(d) THOMAS VAUGHAN.

"when this juggling fateOf soldiery first seiz'd me."

In the same poem he mentions

"that day, when weLeft craggy Biston and the fatal Dee."

"Craggy Biston" is clearly Beeston Castle, one of the outlying defences of Chester, situated on a steeprock not very far east of the Dee. This castle was besieged on several occasions during the Civil War, especially during the campaign of 1645, when Chester was also besieged by the Parliamentarians.[12]Between Beeston and the Dee was fought, on September 24, 1645, the battle of Rowton Heath, after which Charles the First, who had hoped to raise the siege of Chester, was obliged to retreat to Denbigh.[13]The following lines from Vaughan'sElegy on Mr. R. W.(vol. ii., p. 79), who fell in that battle, seem to have been written by an eye-witness:

"O that dayWhen like the fathers in the fire and cloudI miss'd thy face! I might in ev'ry crowdSee arms like thine, and men advance, but noneSo near to lightning mov'd, nor so fell on.Have you observ'd how soon the nimble eyeBrings th' object to conceit, and doth so viePerformance with the soul, that you would swearThe act and apprehension both lodg'd there?Just so mov'd he: like shot his active handDrew blood, ere well the foe could understand.But here I lost him."

This appears to me pretty conclusive evidence; against it, however, must be set the passage on theCivil War in the autobiographical poemAd Posteros(vol. ii., p. 51).

Vixi, divisos cum fregerat haeresis AnglosInter Tysiphonas presbyteri et populi.His primum miseris per amoena furentibus arvaProstravit sanctam vilis avena rosam.Turbarunt fontes, et fusis pax perit undis,Moestaque coelestes obruit umbra dies.Duret ut integritas tamen, et pia gloria, partemMe nullam in tanta strage fuisse, scias;Credidimus nempe insonti vocem esse cruori,Et vires quae post funera flere docent.Hinc castae, fidaeque pati me more parentisCommonui, et lachrimis fata levare meis;Hinc nusquam horrendis violavi sacra procellis,Nec mihi mens unquam, nec manus atra fuit.

The natural interpretation of this certainly is that Vaughan took no share in the disturbances of his time, except to grieve over them in retirement. Yet, in the first place, the lines may have been written before he took up arms in 1645, and, in the second, they may only mean that he had no share inbringing aboutthe troubles of England, or in sheddinginnocentblood. Similarly when elsewhere, as inAbel's Blood(vol. i. p. 254), and in the prayer to be quoted below, he expresses horror of blood-guiltiness, this need not necessarily be taken as extending to the man who fights in a righteous cause.

Miss Morgan, I may add, suggests that Vaughan was at Rowton Heath, not as a combatant, but as aphysician. The description which he gives of the battle reads like that of a man who saw it from some commanding point of view, but was not himself engaged. I think it not improbable that Vaughan was one of the garrison of Beeston Castle, which is described to me as "a sort of grand stand for the battle-field." Beeston Castle was invested by the Parliamentarians in the course of September 1645. On the approach of Charles the troops were drawn off on 19th September to Chester.[14]Charles no doubt took the opportunity to strengthen the garrison. After Rowton Heath Beeston Castle was again besieged, and on November 16th it surrendered. The garrison were allowed to march across the Dee to Denbigh. I think that this winter ride from the fallen fortress is the one described by Vaughan in the poem to Mr. Ridsley. It is the more probable that Vaughan took part in this campaign of 1645, in that Charles's force was largely recruited from Wales. After the battle of Naseby on June 14th, the King had marched through Wales, collecting such levies as he could. He was in Brecon on August 5th.[15]It is quite possible that Vaughan, whose kinsman Sir William Vaughan was in command of a brigade, volunteered on this occasion. From Brecon Charles marched through Radnorshire, Shropshire, Staffordshire, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Yorkshire, and so to Oxford. In September he set out again, andafter some delay at Hereford and Raglan, finally made for Chester.

It is just conceivable that it is to some occasion in this campaign that Vaughan refers when he calls Dr. Powell his "fellow-prisoner" (vol. ii., p. 178). The poet may even have been the Captain Vaughan whose name appears in the official list of prisoners taken at Rowton Heath.[16]Powell's name is not there, but then the list does not profess to be complete. But on the whole I think that Vaughan and Powell were only fellow-prisoners in the Platonic sense of imprisonment in the flesh, and even if a literal imprisonment is intended, it may have been due to some act of persecution which Vaughan had to suffer as a Royalist at a later date. There is inThe Mount of Olives(1652) aPrayer in Adversity and Troubles occasioned by our Enemies(Grosart, vol. iii., p. 75), which, if it is to be taken—I think it is not—as autobiographical, seems to show that, at least for a time, he lost his estate. The prayer runs: "Thou seest, O God, how furious and implacable mine enemies are: they have not only robbed me of that portion and provision which Thou hast graciously given me, but they have also washed their hands in the blood of my friends, my dearest and nearest relations. I know, O God, and I am daily taught by that disciple whom Thou didst love, that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him. Keep me,therefore, O my God, from the guilt of blood, and suffer me not to stain my soul with the thoughts of recompense and vengeance, which is a branch of Thy great prerogative, and belongs wholly unto Thee. Though they persecute me unto death, and pant after the very dust upon the heads of Thy poor, though they have taken the bread out of Thy children's mouth, and have made me a desolation; yet, Lord, give me Thy grace, and such a measure of charity as may fully forgive them."

It may have been during some such time of trouble, or imprisonment, if imprisonment there was, that Vaughan's wife lived with Thomas Vaughan, as will be seen below, in London.

It has not been thought necessary to reprint in this edition of Henry Vaughan's poems the scanty English and Latin verses of his brother, Thomas Vaughan. They may be found, together with verses by Virgil and Campion ascribed to him, in vol. ii. of Dr. Grosart'sFuller Worthiesedition. But some account of so curious a person will not be out of place.

As for his brother, our chief authority is Anthony à Wood (Ath. Oxon., iii. 722), who says that he was the son of Thomas Vaughan of Llansantffread,[17]that he was born in 1621, educated under Matthew Herbert and at Jesus College, Oxford, of which he became Fellow, took orders and received [in 1640] the living of Llansanffread from his kinsman, Sir George Vaughan [of Fallerstone, Wilts]. He lost his living in the unquiet times of the Civil War, retired to Oxford, and became an eminent chemist, afterwards moving to London, where he worked under the patronage of Sir Robert Murray. He was a great admirer of Cornelius Agrippa, "a great chymist, a noted son of the fire, an experimental philosopher, a zealous brother of the Rosicrucian fraternity ... neither papist nor sectary, but a true resolute protestant in the best sense of the Church of England." In the great plague he fled with Murray from London to Oxford, and thence went to the house of Samuel Kem at Albury, where he died on February 27, 1665/6, of mercury accidentally getting into his nose while he was operating. He was buried at Albury on March 1st. Writing in 1673, Anthony à Wood gives a list of his alchemical and mystical treatises published between 1650 and 1655. Of these he had received a list from Olor Iscanus (Henry Vaughan). They all bear thename of Eugenius Philalethes, except theAula Lucis(1652), which was issued as by S. N.,i.e.[Thoma]S [Vaugha]N. Some of these pamphlets contain Vaughan's share of a vigorous and scurrilous controversy with Henry More, the Platonist. Anthony à Wood distinguishes from Vaughan another Eugenius Philalethes, author of theBrief Natural History(1669), also one Eirenaeus Philalethes, author ofRipley Redivivusand other works, and Eirenaeus Philoponos Philalethes, author ofThe Marrow of Alchemy(1654-5).[18]

