Talk:Edward Kelley

Identity of Rudolph
King Rudolph II would be?? Rudolf II, Elector of Bavaria? Rudolf II, Holy Roman Emperor? -- Someone else


 * Good question. Shall try to fix that.Cimon avaro

Cool. Good to know! -- Someone else 02:32 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)

Cardan Grille and Enochian
I notice that this article (like the Voynich Manuscript article) says that Kelley may have used a Cardan Grille to construct the Enochian language. I've never seen any evidence for this anywhere, and the structure of Enochian would argue against it. I think this may be a conflation of two different things that Graham Rugg has said in various interviews: a.) that Kelley constructed the artificial language Enochian, and b.) Kelley used a Cardan Grille to construct the Voynich MS. But I don't remember seeing anyone anywhere saying that Enochian was constructed using a Cardin Grille. (I've asked this previously on the Voynich MS talk page, too, but I though this might be a more specific place to ask, since there's a lot going on there and the same assertion is made here.) P.Riis 02:03, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

OK, I'm going to remove the reference to the Cardan Grille in the construction of Enochian. P. Riis 18:33, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Wife Swapping
The article at John Dee says that they went through with the wife-swap, but here it leaves the matter ambiguous...perhaps they should match? --Morbid-o 16:56, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Good point. Done. -- Cimon 18:17, May 8, 2005 (UTC)

The modern speculation that Dee shared his wife corporeally with Kelley is not adequately supported to appear in this entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.10.38.46 (talk) 23:58, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Irish connection?
Does he have Irish origins? The surname Kelly is typically Irish, and Talbot was common amongst the Old English of the Pale.--shtove 21:52, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

POV
This article seems slanted against its subject, with emphasis on "convicted criminal" in the first sentence even though that's by no means what he was notable for; scare quotes used liberally throughout; description of his invention of the Enochian language as a fact, and others' taking it seriously as a farce, despite no citation on that and also giving arguments that suggest he didn't purely invent it; and so on. 216.75.189.154 00:39, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the comments made here. The author seems to have expressed a point of view as a fact when he referred to Edward Kelley's revelations as a farce. It may help if I float the following idea. John Dee openly said that they knew that they were looking at the written form of Adamic. They may have deliberately distracted people from the fact that it is the base langauge, so that they would not see alternative meanings in it until it was the right time. The dictionary and stories of making gold also seem to have been distractions for that purpose. If you ignore individual words, you can quite easily perceive alternative meanings which are just as relevant. These range from a slight re-phrasing to completely different meanings. (Naturally, as there were alternative meanings, this can result in amuzing misunderstandings, but there is nothing that says that God does not have a sense of humour.)

I agree with the above commentators. How many people do you immediately regard as a criminal who, even accepting the bias of this article, invented his own entire language? Kelley's life, like anyone else's biography on Wikipedia, deserves an appraisal, not a condemnation. 173.21.106.137 (talk) 07:31, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 03:30, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Introduction is Biased
Does George W. Bush's introduction state, "a convicted criminal (OWI)?" Does William Burroughs' state "arraigned for murder"? Roman Polanski's "acknowledged sexual criminal?" Jesus Christ's "convicted treasonist?" No. I'm changing the opening sentence to a less biasing statement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.21.106.137 (talk) 07:28, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Was Kelley Knighted ?
A number of sources seem to indicate that this is the case, although I can't find one in the few pertinent books I own.173.21.106.137 (talk) 07:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Kelley and the Voynich Manuscript
The manuscript has been dated to the first half/middle of the 15th century, long before EK's life - the sentence should be reworked. Jackiespeel (talk) 23:24, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The parchment is dated so, but could have been used a little later (if stored properly). prokaryotes (talk) 19:52, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Links
The first external link - to the alchemical writings of EK - no longer works. Jackiespeel (talk) 08:47, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Edward Kelley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120324053652/http://hos.ou.edu/galleries//01Ancient/HeroOfAlexandria/1575//15thCentury/Vespucci/ to http://hos.ou.edu/galleries/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC)