OLIVER: What about some of the sort of big names: Richard Holmes, Claire Tomalin?SCURR: Yeah. Oh, Claire, absolutely. I mean, goodness, they've been such influences on me, both of them. Absolutely Richard and his Footsteps and then of course, and those other books, The Ratters of Lightning Ridge and then The Age of Wonder. That's so important, so wonderful.Claire, I revere, I loved and still recommend to my students her book on Mary Wollstonecraft. I also, by the way, love Virginia Woolf's essay on Mary Wollstonecraft. I think that's a different sort of thing where Woolf describes Mary Wollstonecraft pursuing her lover like a dolphin. She won't let him go. He thought he'd hooked a minnow. He wasn't expecting a dolphin to come after him. It was Mary Wollstonecraft. So, Claire Tomalin, her Peyps, Hardy, absolutely hugely important books and deeply, deeply humane actually.And that's the other thing, I think biography, by definition, you do get the sharpness of Woolf or Strachey, but I think to put someone else's life at the center of your book, that's a humane act. It's to say, no, I'm going to spend this number years of my life preserving and communicating this other person's life. And that's a very wonderful thing to do.OLIVER: What do you think of the sort of standard criticism of biography, that it's just not accurate enough? So, for example, Austen Scholars will point to various things in the Tomalin biography where she's deleted the facts or said things to make the narrative flow, but it's just not really accurate enough. The novelistic tendency overwhelms the historical one or whatever. You've obviously avoided that with various decisions you made in the Aubrey book, but as a genre.SCURR: I'd never say that. That would be a real hostage to fortune, wouldn't it?OLIVER: Well, you know what I mean?SCURR: And saying, look at, look at this—OLIVER: Page 28.SCURR: —at this piece of nonsense you introduced. Well, accuracy is extremely important. What I think about that is it all contributes to knowledge. If someone comes along and finds a mistake or wants to bring in some other evidence—And actually Kate Bennett, she does this with Aubrey as well. She says that, oh, Aubrey's really got this wrong, or he's gotten in a muddle about that. She's not saying, and therefore let's just chuck it out because it's inaccurate. You need to see this as well as that. So I think of it more as a collaborative relationship about adding to knowledge and if somebody corrects a previous book or previous claim or something, or point something, then that's fine actually.Again, going back to Holroyd, he thought that that biography was an art form constrained by the facts. So he's got a place for art in it. And I know what he means by that. And I think ultimately that's probably why I couldn't write a novel about a biographical subject because of being constrained by the facts. And yet Hilary Mantel has written many historical novels that are absolutely constrained by the facts. It's just what they're doing besides the facts, alongside the facts. So perhaps some people are going to come along and contribute other information and other people will come along and contribute some imaginative answer to the whole. And both are fine. I think we should be liberal broad church here.OLIVER: Is the genre dying?SCURR: Not so far as I'm aware. We are always doing this about genres dying, aren't we? Those things are always dying.OLIVER: People talk about biography dying a lot.SCURR: Well, perhaps they do. I haven't been listening to that. Why do they say it's dying?OLIVER: Because you can't sell these 700-page lives of people.SCURR: We can't sell most books. I mean, if we're going to go buy sales . . .OLIVER: This, yeah. Well, this story in The Times recently as well, that all the nonfiction that sells now is trash and that the serious books aren't there. And the whole civilization's dying routine.SCURR: Well if it is, we just have to carry on doing what we are doing.OLIVER: Yeah. What do you think is going to be the future of biography? Because I think more than a lot of other nonfiction genres, it's so changeable, it's so flexible. If you look at any decade, you see so much variety in structure and form. What do you think is coming next?SCURR: I'm like Aubrey; I think that's going to be for posterity to decide. As long as there are human beings, we will tell stories and we will want to tell stories about ourselves, and we will want to tell stories about the people we have loved and or hated, or the people who we think matter, for whatever reason, in science, in art, in literature. There will always be a need for the story of the human life.I think it will inevitably change enormously in ways that we couldn't possibly imagine. Just as Aubrey knew that he couldn't possibly imagine what posterity was going to make of the information that he had collected, and he didn't think that was something that he should be constrained by. He thought it was about passing it on.OLIVER: And what will Ruth Scurr do next?SCURR: I'll ask her. I think she's supposed to be writing about Rousseau and is very excited about that, but has been massively distracted by the Royal Society of Literature and becoming chair of that. So, I'm trying to pull myself back into my project. And I was very excited actually, because again, when I was looking at The Common Reader I saw Woolf refer to the Montaigne, Pepys, and Rousseau as people who had provided these spectacular portraits of themselves. And I was very excited by that. So I'm going to write a book about Rousseau and his time in England.OLIVER: Very exciting. I look forward to it. Ruth Scurr, author of John Aubrey: My Own Life, thank you very much.SCURR: Thank you, Henry. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.commonreader.co.uk

Solve crimes with the great detective in "Sherlock Holmes Short Stories." Featuring classic tales by Arthur Conan Doyle, this podcast brings you the brilliant deductions and thrilling adventures of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson. Whether you're a longtime fan or new to the world of Holmes, these timeless mysteries will keep you captivated.

On this day in Tudor history, 30th October 1566, Queen Elizabeth I's former tutor, Roger Ascham, wrote her a long, heartfelt letter of praise and moral guidance. Centuries later, this same letter would be twisted into something sensational, supposed proof that Elizabeth secretly married Robert Dudley and bore a child… the future philosopher Francis Bacon. But what did Ascham actually write? And how did a pious letter about kingship, learning, and virtue become “evidence” for a royal scandal? In this episode, I uncover: - Who Roger Ascham really was — Elizabeth's beloved tutor and humanist scholar - What his 1566 letter truly says (and doesn't say) - How Victorian writers and Baconian theorists turned scripture into scandal - Why the so-called “secret pregnancy” theory falls apart when you read the text Ascham's Divae Elizabethae isn't confession or gossip, it's devotion: a dying scholar's tribute to the queen he'd once taught. So let's separate Tudor truth from centuries of speculation. Listen now to discover why this misunderstood letter reveals more about our obsession with the Virgin Queen's image than about her real life. #TudorHistory #ElizabethI #RogerAscham #RobertDudley #FrancisBacon #TudorMyths #HistoryDebunked #AnneBoleynFiles

Bitches love sonnets.Topics in this episode include putting Beurla on it, basilisks and 13th century bestiaries, Pericles and purported Shakespeare apocrypha, the Baconian theory of Shakespeare authorship, Bacon ciphers, George Brandes, Sidney, Frank Harris, the power of a granddaughter's love, Hans Walter Gabler and the most controversial line in Ulysses, Thomas Aquinas, George Bernard Shaw's take on Shakespeare, we finally get to the sonnets, Mary Fitton, William Herbet, Shakespeare's trauma, consubstantiality, and one of the best entrances in all of literature.Support us on Patreon to access episodes early, bonus content, and a video version of our podcast.Blooms & Barnacles Social Media:Facebook | BlueSky | InstagramSubscribe to Blooms & Barnacles:Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube

Solve crimes with the great detective in "Sherlock Holmes Short Stories." Featuring classic tales by Arthur Conan Doyle, this podcast brings you the brilliant deductions and thrilling adventures of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson. Whether you're a longtime fan or new to the world of Holmes, these timeless mysteries will keep you captivated.

Steeped in historical narratives, the elusive search for the Holy Grail has captured the imaginations of Men for centuries.  Mysterious tales, rich with intrigue, highlight the adventurous pursuits of the Knights Templar whose alleged role was that of guardianship, and the exploits of those with less than noble aims. Against all speculative accounts and investigative efforts, the true nature of the Grail, as well as the inscrutable motives of those coveting its incredible powers still remains shrouded in the mists of time. Is the enigmatic Grail a relic of the past, or has it been right under our feet the entire time?  Peter Dawkins, co-founder of the Gatekeeper Trust and founder-principal of the Francis Bacon Research Trust, joins this Alfacast to discuss the ancient art of pilgrimage as a way of journeying with an awareness of the sacred nature of our environment.  Peter also runs the Zoence Academy and Mystery School together with his wife and partner Sarah, which is particularly involved in the Western wisdom traditions and the wisdom of the land. Peter is a philosopher, historian, author, lecturer, teacher and leader of workshops, seminars and special events in many countries of the world. His specialist interest is in the Western wisdom traditions and mysteries, mythology, sacred architecture and landscape, and the English Renaissance. He is a recognised authority on the history and wisdom of the 16th/17th century Rosicrucians, Francis Bacon and Shakespeare, and their effect on the world. He teaches mostly through talks, seminars, workshops, mystery school events and pilgrimages to sacred sites of the world. In Peter's own words:  "Just as acupressure can restore the healthy flow of vital energy in humans, so walking with awareness, and in a simple, friendly and sacred way, can help Mother Earth. It can enhance the Earth's natural energies, helping to bring healing and balance to the environment and to the planet as a whole." Peter will introduce the Baconian work, which is likewise involved with knowledge of the landscape, as well as the history, philosophy, culture and consciousness to elucidate the otherwise esoteric Western Wisdom Traditions. Shakespeare and the Rosicrucians. Peter's book, The Shakespeare Enigma, presents the treasure trail that leads to (and is) this ‘doorway', whilst its complementary book, Building Paradise, describes what the Baconian-Rosicrucian method and work actually is. A panoramic summary of this wisdom knowledge is given in his book, Core Truths, and  a more detailed description of the wisdom that underlies the Shakespeare plays can be found in his series of books on the ‘Wisdom of Shakespeare' . The FBRT website and most of the essays are also written by Peter, which go into even greater detail concerning all of this and more. Perhaps the Earth itself is the Grail, and it is incumbent on each of us to reinvigorate ourselves, and the land we so take for granted, by walking the path of awareness. Show links: https://www.peterdawkins.com https://www.fbrt.org.uk Learn The True Nature Of Dis-Ease & How Our Bodies Actually Work: https://alfavedic.com/themyth/ Join Our Private Community And Join In The Discussion: https://alfavedic.com/join-us/ Follow our new YT channel: / @offgridelegance Start healing yourself and loved ones with ozone! https://alfavedic.com/ozone Get our favorite blue blocker glasses! https://alfavedic.com/raoptics Learn how to express your law and uphold your rights as one of mankind. https://alfavedic.com/lawformankind Alfa Vedic is an off-grid agriculture & health co-op focused on developing products, media & educational platforms for the betterment of our world. By using advanced scientific methods, cutting-edge technologies and tools derived from the knowledge of the world's greatest minds, the AV community aims to be a model for the future we all want to see. Our comprehensive line of health products and nutrition is available on our website. Most products are hand mixed and formulated right on our off grid farm including our Immortality Teas which we grow on site. Find them all at https://alfavedic.com​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ Follow Alfa Vedic: https://linktr.ee/alfavedic Follow Mike Winner: https://linktr.ee/djmikewinner

