The text below is excerpted from the much longer article.  Amazing stuff.

http://www.dipmat.unipg.it/~bartocci/ep2ded.htm

The idea for this secret and farsighted course arose from the intense debate
in England of the 1580's and 90's on war as the instrument for national
security and expansion. It was becoming clear to men like William Cecil, his
son Robert, the mathematician and intelligencer John Dee, scholar Hakluyt,
Francis Walsingham, and Francis Bacon that England's future lay in overseas
trade, expansion, inventions and that, because of its naval superiority,
insular England - in the words of Bacon - "is at liberty and may take as
much and as little of the war as (it) will." The debate was a national one.
Students and teachers at Oxford were debating in that decade among the usual
"Questiones Philosophicae" such as "Is Woman a nature's mistake?," "Do many
worlds exist?," also "Can war be just for both sides?," "Should one advocate
war to promote national goals?," "Is it wiser for a king to invade or [wait]
to be invaded?" The same issues - as we shall see - were discussed among
lawyers and students of jurisprudence at Gray's Inn where Bacon worked in
1590's. In the intellectual atmosphere of the Elisabethan establishment
these debates reflected and influenced the political struggle on the issue
in the Court and the Privy Council between the "peace party" led by William
and Robert Cecil and the "war party" led by Essex, Walter Raleigh and
others. These argued as Essex did in May 1598 in his Apologia that "Peace
will encourage the enemy," "A just war is our necessity," while the Cecils
maintained what they always believed and acted upon, that "War is a curse."
In that month at one fiery Privy Council meeting the elder Cecil shut up
Essex by reading to him prophetically from his pocket Bible about the "men
of blood" dying prematurily, which Essex did of the axe at 32 in 1601. By
1604 under James I who succeeded Elisabeth in 1603 the issue was settled.
Raleigh was in the Tower and Robert Cecil had negotiated for England a peace
after 30 years of strife and war with Spain, a peace that helped to open her
global ernpire to British trade.

The Grandest Scheme

Previous decipherers of the Rainbow, Frances Yates, Roy Strong and Rene
Graziani, approached it as an expression of "courtly eulogy," of a cult of
Elisabeth or "religious sentiment." For Elisabeth herself, her Privy
Council, Court and establishment, these were the sweets and trifles whereas
power politics, policy, knowledge, intelligence were the daily bread. For
the men of the new Elisabethan generation such as Essex, Raleigh, Francis
Bacon and others in the decade after the 1588 Armada defeat, the language of
art and religion, if used at all, was at best a means to communicate,
embellish or hide more ambitious political schemes. Theirs were the updated
concerns of the previous generation's explorers, sea dogs like Drake,
Cavendish, Hawkins, promoters of commerce like William Cecil and Gresham,
intelligencers like Walsingham, Richard Hakluyt and John Dee. Their exploits
and designs are described in great detail in Richard Hakluyt's The Principal
Navigations, Voyages, Traffiques & Discoveries of the English Nation, Made
by Sea or Over-Land to the Remote and Farthest quarters of the Earth at any
time within the compasse of these 1600 Years, published in London in 1589;
in biographies of William Cecil, Thomas Gresham, Francis Walsingham, John
Dee, Francis Drake and others. The "aspiring minds" of the new generation,
as shown by R. Elser, saw the whole earth as England's imperial "Oyster" to
be "opened" by Englishmen's intellectual, political, military, commercial
and geographic "grand schemes," "mighty designs," "romantic models," as they
called them. They dreamed, in Raleigh's words "to seek new worlds for gold,
for praise, for glory." Such was Sherley's idea to close Suez to Spanish
trade, Essex's plan to invade Spain, Robert Cecil's "Grand Contract" between
King and Parliament. Such were Raleigh's colonial expeditions and searches
for Eldorado, Bacon's goal for a "total reconstruction of science, arts and
all human knowledge" to serve England and by it humanity. Most such ideas
were, as a Venetian diplomat described Sherley's, "Grand Scheme, Impossible
to accomplish." The Rainbow, I suggest was the grandest scheme of all. Some
time around the year 1600 cousins Francis Bacon and Robert Cecil, most
probably with the knowledge of Elisabeth, were involved in the production of
a farsighted statement of Pax Britannica and imperial strategy based not on
war but on England's intelligence, espionage, science, and other might.