A few facts, from well-known sources, may be added to Anthony à Wood's account. The University Registers show that "Thos. Vaughan, son of Thomas of Llansanfraid, co. Brecon, pleb., matriculated from Jesus College on 14 Dec, 1638, aged 16."He took his B.A. on 18 Feb., 1641/2, but does not appear to have taken his M.A., though he became Fellow of his College (Foster,Alumni Oxon.). John Walker (Sufferings of the Clergy(1714), p. 389) states that he was ejected from his living on the charges of "drunkenness, immorality, and bearing arms for the King."[19]This must have been in 1649, under the Act for the Propagation of the Gospel in Wales. There exists a letter from Thomas Vaughan to a friend in London, dated from "Newtown, Ash Wednesday, 1653;"[20]and it appears from Jones'History of Brecknockshire(ii., 542), that at one time he lived with his brother Henry there. The allusions to Henry More, to Murray, and to the Isis and Thames seem to show that he is the Daphnis of his brother'sEclogue(vol. ii., p. 278). No trace of his death or burial can however be now found at Albury. Mr. Gordon Goodwin points out to me that Dr. Samuel Kem was a somewhat notorious character (Dict. Nat. Biog., s.v.Kem): perhaps this friendship, together with the personal confession quoted below, throws light on the charges which lost Vaughan his living. On the other handAnthony à Wood speaks well of him, and the tone of his writings bears out this more kindly judgment, at any rate so far as his later years are concerned.

What has been said fairly well exhausted the available information on Thomas Vaughan until a few years ago, when Mr. A. E. Waite discovered in Sloane MS. 1741 a valuable manuscript of his, containing amongst other things a number of autobiographical memoranda. He printed some extracts from this in the preface to an edition of some ofThe Magical Writings of Thomas Vaughan(Redway, 1888), and has been kind enough to furnish me with a reference to the MS. itself, which I have carefully examined. It bears the titleAqua Vitae non Vitis, and the inscription "Ex libris Thomas et Rebecca Vaughan, 1651, Sept. 28. Quos Deus coniunxit quis separabit?" The contents are partly personal jottings and records of dreams, partly alchemical formulae. They appear to cover the period 1658-1662. We learn from them the following facts:—Vaughan was married on September 28, 1651, to a lady named Rebecca (f. 106 (b)). With her and his "Sister Vaughan" he lived and studied alchemy at the Pinner of Wakefield.[21]He had previously lodged at Mr. Coalman's in Holborn (f. 104 (b)). His wife died on Saturday, April 17, 1658, and was buried atMappersall, in Bedfordshire (f. 106 (b)).[22]In 1658 his father and his brother W. were both dead, and he mentions the news of his father's death coming to his niece in a letter from the country (f. 89 (b)). On April 9, 1659, he saw his brother H. in a dream. On 16 July, 1658, he was living at Wapping (f. 103 (b)), and at an earlier period at Paddington. There is an inventory of his wife's goods left at Mrs. Highgate's, and mention of a Mr. Highgate and a Sir John Underhill (f. 107). He names his cousin, Mr. J. Walbeoffe, with whom he had some money transactions (f. 18), and speaks of "a certain person with whom I had in former times revelled away my years in drinking" (f. 103). Perhaps this also was John Walbeoffe, on whomseevol. ii., p. 189,note. The alchemical formulae and receipts are interesting. In one place (f. 12) Vaughan announces the discovery of the "Extract of Oil of Halcaly," which he had previously found in his wife's days and had lost again. This he calls "the greatest joy I can ever have in this world after her death." He seems to have regarded it as the key to an universal solvent. Nearly every receipt is followed by his and his wife'sinitials in the form T. R. V. or T.V.R., and by some expression of devotion to her or of religious piety.

I now come to the remarkable statements made with respect to Thomas Vaughan in theMémoires d'une ex-Palladiste, now in course of publication by Miss Diana Vaughan. Miss Vaughan is a lady who has created a considerable sensation in Paris. Her own account of herself is that she was brought up as a worshipper of Lucifer, and was for some years a leading spirit amongst certain androgynous lodges of Freemasons, in which the worship of Lucifer is largely practised. She has now, owing to the direct interposition of Joan of Arc, become a Catholic, and has made it her mission to combat Luciferian Freemasonry in every way. HerMemoirsare partly abiography, partly an account of this cult.[23]Miss Vaughan claims to be a great-grand-daughter of Thomas Vaughan's. She declares him to have been a Luciferian, Grand-master of the Rosicrucian order, and the founder of modern Freemasonry; and givesan exhaustive account of his career on the authority of family archives. The following paragraphs contain the substance of her narrative, the "legend of Philalethes," as it was told to Miss Vaughan by her father and her uncle, who were intimate friends of Albert Pike.