The conviction that the natural world is obedient, adhering to laws, is a widespread assumption of modern science. But where did this idea originate and what beliefs does it imply? In this episode of the Sheldrake-Vernon Dialogues, Rupert Sheldrake and Mark Vernon discuss the impact on science of the Elizabethan lawyer, Francis Bacon. His New Instrument of Thought, or Novum Organum, put laws at the centre of science and was intended as an upgrade on assumptions developed by Aristotle. But does the existence of mind-like laws of nature, somehow acting on otherwise mindless matter, even make sense? What difference is made by insights subsequent to Baconian philosophy, such as the discovery of evolution or the sense that the natural world is not machine-like but behaves like an organism? Could the laws of nature be more like habits? And what about the existence of miracles, the purposes of organisms, and the extraordinary fecundity of creativity?

The conviction that the natural world is obedient, adhering to laws, is a widespread assumption of modern science. But where did this idea originate and what beliefs does it imply? In this episode of the Sheldrake-Vernon Dialogues, Rupert Sheldrake and Mark Vernon discuss the impact on science of the Elizabethan lawyer, Francis Bacon. His New Instrument of Thought, or Novum Organum, published in 1620, put laws at the centre of science and was intended as an upgrade on assumptions developed by Aristotle. But does the existence of mind-like laws of nature, somehow acting on otherwise mindless matter, even make sense? What difference is made by insights subsequent to Baconian philosophy, such as the discovery of evolution or the sense that the natural world is not machine-like but behaves like an organism? Could the laws of nature be more like habits? And what about the purposes of organisms, and creativity?

Solve crimes with the great detective in "Sherlock Holmes Short Stories." Featuring classic tales by Arthur Conan Doyle, this podcast brings you the brilliant deductions and thrilling adventures of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson. Whether you're a longtime fan or new to the world of Holmes, these timeless mysteries will keep you captivated.

The Baconian theory of Shakespeare authorship is a strange but kinda compelling argument that the literary genius behind the iconic plays and poems was not William Shakespeare but, rather, Sir Francis Bacon, a man of profound influence during the Elizabethan era.Hang on.What?Before you knee-jerk, consider that Shakespeare was a man of humble origins with limited education. How could he have possibly possessed the vast knowledge and insights found in his works?Well, the simple answer is that he didn't.Robert Frederick, who has been researching the Bacon-Shakespeare link for years, joined me for a conversation about it all.

In the second part of a special WEEKLY 4-part series on the Shakespeare authorship controversy, I look at the first candidate put forward as being the person who supposedly wrote the works attributed to Shakespeare, and the madness that this theory engendered. Visit factormeals.com/blind50 and use code blind50 to get 50% off your first box and 20% off your next box! Direct all advertising inquiries to advertising@airwavemedia.com. Visit www.airwavemedia.com to find other high-quality podcasts! Find a transcript of this episode with source citations and related imagery at www.historicalblindness.com sometime before the release of the next episode. Pledge support on Patreon to get an ad-free feed with exclusive episodes! Check out my novel, Manuscript Found!  And check out the show merch, which make perfect gifts!  Further support the show by giving a one-time gift at paypal.me/NathanLeviLloyd or finding me on Venmo at @HistoricalBlindness. Some music on this episode was licensed under a Blue Dot Sessions blanket license at the time of this episodes publication. Tracks include "Cicle Deserrat," "Cherry Heath," "Brer Krille," "The Gran Dias," "Bauxite," "The Griffiths," and "Borough." Other music, including "Brooks" and "Remedy for Melancholy," are by Kai Engel, licensed under Creative Commons. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Embark on a tempestuous voyage through the turbulent waves of literary history as we confront the enduring tempest of the Shakespeare authorship controversy. In this fiery episode of History Rage, we're broadcasting live from the Gloucester History Festival, where host Paul Bavill is joined by the renowned historian, broadcaster, and author, Michael Wood. Together, they set sail to dismantle the conspiracy-laden waters that question the Bard's very pen.The Bard's Battle:- Michael Wood expresses his simmering frustration with the theory that William Shakespeare did not author his own works, confronting the classist undertones fueling this persistent myth.- An examination of the education and environment that shaped Shakespeare, highlighting the robustness of Elizabethan grammar schools and the Bard's voracious appetite for reading.The Conspiracy Castaways:- A critical look at the main contenders championed by authorship skeptics: the Earl of Oxford and Francis Bacon, revealing the absurdity of their claims through historical evidence and linguistic analysis.- Wood debunks the Oxfordian theory with its timeline troubles and the Baconian hypothesis with its linguistic lunacy, proving both to be more fiction than fact.The Authenticity Anchor:- A defense of primary sources as the bedrock of historical understanding, emphasizing the importance of contemporary, corroborated evidence in validating Shakespeare's authorship.- Wood calls upon the historical documents that anchor Shakespeare to Stratford-upon-Avon, his acting troupe, and his literary legacy, challenging any who dare to drift from these truths.The True Treasure:- While acknowledging the genuine mysteries of Shakespeare's life, Wood advocates for a focus on the fascinating unknowns rather than the fabricated falsehoods.- A personal reflection on the allure of the Bard's enigmatic history and a yearning to uncover the untold tales of his formative years.Join us for a tempest of truth as Michael Wood passionately defends the Bard from the slings and arrows of outrageous skepticism. Dive into the depths of literary history and emerge with a renewed appreciation for the man from Stratford-upon-Avon. Follow @MichaelWoodMV on Twitter to keep up with his scholarly pursuits, and don't forget to grab a copy of his latest work, "In the Footsteps of Dufu," to witness history through the eyes of China's cherished poet.To stay enraged with more historical revelations, follow @HistoryRage on Twitter and support us on Patreon at patreon.com/historyrage for early access to episodes, prize draws, and the coveted History Rage mug. Stay tuned, stay informed, and above all, stay angry! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Newtonian philosophy, and John Locke, along with Francis Bacon has an exciting empirical philosophical package that took Europe by storm in the 1740s, with the able assistance of Voltaire.  Locke offered an epistemology interesting to philosophers, but people like Montesquieu were more taken by his description of the interaction between political players, early public choice theory.  The excitement came from the Baconian program, backed by the vivid reality of real discoveries and solutions by Boyle and Newton.

Is Shakespeare Dead by Mark Twain audiobook. A short, semi-autobiographical work by American humorist Mark Twain. It explores the controversy over the authorship of the Shakespearean literary canon via satire, anecdote, and extensive quotation of contemporary authors on the subject. In the book, Twain expounds the view that Shakespeare of Stratford was not the author of the canon, and lends tentative support to the Baconian theory. The book opens with a scene from his early adulthood, where he was trained to be a steamboat pilot by an elder who often argued with him over the controversy. Twain's arguments include the following points: That little was known about Shakespeare's life, and the bulk of his biographies were based on conjecture. That a number of eminent British barristers and judges found Shakespeare's plays permeated with precise legal thought, and that the author could only have been a veteran legal professional. That in contrast, Shakespeare of Stratford had never held a legal position or office, and had only been in court over petty lawsuits late in life. That small towns lionize and celebrate their famous authors for generations, but this had not happened in Shakespeare's case. He described his own fame in Hannibal as a case in point. Twain draws parallels and analogies from the pretensions of modern religious figures and commentators on the nature of Satan. He compares the believers in Shakespeare to adherents of Arthur Orton and Mary Baker Eddy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Singular Affair of The Baconian Cipher

