View allAll Photos Tagged ROSICRUCIANS
San Jose, California
Postmarked July ? 1946
Pub. By D. A.Milligan News Agency, San Jose, Cal – Chamber of Com. Photo Natural Color Post Card Made in U.S.A. by E.C. Kropp Co. Milwaukee, Wis. (Eay)
Postcard from my collection.
Full page illustration found on page 21 of the second part of The Secret Symbols of The Rosicrucians. This is one of the most complex of the diagrams found within the book, showing the connections between God, nature, man, philosophy, magic, alchemy. Peculiar phrases such as "The beginning of a thing is the beginning of its end," "When thou knowesth thyself, shalt thou know this symbol," and "He who has eyes shall see," are found dotted throughout the illustration. The influence of Hermeticism, alchemy, occult beliefs, and religion, is overabundant.
From The Secret Symbols of The Rosicrucians [1888]
The Ferguson Collection (Ref: Ferguson Ag-x.16)
View the catalogue online: eleanor.lib.gla.ac.uk/record=b1756172
Rosicrucian Egyptian Museum is a museum about Ancient Egypt located at Ancient Mystical Order Rosae Crucis Rosicrucian Park in the Rose Garden neighborhood of San Jose, California.
Donna and I spent a couple very pleasant hours when we visited the Rosicrucian facility almost seven years ago. For one reason or another, I didn’t post most of my photos on flickr. Hope this makes up for that.
Note: I have more or less figured out how to acquire something like 24,000+ photos in the Cloud. I will be posting those I think are the most interesting from time to time.
Rosicrucian Egyptian Museum is a museum about Ancient Egypt located at Ancient Mystical Order Rosae Crucis Rosicrucian Park in the Rose Garden neighborhood of San Jose, California.
Rosicrucian Egyptian Museum is a museum about Ancient Egypt located at Ancient Mystical Order Rosae Crucis Rosicrucian Park in the Rose Garden neighborhood of San Jose, California.
Stanislas de Guaita (6 April 1861, Tarquimpol, Moselle – 19 December 1897, Tarquimpol) was a French poet based in Paris, an expert on esotericism and European mysticism, and an active member of the Rosicrucian Order. He was very celebrated and successful in his time. He had many disputes with other people who were involved with occultism and magic. Occultism and magic were part of his novels.
Early life
De Guaita came from a noble Italian family who had relocated to France, and as such his title was 'Marquis', or Marquess. He was born in the castle of Alteville in the commune of Tarquimpol, Moselle, and went to school at the lyceum in Nancy, where he studied chemistry, metaphysics and Cabala.[1] As a young man, he moved to Paris, and his luxurious apartment became a meeting place for poets, artists, and writers who were interested in esotericism and mysticism. In the 1880s, Guaita published two collections of poetry The Dark Muse (1883) and The Mystic Rose (1885), which became popular.
Rosicrucian activities
De Guaita's drawings of the upright and inverted pentagrams, representing Spirit over matter (holiness) and matter over Spirit (evil), respectively, from his book La Clef de la Magie Noire, in 1897.
De Guaita was influenced by the writings of l'Abbé Alphonse-Louis Constant, alias Eliphas Lévi, a prominent French occultist who was initiated in London to rosicrucianism by Edward Bulwer-Lytton in 1854.[2] Eliphas Lévi was also initiated as a Freemason on 14 March 1861 in the Grand Orient de France Lodge La Rose du Parfait Silence at the Orient of Paris. De Guaita became further interested in occultism after reading a novel by Joséphin Péladan which was interwoven with Rosicrucian and occult themes. In Paris, de Guaita and Péladan became acquainted, and in 1884, the two decided to try to rebuild the Rosicrucian Brotherhood.[2] They recruited Gérard Encausse to help rebuild the brotherhood. Encausse, who went by the pseudonym “Papus”, was a Spanish-born French physician and occultist who had written books on magic, Cabalah and the Tarot.
In 1888, De Guaita founded the Ordre kabbalistique de la Rose-Croix, or the Kabbalistic Order of the Rose-Cross. Rosicrucianism is an esoteric movement which first began with the publication of the three Rosicrucian Manifestos in the early 17th century. Guaita's Rosicrucian Order provided training in the Cabala, an esoteric form of Jewish and Christian mysticism, which attempts to reveal hidden mystical insights in the Bible and divine nature.[1] The order also conducted examinations and provided university degrees on Cabala topics. Guaita had a large private library of books on metaphysical issues, magic, and the "hidden sciences." He was nicknamed the "Prince of the Rosicrucians" by his contemporaries for his broad learning on Rosicrucian issues. Papus, Peladan, and Antoine de La Rochefoucauld were prominent members. Maurice Barrès was a close friend of De Guaita.
