Re: Twelfth Night by William Shakespeare - Commentaries
- Terri or whoever may be looking in to the group these days. Hoping for some comments from you ...I've watched theThe HBO Production of Elizabeth I /Helen Mirren's portrayal was excellent/ recently and looking at the time line see that the Earl of Essex was executed in 1601 and also Francis Bacon has quite a lead part in that particular production about the Queen of the times.After reading some quotes from Shakespeare's play Twelfth Night /and others/, I found these commentaries... This plays Twelfth Night" 1599-1600
"Merry Wives of Windsor" 1601-02
Dost thou think, because thou art virtuous, there shall be no more cakes and ale?
Expectation is the root of all heartache.Love is not love that alters when it alteration finds.
Much of the spontaneity of this scene is lost to the reader of the comedy; however, on the stage, this is a hilarious comic masterpiece. It is a jovial company; first, Sir Toby and Sir Andrew are carousing in drunken, noisy celebration and are soon joined by Feste, who will also provide some songs. Then Maria, complaining at first, finally joins the celebration. The mood is one of partying and indulgence as Maria keeps a constant lookout, for she knows that Malvolio would delight to report just such shenanigans to the Lady Olivia. The rapid, witty exchanges are difficult for the modern audience, but what emerges of major importance is that Sir Toby is not just an average drunk; he is indeed a true wit, whose lines addressed to Sir Andrew establish the fact that the latter is a gull and an ignoramus.
The entrance of Malvolio is particularly comic. Remember that Malvolio is tall, skinny, and bald. Traditionally, he appears dressed in his nightgown and night cap, and he stands above the party makers as a magnificently ridiculous figure carrying a lit candle in a candlestick. It is difficult to take his authority seriously since he looks so ridiculous. Sir Toby and Feste dance around this foolish figure, and finally, when Malvolio reminds Sir Toby that he can be thrown out of the household, Malvolio has taken a step too far. It should be remembered that in the Elizabethan stratified society, Malvolio, while he is a steward, is inferior to Sir Toby in social rank, and whatever limitations Sir Toby may have, he is a knight and he is Lady Olivia's uncle. Thus after Malvolio's threat, Sir Toby asks him, "Art any more than a steward?" Then the essential conflict between the two is stated by Sir Toby: "Dost thou think, because thou art virtuous, there shall be no more cakes and ale?" This final statement characterizes perfectly the two types of people in the world: There are the Malvolios who would have everyone be as austere and priggish as he is, and then there are the Sir Tobys who will always find pleasure in life. The term "cakes and ale" has become famous as a phrase describing pleasure-loving people. After Sir Toby puts Malvolio in his place, Malvolio turns to Maria to reprimand her, and then he exits.
The remainder of the scene deals with the plot which they will all concoct in order to get even with Malvolio, using the knowledge that Malvolio is such an egotist that he would readily believe that a love letter, ostensibly sent from Olivia, was addressed to him. Thus, as the scene ends, we are prepared not only for the complicated love triangle, but also for the duping of the haughty Malvolio. We also see that Sir Toby is aware of an affection that Maria has for him, and at the end of the comedy, we will learn that these two are married.
- Hi Betsy, glad to see a post for this group again. Sorry I've been so pressured with little time and funds for accessing the web, that I may have missed a lot. These days I'm most intrigued by the names used in Shakespeare's plays. MAL VOL IO. Volume 10? Folio?Hope all's well for you and the family. I'm still functioning though I've been without a car for more than a year now, and without electricity for nearly a year and a half. Castle seems to prefer it that way! And I must admit I enjoy the candlelight and firelight from our one working fireplace.I remember that Terri or someone else mentioned that Elizabeth I disappeared into the countryside for a few months at a time to apparently recuperate from illness, and these times appeared to match that of the birth of certain individuals, including Raleigh. Do you know anymore about the source for this? Love, Liz
- --- In AlchemistRoyalAdvisorDrJohnDee@yahoogroups.com,
> Terri or whoever may be looking in to the group these days. Hoping
> comments from you ...Hi Betsy,
I'm still looking in, but haven't had much to say. What would you
comment on in what you posted? Not sure where you want to go . . .