The traditional accounts of Thomas Vaughan, says Miss Vaughan, contain serious errors. The dates of his birth and of his death, and the pseudonym under which he wrote are all incorrectly stated[24](p. 110). He was born in Monmouth in 1612, being two years the elder of his brother Henry. The two boys were brought up at Oxford, aftertheir father's death, by their uncle, Robert Vaughan the antiquary,[25]and entered at Jesus College (p. 114). In 1636, at the age of 24, Thomas Vaughan went to London, and became the disciple of Robert Fludd, who was a Rosicrucian (p. 148). The real nature of the Rosicrucians has hitherto been a mystery. They were in reality Luciferians, and carried on in secret during the seventeenth century that warfare against Adonai, the god of the Catholics, out of which had already sprung Wiclif, Luther, and the Reformation, and out of which was some day to spring, more deadly and more dangerous still, Freemasonry. The Fraternity of Rosie-Cross was founded by Faustus Socinus in 1597. He was succeeded as head of it by Caesar Cremonini (1604-1617), Michael Maier (1617-1622), Valentin Andreae (1622-1654), and Thomas Vaughan (1654-1678).[26]When Thomas Vaughan first came to London in 1636, Valentin Andreae wasSummus Magisterof the Fraternity, and amongst its leading members were Robert Fludd and Amos Komenski, or Comenius (pp. 129-148). Robert Fludd initiated Thomas Vaughan into the lower degrees of theGolden Cross (p. 148), and sent him to Andreae at Calw, near Stuttgart, with a letter in which he prophesied for him a miraculous future (p. 163). After this visit to Germany, Vaughan returned to London, and after Fludd's death, in 1637, undertook in 1638 his first visit to America. In many of his writings he speaks as a Christian minister, and at this time he probably passed as a Nonconformist (p. 164). He was back in London early in June, 1639 (p. 165), and in the same year visited Denmark, and made a report to Komenski on the mysterious golden horn found at Tondern in that country (p. 166). In 1640 Vaughan received from Komenski the first initiation of the Rosie Cross, and chose the pseudonym of Eirenaeus Philalethes.[27]He now became exceedingly active, going and coming upon the face of the earth. Whenin England, he divided his time between Oxford and London (p. 167). Between 1640 and 1644 he visited Hamburg, the Netherlands, Italy and Sweden (pp. 171-174). It was at this period that he conceived the design of obtaining a far wider circulation than they had yet met with for the ideas of Faustus Socinus. Some of the Rosicrucians were already "accepted masons." Vaughan determined to capture the vast organization of craft masonry by permeating the lodges with Luciferianism. His associate in this task was Elias Ashmole, with whose aid, a few years later, he composed the degrees of Apprentice (1646), Companion (1648), and Master (1649) (pp. 142, 169-175, 197-206). The Civil War had now approached. Oliver Cromwell was a freemason, a Rosicrucian, and a friend of Vaughan's (p. 176). With the execution of Laud came the crisis of Vaughan's life, his initiation into the highest degree of Rosie Cross by the hands of Lucifer himself. It took place in this wise. At the last moment Vaughan was substituted for the intended executioner of Laud.[28]He had prepared a sacramental cloth which he soaked in the martyr's blood, and on the same night he sacrificed the relic to Lucifer. The divinityappeared, consecrated Vaughan asMagus, named him as the nextSummus Magisterof the Fraternity, and signed a pact, granting him thirty-three years more life, at the end of which he should be borne away from earth without death (p. 177). In 1645 Vaughan wrote, but did not yet publish, his most important treatise, theIntroitus Apertus ad Occlusum Regis Palatium. In 1645, still following the direct command of Lucifer, he departed for America. Here he met the apothecary George Starkey, and in his presence performed the alchemical feat of making gold (p. 179).[29]Here, too, he lived amongst the Lenni-Lennaps, where he was united to the demon Venus-Astarte in the form of a beautiful woman, who after eleven days bore him a daughter. This girl was brought up among the Lenni-Lennaps under the name of Diana Wulisso-Waghan, and became Miss Diana Vaughan's great-great-grandmother (p. 181). In 1648 Vaughan returned to England, and after composing the masonic degree of Master in 1649 (p. 197), he beganthe publication of a series of alchemical and, in reality, Luciferian writings. In 1650 appeared theAnthroposophia Theomagicaand theMagia Adamica, in 1651 theLumen de Lumine; in 1652 theAula Lucis(p. 211). In 1654 Valentin Andreae died, and Vaughan succeeded him asSummus Magisterof the Rosie Cross, the event being announced to him by the homage of three demons, Leviathan, Cerberus, and Belphegor (p. 214). In 1655 he published hisEuphrates, and in 1656 made his head-quarters at Amsterdam or Eirenaeopolis. In 1659 came hisFraternity of R. C.; in 1664 hisMedulla Alchymiae.[30]In 1666 he exhibited the philosopher's stone to Helvetius at La Haye and converted him to occultism: in 1667 he at last resolved to publish his Opus Magnum, theIntroitus Apertus, already written in 1645 (p. 215). In 1668 this was followed by theExperimenta de Praeparatione Mercurii Sophiciand theTractatus Tres(p. 236). The time was now approaching when Vaughan, in fulfilment of the pact of 1644, must disappear from earth. He named Charles Blount as his successor (p. 237), and was granted a magical vision of his grandson, the child of Diana Wulisso-Waghan and a Lenni-Lennap (p. 239). He finished hisMemoirs, published theRipley Revised[31]and theEnarratio Methodica trium Gebri Medicinarum,left his poems to his brother Henry, who published them in the next year as theThalia Rediviva,[32]and on March 25, 1678, disappeared in the company ofLucifer Dieu-Bonhimself (p. 240). This event is vouched for, not only by a written statement of Henry Vaughan (p. 114), but also by the existence in a masonic triangle at Valetta of a magical talisman into which, when properly evoked, the spirit of Philalethes enters and records his glorious end for the edification of the Luciferians present[33](p. 243).

I fear that I have taken Miss Vaughan with undue seriousness. Her account of Thomas Vaughan is not only unsupported by direct evidence,[34]but much of itis of a character which we should not be justified in accepting, even were direct evidence forthcoming. And it is all discordant with the little that we do happen to know of Thomas Vaughan from other sources. The whole thing is, in fact, a pretty obvious romance of very modern fabrication. It appears to have been compiled from such information as to the alchemical and mystical writers of the seventeenth century as was within the reach of Albert Pike and the brothers Vaughan about the year 1870.[35]It is always better to explain than to refute an error; and the nature of the Luciferian tradition of Thomas Vaughan is pretty clearly shown by the fact that it is not corroborated in a single particular by any of the new facts about him that have come to light since this probable date of its composition.[36]The fabricator put Thomas Vaughan's birth-place in Monmouth instead of Brecon, because he had never seen Dr. Grosart'sFuller WorthiesEdition of Henry Vaughan. He makes no mention of any of the facts contained in Sloane MS. 1741, because that MS. was still unknown. And, most fatal of all, he puts Thomas Vaughan's birth in 1612 instead of 1621-2, because Foster'sAlumni Oxoniensesbeing yet unpublished, he was ignorant of the record of that date preserved in the University Registers. But we can go a step further. We can confute him, not only by pointing to the books he did not use, but by pointing to those he did. It has already been shown that the ascription to Vaughan of the English translation of Maier'sThemis Aureais due to a misunderstandingof a phrase used by Anthony à Wood. TheAthenae Oxoniensesthen was one source of the compilation. Another was theHistoire de la Philosophie Hermétique, written by Lenglet-Dufresnoy in 1742. Here is the proof. Miss Vaughan supports her statement as to the birth-date in 1612 by a quotation from theIntroitus Apertus, in which the writer states it to have been composed "en l'an 1645 de notre salut, et le trente-troisième de mon age." This she professes to translate from theeditio princepspublished by Jean Lange in 1667. As a matter of fact it is taken from the version given in Lenglet-Dufresnoy's book. And Lenglet-Dufresnoy followed, not the edition of 1667, but the later edition published by J. M. Faust at Frankfort in 1706. In this the words are "trigesimo tertio," whereas in theeditio princepsthey are "vicesimo tertio," and in W. Cooper's English translation of 1669, "in the 23rd year of my age," thus bringing the date of the birth of Eirenaeus Philalethes not to 1612, but to 1622. The "legend of Philalethes" need detain us no longer. Miss Vaughan's narrative is a very insufficient basis for regarding the pious minister and mystic which Thomas Vaughan appears to have been as a secret enemy of Christianity and a worshipper of Lucifer.

But when the legend is set aside, there still remain certain questions suggested by it which may be considered without much reference to the statements ofMiss Vaughan. Was Thomas Vaughan a Rosicrucian? And was he, admittedly the author of a series of tracts under the name of Eugenius Philalethes, also the author of those which bear the name of Eirenaeus Philalethes? The first question is, I am afraid, insoluble, until it has been decided whether the Fraternity of R. C. ever had an actual existence. Anthony à Wood states that Thomas Vaughan was a zealous Rosicrucian, but probably Anthony à Wood took the term in the general sense of mystic and alchemist. On the other hand Vaughan himself, in his preface to the English translation of the Rosicrucian manifestoes, seems to disavow any personal acquaintance with the members of the fraternity. Even this is not conclusive, for the Rosicrucian rule, as given in theLaws of the Brotherhood, published by Sincerus Renatus in 1710,[37]obliges the members to deny their membership.

There is more material for the discussion of the second question, but I do not know that it is more possible to come to a definite conclusion. The personality of the anonymous adept who took the name of Eirenaeus Philalethes was shrouded in mystery even to his contemporaries. The fullest account given of him on any of his title-pages is on that of theExperimenta de Praeparatione Mercurii Sophici(1668), which is said to be "ex manuscriptoPhilosophi Americani alias Eyrenaei Philalethis, natu Angli, habitatione Cosmopolitae."[38]We have also the description given by George Starkey, or whoever it was, in theMarrow of Alchemy(1654-5), p. 25. Starkey says:—

"His present place in which he doth abideI know not, for the world he walks about,Of which he is a citizen; this tideHe is to visit artists and seek outAntiquities a voyage gone and willReturn when he of travel hath his fill."By nation an Englishman, of noteHis family is in the place where heWas born, his fortune's good, and eke his coatOf arms is of a great antiquity;His learning rare, his years scarce thirty-three;Fuller description get you not from me."