Some of Elisabeth's portraits have one or two such strange features (the
"Phoenix," the "Ermine," the "Sieve", the "Ditchley"'). The Rainbow has
three dozens of them. Why these unusual features? Why so many? What do they
mean? Up to now art historians who tried have not been able to answer these
questions. The Rainbow remains a mystery. FrancesYates, one of the most
productive and bestknown interpreters of Elisabethan and Rennaissance art
symbolism, tried as many other art historians to solve the Rainbow mystery.
In her last work in 1975 she concluded: "Every detail in this picture is
significant ... We may wonder how the artist, or the designer of this
picture could have supposed the beholder of it would understand its
complicated allusions."

To answer these questions, to solve the Rainbow mystery one must reconsider
the approach to art as expressed in the Rainbow in comparison to that of
"pure art" historians of today. To start with, for Elisabeth herself, her
Privy-Council led by such pragmatic politicians as William and Robert Cecil,
for her court and the whole English establishment both before and after
1588, as for the kings, courts and governments of Europe including the
Vatican, "courtly eulogy" (F. Yates), "religious sentiment" (R. Graziani),
the "cult" of Elisabeth (R. Strong) - as they saw the essence of the Rainbow
portrait - were the form, whereas power politics, policy formulation and
implementation, knowledge and intelligence operations were the content of
their daily work and concern. For all of them the language of artistic and
religious symbolism was an ideological and political weapon extremely useful
to mythologize, rationalize and disguise their political, economic, military
goals, ambitions, designs and dreams.

In spite of abundant sources it is not an easy history to write. For, though
feared by everyone, there was no formally organized secret service in
Elisabethan England. In typical English fashion each of its top leaders did
his own intelligence thing - developed sources and agent networks - while
reacting to internal and external threats in the pursuit of more or less
jointly defined national goals. It is the sharing of these goals and of
daily experience that generated the Elisabethan intelligence culture,
unwritten doctrine and tradition all secretly and silently transmitted to
future generations. From the commented deeds, principles, judgements and
writings of five key Elisabethan figures I shall proceed to extract the
basic themes of the knowledge and intelligence doctrines guiding their daily
practical work and relevant for the Rainbow. Four of them are, what Bacon
called power "gamesters": Queen Elisabeth herself, ruling England as an
absolute monarch for 45 years, William Cecil, Francis Walsingham and Robert
Cecil for 64 years the Principal Secretaries of State of England. Their job
was defined by R. Cecil at the end of this period to be "at liberty to deal
... with all matter of speech and intelligence" and for that purpose "to
maintain men abroad ... from all parts of the world." The fifth is the very
foremost analyst of the times, Francis Bacon, the ideologue of the knowledge
revolution of l6th century, who forsightedly saw in intelligence "the light
of the State," the link binding power with knowledge and said so in the
"Rainbow scheme" in 1600 and in his writings right up to his posthumous New
Atlantis in 1626.

Her faithful servant and most famous intelligencer Francis Walsingham was
continuously in trouble with Elisabeth for putting his aggressive,
expansionist religious ideology first, thus: "I wish God's glory and next
the Queen's safety". Elisabeth's shoe throwing and screaming at Walsingham
in 1575 and many times before and after, "You Puritan, you will never be
content till you drive me into a war on all sides and bring the king of
Spain unto me," was accompanied by subtler criticisms of his policy. By
means of a symbolic, iconographic message Elisabeth gave Walsingham the same
lesson. She presented him with a symbolic painting - now in possession of
Mrs Dent-Brocklehurst in England - showing herself leading peace by hand
into England while her predecessor on the throne and sister, Queen Mary, and
her husband, Phillip, King of Spain, are leading the God of War, thus
identifying Walsingham's policy with that of Englands archenemy of the time.

>From 1570 to 1600 at least eight important merchant adventures and
commercial share companies were founded (i.a., East India Company in
December 1600) with the participation of top members of Elisabeth's
government, all of whom were "encouragers of merchants."

With such ambitions and goals in view from William Cecil right from the
start domestic and foreign intelligence was an essential tool of government.
The demand for and the use of intelligence was continuously generated by
five key factors. Four of them are those identified by H. Wilensky in 1967
in his Organizational Intelligence as generators of the intelligence effort
of any social system: the belief prevalent in the power elite if not of the
system that its problems can be rationally described and dealt with, its
degree of conflict with the environment, the unity of its power elite if not
of the system, the complexity of the system and of its problems. For William
Cecil, Francis Walsingham and the whole Elisabethan establishment there was
from the start a fifth factor: the danger of being certain, of feeling
secure about your own, the intentions and capabilities of your allies and
enemies, the need for continuous vigilance, and a continuous search for
indications both of future perils and opportunities. Archives are full of
evidence of the Elisabethan awareness of this fifth factor. It is first of
all seen in the creative use of questions in government documents as tools
to set in doubt the existing estimates, to detect new problems and
alternatives. Furthermore, Walsingham stated in 1586 this basic English
intelligence doctrine generating principle when he wrote to Cecil that the
factions and disagreements within the government are not so dangerous, but
that "there is nothing more dangerous than [the feeling of] securitie." In
1574 he warned Cecil that the new Spanish Ambassador has come "to lulle us a
sleepe for a tyme."