what I find curious, or at least very synchronistic, is 1601/Essex
coming up again. Yesterday Alaerian and another friend of ours wound
up at a free lute concert . . . turned out to be a multimedia
presentation/concert on John Dowland and the "Cult of Elizabeth,"
particularly chronicaling the rise and fall of Essex via the music of
Dowland. So that's what I think of when I look at your post, rather
than anything too scholarly. Re: Twelfth Night: many look at the Duke
Orsino's taste for the "dying fall" as a reference to Dowland's "Flow
My Tears," often connected to Essex.
Also, I'm sure you know the festival of Twelfth Night is the Roman
Saturnalia, the Feast of Fools. The Baconians have an essay about
Twelfth Night and Orpheus over at:
I might connect the dots to different people or at least a different
causal order, but the connections drawn there are at least
> I've watched the
> The HBO Production of Elizabeth I /Helen Mirren's portrayal was
> recently and looking at the time line see that the Earl of Essexwas executed
> in 1601 and also Francis Bacon has quite a lead part in thatparticular
> production about the Queen of the times.Night /and
> After reading some quotes from Shakespeare's play Twelfth
> others/, I found these commentaries... This plays _Twelfth Night_tech.mit.edu/Shakespeare/Comedy/twelfthnight/twelfthnight.html) "
> "_Merry Wives of Windsor_tech.mit.edu/Shakespeare/Comedy/themerrywivesofwindsor/themerrywivesof
windsor.html) " 1601-02
> Dost thou think, because thou art virtuous, there shall be no more
> Expectation is the root of all heartache.
> Love is not love that alters when it alteration finds.
> _Twelfth Night by William Shakespeare - Summaries and
> Much of the spontaneity of this scene is lost to the reader of the
> however, on the stage, this is a hilarious comic masterpiece. Itis a jovial
> company; first, Sir Toby and Sir Andrew are carousing in drunken,noisy
> celebration and are soon joined by Feste, who will also providesome songs. Then
> Maria, complaining at first, finally joins the celebration. Themood is one of
> partying and indulgence as Maria keeps a constant lookout, for sheknows that
> Malvolio would delight to report just such shenanigans to the LadyOlivia.
> The rapid, witty exchanges are difficult for the modern audience,but what
> emerges of major importance is that Sir Toby is not just anaverage drunk; he is
> indeed a true wit, whose lines addressed to Sir Andrew establishthe fact
> that the latter is a gull and an ignoramus.Malvolio is
> The entrance of Malvolio is particularly comic. Remember that
> tall, skinny, and bald. Traditionally, he appears dressed in hisnightgown and
> night cap, and he stands above the party makers as a magnificentlyridiculous
> figure carrying a lit candle in a candlestick. It is difficult totake his
> authority seriously since he looks so ridiculous. Sir Toby andFeste dance
> around this foolish figure, and finally, when Malvolio reminds SirToby that he
> can be thrown out of the household, Malvolio has taken a step toofar. It
> should be remembered that in the Elizabethan stratified society,Malvolio, while
> he is a steward, is inferior to Sir Toby in social rank, andwhatever
> limitations Sir Toby may have, he is a knight and he is LadyOlivia's uncle. Thus
> after Malvolio's threat, Sir Toby asks him, "Art any more than asteward?"
> Then the essential conflict between the two is stated by SirToby: "Dost thou
> think, because thou art virtuous, there shall be no more cakes andale?" This
> final statement characterizes perfectly the two types of people inthe world:
> There are the Malvolios who would have everyone be as austere andpriggish as
> he is, and then there are the Sir Tobys who will always findpleasure in
> life. The term "cakes and ale" has become famous as a phrasedescribing
> pleasure-loving people. After Sir Toby puts Malvolio in his place,Malvolio turns to
> Maria to reprimand her, and then he exits.concoct
> The remainder of the scene deals with the plot which they will all
> in order to get even with Malvolio, using the knowledge thatMalvolio is such
> an egotist that he would readily believe that a love letter,ostensibly sent
> from Olivia, was addressed to him. Thus, as the scene ends, we areprepared
> not only for the complicated love triangle, but also for theduping of the
> haughty Malvolio. We also see that Sir Toby is aware of anaffection that Maria
> has for him, and at the end of the comedy, we will learn thatthese two are
- --- In AlchemistRoyalAdvisorDrJohnDee@yahoogroups.com, "Liz Forrest"
> I remember that Terri or someone else mentioned that Elizabeth Idisappeared
> into the countryside for a few months at a time to apparentlyrecuperate
> from illness, and these times appeared to match that of the birthof certain
> individuals, including Raleigh. Do you know anymore about thesource for
> this? Love, LizHi Liz, sorry I missed this question before.