"By nation an Englishman, of noteHis family is in the place where heWas born, his fortune's good, and eke his coatOf arms is of a great antiquity;His learning rare, his years scarce thirty-three;Fuller description get you not from me."

Starkey gives the age of Eirenaeus Philalethes as 33 in 1654. This precisely confirms the writer's own statement in the earlier editions of theIntroitus Apertusthat he was 23 in 1645, and fixes the birth-date as 1621 or 1622. Now this agrees remarkably with the birth-date ascertained from other sources of Thomas Vaughan. But Thomas died in 1666, and it is usually asserted that Eirenaeus Philalethes lived until at least 1678. Miss Vaughan states that he must have been alive in that year, because he then published theRipley Revived, and theEnarratio Trium Gebri Medicinarum. She declares that the author of theEnarratiomentions the pains taken about that edition (p. 240). I do not find any prefatory matter in this book at all. There is a preface to theRipley Revived, but this was written long before 1678, for it mentions theIntroitus Apertus, published in 1667, as still in manuscript. Neither Jean Lange, the editor of theIntroitus Apertusof 1667, writing 9th December, 1666, nor William Cooper, the editor of the English translation[39]of 1669, writing 15th September, 1668, know whether the author is still alive. In fact he cannot be shown to have outlived Thomas Vaughan, for there is no proof that the adept who showed the philosopher's stone to Helvetius on December 27th, 1666,[40]was the same as he who showed it to George Starkey many years before. I will briefly enumerate a few other links which connect Eirenaeus Philalethes with Thomas Vaughan. A German translation of theIntroitus Apertus, published at Hamburg under the title ofAbyssus Alchemiae(1704), is said on the title-page to be "von T. de Vagan." Miss Vaughan states that a similar translation of the first of theTres Tractatus, published at Hamburg in 1705, also bears this name (p. 237), and this is borne out by Lenglet-Dufresnoy (iii. 261-6), who speaks of a French MS. of theTres Tractatusinscribed "par Thomas de Vagan, dit Philalèthe ou Martin Birrhius." Birrhius, however, was only the editor. These ascriptions are probably made on the authority of G. W. Wedelius, who in his preface, dated 2nd Sept., 1698, to an edition of theIntroitus Apertus, published at Jena in 1699, says of the author:—"Ex Anglia tamen vulgo habetur oriundus ... et Thomas De Vagan appellatus." The EnglishThree Tracts(1694) are stated on the title-page to have beenwritten in Latin by Eirenaeus Philalethes; but there is a note in the British Museum Catalogue to the effect that the Latin original has the nameEugeniusPhilalethes. Unfortunately this LatinTres Tractatus, published in 1668 by Martin Birrhius at Amsterdam, is not in the Library, and I cannot verify the statement. Finally, I may note that theRipley Revived(1678) has an engraved title-page by Robert Vaughan, who also did the title-page toOlor Iscanus, and that Starkey'sMarrow of Alchemycontains, at the end of the preface to Part ii., some lines by William Sampson, which mention

"Harry Mastix MoorWho judged of Nature when he did not know her";

clearly an allusion to More's controversy with Thomas Vaughan.

It will be seen that there is someprimâ facieevidence for identifying Eirenaeus Philalethes with Thomas Vaughan, whereas he was probably not George Starkey (Eirenaeus Philoponos Philalethes), and cannot be shown to have been anyone else. But I am not satisfied. We do not know that Thomas Vaughan was ever in America, and there is the strong evidence of Anthony à Wood, who distinguishes between Eirenaeus and Eugenius, and who appears to have had information from Henry Vaughan himself. Mr. A. E. Waite argues against the identification on the ground that Eirenaeus Philalethes was a"physical alchemist," whereas Thomas Vaughan's alchemy was spiritual and mystical. But we have Vaughan's authority for saying that he had pursued the physical alchemy also.[41]And he was clearly doing so when he wrote Sloane MS. 1741. A more pertinent objection is perhaps that Eirenaeus Philalethes appears to have been in possession of the grand secret when he wrote theIntroitus Apertusin 1645, whereas Thomas Vaughan was still seeking it in 1658. To pursue the matter further would require a wide knowledge of the alchemical writings of the seventeenth century, which unfortunately I do not possess.[42]

My gratitude is due for help received in compiling the biographical and other notes in these volumes to Dr. Grosart, Mr. C. H. Firth, Mr. W. C. Hazlitt, Mr. A. E. Waite, and the Rev. Llewellyn Thomas; notably to Miss G. E. F. Morgan of Brecon, whose knowledge of local genealogy and antiquities has been invaluable.

July, 1896.E. K. Chambers.

