40 Headley, op. cit., p. 130.
41 Ibid.
42 Ibid., p. 130 – 1.
43 Cited in Yates, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition, p. 394, footnote 1.
44 Yates, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition, p. 390.
45 Ibid. p. 366.
46 Ibid. p. 387.
47 Ibid. p. 369.
48 See Chapter Two.
49 Yates, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition, p. 367.
50 Ibid., pp. 367 – 8.
51 Ibid., p. 368.
52 Ibid.
53 Ibid., p. 369.
54 Ibid., p. 370.
55 Ibid., p. 369.
56 Ibid.
57 Ibid., p. 370.
58 Ibid.
59 Ibid., p. 371.
60 See Chapter Eight and Yates, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition, pp. 55 – 6, citing the Asclepius: ‘The gods who exercised their dominion over the earth will be restored one day and installed in a city at the extreme limit of Egypt, a city which will be founded towards the setting sun, and into which will hasten, by land and sea, the whole race of mortal men …’
61 Scott, op. cit., pp. 221 – 2.
CHAPTER THIRTEEN: THE INVISIBLE BROTHERHOOD
1 Cited in F. Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, Ark Paperbacks, London, 1986, p. 103.
2 Cited in Ibid., p. 104.
3 Ibid., p. 103.
4 Ibid., p. 104.
5 Ibid.
6 Ibid., pp. 30, 238, 251.
7 Fama, in Ibid., p. 239.
8 Fama, in Ibid., pp. 239 – 40.
9 Fama, in Ibid., pp. 240 – 41.
10 Ibid., p. 242.
11 Ibid.
12 Ibid., p. 242 – 3.
13 Ibid., p. 243.
14 Ibid., p. 246.
15 Ibid.
16 Ibid., p. 248.
17 Ibid., p. 251.
18 Ibid., p. 244.
19 Confessio in Ibid., p. 252.
20 Ibid., p. 253.
21 Ibid., p. 257.
22 Ibid.
23 Ibid., p. 258.
24 Ibid.
25 Ibid., p. 259.
26 Ibid., pp. 248 & 255.
27 Ibid., p. 30.
28 Joscelyn Godwin (trans.), The Chemical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz, with Introduction and Commentary by Adam McLean, Phanes Press, Grand Rapids, MI, 1991, Introduction, p. 7.
29 Yates, Rosicrucian Enlightenment, p. 30.
30 Godwin, The Chemical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz, p. 10.
31 Yates, Rosicrucian Enlightenment, p. 31.
32 Ibid., p. 50: ‘Andreae was certainly behind the scenes of the whole movement [the Rosicrucians] to which he frequently refers in his numerous works.’
33 Yates, Rosicrucian Enlightenment, p. 30 – 31.
34 Godwin, The Chemical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz, p. 10.
35 The full title is ‘The Chemical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz in the year 1459’, see Godwin, The Chemical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz, p. 13.
36 Ibid., p. 15.
37 Electronic Bible Search, Franklin Electronic Bible; for ‘Father of Light’.
38 See Chapter Six.
39 Godwin, The Chemical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz, p. 15.
40 Ibid., p. 16.
41 Ibid., p. 107.
42 Ibid., pp. 16 – 17.
43 Ibid., pp. 33 – 4.
44 Ibid., pp. 46 – 8.
45 Ibid., p. 80.
46 Ibid., p. 102.
47 Stephan Holler, in Gnosis: A Journal of the Western Inner Traditions, The Lumen Foundation, San Francisco, Summer 1996, p. 26; See also Godwin, The Chemical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz, p. 145, Adam McLean's commentary on the symbolism of the death of the king and the queen in the Chemical Wedding: ‘Now a physical death is actually a rebirth in the spiritual world, from when a being is released from its material envelope it returns to a more spiritual state.’
48 Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, p. 57.
49 Ibid., p. 147.
50 Yates, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition, pp. 312 – 13.
51 Ibid., p. 414.
52 Ibid., p. 373.
53 Ibid., p. 367.
54 Ibid., p. 413.
55 Ibid.
56 Ibid.
57 McIntosh, op. cit., p. 21.
58 Yates, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition, pp. 413 – 4, footnote 1. However, in Carlos Gilly's article ‘Campanella fra i Rosacroce’ in Tommaso Campanella e l'attesa del secolo aureo, Fondazione Luigi Firpo, Florence, 1998, pp. 107 – 55, Carlos Gilly argues that Tobias Adami did not bring copies of Campanella's manuscripts to Germany till after 1610 when the Rosicrucian Fama manifesto (another work by Andreae) were already written. Gilly quotes Ole Worm's ‘Laurea philosophica summa’ published in Copenhagen 1619, where the author reports that he had known of the Manifesto in 1611, that is before it was publicly put to the press and thus could not have been influenced by Campanella's ideas. This argument, in my opinion is weak. Civitas Solis was written in 1602, and surely its content, if not actual physical copies, were probably known to Andreae and his entourage before the writing of the Manifesto; otherwise why would Tobias Adami risk smuggling them out of the Inquisition prison in Naples to take to Andreae? And why would Wense suggest to Andreae to name his utopian boo k Civitas Solis?