That discussionw as back in the spring of 2005 when I was posting a
lot of my notes to the list, abnd this list is the only written
source I know of for the speculation. That discussion was
intertwined with my comments on an article called "The Earl and the
Alchemist," and speculation about who likely killed Ferdinando
Stanley and why, but that article does not bring in Ralegh; I did,
and attributed it to an earlier conversation I'd had with Vincent.
See message 544 in particular. I'll paste it in below, but anyone
else interested who wasn't on the list at that time might want to
start with message #506, the start of the "The Earl and the
Alchemist"/part two thread, to make sense of why the discussion went
in this particular direction.
reposted message 544:
--- In AlchemistRoyalAdvisorDrJohnDee@yahoogroups.com, Liz Forrest
> "Of course, to state the obvious, Lord Burgley and his son Robertwell
> Cecil are not Queen, nor is James, yet. Elizabeth is. Her failure
> to do anything about either of the Cecils while being the most overt
> crowned supporter of the occult in recent history boggles the mind.
> The conventional answer is that if she'd "solved" this problem by
> naming an English successor, like the Earl of Derby or the Wizard
> Earl of Northumberland, civil war would ensue; if she named James,
> she was naming a Cecil puppet to the throne. That explanation
> doesn't quite wash. One way to unknot this is by looking into the
> tangled mess surrounding Sir Walter Ralegh, the Earl of Essex, and
> intrigues in Ireland, but another time. Or maybe I'll leave that to
> Liz. :) "
> Oh yez? Just because I was named Elizabeth and born in England,
> in the city of 'satanic mills' (Wm Blake) and now live in a place
> known to Raleigh et al? Might be seen as a green herring in someWhy Liz, you're one of the greenest herrings I know. ; )
> circles! :-)
> However, I suspect that Elizabeth knew she was being kept out ofsome of
> the deeper machinations of the occult male world,I think a whole book could be written about this-- though to prove
anything we'd have to go symbol by symbol, because it can only be
argued in terms of images and associations. Early in her life,
especially before she is Queen, it seems pretty clear Elizabeth is at
the center of some sort of group of female initiates, probably what
Margaret Alice Murray calls the witch cult.
(BTW, just learned that her book "The Witch-Cult in Western Europe"
is now all available on-line at:
It would be interesting sometime to talk about how that symbolism,
particularly of the Pearl, gives hints to how Elizabeth tries to
magickally influence the court. I'm fairly sure she has a
magickal "system" early on that, like that of the "witch cult"
because they're the same, is focused at Yesod, and works pretty well
at influencing local events. It doesn't work really well at
influencing things beyond the local when one is up against the odds
that she and other women of that time were up against. If I may be
banal, its like trying to keep a small business in operation in the
age of corporate takeovers.
Not that there's some cut-off point where she switches from one sort
of alchemical symbols to another, but one starts to predominate over
the other, and those who have access to instruction in the latter are
almost all male, except for a few curious exceptions like the
alchemist Countess of Pembroke.
(Now, if a student of mine wrote something as generalized as what I'd
just typed, I'd insist they give some sort of explanation or
examples, but for now I'll just turn it around and say: if anyone's
interested in this, look and see if you can find the evidence. LOL.
When life calms down some day, I'll do the same, and post it.)
By the time period we're talking about, (at least) two things have
1. most of the women who were around her early on are dead, or
neutralized by being married off to creeps.