FOOTNOTES:[1]Dr. Grosart, however, says (ii. 298), "In all the pedigrees that have been submitted to me, Thomas is placed as the first of the twins." But, as Henry inherited Newton, and Thomas took orders, Anthony à Wood is probably right.[2]The tombstone says 73. G. T. Clark repeats Jones' error.[3]The tombstone is actually in the north aisle of the church itself.[4]Obviously Mr. Clark has confused Lucy Jones with her daughter, Denise Jones.[5]This was noted by Mr W. B. Rye inThe Genealogist, iii. 33, from the Entry Book of the Registry at Hereford. Since then Mr. Clark of Hereford has kindly sent me, through Miss Morgan, a copy of the bond entered into by the administratrix, Elizabetha Vaughan de Llansanfread, and her son-in-law and surety, Roger Prosser de Villa Brecon. The bond, or the copy, is dated in error "30 May, 1694, et 7th Wm. iii." Administration was granted on May 29, 1695. The inventory of the personal property amounted to £49 4s. 0d. The witnesses are Walter Prosser and David Thomas.[6]An old alphabetical catalogue of wills in the Hereford Registry, between 1660-1677, has the following entries:—Thomas Vaughan, Lansamfread, 11 Dec., 1660.Franca Vaughan, Lansamfread, 16 Nov., 1677.The wills cannot, in the present state of the Registry, be found (Genealogist, iii., 33). These dates are much too early for the poet's son and daughter-in-law; but whose are the wills?[7]TheTurbervilleandJoneslines are taken from Theophilus Jones'History of Brecknockshire(ii. 444), and from Harl. MS. 2289, f. 70, respectively. Miss Morgan has kindly traced the Prossers from theRegistersof St. John's and St. Mary's Churches, Brecon.[8]Miss Morgan tells me that David Morgan David Howel's father, Morgan ap Howel, is described in a pedigree as "of Trenewydd in Penkelley"; and I find from Harl. MS. 2289, ff. 84 (b), 85, that the Powells "of Newton Penkelley" were related to the Powells of Cantreff. (Seevol. ii., p. 57,note.)[9]The will of this Charles Vaughan has been abstracted by Mr. W. B. Rye (Genealogist, iii. 33) from the Hereford Will Office. It was made 9th April, 1707, and proved 29th May, 1707. The testator is described as of Skellrog, Llansanffread, and mention is made of his wife Margaret Powell, and of a son William. This William, therefore, and not a grandson of Henry Vaughan, may be the William Vaughan of Llansantffread, who married Mary Games of Tregaer (p. xxi). Skellrog appears to have passed to another and probably elder son, Charles.[10]S. W. Williams,Llansaintffread ChurchinArchaeologia Cambrensis(1887.)[11]W. B. Rye inGenealogist, iii. 36, from Entry Book in Hereford Will Office.[12]An account of the part played by Beeston Castle during the Civil War will be found in Ormerod'sHistory of Cheshire(ed. Helsby), ii. 272sqq.[13]Gardiner,The Great Civil War, ch. xxxvi.; J. R. Phillips,The Civil War in Wales and the Marches, i. 329; ii. 270.[14]Ormerod, i. 243.[15]Phillips, i. 314.[16]Phillips, ii. 272.[17]Both Wood and Foster give the father's name as Thomas, but it appears to be Henry in all the pedigrees.[18]The following list of Vaughan's admitted prose treatises is mainly taken from Dr. Grosart:—Anthroposophia Theomagica(1650);Anima Magica Abscondita(1650);Magia Adamicawith theCoelum Terrae(1650);The Man-Mouse taken in a Trap(1650);The Second Wash; or, the Moor scoured once more(1651) [These two are polemics against Henry More];Lumen de Lumine, with theAphorismi Magici Eugeniani(1651);The Fame and Confession of the Fraternity of R:C:(1653);Aula Lucis(1652);Euphrates(1655);Nollius' Chymist's Key(1657);A Brief Natural History(1669); [Wood ascribes this to another writer, as it was not in the list furnished him by Henry Vaughan].—Henry More's pamphlets against Vaughan are theObservations upon Anthroposophia Theomagica and Anima Magica Abscondita(1650), issued under the name of Alazonomastix Philalethes andThe Second Lash of Alazonomastix(1651).[19]Walker falls into the curious confusion of supposing that there were two Thomas Vaughans, one rector of Llansantffread, the other of Newton St. Bridget. But "St. Bridget" is only the English form of the Welsh "Santffread."[20]Printed from the Rawl. MSS. in Thurloe'sState Papers, ii. 120.[21]Is this the inn of that name once in the Gray's Inn Road? (Cunningham and Wheatley,Handbook to London.)[22]The Rev. Henry Howlett has kindly sent me the following extract from the registers of Meppershall:—"1658.Buried.Rebecka, the Wife of Mr. Vahannethe 26th of Aprill."[23]An entire literature has grown up in Paris during the last year around the question whether the cultus of Lucifer is practised in certain Masonic Lodges. A number of Catholic journalists and pamphleteers assert very categorically that this is the case, that the centre of this cultus, containing the full Luciferian initiates, is the 33rddegree of a so-called New and Reformed Palladian Rite, having its head-quarters at Charlestown, and that the chiefs of this Rite have obtained a controlling influence over the whole of Freemasonry. The creed is described as Manichaean in character, with Lucifer as Dieu-Bon and Adonai, the God of the Catholics, as Dieu-Mauvais. Adonai is the principle of asceticism, Lucifer of natural humanity andla joie de vivre. The rituals and the accepted interpretation of the Masonic symbolism used in the lodges, or "triangles," are of a phallic type. Women are admitted to membership. Immorality, a parody of the Eucharist, known as the black mass, and the practice of black magic, take place at the meetings. Lucifer is worshipped in the form of Baphomet, but from time to time he is personally evoked, and manifested to his followers. Luciferianism tends to become identical with Satanism, in which Lucifer and Satan are identified and frankly worshipped as evil. The first mention of Luciferian Freemasonry was in theY-a-t-il des Femmes dans la Franc Maçonnerie?(1891), of the somewhat notorious Leo Taxil. But the case rests mainly on the alleged revelations of writers who claim to have themselves been members of the Palladian Rite. The chief of these are Dr. Hacke or Bataille, Signor Margiotta and Miss Diana Vaughan. Unfortunately very little evidence is forthcoming as to the identity of any of these personages. Many leading Masons,e.g., M. Papus in hisLe Diable et l'Occultisme, deny that Luciferian Freemasonry exists at all, and it is freely stated (cf.Lightfor 27 June and 4 July, 1896, pp. 305, 322) that Miss Diana Vaughan is a myth, and that herMémoireswith the rest of the revelations are the ingenious concoction of a band of irresponsible journalists of whom Leo Taxil is the chief. No one appears to have seen Miss Vaughan, and she is alleged to be hiding in some convent from the vengeance of the Luciferians. Probably there will be some further light thrown on the matter before long: in the meantime a good summary of the evidence up-to-date may be found in A. E. Waite'sDevil-Worship in France(1896). Assuming that Luciferianism really exists, I do not for a moment believe that it has the antiquity which Miss Vaughan claims for it. The various Rites of modern Freemasonry, with their fantastic and high-sounding degrees, are comparatively recent excrescences upon the original Craft Masonry. The New and Reformed Palladian Rite is said to have been founded at Charlestown by the well-known Mason, Albert Pike, in 1870. It is based on the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, which dates from the beginning of the century. If there is such a thing as Luciferianism, I do not think we need look further back than 1870 for its origin. As expounded by Miss Vaughan and others, it is pretty clearly a compilation from Eliphaz Levi and other occultist and Cabbalistic writers, with a good deal of modern American Spiritualism thrown in. Albert Pike, a man of considerable learning, could easily have invented it. Masonic symbolism lends itself readily enough to a wide range of interpretations. I do not say that seventeenth-century occultism has left no traces upon Freemasonry which modern ritual-mongers may have elaborated; but it is a far cry from this to the belief that Thomas Vaughan and Luther were Manichaean worshippers of Lucifer and Protestantism an organized warfare on Adonai.[24]Miss Vaughan quotes from Allibone'sHistory of English Literature. Allibone only repeats Anthony à Wood's account.[25]Robert Vaughan belonged to quite a different branch from the Vaughans of Newton: and, as Sl. MS. 1741 shows, the father of Henry and Thomas Vaughan did not die until 1658.[26]Miss Vaughan gives an elaborate account of the Rosicrucians and of their famous manifestoes, which I have no room to reproduce.[27]Miss Vaughan states that Thomas Vaughan signed "notEugenius Philalethes, butEirenaeus Philalethes" (p. 114). But she ascribes to him theAnthroposophia Theomagicaand other writings which are signed, though she does not mention it,Eugenius Philalethes(p. 211). She quotes from Anthony à Wood the assertion, which he does not make, that the English translations of theFama Fraternitatis Rosae Crucis(1652) and of Maier'sThemis Aurea(1656) both bear the name of Eugenius, and were by another Thomas Vaughan! The manuscripts of both are, she says, signedEirenaeus(p. 163). What Wood says is that he has seen a translation of Maier's tract, dedicated to Elias Ashmole by [N. L.]/[T. S.] H. S., and that Ashmole has forgotten whose the initials are. He does not suggest that this translation is by a Thomas Vaughan. (Ath. Oxon., iii. 724.)[28]This episode has previously done duty in theVingt Ans Après(vol. iii., ch. 8-10), of Alexandre Dumas, in which Mordaunt acts as the executioner of Charles. There is a Latin poem amongst Vaughan's remains inThalia RedivivaentitledEpitaphium Gulielmi Laud Episcopi Cantuariensis, full of sorrow for the archbishop's death.[29]Miss Vaughan refers to Lenglet-Dufresnoy'sHistoire de la Philosophie Hermétiqueas an authority on Starkey's relations with Eirenaeus Philalethes. Lenglet-Dufresnoy probably took his account fromThe Marrow of Alchemy(1654-5). The prefaces to this are signed with anagrams of George Starkey's name. But he ascribes the poem to a friend, who is called in theBreve Manuductorium ad Campum SophiaeAgricola Rhomaeus. Perhaps Starkey himself was the real author. The title-page has the name Eirenaeus Philoponus Philalethes, apparently a distinct designation from that of Eirenaeus Philalethes.[30]TheMedulla Alchemiae(1664) is only a Latin translation of theMarrow of Alchemy(1654-5) of Eirenaeus Philoponos Philalethes.[31]The actual name of the tract isRipley Revived.[32]TheThalia Redivivawas actually published in 1678, not 1679.[33]Miss Vaughan has herself witnessed this, in the presence of Lucifer. Moreover, the spirit of Philalethes has appeared, and conversed with her (pp. 257-267).[34]Miss Vaughan refers to several family documents, but does not offer them for inspection. They include (a) the will of her grandfather James, enumerating the proofs of his descent (p. 111); (b) the autobiographical Memoirs of Philalethes, from which Miss Vaughan quotes largely (pp. 174, 240); (c) a letter from Fludd to Andreae (pp. 114, 149); (d) a MS. of theIntroitus Apertus, of which the margin has been covered by Vaughan with a comment for Luciferian initiates (pp. 111, 217, 225); (e) a letter from Andreae in the archives of the Sovereign Patriarchal Council of Hamburg (p. 197); (f) Henry Vaughan's account of his brother's disappearance in the archives of the Supreme Dogmatic Directory of Charleston (p. 114); (g) Masonic rituals in the archives of Masonic chapters at Bristol and Gibraltar (p. 200); (h) Rosicrucian rituals drawn up by one Nick Stone in the hands of Dr. W. W. W[estcott] of London (p. 141). The documents in Masonic hands are presumably, like the Valetta talisman, now out of Miss Vaughan's reach. A communication signed Q. V. inLightfor May 16, 1896, denies, on Dr. Westcott's authority, that his rituals have anything to do with Nick Stone, or that Miss Vaughan ever saw them. Dr. Westcott is the head of the modernSocietas Rosicruciana in Anglia. This body does not even pretend to be theFraternity of R. C.Finally, there is (i) Thomas Vaughan's original pact with Lucifer, now, according to Miss Vaughan, in holy hands, and to be destroyed on the day she takes the veil.[35]Miss Vaughan somewhat naïvely gives us a lead. After describing Thomas Vaughan's sojourn with Venus-Astarte among the Lenni-Lennaps, she adds: "This legend is not accepted by all the Elect Mages; there are those who regard it as fabricated by my grandfather James of Boston, who was, they believe, of Delaware origin, or, at any rate, a half-breed; and they even assert that, in the desire to Anglicize himself, he invented an entirely false genealogy, by way of justifying his change of the Lennap name Waghan into Vaughan. Herein the opponents of the Luciferian legend of Thomas Vaughan go too far" (p. 181).[36]I have already pointed out that Miss Vaughan is quite possibly a myth. But, if she exists, I do not see any reason to suppose that she personally invented the "legend of Philalethes." It lies between Leo Taxil and his friends in 1895, and the alleged founders of Palladism in or about 1870, that is Albert Pike and Miss Vaughan's father and uncle. And, so far as it goes, the ignorance shown in the legend of all books published in the last twenty years is evidence for the earlier date, and therefore, to some extent, for the actual existence of Luciferianism.[37]Cf.A. E. Waite,Real History of the Rosicrucians, p. 274.[38]The principal writings ascribed to Eirenaeus Philalethes areIntroitus Apertus in Occlusum Regis Palatium(1667),Tres Tractatus(1668),Experimenta de Praeparatione Mercurii Sophici(1668),Ripley Revived(1678),Enarratio Trium Gebri Medicinarum(1678). The works of Eirenaeus Philoponos Philalethes (George Starkey?) are often attributed to him in error. The B. M. Catalogue, s.vv.Philaletha, Philalethes, is a mass of confusions. Lenglet-Dufresnoy,Histoire de la Philosophie Hermétique(iii. 261-266), gives a long list of printed and manuscript works. Most of these he had probably never seen. He probably took many items in his list from one in J. M. Faust's edition of theIntroitus Apertus(Frankfort, 1706); and this, in its turn, was based on what Eirenaeus Philalethes himself says he has written in the preface toRipley Revived. He there says, after naming other works: "Two English Poems I wrote, declaring the whole secret, which are lost. Also an Enchiridion of Experiments, together with a Diurnal of Meditations, in which were many Philosophical receipts, declaring the whole secret, with an Aenigma annexed; which also fell into such hands which I conceive will never restore it. This last was written in English." Can this Enchiridion and Diurnal be Sl. MS. 1741? I find no "Aenigma." Can Starkey have stolen the poems and published them as theMarrow of Alchemy?[39]The preface toRipley Revivedmakes it clear that theIntroitus Apertuswas originally written in Latin, not in English.[40]This is recorded in Helvetius'Vitulus Aureus(1667). Helvetius describes his master as 43 or 44 years old, and calls him Elias Artistes.[41]Seethe passage from the Epistle toEuphrates, quoted by Grosart (Vol. ii., p. 312).[42]The "legend of Philalethes" has already been exposed by Mr. A. E. Waite in hisDevil Worship in France(ch. xiii.). I am also indebted to what Mr. Waite has written on Eirenaeus Philalethes in that book, as well as in hisTrue History of the Rosicrucians(1887) and hisLives of Alchymistical Philosophers(1888).