Try the new "Tales of Escape & Suspense"- links below! ANDROID USERS- 1001 Tales of Escape & Suspense at Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/2HQYk53AJHTOgBTLBzyP3w 1001 Stories From The Old West at Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/0c2fc0cGwJBcPfyC8NWNTw 1001 Radio Crime Solvers at Spotify- https://open.spotify.com/show/0UAUS12lnS2063PWK9CZ37 1001's Best of Jack London at Spotify https://open.spotify.com/show/2HzkpdKeWJgUU9rbx3NqgF 1001 Radio Days at Spotify https://open.spotify.com/show/5jyc4nVoe00xoOxrhyAa8H 1001 Classic Short Stories & Tales at Spotify https://open.spotify.com/show/6rzDb5uFdOhfw5X6P5lkWn 1001 Heroes, Legends, Histories & Mysteries at Spotify https://open.spotify.com/show/6rO7HELtRcGfV48UeP8aFQ 1001 Sherlock Holmes Stories & The Best of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle at Spotify https://open.spotify.com/show/4dIgYvBwZVTN5ewF0JPaTK 1001 Ghost Stories & Tales of the Macabre on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/5P4hV28LgpG89dRNMfSDKJ 1001 Stories for the Road on Spotify https://open.spotify.com/show/6FhlsxYFTGNPiSMYxM9O9K 1001 Greatest Love Stories on Spotify https://open.spotify.com/show/5sUUFDVTatnGt7FiNQvSHe 1001 History's Best Storytellers: (INTERVIEWS) on Spotify https://open.spotify.com/show/3QyZ1u4f9OLb9O32KX6Ghr APPLE USERS New! 1001 Tales of Escape and Suspense at Apple Podcasts https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/1001-tales-of-escape-and-suspense/id1689248043 Catch 1001 Stories From The Old West- https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/1001-stories-from-the-old-west/id1613213865 Catch 1001's Best of Jack London- https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/1001-best-of-jack-london/id1656939169 Catch 1001 Radio Crime Solvers- https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/1001-radio-crime-solvers/id1657397371 Catch 1001 Heroes on Apple https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/1001-heroes-legends-histories-mysteries-podcast/id956154836?mt=2  Catch 1001 Classic Short Stories at Apple Podcast https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/1001-classic-short-stories-tales/id1078098622 Catch 1001 Stories for the Road at Apple Podcast now:  https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/1001-stories-for-the-road/id1227478901 NEW Enjoy 1001 Greatest Love Stories on Apple Devices here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/1001-greatest-love-stories/id1485751552 Catch 1001 RADIO DAYS now at Apple iTunes!  https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/1001-radio-days/id1405045413?mt=2 NEW 1001 Ghost Stories & Tales of the Macabre is now playing at Apple Podcasts! https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/1001-ghost-stories-tales-of-the-macabre/id1516332327 NEW Enjoy 1001 History's Best Storytellers (Interviews) on Apple Devices here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/1001-historys-best-storytellers/id1483649026 NEW Enjoy 1001 Sherlock Holmes Stories and The Best of Arthur Conan Doyle https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/1001-sherlock-holmes-stories-best-sir-arthur-conan/id1534427618 Get all of our shows at one website: https://.1001storiespodcast.com My email works as well for comments: 1001storiespodcast@gmail.com SUPPORT OUR SHOW BY BECOMING A PATRON! https://.patreon.com/1001storiesnetwork. Its time I started asking for support! Thank you. Its a few dollars a month OR a one time. (Any amount is appreciated). YOUR REVIEWS ARE NEEDED AND APPRECIATED! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Vintage Classic Radio presents the best of detective noir in the golden age of radio.

My Friend Irma followed by Sherlock Holmes

During the enlightenment there are profound differences of opinion.  But there is a sense that human progress and social progress for the vast majority was both possible and desirable.There is the Baconian program with many scientists working in its name.  There is the Lockean idea that wealth is the product of human creativity and that therefore, it is in principle unlimited, i.e. poverty can be eliminated.   Many were inspired by this idea.By the end of the 18th century we see Montesquieu cited as the Francis Bacon of the study of man and society, while Adam Smith was the Newton.This is an episode where we trace out many of the channels that connected Enlightenment ideals to the people in the Industrial Revolution, who did all the things.

Release Date: December 16, 2010Sherlock Holmes is having a friendly argument with a visiting French detective over which country has the most ingenous criminals when the agony column leads the two Detectives and Dr. Watson into the English countryside to rescue a man in distress and finds himself asked to investigate who wrote Shakespeare's plays.Original Air Date: May 27, 1946Support the show monthly at patreon.greatdetectives.netSupport the show on a one-time basis at http://support.greatdetectives.net.Mail a donation to: Adam Graham, PO Box 15913, Boise, Idaho 83715Take the listener survey at http://survey.greatdetectives.netGive us a call at 208-991-4783Follow us on Instagram at http://instagram.com/greatdetectivesFollow us on Twitter @radiodetectives

J talks with author, and Baconian researcher, Stephanie McPeak Petersen who has been unraveling hidden history through encoded knowledge left to us by Sir Francis Bacon and other Renaissance figures. In her newest book, "The Next Octave: a sustainable economy encoded in music", with a forward by William Henry, Stephanie uncovers a consilience between music and money and their immutable connection. • They talk about everything from governing philosophies tempering both music and money creating two systems of fiat notes, to a controversy that pivots upon Plato and Bacon where Plato lured us in with encoded musical ratios built into the political structures of his city-states; and the questions of whether Bacon can lead us out with a ciphered trail of breadcrumbs and if tuning music and money with just intervals could hold the key to creating a more harmonious and economically sustainable world?  • You can find Stephanie's book at https://www.amazon.com/Next-Octave-Sustainable-Economy-Encoded/dp/B09BC8MNRP (https://www.amazon.com/Next-Octave-Sustainable-Economy-Encoded/dp/B09BC8MNRP) • and her YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/c/StephanieMcPeakPetersen (https://www.youtube.com/c/StephanieMcPeakPetersen) • and follow her on IG at https://www.instagram.com/petersen_duet (https://www.instagram.com/petersen_duet)• And be sure to find us: https://linktr.ee/itd.jcosta (https://linktr.ee/itd.jcosta)

Sherlock Holmes followed by The Great Gildersleeve

This episode of the Popperian Podcast features an interview that Jed Lea-Henry conducted with Jagdish Hattiangadi. They speak about the induction of Francis Bacon, why Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn rejected it, how this rejection was based on a misunderstanding/misreading of Bacon, and importantly how this rejection of induction opened a space for “the belittlers of science” to “undermine the social acceptability of scientific research.” Jagdish Hattiangadi is a Professor of Philosophy at York University, Toronto. *** Jagdish Hattiangadi's forthcoming book is tentatively titled: ‘Skeptical Knowledge: The Theory and Craft of Breaking Through in Science' *** Popper and Kuhn: A Different Retrospect Popper and Kuhn: A Different Retrospect - Jagdish Hattiangadi, 2021 (sagepub.com) *** Jagdish Hattiangadi's academic profiles Jagdish Hattiangadi (yorku.ca) and Jagdish Hattiangadi - Academia.edu Support via Patreon – https://www.patreon.com/jedleahenry Support via PayPal – https://www.paypal.me/jrleahenry Shop – https://shop.spreadshirt.com.au/JLH-shop/ Support via Bitcoin - 31wQMYixAJ7Tisp773cSvpUuzr2rmRhjaW Website – The Popperian Podcast — Jed Lea-Henry Libsyn – The Popperian Podcast (libsyn.com) Youtube – The Popperian Podcast - YouTube Twitter – https://twitter.com/jedleahenry RSS - https://popperian-podcast.libsyn.com/rss *** Underlying artwork by Arturo Espinosa

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is The Methods of Rationality, Part 11: Chapter 11: Omake Files 1, 2, 3, published by Eliezer Yudkowsky. Hail the Dark Lord Rowling. "Omake" is a non-canonical extra. OMAKE FILES #1: 72 Hours to Victory (A.k.a. "What Happens If You Change Harry But Leave All Other Characters Constant") Dumbledore peered over his desk at young Harry, twinkling in a kindly sort of way. The boy had come to him with a terribly intense look on his childish face - Dumbledore hoped that whatever this matter was, it wasn't too serious. Harry was far too young for his life trials to be starting already. "What was it you wished to speak to me about, Harry?" Harry James Potter-Evans-Verres leaned forward in his chair, smiling grimly. "Headmaster, I got a sharp pain in my scar during the Sorting Feast. Considering how and where I got this scar, it didn't seem like the sort of thing I should just ignore. I thought at first it was because of Professor Snape, but I followed the Baconian experimental method which is to find the conditions for both the presence and the absence of the phenomenon, and I've determined that my scar hurts if and only if I'm facing the back of Professor Quirrell's head, whatever's under his turban. While it could be something more innocuous, I think we should provisionally assume the worst, that it's You-Know-Who - wait, don't look so horrified, this is actually a priceless opportunity -" OMAKE FILES #2: I Ain't Afraid of Dark Lords This was the original version of Chapter 9. It was replaced because - while many readers did enjoy it - many other readers had massive allergies to songs in fanfics, for reasons that should not much need belaboring. I didn't want to drive readers away before they got to Ch. 10. Lee Jordan is the fellow prankster of Fred and George (in canon). "Lee Jordan" had sounded like a Muggleborn name to me, implying that he would be capable of instructing Fred and George on a tune that Harry would know. This was not as obvious to some readers as it was to your author. Draco went to Slytherin, and Harry breathed a small sigh of relief. It had seemed like a sure thing, but you never did know what tiny event might upset the course of your master plan. They were approaching the Ps now... And over at the Gryffindor table, there was a whispered conversation. "What if he doesn't like it?" "He's got no right to not like it - "- not after the prank he played on -" "- Neville Longbottom, his name was -" "- he's as fair a fair target now as fair can be." "All right. Just make sure you don't forget your parts." "We've rehearsed it often enough -" "- over the last three hours." And Minerva McGonagall, from where she stood at the speaker's podium of the Head Table, looked down at the next name on her list. Please don't let him be a Gryffindor please don't let him be a Gryffindor OH PLEASE don't let him be a Gryffindor... She took a deep breath, and called: "Potter, Harry!" There was a sudden silence in the hall as all whispered conversation stopped. A silence broken by a horrible buzzing noise that modulated and changed in hideous mockery of musical melody. Minerva's head jerked around, shocked, and identified the buzzing noise as coming from the Gryffindor direction, where They were standing on top of the table blowing into some kind of tiny devices held against Their lips. Her hand started to drop to her wand, to Silencio the lot of Them, but another sound stopped her. Dumbledore was chuckling. Minerva's eyes went back to Harry Potter, who had only just started to step out of line before he'd stumbled and halted. Then the young boy began to walk again, moving his legs in odd sweeping motions, and waving his arms back and forth and snapping his fingers, in synchrony with Their music. To the tune of "Ghostbusters" (As performed on the kazoo by Fred and George Weasley, and ...

Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is The Methods of Rationality, Part 11: Chapter 11: Omake Files 1, 2, 3, published by Eliezer Yudkowsky. Hail the Dark Lord Rowling. "Omake" is a non-canonical extra. OMAKE FILES #1: 72 Hours to Victory (A.k.a. "What Happens If You Change Harry But Leave All Other Characters Constant") Dumbledore peered over his desk at young Harry, twinkling in a kindly sort of way. The boy had come to him with a terribly intense look on his childish face - Dumbledore hoped that whatever this matter was, it wasn't too serious. Harry was far too young for his life trials to be starting already. "What was it you wished to speak to me about, Harry?" Harry James Potter-Evans-Verres leaned forward in his chair, smiling grimly. "Headmaster, I got a sharp pain in my scar during the Sorting Feast. Considering how and where I got this scar, it didn't seem like the sort of thing I should just ignore. I thought at first it was because of Professor Snape, but I followed the Baconian experimental method which is to find the conditions for both the presence and the absence of the phenomenon, and I've determined that my scar hurts if and only if I'm facing the back of Professor Quirrell's head, whatever's under his turban. While it could be something more innocuous, I think we should provisionally assume the worst, that it's You-Know-Who - wait, don't look so horrified, this is actually a priceless opportunity -" OMAKE FILES #2: I Ain't Afraid of Dark Lords This was the original version of Chapter 9. It was replaced because - while many readers did enjoy it - many other readers had massive allergies to songs in fanfics, for reasons that should not much need belaboring. I didn't want to drive readers away before they got to Ch. 10. Lee Jordan is the fellow prankster of Fred and George (in canon). "Lee Jordan" had sounded like a Muggleborn name to me, implying that he would be capable of instructing Fred and George on a tune that Harry would know. This was not as obvious to some readers as it was to your author. Draco went to Slytherin, and Harry breathed a small sigh of relief. It had seemed like a sure thing, but you never did know what tiny event might upset the course of your master plan. They were approaching the Ps now... And over at the Gryffindor table, there was a whispered conversation. "What if he doesn't like it?" "He's got no right to not like it - "- not after the prank he played on -" "- Neville Longbottom, his name was -" "- he's as fair a fair target now as fair can be." "All right. Just make sure you don't forget your parts." "We've rehearsed it often enough -" "- over the last three hours." And Minerva McGonagall, from where she stood at the speaker's podium of the Head Table, looked down at the next name on her list. Please don't let him be a Gryffindor please don't let him be a Gryffindor OH PLEASE don't let him be a Gryffindor... She took a deep breath, and called: "Potter, Harry!" There was a sudden silence in the hall as all whispered conversation stopped. A silence broken by a horrible buzzing noise that modulated and changed in hideous mockery of musical melody. Minerva's head jerked around, shocked, and identified the buzzing noise as coming from the Gryffindor direction, where They were standing on top of the table blowing into some kind of tiny devices held against Their lips. Her hand started to drop to her wand, to Silencio the lot of Them, but another sound stopped her. Dumbledore was chuckling. Minerva's eyes went back to Harry Potter, who had only just started to step out of line before he'd stumbled and halted. Then the young boy began to walk again, moving his legs in odd sweeping motions, and waving his arms back and forth and snapping his fingers, in synchrony with Their music. To the tune of "Ghostbusters" (As performed on the kazoo by Fred and George Weasley, and ...

In today's episode, Zack has 30 minutes to become an expert on... Who Really Wrote Shakespeare's Plays! William Shakespeare, that is! The man, the myth, the legend! Emphasis on myth here, because we dove into whether Shakespeare actually wrote all of the writing attributed to him! Zack dove into three big Shakespiracies -the Oxfordian theory, the Baconian theory, and the Marlovian theory. As much as we generally poo poo-ed these ideas, you have to respect how intense and powerful the names sound. Whether Shakespeare's plays were actually written by Edward de Vere, Sir Francis Bacon, Christopher Marlowe, or William Shakespeare himself, this was a really fun ride and an interesting conspiracy the ponder! Highlights Include: - A faked death?! - Lost years (due to twins) - A Mark Twain cameo Follow on instagram @30minuteexpertpodcast and twitter @30minexpertpod Send us your expertise at 30minuteexpertpodcast@gmail.com And please rate and review! Podcast artwork by Rick Radvansky Music by Jake Radvansky  

A short, semi-autobiographical work by American humorist Mark Twain. It explores the controversy over the authorship of the Shakespearean literary canon via satire, anecdote, and extensive quotation of contemporary authors on the subject. In the book, Twain expounds the view that Shakespeare of Stratford was not the author of the canon, and lends tentative support to the Baconian theory. The book opens with a scene from his early adulthood, where he was trained to be a steamboat pilot by an elder who often argued with him over the controversy. Twain's arguments include the following points: That little was known about Shakespeare's life, and the bulk of his biographies were based on conjecture. That a number of eminent British barristers and judges found Shakespeare's plays permeated with precise legal thought, and that the author could only have been a veteran legal professional. That in contrast, Shakespeare of Stratford had never held a legal position or office, and had only been in court over petty lawsuits late in life. That small towns lionize and celebrate their famous authors for generations, but this had not happened in Shakespeare's case. He described his own fame in Hannibal as a case in point. Twain draws parallels and analogies from the pretensions of modern religious figures and commentators on the nature of Satan. He compares the believers in Shakespeare to adherents of Arthur Orton and Mary Baker Eddy. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/3daudiobooks0/support

Mates, it's OLD TIME RADIO MONDAY!

In this episode, we discuss Irving Babbit’s Essay Two Types of Humanitarians Bacon and Rousseau. We discuss Our understanding of human nature reflects our education philosophy The classical, Baconian, and Rousseauian view of Human Nature The Scriptures insight into human nature