In the late 1880s, the Abbé Boullan, a defrocked Catholic Priest and the head of a schismatic branch called the “Church of the Carmel” led a “magical war” against de Guaita. French-Belgian novelist Joris K. Huysmans, a supporter of Boullan, portrayed De Guaita as a Satanic sorcerer in the novel La Bas. Another of Boullan’s supporters, the writer Jules Bois, challenged De Guaita to a pistol duel. De Guaita agreed and took part in the duel, but as both men missed, no one was hurt.
By the 1890s, De Guaita's, Papus' and Péladan’s collaboration became increasingly strained by disagreements over strategy and doctrines. Guaita and Papus lost the support of Péladan, who left to start a competing order. It is in the writings of his friend and childhood roommate Péladan that Stanislas de Guaïta found his first entry into the world of Tradition. Subsequently, reading the work of Eliphas Lévi, of which he would henceforth become the commentator and theorist, initiated him into Christian mysticism; Fabre d'Olivet directs him towards the great mysteries in general and towards the Hebrew language; and Saint-Yves d'Alveydre initiated him into the Synarchy. He joined the very recent Martinist Order of his friend Papus, then a medical student, whose pseudonym he mocked.
In light of all these influences, Guaita advocates a spiritualism exalting the Christian Tradition, which, thanks to the possible establishment of synarchy – an ideal form of government – should lead to the advent of the kingdom of God. In 1888, in the same spirit, he founded with Péladan the Kabbalistic Order of the Rose-Croix, of which Papus immediately joined, Erik Satie and the artists' banker, Olivier Dubs also joined. Peladan then separated from it to found another order: the Catholic Rosicrucians, alleging its refusal of operative magic. In 1887, in collaboration with his secretary and friend Oswald Wirth, he created a Kabbalistic Tarot which is reproduced in the Tarot des Bohemiens by Papus3.
In 1893, the Order of Guaita was attacked by Huysmans, who accused it of bewitching the defrocked Lyon abbot Joseph-Antoine Boullan from a distance. Duels ensue; Huysmans and Jules Bois oppose Papus and Guaita.
Stanislas is still this young poet less fascinated by Baudelairian taste than by the perfect aesthetic of Parnassus by Leconte Delisle and Mallarmé. Moreover, Alain Mercier4, will confirm that Guaita poet “by his classicism of form and writing, is closer to the Parnassians than to the Symbolists. Thus there were two distinct beings in him: the aristocratic and generous hermetic on the one hand, the tormented poet worried about artifice on the other. It was the writer Mendès who encouraged him to read Éliphas Lévi. His original drawing of an inverted pentagram with a goat's head appeared in La Clef de la Magie Noire (The Key to Black Magic), published the year he died. It later became conflated with Baphomet, or the Sabbatic Goat.
He died on December 19, 1897, at the age of 36, in Alteville. He is buried in Tarquimpol7,8. The causes of his early death were explained by kidney problems or drug use. Regarding drugs, he wrote:
“Coca, like hashish, but in other ways, exerts a direct and powerful action on the astral body; its customary use unties, in man, certain compressive links of his hyperphysical nature – links whose persistence is for the greatest number a guarantee of salvation. If I spoke without hesitation on this point, I would encounter unbelievers, even among occultists. I must confine myself to advice. — You who value your life, your reason, the health of your soul, avoid hypodermic injections of cocaine like the plague. Without speaking of the habit which is created very quickly (even more imperative, more tenacious and more fatal a hundred times than any other of the same kind), a particular state has taken birth. »
His rich library, made up of works, parchments, alchemical treatises and grimoires dating back to time immemorial, was dispersed during several sales in Paris, in 1899 (Dorbon - René Philippon), and in 1968 (Drouot ) and 2014 (Piasa).
Stanislas de Guaita seen by his contemporaries
“He spent five months of the year in a small ground floor on Avenue Trudaine, where he only received a few occultists, and from which he sometimes did not leave for weeks. There he had amassed a whole strange and precious library, Latin texts from the Middle Ages, old grimoires loaded with pentacles, parchments illuminated with miniatures, alchemy treatises, the most esteemed editions of Van Helmont, Paracelsus, Raymond Lulle , Saint-Martin, Martinès de Pasqually, Corneille Agrippa, Pierre de Lancre, Knorr de Rosenroth, manuscripts by Eliphas, bindings signed Derome, Capé, Trautz-Bauzonnet, Chambolle-Duru, works of contemporary science. » (Maurice Barrès, A renovator of occultism: Stanislas de Guaita, Chamuel, 1898, p. 29)
“Starting from Eliphas Lévi, he went back to the Kabbalists of the Renaissance and the Hermetic Philosophers of the Middle Ages, reading everything and understanding everything with prodigious ease. The most obscure texts became illuminated as soon as he projected the clarity of his solar spirit onto them. He played with metaphysical problems and I was far from being able to follow him..." (Oswald Wirth, Le Tarot des Imagiers du Moyen Âge, Émile Nourry, Paris, 1927.)