[1]Dr. Grosart, however, says (ii. 298), "In all the pedigrees that have been submitted to me, Thomas is placed as the first of the twins." But, as Henry inherited Newton, and Thomas took orders, Anthony à Wood is probably right.

[2]The tombstone says 73. G. T. Clark repeats Jones' error.

[3]The tombstone is actually in the north aisle of the church itself.

[4]Obviously Mr. Clark has confused Lucy Jones with her daughter, Denise Jones.

[5]This was noted by Mr W. B. Rye inThe Genealogist, iii. 33, from the Entry Book of the Registry at Hereford. Since then Mr. Clark of Hereford has kindly sent me, through Miss Morgan, a copy of the bond entered into by the administratrix, Elizabetha Vaughan de Llansanfread, and her son-in-law and surety, Roger Prosser de Villa Brecon. The bond, or the copy, is dated in error "30 May, 1694, et 7th Wm. iii." Administration was granted on May 29, 1695. The inventory of the personal property amounted to £49 4s. 0d. The witnesses are Walter Prosser and David Thomas.

[6]An old alphabetical catalogue of wills in the Hereford Registry, between 1660-1677, has the following entries:—Thomas Vaughan, Lansamfread, 11 Dec., 1660.Franca Vaughan, Lansamfread, 16 Nov., 1677.The wills cannot, in the present state of the Registry, be found (Genealogist, iii., 33). These dates are much too early for the poet's son and daughter-in-law; but whose are the wills?

[6]An old alphabetical catalogue of wills in the Hereford Registry, between 1660-1677, has the following entries:—

Thomas Vaughan, Lansamfread, 11 Dec., 1660.Franca Vaughan, Lansamfread, 16 Nov., 1677.

The wills cannot, in the present state of the Registry, be found (Genealogist, iii., 33). These dates are much too early for the poet's son and daughter-in-law; but whose are the wills?

[7]TheTurbervilleandJoneslines are taken from Theophilus Jones'History of Brecknockshire(ii. 444), and from Harl. MS. 2289, f. 70, respectively. Miss Morgan has kindly traced the Prossers from theRegistersof St. John's and St. Mary's Churches, Brecon.