2. she has acquired some caballistic understanding from someone, and
the someone has to be Dee. The magickal imagery shifts from a focal
point at Yesod to Tiphareth.
But at the same time this is happening, as almost all of the female
players but Elizabeth are removed from the scene, yes, she is kept
out of many of the machinations of that world: most particularly, she
is kept out of the circles that don't involve Dee, who of course is
gone for many years and comes back to a vastly different country.
People who write of Dee's connection to the "spy networks" usually
write that he worked for Francis Walsingham. If one looks at the
symbolism, and considers the role a court magician would have, one
sees that this can't possibly be true. Dee has to be, from
Elizabeth's coronation on, the "head" of her intelligence network,
and Walsingham (before Dee leaves) reports to Dee. While Dee is
gone, Walsingham is behind all sorts of things Dee would never
have "approved" of, but remember Walsingham is an operator who
figures out how to do things in the physical; he's no magician
intelligencer, but a spymaster of Malkuth. When Dee and Kelly leave,
its a sign of how precarious things have become, but one shouldn't
make the mistake of thinking that somehow he's sneaking out of the
country before the Queen finds out about it. Its the Cecils he's
trying to get away from, in the middle of the night with the help of
the Stanleys, and they are going to a point where Dee (and Elizabeth,
whom presumably has been advised) thinks he will have greater
LOL, leverage to do what, is the million dollar question? To herald
in the "Golden Age." Examples? Ah, later.
which just might
> explain why Raleigh and Spenser arrived here in 1580 with the troopsEarl
> and Lord Grey
> de Wilton, respectively, under orders to seize (and inspect?) the
> of Desmond's library. I gather that c. 90 MS were received by her,but
> the original library may well have been censored before everleaving this
> place.As I said in my other post, I would love to find more information on
this, even if its legendary or guesswork. Any idea if some of those
manuscripts were connected to St. Malachy?
Admittedly this is sheer but intuitive guesswork on my part, as
> I'm 'reading between the lines' of the outlines we've been handeddown
> and looking at how prevalent all-male secret societies have been.anyone
> But it could explain her prevarication if she was unable to trust
> around her, and perhaps she saw the Cecils and their faction as atool
> to test her supposed closer followers/allies against?That's an interesting idea, though I think really she knows from
early on that they're her greatest danger, and the people behind a
host of deaths close to her, from her first Lord Treasurer Parry to
Leicester's wife Amy Robsart. I think she makes the mistake of
thinking she is smarter than Lord Burgley, and way overplays her
It would also depend
> upon just how conscious she was on other levels, perhaps allowingherself
> to be guided from a particular 'angelic' source, following Dee'slead? Would
> she have entrusted that kind of information about herself to anyoneelse?
> Did Love betray her in that sense, in pillow talk?Not sure what you mean here, unless you're referring again to
the "who are Elizabeth's children" game. But since I'm the one who
raised the question about why Elizabeth doesn't do something about
the Cecils, consider that what may have "betrayed her" was her own
rather odd interactions with her offspring.
Yes, I am assuming she had some, but not Francis Bacon. In one of my
more obsessive periods, I went through Agnes Strickland's book on
Elizabeth (in the Lives of the Queens of England), which despite its
weird Victorian prudishness is still the most detailed book I could
find), and Strickland's sources to the degree I could get them, and
tried to find times in Elizabeth's life when she could have had
children. Then I matched that against some more recent books, and
found that they were not as detailed as Strickland.
I'm not alone in playing this game, so I also went through the works
of others who had looked for the same thing-- mainly the Baconians.
They usually come up with two: Francis Bacon and the Earl of Essex.
Replace Bacon with the Countess of Pembroke, and for once I agree
with them, though as I've said before, it should be obvious to anyone
who studies Dee's circle that Bacon is on the "outside," not the
inside, and serves as a perfect occult blind due to his sharing the
same birth year as the Countess of Pembroke. Built into my argument
is the assumption that the Queen's children would all have been
magickal students of Dee, just as she and her brother Edward were.