59 J. P. Kenyon, The Stuarts, Fontana, London, 1966, p. 41.
60 Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, pp. 39 – 40: ‘There can be no doubt that we should see the movement behind the Rosicrucian publications as a movement ultimately stemming from John Dee. The Dee influence could have come into Germany from England with the English connections of the elector palatine, and it could have spread from Bohemia where Dee had propagated his stirring mission in earlier years …’
61 Ibid., p. 36 – 7.
62 McIntosh, op. cit., p. 24.
63 Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, pp. 134 – 8.
64 Ibid., p. 19.
65 Joscelyn Godwin, Robert Fludd: Hermetic Philosopher and Surveyor of Two Worlds, Phanes Press, Grand Rapids, MI, 1972, p. 11.
66 Hence the term ‘Bohemian’ to describe a roving or homeless person.
67 Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, p. 178.
CHAPTER FOURTEEN: EMERGENCE OF THE INVISIBLES
1 Oldenbourg, op. cit., p. 311.
2 Ibid., p. 78.
3 See Chapters Eleven & Twelve.
4 See Chapter Eleven.
5 Fama, cited in Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, p. 243.
6 McIntosh, op. cit., pp. 16 – 18.
7 Ibid., p. 18.
8 Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, p. 118.
9 Francis Bacon, The Advancement of Learning, book II, Macmillan & Co., London, 1895, Dedication to James I, section 13.
10 Scott, op. cit., p. 117.
11 Ibid., p. 321
12 Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, p. 119.
13 Ibid., p. 119.
14 Robert Lomas, The Invisible College, Headline, London, 2001, pp. 71 – 80 & pp. 85 – 6.
15 Fama, cited in Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, p. 243.
16 McIntosh, op. cit., p. 33.
17 Ibid.
18 Godwin, Robert Fludd: Hermetic Philosopher and Surveyor ofTwo Worlds, p. 11.
19 Ibid.
20 Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, p. 70.
21 Francis Bacon, New Atlantis, Kessinger Publishing, Kila, MT, 1992, p. 329.
22 Jerry Baker (ed.), New Atlantis and The Great Instauration: Bacon, Harlan Davidson, Arlington Heights, IL, 1989, p. xxx.
23 Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, p. 126; see also p. 55 for the R. C. ‘seal’.
24 Ibid., p. 127.
25 John Heydon, The Holy Guide, London, 1662, sig. B6 recto.; sig. C7 recto.
26 Alexander Piatigorsky, Freemasonry, Harvill Press, London, 1997, p. 83.
27 Sir James Stubbs, Freemason's Hall, The Library Art and
Publication Committee, London, 1983, pp. 53 – 5.
28 I Kings 6:11 – 14.
29 New Atlantis and The Great Instauration: Bacon, p. xxv.
30 Scott, op. cit., p. 501 – 3.
31 E. A. Wallis Budge, An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary, Dover Publications, New York, 1978, vol. I, p. 9a.
32 Yates, The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age, p. 96.
33 Fama, cited in Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, p. 248.
34 A. Fowler, Spenser and the Numbers of Time, Routledge & Keegan Paul, London, 1964.
35 Yates, The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age, p. 95.
36 Angus Fletcher, The Prophetic Moment: An Essay on Spenser, Chicago University Press, Chicago & London, 1971, pp. 157 & 275.
37 I Kings 9:24.
38 Ron Heisler, ‘Michael Maier and England’, The Hermetic Journal, 1989.
39 Ibid.
40 Ibid.
41 Donald R. Dickson, The Tessera of Antilia: Utopian Botherhoods & Secret Societies in the Early Seventeenth Century, E. J. Brill, Boston, 1998.
42 Ibid., pp. 114 – 5.
43 Ibid., p. 121.
44 Piatigorsky, op. cit., p. 38.
45 Fred Pick & G. Norman Knight, The Pocket History of Freemasonry, Frederick Muller, London, 1953, p. 30.
46 Piatigorsky, op. cit., p. 46.
47 Pick & Knight, op. cit., p. 32.
48 Ibid. p. 34.
49 Ibid. p. 35.
50 Lomas, op. cit., chapter 5.
51 Pick & Knight, op. cit., pp. 23 & 43.
52 Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, p. 182.