The principal sectors in which William Cecil and his successors concentrated
their intelligence effort were: internal security and counter-espionage,
political and military intelligence in Europe including "kindling fires" in
enemy camps, commercial and economic intelligence, and in time the
"expansion intelligence" in all parts of the globe.

Walsingham: "A Diligent Searcher of Hidden Secrets"

This way of thinking - with rationalizations, suspicions, emphasis on
"foresight" - generated demand for intelligence, for covert, diplomatic,
paramilitary and other operations, counter-intelligence, police, judicial,
diplomatic and political action. The best documentated example of such
intelligence generation in the course of crisis management is the one
related to the assassination of William of Orange in June 1584. Three
documents in question were all written by Francis Walsingham, the man Cecil
chose in 1572, when he became Lord Treasurer, to succeed him as the
Secretary of State.

By the Spring of 1587, when preliminary intelligence reports from all over
Europe indicated Spain's intention to invade England, Walsingham drafted in
his own hand the following:

"Plot for Intelligence out of Spain"

1. Sir Edward Stafford [English ambassador in France] to draw what he can
from the Venetian ambassador.

2. To procure some correspondence with the French King's ambassador in
Spain.

3. To take order with some at Rouen to have frequent advertisements from
such as arrive out of Spain at Nantes, Newhaven [Havre] and Dieppe.

4. To make choice of two especial persons French, Flemings or Italians to go
along the coast to see what preparations ore a making there. To furnish them
with letters of credit.

5. To have two intelligencers at the Court of Spain, one of Finale, another
of Genoa.

6. To have intelligence at Brussels, Leyden, Bar.

7. To employ the Lord of Dunsany.

One basic principle of English intelligence is thus formulated in the
official history of British Intelligence in the Second World War (by F.H.
Hinsley et alii, 1981): "The value and the justification of intelligence
depend on the use that is made of its findings." Numerous examples show that
this principle was established and used consistently under Elisabeth's
reign. This is clearly shown by how from the "Matters to be resolved in
Council," "A plot for the Annoying the King of Spain," the "Plot for
Intelligence out of Spain" and the intelligence Walsingham and others
gathered, a plan was devised for preventive action. Richard Hakluyt in Vol.
VI of his The Principal Navigations, Voyages, Traffiques and discoveries of
the English Nation, whose first volume was dedicated to Walsingham in 1589,
its second and third editions to Robert Cecil in 1597 and 1600, describes
the famous Cadiz raid in 1587 by the English fleet under the command of Sir
Francis Drake: A brief relation of the notable service performed by Sir
Francis Drake upon the Spanish Fleete prepared in the Road of Cadiz; and of
his destroying of 100 sails of barks, etc. The report starts with the
relation of intelligence on which the operation is based: "Her Majestie
being informed of a mighty preparation by Sea begunne in Spain for the
invasion of England, by good advice of her grave and prudent Counsell
thought it expedient to prevent the same." Thus, having in the words of
Drake "singed the beard of the King of Spain" by this preventive action
based on intelligence, Walsingham continued his intelligence effort, so that
when in June 1588 the Spanish Armada approached England, the English - in
the words of one observer - "knew more about the Armada than the king of
Spain himself."

Whoever reads only a small sample of Elisabethan government documents will
find that from his first day in office William Cecil - as well as Walsingham
and Robert Cecil after him - began to identify the shifting intelligence
objectives as the one just described, to invent intelligence software
techniques necessary for the purpose, to find or manage men who "could
penetrate everything" and "keep a bright lookout on all sides." The targets
were many and the three Principal Secretaries of State neglected none: all
ports, borders with Scotland, Catholic refugee groups and seminars training
infiltrator priests in the Low Countries, France, Spain and Rome, recusants
in prison in England, all embassies in London, dissatisfied nobility, Mary
of Scotland, the Papal curia, England's chief resources, money and export
markets, various factions contending for power in France, Dutch factions and
court, Ireland, and numerous actual or potential agents or double agents
etc. The activity this intelligence effort required of the Secretary of
State - besides other duties than domestic and foreign intelligence - was
enormous. We know that Robert Cecil in 80 days in 1610, according to one
contemporary "directed and signed 2884 letters" besides "other continuous
employment." About William Cecil's agent network there is little systematic
knowledge but abundant evidence keeps repeating "His spies were everywhere,"
"Spies and secret agents paid by him were in every court and camp." For
Walsingham and Robert Cecil we have some indications of the relatively small
organisation and the cost of intelligence. According to Beale, Walsingham at
one time received information from agents in 37 places, from 12 in France to
3 in the Turkish Empire. This was handled by a small number of clerks in
London taking care of correspondence, archives and agents.