  Today's episode examines the life of an eccentric, possibly mentally ill woman and the incredible house she built. We‘ll talk about possible hauntings, impossible architecture and the delusion of a heart broken woman. We are discussing Sarah Winchester and what some less than creative people have dubbed The Winchester Mystery House!      Her birth name was Sarah Lockwood Pardee. She was the fifth of seven children born to Leonard Pardee and Sarah Burns. There are no existing records or any other form of factual information to establish Sarah’s date of birth—even the year remains unknown. The scarce information that survives from the historical record indicates her birth must have occurred somewhere between 1835 and 1845. At the time of Sarah’s birth, the Pardee’s were a respectable, upper middle class New Haven family. Her father Leonard was a joiner by trade whose shrewd sense of business found him moving up the ladder of polite society as a successful carriage manufacturer. Later, during the Civil War, he made a fortune supplying ambulances to the Union Army. Young Sarah’s most distinguishing characteristic was that she was everything but ordinary. She was a child prodigy… a fire starter. Ok, no… By all accounts, she was also considered to be quite beautiful. By the age of twelve, Sarah was already fluent in the Latin, French, Spanish, and Italian languages. Furthermore, her knowledge of the classics (most notably Homer… no, not Simpson, and Shakespeare) along with a remarkable talent as a musician was well noticed. It is no wonder that New Haven Society would eventually dub her “The Belle of New Haven.” In addition to Sarah’s brilliance and respectable place in society, there were several factors about New Haven that presented a unique influence on her upbringing. To begin, there was Yale University (originally known as Yale College). From its inception, Yale (and New Haven) was a hub of progressive, Freemasonic-Rosicrucian thinking and activity. By the way, we’ll most definitely be taking a train ride on the Freemasons. As a result, Sarah was raised and educated in an environment ripe with Freemasonic and Rosicrucian philosophy. Several of Sarah’s uncles and cousins were Freemasons. But more importantly, at an early age, she was admitted to Yale’s only female scholastic institution known as the “Young Ladies Collegiate Institute.” Two of the school’s most influential administrators and professors, Judson A. Root and his brother N.W. Taylor Root were both Rose Croix Freemasons. In addition to the liberal arts, the Roots set forth a strict curriculum consisting of the sciences and mathematics. Sounds super fucking boring. Furthermore, two of Sarah’s schoolmates Susan and Rebecca Bacon were the daughters of New Haven’s highly respected Reverend Dr. Leonard Woolsey Bacon (no relation to Francis Bacon, who was an English philosopher and statesman who served as Attorney General and as Lord Chancellor of England. His works are credited with developing the scientific method and remained influential through the scientific revolution, just in case you nerds were wondering.). While Sarah and the Bacon girls were attending the school, Dr. Bacon’s sister Delia, also a New Haven resident, attracted considerable fame and attention for writing her famous treatise that Sir Francis Bacon (with the aid of a circle of the finest literary minds of the Elizabethan-Jacobean Age) was the actual author, editor, and publisher of the original works of Shakespeare. Ah ha! See! Her work was sponsored by the author Nathaniel Hawthorne and was later supported by the likes of Ralph Waldo Emerson and Mark Twain! Good ol Samuel Clemens. In addition to her writing, Delia Bacon gave numerous public lectures to the citizens of New Haven; thus, New Haven, Connecticut was the actual birthplace of the “Bacon is Shakespeare” doctrine. We’re here to learn ya, folks! Given her direct exposure to the Baconian Doctrine, along with her passion for the Shakespearean works, it was inevitable that Sarah was drawn like an irresistible force to a more than passing interest in the new theorem. Moreover, the Baconian-Masonic preoccupation with secret encryption techniques using numbered cipher systems most certainly influenced young Sarah’s world view. This unique backdrop to Sarah’s early development played a crucial role which, in essence, defined what would become her life’s work. So much smarts! As we’ll see, the Belle of New Haven became a staunch Baconian for the rest of her life. She just LOOOVED HER BACON! BLTs, Canadian bacon, pancetta… she loved it all! A completely strict diet of fucking bacon! Except turkey bacon. Fuck that fake shit. No, but seriously, She also acquired a vast and uncanny knowledge of Masonic-Rosicrucian ritual and symbolism… SSSYMBOLISM. Additionally, she gravitated to Theosophy. Theosophy is a religion established in the United States during the late nineteenth century. It was founded primarily by the Russian immigrant Helena Blavatsky and draws its teachings predominantly from Blavatsky's writings.Author and historian Ralph Rambo (who actually knew Sarah and is a direct descendant of American bad ass and war hero John J Rambo) wrote “it is believed that Mrs. Winchester was a Theosophist.” Rambo didn’t elaborate on the matter, making him and his statement one of the more boring we’ve heard, but since he was close to Sarah he was certainly in a position to know some things about her. It should be noted that most Rosicrucians are theosophists. Sarah adhered both to Bacon’s Kabbalistic theosophy, which is the eternal belief in the Mortal Kombat franchise no matter how bad their movies are… ok, that was stupid. Anyway, she was also super into the theosophical perspective held by Rudolph Steiner (1861- 1925). Steiner viewed the universe as a vast, living organism in which all things are likened to individually evolving units or cells that comprise a greater universal, synergistic body that is “ever building.” As we shall further see, the “ever building” theme was at the core of Sarah’s methodology. William Wirt Winchester was born in Baltimore, MD on July 22, 1837. He was the only son of Oliver Fisher Winchester and Jane Ellen Hope. In keeping with a popular trend of the day, he was named after William Wirt, the highly popular and longest serving Attorney General of the United States . Soon after William’s arrival, the Winchesters moved to New Haven where the enterprising Oliver, along with his partner John Davies, founded a successful clothing manufacturing company. Gradually, the Winchester patriarch amassed a considerable fortune. Later, Oliver channeled his efforts into a firearms manufacturing venture that eventually (1866) evolved into the famous Winchester Repeating Arms Company. Fuckin’ Winchester! Woo!! According to historical documents, the Winchesters and the Pardees were well acquainted, particularly through the auspices of New Haven’s First Baptist Church. Additionally, Sarah Pardee and William’s sister Annie were classmates at the Young Ladies Collegiate Institute. Not far away, William attended New Haven’s Collegiate and Commercial Institute—another arm of Yale College. Here, William’s teachers included N.W. Taylor Root (one of Sarah’s instructors) and Henry E. Pardee who was another of Sarah’s cousins. Thus, Young Sarah and William found themselves studying virtually the same curriculum under very similar circumstances. Moreover, like the Pardees, the Winchester family was not lacking in members who were Freemasons. Sarah and William were married on September 30, 1862. Their only child, Annie Pardee Winchester came into the world on July 12, 1866. Unfortunately, due to an infantile decease known as Marasmus (a severe form of malnutrition due to the body’s inability to metabolize proteins), Annie died 40 days later. In 1880, Ol Oliver Fisher Winchester died, leaving the succession of the Winchester Repeating Arms Company to his only son. One year later, William died of fucking Tuberculosis at the age of 43. Dammit, TB! The double loss of Annie and William was a staggering blow to Sarah. However, the loss did leave the widow Winchester with an inheritance of 20 million dollars (510 million today) plus nearly 50% of the Winchester Arms stock—which, in turn earned her approximately $1,000 dollars per day (25,000 today)  in royalties for the rest of her life—the result of which made her one of the wealthiest women in the world. Get it, girl!  According to Ralph Rambo, john j rambo’s great great uncle, Sarah went on a three year world tour with her new band “Rifles and Posies”, who sold 3 million records worldwide and had a huge hit with their single “fuck tuberculosis” before settling in California in 1884.   “The New Haven Register,” dated 1886, lists Sarah as having been “removed to Europe.” No other information has survived to tell us exactly where Mrs. Winchester went during those years or what her activities consisted of. But we can project some well educated theories. Although Freemasonry has traditionally barred women from its membership, there are numerous documented cases in which some head-strong women have gained admittance into liberal, Masonic Lodges as far back as the 18th Century. A movement in France called Co-Freemasonry, which allows for male and female membership was already underway when Sarah arrived in that country. Given her social status, a predilection towards Freemasonic tenets, and a mastery of the European languages, Sarah could easily have been admitted into any of the permissive French Masonic lodges. Another possible scenario involving Mrs. Winchester’s activities while abroad could well have included visits to esoteric, architectural landmarks such as the French Cathedral of Chartres. Sarah’s Masonic-Rosicrucian interest in labyrinths would have drawn her to Chartres with its 11 circuit labyrinth, a puzzle-like feature that stresses the discipline of the initiatic tradition of the ancient mystery schools. Likewise, she would also have found inspiration in the Freemasonic symbolism and the mysterious structure (including a staircase that leads nowhere) of Rosslyn Chapel in Scotland . In 1884, Sarah took up residence in the San Francisco Bay area—eventually moving inland to the Santa Clara Valley (now San Jose) to buy an eight room farmhouse from one Dr. Robert Caldwell. Her apparent motive for the move was to live in close proximity to her numerous Pardee relatives, most of whom had come to California during the 1849 Gold Rush, and were scattered from Sacramento to the Bay area. One of these Pardee relatives, Enoch H. Pardee, had become a highly respected physician and politician while living in Oakland. Later his son George C. Pardee followed in his father’s footsteps rising to the office of Governor of California (1903- 1907. It is interesting that Wikipedia makes particular note of Enoch Pardee having been “a prominent occultist.” Most likely the occult reference has to do with the fact that both Enoch and his son George were members of the highly secretive and mysterious ( California based) Bohemian Club which was an offshoot of Yale’s Skull and Bones Society. Moreover, Enoch and George were Knights Templar Freemasons. Also interesting, is the fact that President Theodore Roosevelt (another member of the Bohemian Club) came to California in 1903 to ask Governor Pardee to run as his Vice Presidential candidate in the 1904 national election. The offer was turned down. During the same trip, Roosevelt attempted to visit Sarah Pardee Winchester. Again, Roosevelt’s offer was turned down.  THE STORY BEHIND THE HOUSE         The story goes that after the death of her child and her husband she moved to California and bought the 8 room farmhouse and began building. It is said once construction started it was a continuous process. Workers in the area would work in shifts 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.  We're going to explore the stories about her mental state,  the construction of the house, and the reports of ghosts and spooky stuff.     The story supposedly starts like this: There was no plan – no official blueprints were drawn up, no architectural vision was created, and yet a once-unfinished house took shape on a sprawling lot in the heart of San Jose, California. Inside, staircases ascended through several levels before ending abruptly, doorways opened to blank walls, and corners rounded to dead ends. The house was the brainchild of Sarah Winchester, heir by marriage to the Winchester firearms fortune, and since the project began in 1884 rumors have swirled about the construction, the inhabitants, and the seemingly endless maze that sits at 525 South Winchester Blvd.Today, the house is known as the Winchester Mystery House, but at the time of its construction, it was simply Sarah Winchester’s House. Newly in possession of a massive fortune and struggling with the loss of her husband and daughter, she sought the advice of a medium. She hoped, perhaps, to get advice from the beyond as to how to spend her fortune or what to do with her life. Though the exact specifics remain between Sarah Winchester and her medium, the story goes that the medium was able to channel dearly departed William, who advised Sarah to leave her home in New Haven, Connecticut, and head west to California. As far as what to do with her money, William answered that too; she was to use the fortune to build a home for the spirits of those who had fallen victim to Winchester rifles, lest she be haunted by them for the rest of her life. So there's that… Spirits from beyond told her to build! After this is when she ended up in San Jose and purchased the farm house. Winchester hired carpenters to work around the clock, expanding the small house into a seven-story mansion. The construction of the House was an “ever building” enterprise in which rotating shifts of workers labored 24 hours per day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. the House gradually mushroomed outward and upward,By the turn of the century, Sarah Winchester had her ghost house: an oddly laid out mansion, with seven stories, 161 rooms, 47 fireplaces, 10,000 panes of glass, two basements, three elevators, and a mysterious fun-house-like interior. It was built at a price tag of the $5 million dollars in 1923 or $71 million today. Due to the lack of a plan and the presence of an architect, the house was constructed haphazardly; rooms were added onto exterior walls resulting in windows overlooking other rooms. Multiple staircases would be added, all with different sized risers, giving each staircase a distorted look. Gold and silver chandeliers hung from the ceilings above hand-inlaid parquet flooring. Dozens of artful stained-glass windows created by Tiffany & Co. dotted the walls, including some designed by Louis Comfort Tiffany himself. One window, in particular, was intended to create a prismatic rainbow effect on the floor when light flowed through it – of course, the window ended up on an interior wall, and thus the effect was never achieved. Even more luxurious than the fixtures was the plumbing an electrical work. Rare for the time, the Winchester Mystery House boasted indoor plumbing, including coveted hot running water, and push-button gas lighting available throughout the home. Additionally, forced-air heating flowed throughout the house. Adding further to the mysterious features, the prime numbers 7, 11, and 13 are repeatedly displayed in various ways throughout the House—the number 13 being most prominent. These numbers consistently show up in the number of windows in many of the rooms, or the number of stairs in the staircases, or the number of rails in the railings, or the number of panels in the floors and walls, or the number of lights in a chandelier, etc. Unquestionably, these three prime numbers were extremely important to Sarah. In 1906 something happened that would change the landscape of california and the Winchester house. The 1906 San Francisco earthquake struck the coast of Northern California at 5:12 a.m. on Wednesday, April 18 with an estimated moment magnitude of 7.9 and a maximum Mercalli intensity of XI (Extreme). High-intensity shaking was felt from Eureka on the North Coast to the Salinas Valley, an agricultural region to the south of the San Francisco Bay Area. Devastating fires soon broke out in the city and lasted for several days. More than 3,000 people died. Over 80% of the city of San Francisco was destroyed. The events are remembered as one of the worst and deadliest earthquakes in the history of the United States. The death toll remains the greatest loss of life from a natural disaster in California's history and high on the lists of American disasters. Although The impact of the earthquake on San Francisco was the most famous, the earthquake also inflicted considerable damage on several other cities. These include San Jose and Santa Rosa, the entire downtown of which was essentially destroyed. Since if the damage in San Jose was located at, you guessed it, the Winchester house. Standing 7 stories at the time, the house was damaged badly and the top three floors were essentially reduced and the house said at for stories from then on due to the damage.  