[8]Miss Morgan tells me that David Morgan David Howel's father, Morgan ap Howel, is described in a pedigree as "of Trenewydd in Penkelley"; and I find from Harl. MS. 2289, ff. 84 (b), 85, that the Powells "of Newton Penkelley" were related to the Powells of Cantreff. (Seevol. ii., p. 57,note.)

[9]The will of this Charles Vaughan has been abstracted by Mr. W. B. Rye (Genealogist, iii. 33) from the Hereford Will Office. It was made 9th April, 1707, and proved 29th May, 1707. The testator is described as of Skellrog, Llansanffread, and mention is made of his wife Margaret Powell, and of a son William. This William, therefore, and not a grandson of Henry Vaughan, may be the William Vaughan of Llansantffread, who married Mary Games of Tregaer (p. xxi). Skellrog appears to have passed to another and probably elder son, Charles.

[10]S. W. Williams,Llansaintffread ChurchinArchaeologia Cambrensis(1887.)

[11]W. B. Rye inGenealogist, iii. 36, from Entry Book in Hereford Will Office.

[12]An account of the part played by Beeston Castle during the Civil War will be found in Ormerod'sHistory of Cheshire(ed. Helsby), ii. 272sqq.

[13]Gardiner,The Great Civil War, ch. xxxvi.; J. R. Phillips,The Civil War in Wales and the Marches, i. 329; ii. 270.

[14]Ormerod, i. 243.

[15]Phillips, i. 314.

[16]Phillips, ii. 272.

[17]Both Wood and Foster give the father's name as Thomas, but it appears to be Henry in all the pedigrees.

[18]The following list of Vaughan's admitted prose treatises is mainly taken from Dr. Grosart:—Anthroposophia Theomagica(1650);Anima Magica Abscondita(1650);Magia Adamicawith theCoelum Terrae(1650);The Man-Mouse taken in a Trap(1650);The Second Wash; or, the Moor scoured once more(1651) [These two are polemics against Henry More];Lumen de Lumine, with theAphorismi Magici Eugeniani(1651);The Fame and Confession of the Fraternity of R:C:(1653);Aula Lucis(1652);Euphrates(1655);Nollius' Chymist's Key(1657);A Brief Natural History(1669); [Wood ascribes this to another writer, as it was not in the list furnished him by Henry Vaughan].—Henry More's pamphlets against Vaughan are theObservations upon Anthroposophia Theomagica and Anima Magica Abscondita(1650), issued under the name of Alazonomastix Philalethes andThe Second Lash of Alazonomastix(1651).

[19]Walker falls into the curious confusion of supposing that there were two Thomas Vaughans, one rector of Llansantffread, the other of Newton St. Bridget. But "St. Bridget" is only the English form of the Welsh "Santffread."

[20]Printed from the Rawl. MSS. in Thurloe'sState Papers, ii. 120.

[21]Is this the inn of that name once in the Gray's Inn Road? (Cunningham and Wheatley,Handbook to London.)

[22]The Rev. Henry Howlett has kindly sent me the following extract from the registers of Meppershall:—"1658.Buried.Rebecka, the Wife of Mr. Vahannethe 26th of Aprill."

[22]The Rev. Henry Howlett has kindly sent me the following extract from the registers of Meppershall:—

"1658.Buried.Rebecka, the Wife of Mr. Vahannethe 26th of Aprill."

[23]An entire literature has grown up in Paris during the last year around the question whether the cultus of Lucifer is practised in certain Masonic Lodges. A number of Catholic journalists and pamphleteers assert very categorically that this is the case, that the centre of this cultus, containing the full Luciferian initiates, is the 33rddegree of a so-called New and Reformed Palladian Rite, having its head-quarters at Charlestown, and that the chiefs of this Rite have obtained a controlling influence over the whole of Freemasonry. The creed is described as Manichaean in character, with Lucifer as Dieu-Bon and Adonai, the God of the Catholics, as Dieu-Mauvais. Adonai is the principle of asceticism, Lucifer of natural humanity andla joie de vivre. The rituals and the accepted interpretation of the Masonic symbolism used in the lodges, or "triangles," are of a phallic type. Women are admitted to membership. Immorality, a parody of the Eucharist, known as the black mass, and the practice of black magic, take place at the meetings. Lucifer is worshipped in the form of Baphomet, but from time to time he is personally evoked, and manifested to his followers. Luciferianism tends to become identical with Satanism, in which Lucifer and Satan are identified and frankly worshipped as evil. The first mention of Luciferian Freemasonry was in theY-a-t-il des Femmes dans la Franc Maçonnerie?(1891), of the somewhat notorious Leo Taxil. But the case rests mainly on the alleged revelations of writers who claim to have themselves been members of the Palladian Rite. The chief of these are Dr. Hacke or Bataille, Signor Margiotta and Miss Diana Vaughan. Unfortunately very little evidence is forthcoming as to the identity of any of these personages. Many leading Masons,e.g., M. Papus in hisLe Diable et l'Occultisme, deny that Luciferian Freemasonry exists at all, and it is freely stated (cf.Lightfor 27 June and 4 July, 1896, pp. 305, 322) that Miss Diana Vaughan is a myth, and that herMémoireswith the rest of the revelations are the ingenious concoction of a band of irresponsible journalists of whom Leo Taxil is the chief. No one appears to have seen Miss Vaughan, and she is alleged to be hiding in some convent from the vengeance of the Luciferians. Probably there will be some further light thrown on the matter before long: in the meantime a good summary of the evidence up-to-date may be found in A. E. Waite'sDevil-Worship in France(1896). Assuming that Luciferianism really exists, I do not for a moment believe that it has the antiquity which Miss Vaughan claims for it. The various Rites of modern Freemasonry, with their fantastic and high-sounding degrees, are comparatively recent excrescences upon the original Craft Masonry. The New and Reformed Palladian Rite is said to have been founded at Charlestown by the well-known Mason, Albert Pike, in 1870. It is based on the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, which dates from the beginning of the century. If there is such a thing as Luciferianism, I do not think we need look further back than 1870 for its origin. As expounded by Miss Vaughan and others, it is pretty clearly a compilation from Eliphaz Levi and other occultist and Cabbalistic writers, with a good deal of modern American Spiritualism thrown in. Albert Pike, a man of considerable learning, could easily have invented it. Masonic symbolism lends itself readily enough to a wide range of interpretations. I do not say that seventeenth-century occultism has left no traces upon Freemasonry which modern ritual-mongers may have elaborated; but it is a far cry from this to the belief that Thomas Vaughan and Luther were Manichaean worshippers of Lucifer and Protestantism an organized warfare on Adonai.

[24]Miss Vaughan quotes from Allibone'sHistory of English Literature. Allibone only repeats Anthony à Wood's account.

[25]Robert Vaughan belonged to quite a different branch from the Vaughans of Newton: and, as Sl. MS. 1741 shows, the father of Henry and Thomas Vaughan did not die until 1658.

[26]Miss Vaughan gives an elaborate account of the Rosicrucians and of their famous manifestoes, which I have no room to reproduce.

[27]Miss Vaughan states that Thomas Vaughan signed "notEugenius Philalethes, butEirenaeus Philalethes" (p. 114). But she ascribes to him theAnthroposophia Theomagicaand other writings which are signed, though she does not mention it,Eugenius Philalethes(p. 211). She quotes from Anthony à Wood the assertion, which he does not make, that the English translations of theFama Fraternitatis Rosae Crucis(1652) and of Maier'sThemis Aurea(1656) both bear the name of Eugenius, and were by another Thomas Vaughan! The manuscripts of both are, she says, signedEirenaeus(p. 163). What Wood says is that he has seen a translation of Maier's tract, dedicated to Elias Ashmole by [N. L.]/[T. S.] H. S., and that Ashmole has forgotten whose the initials are. He does not suggest that this translation is by a Thomas Vaughan. (Ath. Oxon., iii. 724.)