Many students of history claim that British secret service practiced this
doctrine everywhere during the centuries of the Empire. Some of Walsingham's
exploits along the same line, "intelligence is war carried by other means,"
have become legends hard to document, but nevertheless parts of the British
intelligence lore. Two of them are to be found in Wellwood's Memoirs. The
first tells that from an agent in the Pope's entourage Walsingham obtained
the Spanish plans for the financing of the invasion of England: "upon this
Intelligence, Walsingham found a way to retard the Spanish invasion for a
whole Year, by getting the Spanish Bills protested at Genoa, which should
have supplied them with Mony to carry on their Preparations." The other
example is that - according to Wellwood "Walsingham also laid the Foundation
of the Civil Wars in France and in the Low-Countries, which put a final stop
to the vast Designs of the House of Austria" and told the Queen "that she
had no reason to fear the Spaniard; for tho he had a strong Appetite, and a
good Digestion, he had given him such a Bone to pick as would take him up
twenty Years at least, and break his Teeth at last. So her Majesty had no
more to do, but to throw into the Fire she had kindled, some English Fuel
from time to time to keep it burning."

"You see ... we maintein a trade not for gold, silver or jewels, nor for
silks, nor for spices, nor for any commodity of matter, but only for God's
first creature, which was LIGHT; to have light (I say) of the growth of all
parts of the world ... These adventureres (he added) we call Merchants of
Light." What all the political scientists and historians of science who have
written on Bacon have missed or passed over is that these and a dozen other
types of "merchants" listed in New Atlantis are plain and simple
intelligencers, acting secretly abroad under a variety of covers and that
the security of the New Atlantis against foreign intelligencers is extremely
high. New Atlantis can be understood as a creative synthesis of the enormous
commercial, exploratory, freebooter experience accumulated from 1560 to 1600
and described in books like Hakluyt's voyages. Historians, in my opinion,
have not explored this as the source for the "New Atlantis scheme." This is
exactly how succeeding generations of the English intellectual elite
understood the New Atlantis. Foulke Glenvill, for example, says that with
his New Atlantis Bacon produced a "mighty design" for the Royal Society. And
in its earliest days the Royal Society did not act only as a center for
research in the natural sciences but also for economic, technological,
scientific intelligence, as anyone who has read the early Philosophical
Transactions can testify. Spratt's history of the Royal Society in 1666
describes in detail the use of detailed "Queries" to program the"merchants
of light" before they sailed from England and to "debrief" them, as one
would say today, upon their return. Thus, thanks to Bacon the value not only
of the political but also of economic, geographic, technological, scientific
intelligence became an early component of the English intelligence culture -
long before this was the fact in any other country.

Except for the likeness of Elisabeth the symbols of light dominate all
others in the Rainbow. Thus in order of "brilliance" one [c]an list these
light symbols as the golden cloak with its eyes, the astronomical symbols:
the sun - identified with England and Elisabeth, with her bright, sunny
face, and its position relative fo the rainbow in her hand and the
inscription in Latin above the hand; the moon - the image of Walsingham (?),
Elisabeth's chief intelligencer who sees in the dark all plots and
intrigues; of Cynthia of the Seas, and of the virgin goddess Diana Lucifera;
the rainbow; the profusion of pearls, rubies, diamonds, throughout the
painting. It is significant to note that in Advancement of Learning, Bacon
compares the interactions of light with the noble stones to various kinds of
truth, both those obvious and those of the more knotted, complex, tortured
kind: "Truth as a naked and open daylight ... may perhaps come to the price
of a pearl that showeth best by day; but it will not rise to the price of a
diamond or carbuncle that showeth in varied lights."

Out of a total of 37 identified symbols in the Rainbow, 14 are connected
with light (and light as intellect). Finally, as the last and most important
symbol of light in the Rainbow we have to examine closely the meanings of
the knotted snake, made entirely of noble stones, representing for Bacon,
among others, Lucifer, the bearer of light.





Reply via email to