Aside from its immense size and Victorian style architecture, the House has a number of unique characteristics. To begin, it is undeniably a labyrinth. There are literally miles of maze-like corridors and twisting hallways, some of which have dead ends—forcing the traveler to turn around and back-up. There are also some centrally located passages and stairways that serve as shortcuts allowing a virtual leap from one side of the House to the other. Traversing the labyrinth is truly dizzying and disorienting to one’s sensibilities. The House abounds in oddities and anomalous features. There are rooms within rooms. There is a staircase that leads nowhere, abruptly halting at the ceiling. In another place, there is a door which opens into a solid wall. Some of the House’s 47 chimneys have an overhead ceiling—while, in some places, there are skylights covered by a roof—and some skylights are covered by another skylight—and, in one place, there is a skylight built into the floor. There are tiny doors leading into large spaces, and large doors that lead into very small spaces. In another part of the House, a second story door opens outward to a sheer drop to the ground below. Moreover, upside-down pillars can be found all about the House. Many visitors to the Winchester mansion have justifiably compared its strange design to the work of the late Dutch artist M.C. Escher. Practically a small town unto itself, the Winchester estate was virtually self sufficient with its own carpenter and plumber’s workshops along with an on-premise water and electrical supply, and a sewage drainage system. On September 5, 1922, she died in her sleep of heart failure. A service was held in Palo Alto, California, and her remains lay at Alta Mesa Cemetery until they were transferred, along with those of her sister, to New Haven, Connecticut.  She was buried next to her husband and their infant child in Evergreen Cemetery, New Haven, Connecticut. She left a will written in thirteen sections, which she signed thirteen times.  In accordance with her will Sarah had her entire estate divided up in generous portions to be distributed among a number of charities and those people who had faithfully spent years in her service. Her favorite niece and secretary, Marian Marriott, oversaw the removal and sale of all of Sarah’s furnishings and personal property. Roy Lieb, Mrs. Winchester’s attorney of many years, had been named in her will as executor to her estate. He sold the House to the people who, in 1933, preserved it as a “living” museum—today, it is known as the Winchester Mystery House also known as California Historical Landmark #868. Although no mention has ever surfaced as to any specific guidelines or special instructions by which Mr. Lieb would select a buyer for the property, one gets the distinct impression that Sarah wanted the House to stand intact and perpetually preserved… and so it does. SOME OF THE FOLKLORE Some of this stuff we've touched on already but here's a rundown of the folklore behind the house.  Despite the fact that Sarah Winchester was extremely secretive about herself, nearly all of what the public thinks it knows about her reads like a mish-mash of gossip out “The National Enquirer.” some refer to this body of misinformation as “The Folklore.” Indeed, on a research visits to the Winchester Mystery House, a senior tour guide informed one writer that “in the old days, the tour guides were encouraged to make up stuff just to give some spice to the story.” The Folklore about Sarah says that, after William’s death in 1881, the highly distraught Mrs. Winchester sought the advice of the then famous Boston medium Adam Coons. During a séance with Coons, Sarah was told that because of the many people who had been slain by the Winchester Rifle, she was cursed by the Winchester fortune. Coons further instructed Sarah that the angry spirits demanded that she move to California and build them a house. Upon her arrival in California, Sarah began holding her own séances every midnight so that she could receive the next day’s building instructions from the spirits. Her séances allegedly involved the use of a Ouija board and planchette, and 13 various colored robes she would ritualistically wear each night (for the edification of the spirits) within the confines of her “Séance Room.” To further appease the angry spirits, Mrs. Winchester made sure the construction of the House went on, nonstop, 24 / 7, 365 days a year for fear that should the building ever stop, she would die. For some inexplicable reason, however, Mrs. Winchester took precautions in the building design so as to incorporate all of the strange features of the House to “confuse the evil spirits.” Moreover, she would ring her alarm bell every night at midnight to signal the spirits that it was séance time, and then again at 2:00 am, signaling the spirits that it was time to depart. Which begs the question “who was in charge of whom?” And, why would spirits’ have an inability or need to keep track of time? Whenever people make mention of Sarah Winchester the typical response you get from people is “Oh yeah…wasn’t she the crazy lady who built that weird house because she was afraid the spirits would kill her?” Many of these people have never been to the Winchester House. Their source is usually television. “ America ’s Most Haunted Places” tops the list of TV shows that grossly reinforces the Folklore of the house. The misinformation is further compounded by the “Haunted House” tour business thriving in San Jose as the commercial enterprise known as the “Winchester Mystery House” which profits by perpetuating the Folklore myth. In fairness to the management of the “WMH,” they try to present Mrs. Winchester in a positive light. However, their Halloween flashlight tours, along with booklets, postcards, coffee mugs and other sundry items being sold in the WMH souvenir shop displaying the title “The Mansion Designed By Spirits” only enhances the Folklore version of Sarah Winchester’s life. You’ve got to hand it to them, they’ve created a highly effective marketing strategy for a very lucrative commercial enterprise. These are good people who mean well—but this is hardly the legacy Sarah wanted to leave to posterity.  Even in more recent times the house keeps giving up secrets. In 2016, a secret attic was discovered. Inside the attic were a pump organ, a Victorian-era couch, a dress form, a sewing machine, and various paintings. There was a rumour that Sarah had a secrecy room full of undisplayed treasures and large amounts of cash, it was thought this attic may have been that room but there is no concrete proof of this.  So these are the stories about Sarah Winchester and her house, now comes the sad news, most of what you think you know, and most of what you've just heard, are myths. Stories that have grown over the years about the woman and the house. Early on we talked about president roosevelt trying to visit Sarah and the house. If you forgot, the story goes that Theodore Roosevelt attempted to visit Sarah at home in 1903, but was turned away. This is used as an example of her alleged weirdness. It is said the rumors likely started about Sarah because in life she was extremely private, refused to address gossip and did not engage much in the community.  This infamous presidential visit never occurred. Eyewitness accounts state that the President's carriage never stopped at the Winchester place. Furthermore, Winchester had rented a house near San Francisco that year to prepare for the wedding of her niece. She was not at home. There is another myth that Sarah would spy on her employees. It is said that some employees believed Sarah could walk through walls and closed doors. The claims are that Sarah had elaborate spying features built into the house. There is no evidence she spied on her workers. Would a suspicious employer retain the same workers for decades? Would she name them in her will? Would she buy them homes? Would they name children after her? All these things happened. In short, there is no evidence that she ever spied on her employees. Then there is the fascination with the number 13 and several other numbers. Since websites detail the occurrences of 13 in the house: 13 robe hooks in the seance room, 13 panes of glass in several windows, a stairway with 13 steps, just to name a few. These facts are used as evidence to prove the woman was ruled by superstition. References to the number 13 were added after Sarah's death, according to workers at the time. The 13 hooks were added not long ago.  Then we have some of the crazy architecture. The story goes that she built crazy things like hallways to nowhere, stairs to nowhere, doors that lead to walls, and doors that lead to several story drops, to confuse spirits. Some websites make much of the architectural "oddities" of the house, such as doors and flights of stairs leading into walls, and how they were supposedly built to confuse vengeful ghosts. Some say there is a more natural explanation—the 1906 earthquake.  Research uncovered the fact that there was massive damage to the house in the trembler and that Sarah never fully repaired it. The stairs and doors that lead to "nowhere" are merely where damage has been sealed off or where landings have fallen away. After the earthquake she moved to another house. She did not want to make the necessary repairs—it had nothing to do with spirits. Not to mention she herself admitted that with her being the architect and having no formal training, things often did not go as planned. "I am constantly having to make an upheaval for some reason,” Winchester wrote to her sister-in-law in 1898. “For instance, my upper hall which leads to the sleeping apartment was rendered so unexpectedly dark by a little addition that after a number of people had missed their footing on the stairs I decided that safety demanded something to be done." Far from an exercise in spiritualism, Winchester’s labyrinth arose because she made mistakes — and had the disposable income to carry on making them. It didn’t help her reputation that she was naturally reserved. While most Bay Area millionaires were out in society, attending galas and loudly donating to charities, Winchester preferred a quiet life with the close family who occasionally lived with her. In the absence of her own voice, locals began to gossip. One of the biggest myths however is the stories of how construction started and kept in going 24-7. There were actually many instances of Sarah sending workers away. Many times in the summer months she would send them away for a couple months because it got too hot. And in the winter she would send them away for a little break for everyone. This has been uncovered in Sarah's own writings. The Feb. 24, 1895 issue of the San Francisco Chronicle ran an article that almost single-handedly laid the foundation for the Winchester Mystery House legend."The sound of the hammer is never hushed,” it reported. “... The reason for it is in Mrs. Winchester's belief that when the house is entirely finished she will die." So aside from appeasing spirits with the continued building this article states that she believes that if she ever finished the house that's when she would die, so that's why she kept building.  "Whether she had discovered the secret of eternal youth and will live as long as the building material, saws and hammers last, or is doomed to disappointment as great as Ponce de Leon in his search for the fountain of life, is a question for time to solve,” the story concludes. Some modern-day historians speculate one of the reasons Winchester kept building was because of the economic climate. By continuing construction, she was able to keep locals employed. In her unusual way, it was an act of kindness. "She had a social conscience and she did try to give back," Winchester Mystery House historian Janan Boehme told the Los Angeles Times in 2017. "This house, in itself, was her biggest social work of all." As far as all of the supernatural talk, most of it started after her death. The famed Winchester mansion fell into the hands of John H. Brown, a theme park worker who designed roller coasters. One of his inventions, the Backety-Back coaster in Canada, killed a woman who was thrown from a car. After her death, the Browns moved to California. When the Winchester house went up for rent, Brown and his wife Mayme jumped at the chance and quickly began playing up the home’s strangeness. Less than two years after Sarah Winchester’s death, newspapers were suddenly beginning to write about the mansion’s supernatural powers. “The seance room, dedicated to the spirit world in which Mrs. Winchester had such faith, is magnificently done in heavy velvet of many colors,” the Healdsburg Tribune wrote in 1924. “... Here are hundreds of clothes hooks, upon which hang many costumes. Mrs. Winchester, it is said, believed that she could don any of these costumes and speak to the spirits of the characters of the area represented by the clothing.” (It is worth noting here: There are no contemporary accounts of Winchester holding seances in the home, and “Ghostland” writes that the “seance room” was actually a gardener’s private quarters.) The myth took hold, though, and the home, with its dead ends and tight turns, is easy to imagine as haunted. Although the spirits are fun, the ghosts shroud the real life of a fascinating, creative woman. Winchester was "as sane and clear headed a woman as I have ever known,” her lawyer Samuel Leib said after her death. “She had a better grasp of business and financial affairs than most men." Speaking of supernatural, let's get into the haunted history. Dozens of psychics have visited the house over the years and most have come away convinced, or claim to be convinced, that spirits still wander the place. It was even named one of the “Most Haunted Places in the World” by Time magazine. Here are just a few tales, courtesy of Winchester tour manager Janan Boehme. The Case of the Ghostly Handyman Some of Sarah Winchester’s loyal workmen and house servants may still be looking after the place, according to sightings of figures or the “feeling of a presence” reported many times over the years, by tour guides and visitors alike. One frequent apparition is a man with jet-black hair believed to have been a former handyman. He’s been seen repairing the fireplace in the ballroom, or pushing an equally spectral wheelbarrow – if wheelbarrows indeed linger in the beyond — down a long, dark hallway. The Secret of the Invisible HandSeveral years ago, a man working on one of the many restoration projects in the mansion started his day early in a section with several fireplaces, known as the Hall of Fires. The house was dead quiet before tours got underway, and he was working up on a ladder when he felt someone tap him on the back. He turned to ask what the person wanted. No one was there. Reassuring himself he’d just imagined the sensation, he went back to his work, only to experience what felt like someone pushing against his back. That was enough. He hurried down the ladder, crossed the estate and started on another project, figuring that someone — or something — didn’t want him working in the Hall of Fires that day. The Sign of the Heavy SighA tour guide named Samantha recently led visitors to the room the Daisy Bedroom, where Sarah Winchester was trapped during the 1906 quake. Samantha was about to begin her spiel when a very clear “sigh” came from the small hallway outside the bedroom door. Thinking one of her guests had merely fallen behind, Samantha turned to call the person into the room but saw no one. Then, as her eyes adjusted to the darkened hallway, she did see something. The form of a small, dark person slowly emerged, gliding around a corner. Samantha quickly stepped around the corner and again saw nothing but heard yet another deep sigh. She felt sure it was the tiny form of Sarah Winchester herself, perhaps peeved to find people in her favorite bedroom. You can find a surveillance video that seems to show a ghost or something moving around in a balcony late ate night on the fourth floor. Just as unexpected things turn up on video, the same is true of photographs. The Winchester Mystery House's own Public Relations Coordinator reports that he took several photos of the mansion in 2015. When he downloaded the photos he deleted what he didn't need. But, one caught his eye. In one window of the house, Tim O'Day spotted something. Was it a shadow? A reflection of a cloud? Or something else? Visitors to the Winchester Mystery House also report taking photos with strange shapes in the windows. A few even shared their snapshots on Facebook. If you visit, study all photos carefully before hitting the delete button. You never know what you will find! Top haunted house movies from ranker.com https://www.ranker.com/list/the-best-haunted-house-movies/ranker-film?ref=collections_btm&l=367358&collectionId=2164

