The Modern Forgery Hypothesis

[ReneZ]

But the book's later history was central to his belief and/or arguments for the Bacon authorship.  As you reported in great detail, he did spend quite a bit of effort tracking down that history.  Including investigating the doings of Dee and Kelley, Rudolf, Jacobus, and other people in Rudolf's court.

The evidence suggests that it was the other way around, sort of. He was boasting a Bacon origin as from 1912.  Then, as late as 1915 he was arguing that the Rudolf in the letter was Rudolf I, who was a contemporary of Bacon, who died in 1291, and _NOT_ Rudolf II. 

So yes, he read the name Bacon and the name Rudolf in the letter before that, but he only started to dig into that part of history after he realised it was Rudolf II of Prague, not Rudolf I.
Apparently, that happened around 1918-1919.

   

   

See also here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.