The events and strange controversies around the Earl of Essex (as
well as his winding up at court and rising so fast) make much more
sense if you factor him into the succession game as the Queen's son,
as some Baconians do, and suppose that even as late as 1593 she still
entertains some fantasy that he can somehow get over his misogynism
and be acknowledged in time. Some of the later progresses,
especially the one put on by Sir Henry Lee (who some say was
Elizabsth's half-brother) seem to be using imagery to help magickally
bring this about. It also might explain Francis Bacon's connection
to Essex: Bacon is as syncophantic as he is smart, and perhaps knows
Essex thinks he will be King. So Bacon attaches himself to Essex.
When it becomes clear Essex is headed for the Tower instead, Bacon
drops him and sucks onto James. Dee's group has had to cut their
connection with Essex by the 1590s, because its become clear he's
mainly a danger to himself and others, regardless of who his parents
But we have one more person who, even more than Essex, comes from
nowhere and rises quickly at court, who is the Queen's favorite and
who she seems unusually involved in the life of. That's Sir Walter
Take a look at where he is born, supposedly to whom, and tell me how
he possibly winds up at court being as favored as he is. Then take a
look at his birthday, and you'll notice he's born right about the
same time as when the teen-aged Elizabeth is "sick" and out of the
public eye and even unable to have visitors for months, near the same
time as when those who are taking care of her (one of whom is later
killed, likely on Burgley's orders) are on trial because of
the "supposed" romantic relations between Princess Elizabeth and
Thomas Seymour. (Seymour is married to Queen Catharine Parr, who has
outlived Henry VIII. Elizabeth lives in the household until
Catharine sends her away due to her relations with Seymour; by then,
I'd guess, Elizabeth is already pregnant. In a matter of months,
Seymour is executed).
Admittedly, I didn't connect this to Ralegh on my own. I figured out
that Elizabeth could easily have been pregnant at that time, and
started looking for who could have been born that year. Vincent
suggested I look at court favorites who seemed to be there for no
apparent reason . . . and the only name that pops up who is the right
age is Walter Ralegh. I'd love to find others speculating on the
topic, but he and I are the only two people I know.
If Ralegh was Elizabeth's son, it makes most of what we see in the
1590s make sense; it makes Dee's tolerating Adrian Gilbert (Ralegh's
half-brother) make sense (as well as the Countess of Pembroke
employing Gilbert); and it makes Essex's rivalry with Ralegh make
sense. Just assume that Essex wants the crown but has been too
messed up by the Cecils (remember he grew up in Burgley's household)
to be trusted, and Ralegh is the first-born son but-- like the other
possible heirs apparent, the Stanley brothers, and like the Wizard
Earl of Northumberland--doesn't really want it. It also explains
Elizabeth's reaction to both Ralegh and Essex's marraiges. As for
Ralegh being from Devonshire . . . if you look at others close in the
line of succession back in the 1550s, you find a Tudor cousin in
Of course, I don't expect anyone here to buy this argument, and I'm
pretty sure it will stay out of what Vincent and I are writing about
Dee and Shakespeare. On the other hand, if you take it, please
attribute. ; )
By the way, this also helps account for the different attitudes
Ralegh and Essex have towards the "Matter of Ireland." What is
doesn't explain, still, is what all these different folks were
looking for there, or what they found.
It's a tricky one, as
> even dreams come from an unknown source, and are often out ofcontext,
> just as with the words and voices I've sometimes heard.Southwells,
> I do see that Raleigh, Spenser, the Boyles of Cork, and the
> the Throckmortons, and Parsons seem to have been in a very closecircle,
> partly due to their situation in a conquered land, and maybe alsobecause
> of their relationship with Elizabeth Ist, and that the Southwellswere
> not only Freemasons, but one was Robert Southwell, the Jesuit poetand
> The Jesuit relationship to the Church in Rome is also an intriguing
> They've sometimes seemed to me, to be more reminiscent of theancient
> Druids' supposed attitude to learning than most other westernreligious
> groups, at least from what my father told me of his experience withthem.
>Can you say more about what you mean here?