53 Ibid., p. 183.
54 Ibid.
55 Ibid.
56 Ibid., p. 182.
57 Ibid., p. 177.
58 Ibid., p. 176.
59 Ibid., p. 178.
60 First published in Amsterdam in 1668.
61 Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, p. 179.
62 Christopher Falkus, Charles II, Cardinal, London, 1975, p. 21.
63 After the Restoration, Charles II gave Prince Rupert various naval commands during the war against the Dutch. In the years before his death Rupert dabbled in scientific experiments and is said to have invented the art of mezzotint printmaking.
64 Pick & Knight, op. cit., p. 45. Present at Ashmole ‘raising’ ceremony was a certain Lord Henry Mainwaring, a colonel with the Roundheads, and by one of those strange twist of fate that can befall a person's life, Mainwaring's wife, after she was made a widow a few years later, would become Elias Ashmole's second wife in 1649.
65 For a saucy account of this romance see Guy Breton, Histoires d'amour de l'fistoire de France, Presse Pocket, Paris, 1960, pp. 14 – 15.
66 Falkus, op. cit., p. 38.
67 Ibid.
68 Ibid., p. 39.
69 Ibid., p. 46.
70 Ibid., p. 47.
71 He was presumably of Babylonian, i.e. dark, complexion.
72 Falkus, op. cit., p. 47.
73 Paul Naudon, Histoire générale de la Franc-Maçonnerie , Office du Livre, Paris, 1981, p. 49.
74 Lawrence, op. cit., pp. 92 – 100.
75 Antonia Fraser, King Charles II, Mandarin, London, 1993, p. 182.
76 Lomas, op. cit., p. 220.
77 Bluché, op. cit., p. 247.
78 For example, by Joseph Ritman and his colleagues at the Hermetic/Rosicrucian Library in Amsterdam. See The Silent Language: The Symbols of Hermetic Philosophy, In de Pelikaan Press, Amsterdam, 1994.
79 The origin of many of these sort of universalism or utopian movements in Europe stemmed from the growing rift between the papacy and the more purist factions of Christianity which eventually lead to the Protestant Reformation and the Catholic Counter-Reformation in the mid-16th and early 17th century. And there is no one person was more acutely aware of this dangerous rift between the Christian factions than Cardinal Richelieu in Paris, who was in charge of both the religious as well as the affairs of state of France. Richelieu was constantly vigilant of the religious tension in France and the terrible civil war that this had cause in the not-too-distant past. And although the French court was intensely Catholic, especially after the union of Louis XIII and Anne of Austria, it was nonetheless well known that one of Richelieu's great ambitions was to end the papal-Habsburg-Spanish hegemony on central Europe. In his first years in office Richelieu surprised everyone with his ruthless determination to oppose these forces by taking quick and decisive military action against the papal forces in the Swiss canton of Grisons. This had sent a clear message to all those who were under the illusion that Richelieu was the unequivocal defender of Roman Catholicism and the Catholic League. His biggest political challenge came in 1630 when the Queen Mother, the hysterically staunch Catholic Marie de’Medici, incited her weak son, Louis XIII, to dismiss Richelieu. In a moment of uncharacteristic show of strength, Louis XIII refused to obey her and, instead, had her banished from court. This crucial decision that was to change the course of French history is known as the ‘night of the dupes’, an allusion to how Richelieu's astute political acumen had even duped the regents of France. Richelieu confused many with his shifting foreign policies, for on the one hand he dealt severely with Protestant Huguenot uprisings such as the one at La Rochelle after they sided with the English Protestants in 1628, and on the other hand he delivered equal severity towards the Catholic League when, for example, in 1635 he sided France with the Protestants during the Thirty Years War. Such acts earned him the hatred of both the Catholics and the Protestant extremists and generated an endless conflict between him and the pope in Rome. Immensely wealthy, Richelieu was an avid patron of the arts, and was himself a playwright and musician of some talent. The Académie Française, which he founded when he was fifty-three years old, was his pride and joy. Could Richelieu have been somewhat sympathetic to a new ‘Christian’ movement such as the Rosicrucian movement in Germany that sought to bring about a universal reform? Did he encourage individuals like Decarte to form a somewhat similar society in France to promote ‘natural philosophy’ as an antidote to the religious mania in Europe? These are extremely provocative and speculative questions that, nonetheless, require further investigation.
80 Yates, ‘Considérations de Bruno et de Campanella sur la monarchie française’, p. 12.
81 Lomas, op. cit., p. 114 – 6.
82 She died a year after they married, in January 1653, while giving birth to a stillborn child; Moray was heartbroken and never remarried.