We travel back to 1946 for an episode from Sherlock Holmes, "The Baconian Cipher". And stay tuned for Phil Harris and Alice Faye in "Inventing a New Drug"

Steven welcomes Carole Sue Lipman, president of the Shakespeare Authorship Roundtable to discuss the her work with the global forum as well as the life and times of Delia Bacon, first Baconian, and much maligned Shakespeare Authorship researcher. Support the show by picking up official Don't Quill the Messenger merchandise at www.dontquillthepodcast.com  Presented by the Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship. Learn more at www.shakespeareoxfordfellowship.org  Don't Quill the Messenger is a part of the Dragon Wagon Radio independent podcast network. For more great podcasts visit www.dragonwagonradio.com

Special guest artist and comedian Kyle Ian Fisher joins us on the podcast in the third part of a four part series on Oak Island. There are theories that William Shakespeare was not the true author of his own works. Probably the most prominent theory as to who could have authored Shakespeare's work is Francis Bacon. It is believed that in his travels to Canada he may have buried this secret on the island. You can find Kyle Ian Fisher on Instagram @thekfish1

A new episodeAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacyThis podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Chartable - https://chartable.com/privacyPodcorn - https://podcorn.com/privacy Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A new episodeAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacyThis podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Chartable - https://chartable.com/privacyPodcorn - https://podcorn.com/privacy Our GDPR privacy policy was updated on August 8, 2022. Visit acast.com/privacy for more information.

A new episodeAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacyThis podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Chartable - https://chartable.com/privacyPodcorn - https://podcorn.com/privacy Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A new episodeAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacyThis podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Chartable - https://chartable.com/privacyPodcorn - https://podcorn.com/privacy Our GDPR privacy policy was updated on August 8, 2022. Visit acast.com/privacy for more information.

Daniel is back with an important update: Based upon his theory (explained in our previous talk), he used the Baconian codes to explore a site they point to and - lo & behold - made a huge discovery! What did he find? Where is it? How did he find it? Is this the final point X? Will there be excavations? What does the local authorities say? Daniel answers all of this, notwithstanding discussing several other aspects of the R+C-Shakespeare-Bacon-Oak Island mystery. We also reflect upon the road ahead. AND some good news: After the recording of this program, he now has investors backing him so we all can find out what lies beneath...   POSTSCRIPT: After this recording, Daniel has now attained investors so that an excavation can finally be done - a process that is ongoing with actual findings.   :: :: :: ::   All programs are gratis & listener funded. Please consider supporting our work and help cover costs by donating, subscribing to our channel, liking & sharing our posts. Subscribing to our website (https://www.forumborealis.net/contribute) gives you direct access to all shows before public release + various bonus & backstage clips. Our shows are chronologically arranged in different series collected in separate playlists.   :: :: :: ::   * An Oak Island Game Changer - A conversation with Daniel Ronnstam (S04P17)   * © Forum Borealis. May not be reproduced in any commercial way.   * Guest: Cryptographer & Musician Daniel Fredrik Ronnstam (http://www.forumborealis.net/guests)   * Recorded: 06 January 2016   * Bumper music used with cordial permission from © Loopus.net   * This Program is part of our fourth series called FROM SOLOMONS TEMPLE TO ARCADIA (http://www.forumborealis.net/series)        

Maria Sellers examines the claim that Francis Bacon wrote the works of William Shakespeare, signing his name to them in code.

On this special episode, we’re investigating a centuries-spanning, Da Vinci Code-style conspiracy: Did beloved wordsmith William Shakespeare actually write all those plays? Or was it…someone else?! Megan and RJ probe Shakespeare’s life, watch a very bad movie with a disappointing lack of Radiohead, discuss RJ’s predictably gross book of poems, and hurl obscenities at Academy Award-winning actor Mark Rylance…Maybe there’s a reason we’re not a True Crime show.

During the Great Fire of London in September 1666, Samuel Pepys went out to the garden and dug some holes. There he placed his documents, some wine, and “my parmezan cheese” for safekeeping as the buildings and streets of his city were licked and then consumed by flames. We know this thanks to a diary in which he recorded these burnings and burials. In his new book, Richard Yeo contextualizes the diary-keeping and document-organizing practices of men like Pepys within a rich, detailed account of notes and note-taking among early modern English virtuosi. Notebooks, English Virtuosi, and Early Modern Science (University of Chicago Press, 2014) offers a fascinating glimpse into practices of information management as they allowed English scholars to bridge text and memory, print media and manuscripts, journals and commonplace books, reading and observation, the individual and the collective. Yeo's book explores the relationship between early modern methods of collecting and storing information and the larger project of Baconian natural history, paying special attention to the ways that Bacon and several Fellows of the Royal Society used notebooks and other note-keeping technologies. Beyond this, Notebooks, English Virtuosi, and Early Modern Science is also deeply embedded in the history of memory and its (dis)contents, and engages (especially in a chapter on Samuel Hartlib and his circle) the historiography of epistolary networks and early modern histories of correspondence. Enjoy! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

During the Great Fire of London in September 1666, Samuel Pepys went out to the garden and dug some holes. There he placed his documents, some wine, and “my parmezan cheese” for safekeeping as the buildings and streets of his city were licked and then consumed by flames. We know this thanks to a diary in which he recorded these burnings and burials. In his new book, Richard Yeo contextualizes the diary-keeping and document-organizing practices of men like Pepys within a rich, detailed account of notes and note-taking among early modern English virtuosi. Notebooks, English Virtuosi, and Early Modern Science (University of Chicago Press, 2014) offers a fascinating glimpse into practices of information management as they allowed English scholars to bridge text and memory, print media and manuscripts, journals and commonplace books, reading and observation, the individual and the collective. Yeo's book explores the relationship between early modern methods of collecting and storing information and the larger project of Baconian natural history, paying special attention to the ways that Bacon and several Fellows of the Royal Society used notebooks and other note-keeping technologies. Beyond this, Notebooks, English Virtuosi, and Early Modern Science is also deeply embedded in the history of memory and its (dis)contents, and engages (especially in a chapter on Samuel Hartlib and his circle) the historiography of epistolary networks and early modern histories of correspondence. Enjoy! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