[28]This episode has previously done duty in theVingt Ans Après(vol. iii., ch. 8-10), of Alexandre Dumas, in which Mordaunt acts as the executioner of Charles. There is a Latin poem amongst Vaughan's remains inThalia RedivivaentitledEpitaphium Gulielmi Laud Episcopi Cantuariensis, full of sorrow for the archbishop's death.

[29]Miss Vaughan refers to Lenglet-Dufresnoy'sHistoire de la Philosophie Hermétiqueas an authority on Starkey's relations with Eirenaeus Philalethes. Lenglet-Dufresnoy probably took his account fromThe Marrow of Alchemy(1654-5). The prefaces to this are signed with anagrams of George Starkey's name. But he ascribes the poem to a friend, who is called in theBreve Manuductorium ad Campum SophiaeAgricola Rhomaeus. Perhaps Starkey himself was the real author. The title-page has the name Eirenaeus Philoponus Philalethes, apparently a distinct designation from that of Eirenaeus Philalethes.

[30]TheMedulla Alchemiae(1664) is only a Latin translation of theMarrow of Alchemy(1654-5) of Eirenaeus Philoponos Philalethes.

[31]The actual name of the tract isRipley Revived.

[32]TheThalia Redivivawas actually published in 1678, not 1679.

[33]Miss Vaughan has herself witnessed this, in the presence of Lucifer. Moreover, the spirit of Philalethes has appeared, and conversed with her (pp. 257-267).

[34]Miss Vaughan refers to several family documents, but does not offer them for inspection. They include (a) the will of her grandfather James, enumerating the proofs of his descent (p. 111); (b) the autobiographical Memoirs of Philalethes, from which Miss Vaughan quotes largely (pp. 174, 240); (c) a letter from Fludd to Andreae (pp. 114, 149); (d) a MS. of theIntroitus Apertus, of which the margin has been covered by Vaughan with a comment for Luciferian initiates (pp. 111, 217, 225); (e) a letter from Andreae in the archives of the Sovereign Patriarchal Council of Hamburg (p. 197); (f) Henry Vaughan's account of his brother's disappearance in the archives of the Supreme Dogmatic Directory of Charleston (p. 114); (g) Masonic rituals in the archives of Masonic chapters at Bristol and Gibraltar (p. 200); (h) Rosicrucian rituals drawn up by one Nick Stone in the hands of Dr. W. W. W[estcott] of London (p. 141). The documents in Masonic hands are presumably, like the Valetta talisman, now out of Miss Vaughan's reach. A communication signed Q. V. inLightfor May 16, 1896, denies, on Dr. Westcott's authority, that his rituals have anything to do with Nick Stone, or that Miss Vaughan ever saw them. Dr. Westcott is the head of the modernSocietas Rosicruciana in Anglia. This body does not even pretend to be theFraternity of R. C.Finally, there is (i) Thomas Vaughan's original pact with Lucifer, now, according to Miss Vaughan, in holy hands, and to be destroyed on the day she takes the veil.

[35]Miss Vaughan somewhat naïvely gives us a lead. After describing Thomas Vaughan's sojourn with Venus-Astarte among the Lenni-Lennaps, she adds: "This legend is not accepted by all the Elect Mages; there are those who regard it as fabricated by my grandfather James of Boston, who was, they believe, of Delaware origin, or, at any rate, a half-breed; and they even assert that, in the desire to Anglicize himself, he invented an entirely false genealogy, by way of justifying his change of the Lennap name Waghan into Vaughan. Herein the opponents of the Luciferian legend of Thomas Vaughan go too far" (p. 181).

[36]I have already pointed out that Miss Vaughan is quite possibly a myth. But, if she exists, I do not see any reason to suppose that she personally invented the "legend of Philalethes." It lies between Leo Taxil and his friends in 1895, and the alleged founders of Palladism in or about 1870, that is Albert Pike and Miss Vaughan's father and uncle. And, so far as it goes, the ignorance shown in the legend of all books published in the last twenty years is evidence for the earlier date, and therefore, to some extent, for the actual existence of Luciferianism.

[37]Cf.A. E. Waite,Real History of the Rosicrucians, p. 274.

[38]The principal writings ascribed to Eirenaeus Philalethes areIntroitus Apertus in Occlusum Regis Palatium(1667),Tres Tractatus(1668),Experimenta de Praeparatione Mercurii Sophici(1668),Ripley Revived(1678),Enarratio Trium Gebri Medicinarum(1678). The works of Eirenaeus Philoponos Philalethes (George Starkey?) are often attributed to him in error. The B. M. Catalogue, s.vv.Philaletha, Philalethes, is a mass of confusions. Lenglet-Dufresnoy,Histoire de la Philosophie Hermétique(iii. 261-266), gives a long list of printed and manuscript works. Most of these he had probably never seen. He probably took many items in his list from one in J. M. Faust's edition of theIntroitus Apertus(Frankfort, 1706); and this, in its turn, was based on what Eirenaeus Philalethes himself says he has written in the preface toRipley Revived. He there says, after naming other works: "Two English Poems I wrote, declaring the whole secret, which are lost. Also an Enchiridion of Experiments, together with a Diurnal of Meditations, in which were many Philosophical receipts, declaring the whole secret, with an Aenigma annexed; which also fell into such hands which I conceive will never restore it. This last was written in English." Can this Enchiridion and Diurnal be Sl. MS. 1741? I find no "Aenigma." Can Starkey have stolen the poems and published them as theMarrow of Alchemy?

[39]The preface toRipley Revivedmakes it clear that theIntroitus Apertuswas originally written in Latin, not in English.

[40]This is recorded in Helvetius'Vitulus Aureus(1667). Helvetius describes his master as 43 or 44 years old, and calls him Elias Artistes.

[41]Seethe passage from the Epistle toEuphrates, quoted by Grosart (Vol. ii., p. 312).

[42]The "legend of Philalethes" has already been exposed by Mr. A. E. Waite in hisDevil Worship in France(ch. xiii.). I am also indebted to what Mr. Waite has written on Eirenaeus Philalethes in that book, as well as in hisTrue History of the Rosicrucians(1887) and hisLives of Alchymistical Philosophers(1888).

The translation from Juvenal has a separate title-page.

The Preface is dated "Newton by Usk this 17 of Decemb. 1647."

The prose translations in this volume have separate title-pages:

The preface is dated "Newton by Usk this first of October 1651."

The translation from Anselm has a separate title-page:

The Preface is dated "Newton by Usk, in South-Wales, April 17, 1652." The pieces have separate title-pages:

The Preface is dated "Newton by Uske neare Sketh-Rock. 1653."

A reissue, with additions and a fresh title-page, of (2). The Preface is dated "Newton by Usk, near Sketh-rock Septem. 30, 1654."

The Remains of Eugenius Philalethes [Thomas Vaughan] have a separate title-page.

Olor Iscanus. A collection of some Select Poems, Together with these Translations following, etc. All Englished by H. Vaughan, Silurist. London: Printed and are to be sold by Peter Parker ... 1679. [8vo.]

A reissue, according to Dr. Grosart (ii. 59) and W. C. Hazlitt (Supplement to Third Series Of Collections, p. 106), of the 1651Olor Iscanus, with a fresh title-page. I have not seen a copy.

Back to Index Next