83 Data from California Freemason, ‘The First Initiation on English Soil’, October/ November 2001, available at: www.cafreemason-digital.com.
84 Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, p. 185; the actual translation in English was not Vaughan's.
85 Dudley Wright, ‘The First Initiation’ in The Builder, 1921.
86 Lomas, op. cit. p. 250. For details on Preston see Pick & Knight, op. cit., p. 97.
87 Adrian Tin n iswood, His Invention So Fertile: A Life of Christopher Wren, Jonathan Cape, London, 2001, p. 108.
88 Ibid., p. 109.
89 It might have been the same comet after it had passed the Sun; see Tinniswood, op. cit., p. 112.
90 Ibid., p. 115.
91 Fraser, op. cit., p. 237.
92 Lomas, op. cit., chapter 2.
93 Pick & Knight, op. cit., pp. 50 – 1.
94 Piatigorsky, op. cit., p. 209; Jasper Ridley, The Freemasons, Constable & Co., London, 1999, p. 23; Bernard Williamson & Michael Baigent, ‘Sir Christopher Wren and Freemasonry: New Evidence’, in Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, vol. CIX, pp. 188 – 90.
95 Pick & Knight, op. cit., pp. 68 – 70.
96 Ibid., p. 69.
97 For the story of the Vatican Obelisk see Christopher Hibbert, Rome: The Biography of a City, Penguin Books, London, 1985, pp. 175 – 8. See also E. A. Wallis Budge, Cleopatra's Needle and Other Egyptian Obelisks, Dover Publications, New York, 1990, pp. 255 – 7; also Labib Habachi, The Obelisks of Egypt: Skyscrapers of the Past, Americ
an University Press, Cairo, 1984, p. 131.
98 Today it is possible to be guided through churches and piazzas of Rome by the obelisks in decreasing size: Piazza San Giovanni in Laterano (32.18 m), Piazza San Pietro (25.37 m), Piazza del Popolo (23.20 m), Monte Citorio (21.79 m), Piazza Navona (16.54 m), Piazza dell Esquilino (14.75 m), Piazza del Quirinale (14.64 m), Piazza della Minerva, Trinita del Monti (13.91 m), Monte Picio (9.25 m), Piazza della Rotunda (6.34 m), Piazza della Minerva (5.74 m) and Villa Celimontana (2.68 m).
99 Pliny, Natural History, vol. II, book xxxvi. See also Budge, Cleopatra's Needle and other Egyptian Obelisks, p. 255.
100 Baines & Malek, op. cit., pp. 173 – 4.
101 Hibbert, op. cit., p. 355.
102 A. M. Partini & B. de Rachewiltz, Roma Egizia, Edizione Mediterranee, 1999, pp. 105 – 6.
103 The Basilica was finally consecrated in 1626, on the 1300th anniversary of the original consecration by Constantine. The study of Michelangelo (who died before the work was fully completed) was carried on by Giacomo della Porta and Doenico Fontana. The new façade, erected by Carlo Maderno, was begun in 1607 and completed 1614. In 1650 – 67 Bernini added the famous Piazza and colonnade, which has the obelisk as foci.
104 Paul Johnson, The Papacy, Orion Publishing Group, 1998, p. 154.
105 Sixtus V then appointed Domenico Fontana to move the obelisk and raise it in front of the entrance of St. Peter's Basilica. The whole operation took nearly a year to complete. Fontana employed traditional methods, with the only real innovation over the ancient Egyptians being the use of horses instead of just sheer manpower. On the surface, the pope's motivation was the aesthetic improvement of the Vatican's Piazza, but a more profound purpose was the display of the growing power of the papacy in line with that of the ancient Roman emperors who had brought these Egyptian trophies to Rome more than sixteen centuries earlier. It is true that moving the obelisk to its new location was visually important to the Basilica; but the whole affair was an overt way for Sixtus V to draw the obvious parallel between the ancient emperors and the papacy. And like these emperors and pharaohs of old, Sixtus V granted Fontana extraordinary powers to commandeer any labour, any tools and any materials required for the task of raising the great obelisk. Fontana also had full papal authority to demolish any houses that happened to be in the way. And the pope made it clear that opposition or obstruction to the project by anyone could result in a huge fine and even the punishment of death. Indeed, during the final stage of raising the obelisk into place, Sixtus V gave strict orders that everyone in the huge crowd of spectators that had come to watch should remain totally silent. The penalty for breaking this order, the pope declared, was death. The story goes that at one stage the ropes holding the obelisk were about to break under the huge strain. And so a Genoese sailor bravely ignored the pope's command and shouted: ‘Put water on the ropes!’, thus probably saving the monument from destruction. After the obelisk was safely raised into place, the crowds were finally allowed to cheer.