During the Great Fire of London in September 1666, Samuel Pepys went out to the garden and dug some holes. There he placed his documents, some wine, and “my parmezan cheese” for safekeeping as the buildings and streets of his city were licked and then consumed by flames. We know this thanks to a diary in which he recorded these burnings and burials. In his new book, Richard Yeo contextualizes the diary-keeping and document-organizing practices of men like Pepys within a rich, detailed account of notes and note-taking among early modern English virtuosi. Notebooks, English Virtuosi, and Early Modern Science (University of Chicago Press, 2014) offers a fascinating glimpse into practices of information management as they allowed English scholars to bridge text and memory, print media and manuscripts, journals and commonplace books, reading and observation, the individual and the collective. Yeo’s book explores the relationship between early modern methods of collecting and storing information and the larger project of Baconian natural history, paying special attention to the ways that Bacon and several Fellows of the Royal Society used notebooks and other note-keeping technologies. Beyond this, Notebooks, English Virtuosi, and Early Modern Science is also deeply embedded in the history of memory and its (dis)contents, and engages (especially in a chapter on Samuel Hartlib and his circle) the historiography of epistolary networks and early modern histories of correspondence. Enjoy! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

During the Great Fire of London in September 1666, Samuel Pepys went out to the garden and dug some holes. There he placed his documents, some wine, and “my parmezan cheese” for safekeeping as the buildings and streets of his city were licked and then consumed by flames. We know this thanks to a diary in which he recorded these burnings and burials. In his new book, Richard Yeo contextualizes the diary-keeping and document-organizing practices of men like Pepys within a rich, detailed account of notes and note-taking among early modern English virtuosi. Notebooks, English Virtuosi, and Early Modern Science (University of Chicago Press, 2014) offers a fascinating glimpse into practices of information management as they allowed English scholars to bridge text and memory, print media and manuscripts, journals and commonplace books, reading and observation, the individual and the collective. Yeo’s book explores the relationship between early modern methods of collecting and storing information and the larger project of Baconian natural history, paying special attention to the ways that Bacon and several Fellows of the Royal Society used notebooks and other note-keeping technologies. Beyond this, Notebooks, English Virtuosi, and Early Modern Science is also deeply embedded in the history of memory and its (dis)contents, and engages (especially in a chapter on Samuel Hartlib and his circle) the historiography of epistolary networks and early modern histories of correspondence. Enjoy! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

During the Great Fire of London in September 1666, Samuel Pepys went out to the garden and dug some holes. There he placed his documents, some wine, and “my parmezan cheese” for safekeeping as the buildings and streets of his city were licked and then consumed by flames. We know this thanks to a diary in which he recorded these burnings and burials. In his new book, Richard Yeo contextualizes the diary-keeping and document-organizing practices of men like Pepys within a rich, detailed account of notes and note-taking among early modern English virtuosi. Notebooks, English Virtuosi, and Early Modern Science (University of Chicago Press, 2014) offers a fascinating glimpse into practices of information management as they allowed English scholars to bridge text and memory, print media and manuscripts, journals and commonplace books, reading and observation, the individual and the collective. Yeo’s book explores the relationship between early modern methods of collecting and storing information and the larger project of Baconian natural history, paying special attention to the ways that Bacon and several Fellows of the Royal Society used notebooks and other note-keeping technologies. Beyond this, Notebooks, English Virtuosi, and Early Modern Science is also deeply embedded in the history of memory and its (dis)contents, and engages (especially in a chapter on Samuel Hartlib and his circle) the historiography of epistolary networks and early modern histories of correspondence. Enjoy! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

During the Great Fire of London in September 1666, Samuel Pepys went out to the garden and dug some holes. There he placed his documents, some wine, and “my parmezan cheese” for safekeeping as the buildings and streets of his city were licked and then consumed by flames. We know this thanks to a diary in which he recorded these burnings and burials. In his new book, Richard Yeo contextualizes the diary-keeping and document-organizing practices of men like Pepys within a rich, detailed account of notes and note-taking among early modern English virtuosi. Notebooks, English Virtuosi, and Early Modern Science (University of Chicago Press, 2014) offers a fascinating glimpse into practices of information management as they allowed English scholars to bridge text and memory, print media and manuscripts, journals and commonplace books, reading and observation, the individual and the collective. Yeo’s book explores the relationship between early modern methods of collecting and storing information and the larger project of Baconian natural history, paying special attention to the ways that Bacon and several Fellows of the Royal Society used notebooks and other note-keeping technologies. Beyond this, Notebooks, English Virtuosi, and Early Modern Science is also deeply embedded in the history of memory and its (dis)contents, and engages (especially in a chapter on Samuel Hartlib and his circle) the historiography of epistolary networks and early modern histories of correspondence. Enjoy! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

During the Great Fire of London in September 1666, Samuel Pepys went out to the garden and dug some holes. There he placed his documents, some wine, and “my parmezan cheese” for safekeeping as the buildings and streets of his city were licked and then consumed by flames. We know this thanks to a diary in which he recorded these burnings and burials. In his new book, Richard Yeo contextualizes the diary-keeping and document-organizing practices of men like Pepys within a rich, detailed account of notes and note-taking among early modern English virtuosi. Notebooks, English Virtuosi, and Early Modern Science (University of Chicago Press, 2014) offers a fascinating glimpse into practices of information management as they allowed English scholars to bridge text and memory, print media and manuscripts, journals and commonplace books, reading and observation, the individual and the collective. Yeo’s book explores the relationship between early modern methods of collecting and storing information and the larger project of Baconian natural history, paying special attention to the ways that Bacon and several Fellows of the Royal Society used notebooks and other note-keeping technologies. Beyond this, Notebooks, English Virtuosi, and Early Modern Science is also deeply embedded in the history of memory and its (dis)contents, and engages (especially in a chapter on Samuel Hartlib and his circle) the historiography of epistolary networks and early modern histories of correspondence. Enjoy! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Experimentation and observation are usually associated with natural sciences while formulas and computations appear to be the trade mark of mathematics. Historians of science have even suggested that the birth of modern science occurred with its divorce from mathematical disciplines, precisely over the question of (Baconian) observation. However, as late as the nineteenth century and at a time when mathematics was about to be identified with the free creation of concepts and the purification of methods, several mathematicians – and these far from marginal practioners – claimed that mathematics was a natural science and, as such, had to deal with experimentation and observation for the very definition of its practices and objects. This talk will discuss some of these mathematical observations and the way they are understood as providing mathematical knowledge.

Sherlock Holmes is having a friendly argument with a visiting French detective over which country has the most ingenous criminals when the agon Read more ...

Sherlock Holmes is having a friendly argument with a visiting French detective over which country has the most ingenous criminals when the agony column leads the two Detectives and Dr. Watson into the English countryside to rescue a man in distress and finds himself asked to investigate who wrote Shakespeare’s plays.Original Air Date: May 27, 1946

Patricia Fara, Stephen Pumfrey and Rhodri Lewis join Melvyn Bragg to discuss the Jacobean lawyer, political fixer and alleged founder of modern science Francis Bacon.In the introduction to Thomas Spratt's History of the Royal Society, there is a poem about man called Francis Bacon which declares 'Bacon, like Moses, led us forth at last, The barren wilderness he past, Did on the very border stand Of the blest promis'd land, And from the mountain's top of his exalted wit, Saw it himself, and shew'd us it'.Francis Bacon was a lawyer and political schemer who climbed the greasy pole of Jacobean politics and then fell down it again. But he is most famous for developing an idea of how science should be done - a method that he hoped would slough off the husk of ancient thinking and usher in a new age. It is called Baconian Method and it has influenced and inspired scientists from Bacon's own time to the present day.

Patricia Fara, Stephen Pumfrey and Rhodri Lewis join Melvyn Bragg to discuss the Jacobean lawyer, political fixer and alleged founder of modern science Francis Bacon.In the introduction to Thomas Spratt's History of the Royal Society, there is a poem about man called Francis Bacon which declares 'Bacon, like Moses, led us forth at last, The barren wilderness he past, Did on the very border stand Of the blest promis'd land, And from the mountain's top of his exalted wit, Saw it himself, and shew'd us it'.Francis Bacon was a lawyer and political schemer who climbed the greasy pole of Jacobean politics and then fell down it again. But he is most famous for developing an idea of how science should be done - a method that he hoped would slough off the husk of ancient thinking and usher in a new age. It is called Baconian Method and it has influenced and inspired scientists from Bacon's own time to the present day.

Patricia Fara, Stephen Pumfrey and Rhodri Lewis join Melvyn Bragg to discuss the Jacobean lawyer, political fixer and alleged founder of modern science Francis Bacon.In the introduction to Thomas Spratt's History of the Royal Society, there is a poem about man called Francis Bacon which declares 'Bacon, like Moses, led us forth at last, The barren wilderness he past, Did on the very border stand Of the blest promis'd land, And from the mountain's top of his exalted wit, Saw it himself, and shew'd us it'.Francis Bacon was a lawyer and political schemer who climbed the greasy pole of Jacobean politics and then fell down it again. But he is most famous for developing an idea of how science should be done - a method that he hoped would slough off the husk of ancient thinking and usher in a new age. It is called Baconian Method and it has influenced and inspired scientists from Bacon's own time to the present day.

Lessl’s field is rhetoric. The history of the relationship between faith and science shifted when the theological nucleus was removed and science was inserted. Rhetoric was left behind. Faith was erased in the middle of the nineteenth century. Kant was intensely hostile to Catholicism. He wanted to replace it with humanism.Science evolved in three stages: The Medieval Period during 1100-1600; Baconian science 1600-1750 aligns science with the Protestant Reformation; and Positive science circa mid-18th century during which science was seen as the stable foundation for an enlightened society.From the 2001 History of Liberty seminar.