- --- In AlchemistRoyalAdvisorDrJohnDee@yahoogroups.com, "Terri Burns"
> Not sure what you mean here, unless you're referring again toMeanwhile, one could also play the "whatever happened to Henry
> the "who are Elizabeth's children" game.
VIII's "illegitimate" offspring game, just for yuks and to see how
they impact the England of Dee's time.
You'll find out he actually had many male offspring, and not just the
ones that died young or stillborn, and not only "legitimate" Edward,
born in 1536, the year after Henry axed Anne Boleyn. These offspring
include Henry Fitzroy (put in the line of succession even
though "illegitimate," but who died in . . . 1536), Sir John Perrott,
Thomas Stukley, and Henry Carey. The last three often used to be
spoken of as men "reputed" to be Henry VIII's sons, though more and
more historians assume the reputation is the reality.
You can find a Wikipedia listing of Henry VIII's offspring that most
historians would agree with:
What happenned to all these "illegitimate" royals when they grow up?
Its curious that three of them, John Perrott, Catharine Carey, and
Henry Carey, can be pretty easily connected to the circle around Dee,
and Thomas Stukley to Robert Dudley, Dee's parton.
John Perrott supposedly looked like Henry VIII and had his temper. He
was close to Edward and Elizabeth, and caused all kinds of difficulty
late in his life as the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. You can make
some interesting and disturbing connections between Perrot's later
years and the activities surrounding everyone from Dee to Essex to
William Stanley. That he was in the circle around Dee may not mean
that it was a very comfortable connection; it certainly was not so
for Elizabeth, had years of trouble dealing with this explosive half-
brother. Thomas Stukley was associated with the Seymours (connection
to Thomas Seymour of early Elibethan scandals I looked act when
making the argument about Ralegh as a possible son of Elizabeth), was
from Devon (like Ralegh), but unlike Ralegh was a double or triple
agent between France and England who actively supported his half-
sister Mary and opposed the rule of his other half-sister, Elizabeth.
The Carey family seems like a less problematic association. (Go
ahead, ask for sources here if you need them and I'll pull out a
stack, or just take the easy explanation that, unlike Perrot and
Stukley, they are descendents of both the Tudors and Boleyns) These
days, no one seems to dispute whether or not Henry Carey was Henry
VIII's son by Mary Boleyn . . . mainly because the current heirs,
Princes William and Harry, trace their ancestry back to Henry VIII
via Henry Carey. Funny what a little royal support will do towards
legitimizing the bloodline. When Dee was in the Tower, another Carey
(Christopher Carey) was part of what looks like a Protestant cell
surrounding Dee and supportnig Elizabeth (see discussion in Woolsey's
book _The Queen's Conjurer_.)
In looking for connections between Dee, Kelley, the Stanleys, and
Shakespeare, this is of interest because, after Ferdinando Stanley
Lord Strange dies/is killed in 1594, his players (which likely
include Shakespeare and included Marlowe until his death-by-political-
hit in 1593), Henry Carey, Lord Chamberlain and half-brother of the
Queen, becomes their patron. Carey, like the Stanleys, Ralegh,
Essex, and Henry Percy, appears part of the circles that Cecil and
his spy ring considered "in the way" of their effort to put James I
of Scotland on the throne. Dee has connections to everyone involved,
so if you read his diary entries from his return to England in 1589,
we should assume that what may be most important is what can't be
said. (See earlier thread on the Hesketh plot, for instance, or
message 553, the 1593-1594 timeline).
For what that all is worth. Maybe its a good advertisement for
people to not breed.
- --- In AlchemistRoyalAdvisorDrJohnDee@yahoogroups.com, "Terri Burns"
> You can find a Wikipedia listing of Henry VIII's offspring thatmost
> historians would agree with:Oh, and I forgot to mention another little sub-thread no one (that I
know of) seems to have followed . . .
One of these children (and the only "illegitimate" daughter anyone
tells us of, except of course, Elizabeth on the occasions she is
called "illegitamate") is a woman named "Etheldreda Malte" who
marries John Harrington and supposedly dies with no children. Anyone
who wants to do a little digging might find interesting connections
(back) to Dee's father and (foreward) to Shakespeare by following the
lines connected to this group.
Some help, by indirection:
I find all this very fascinating and look forward to trying to help
delve into it ...
At the moment Elizabeth (Cate Blanchett) is on AMC - I'm watching it,
but so far her offering does not quite match the HBO one...
I'm not feeling up to par lately so I'll just keep these notes and be
hoping to get back with you all later,
--- In AlchemistRoyalAdvisorDrJohnDee@yahoogroups.com, "Terri Burns"
> --- In AlchemistRoyalAdvisorDrJohnDee@yahoogroups.com, "Terri
> <burnst@> wrote:I
> > You can find a Wikipedia listing of Henry VIII's offspring that
> > historians would agree with:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VIII_of_England
> Oh, and I forgot to mention another little sub-thread no one (that
> know of) seems to have followed . . .Anyone
> One of these children (and the only "illegitimate" daughter anyone
> tells us of, except of course, Elizabeth on the occasions she is
> called "illegitamate") is a woman named "Etheldreda Malte" who
> marries John Harrington and supposedly dies with no children.
> who wants to do a little digging might find interesting connectionsthe
> (back) to Dee's father and (foreward) to Shakespeare by following
> lines connected to this group.
> Some help, by indirection:
- --- In AlchemistRoyalAdvisorDrJohnDee@yahoogroups.com, "elfsbeth"
>Thanks . . . look forward to seeing what you come up with.
> I find all this very fascinating and look forward to trying to help
> delve into it ...
BTW, along with posting many typos, I've made at least one mistake--
Henry VIII had daughters not in the line of succession other than
"Etheldreda Malte." I mentioned one of them, Catharine Carey, in an
earlier post. I suppose that should teach me not to write off the top
of my head (but it probably won't.)
Incidentally, you can find "Etheldreda Malte"'s name referred to
various ways . . . "Ethelreda Dingley," and "Audrey Dingley" to name a
couple. She was supposedly the daughter of Henry VIII's tailor (when
not being pointed out at the daughter of Henry VIII.) Dee's father,
remember, was a "gentleman sewer" (not server, as sometimes mis-
reported) of Henry VIII. She also winds up connected indirectly, via
Harrington, to the Ardens, Shakespeare's mother's family.
- Oh my goodness, thanks so much for the connections, especially the
Dingley one, Terri. There's a family with a very similar name which
traces back to Kerry that I've often wondered about. Area of Kerry
known still as 'the Dingle'? O Driscolls would have connections
around that area too, Valencia Island, etc., being mariners with
history tracing back to being admirals for the Irish high kings. Was
Dee a name which stemmed from the use of the initial D? Use of the
name Delta has appeared in many spy stories. :-) Drus Ceoil (druid
of the wood?) also holds a D, Delta or Door connection as Druid and
Oak. I take it her first name indicates Anglo-Saxon heritage too?
Would much appreciate any other pointers and thanks for the url above.
On 10/16/06, Terri Burns <burnst@...> wrote:
> --- In AlchemistRoyalAdvisorDrJohnDee@yahoogroups.com, "elfsbeth"
> <ClaireNoaell@...> wrote:
> > Terri,
> > I find all this very fascinating and look forward to trying to help
> > delve into it ...
> Thanks . . . look forward to seeing what you come up with.
> BTW, along with posting many typos, I've made at least one mistake--
> Henry VIII had daughters not in the line of succession other than
> "Etheldreda Malte." I mentioned one of them, Catharine Carey, in an
> earlier post. I suppose that should teach me not to write off the top
> of my head (but it probably won't.)
> Incidentally, you can find "Etheldreda Malte"'s name referred to
> various ways . . . "Ethelreda Dingley," and "Audrey Dingley" to name a
> couple. She was supposedly the daughter of Henry VIII's tailor (when
> not being pointed out at the daughter of Henry VIII.) Dee's father,
> remember, was a "gentleman sewer" (not server, as sometimes mis-
> reported) of Henry VIII. She also winds up connected indirectly, via
> Harrington, to the Ardens, Shakespeare's mother's family.
> Yahoo! Groups Links