“He was very rich, and had devoted himself to occult sciences without knowledge or method. He only saw the picturesque side of it, like Rembrandt, like Téniers, like Jordaëns. Dressed in a red robe, sword in hand, in a setting that Breughel would not have disavowed, he evoked fantasies and dissolved larvae. The truth is that, saturated with morphine and alcohol, he really believed he saw animals climbing along his limbs, and specters moving stubbornly before his eyes. » (Michel de Lézinier, With Huysmans - Promenades et souvenirs, Paris, Delpeuch, 1928.)
Arthur Edward Waite (October 2, 1857 - May 19, 1942) was an American-British occultist. A.E. Waite joined the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn in 1891 and the Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia in 1902. Waite joined the Outer Order of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn in January 1891 after being introduced by E.W. Berridge.[5] In 1893 he withdrew from the Golden Dawn. In 1896 he rejoined the Outer Order of the Golden Dawn. In 1899 he entered the Second order of the Golden Dawn. He became a Freemason in 1901,and entered the Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia in 1902. Waite was interested in the higher grades of Freemasonry and saw initiation into Craft Masonry as a way to gain access to these rites. After joining the Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia and the Knights Templar, Waite traveled to Switzerland in 1903 to receive the Régime Ecossais Rectifié or the Rectified Scottish Rite and its grade of Chevalier Bienfaisant de la Cité Sainte (C.B.C.S.). Waite believed that the Rectified Scottish Rite, more than any other Masonic Rite, represented the "Secret Tradition" of mystical spiritual illumination.
In 1903 Waite founded the Independent and Rectified Order R. R. et A. C. This Order was disbanded in 1914. The Golden Dawn was torn by internal feuding until Waite's departure in 1914; in July 1915 he formed the Fellowship of the Rosy Cross,[7] not to be confused with the Societas Rosicruciana. By that time there existed some half-dozen offshoots from the original Golden Dawn, and as a whole it never recoveredWhen he became Grand Master of the Order in 1903, changing its name to the "Holy Order of the Golden Dawn", many members rejected his ideas on the primacy of mysticism over magic, and a rival group, the "Morning Star", seceded under the leadership of William Butler Yeats. The Golden Dawn was torn apart by numerous internal conflicts until Waite's departure in 1914. Arthur Edward Waite was a British poet and scholarly mystic who wrote extensively on occult and esoteric matters, and was the co-creator of the Rider–Waite tarot deck (also called the Rider–Waite–Smith or Waite–Smith deck). As his biographer R. A. Gilbert described him, "Waite's name has survived because he was the first to attempt a systematic study of the history of Western occultism—viewed as a spiritual tradition rather than as aspects of protoscience or as the pathology of religion."
He was a Freemason, as well as being a member of the SRIA and Golden Dawn.
He spent most of his life in or near London, connected to various publishing houses and editing a magazine, The Unknown World.
Waite was a prolific author of occult texts on divination, Rosicrucianism, Freemasonry, black and ceremonial magic (goétie and théurgie), Kabbalah and alchemy; he also translated and republished several mystical and alchemical works. His work on the Holy Grail, influenced by his friendship with Arthur Machen, is remarkable. Some of these books, such as the "Book of Ceremonial Magic", "The Holy Kabbalah", and the "New Encyclopedia of Freemasonry", have recently gone out of print.
René Guénon dissociates himself from this somewhat arranged Grail: "Mr. Arthur Edward Waite has published a work on the legends of the Holy Grail which is impressive in its scope and in the amount of research it represents, and in which all those interested in this question will find a very complete and methodical exposition of the content of the many texts that refer to it, as well as of the various theories that have been proposed to explain the origin and the meaning of these highly complex legends, which are sometimes even contradictory in some of their elements. It should be added that Mr. Waite did not intend his work to be purely scholarly, and he is to be commended for this, for we fully agree with him that any work that does not go beyond this point of view is of little value and can only be of "documentary" interest; his aim was to bring out the real, "inner" meaning of the symbolism of the Holy Grail and the "quest". Unfortunately, we have to say that this side of his work is the least satisfactory; in fact, the conclusions he reaches are rather disappointing, especially when we consider all the hard work that went into reaching them; and it is on this point that we'd like to make a few observations, which will naturally relate to questions we've already dealt with on other occasions". ...
"It's no insult to Mr. Waite, we believe, to say that his work is somewhat one-sighted. to say that his work is somewhat one-sighted. "partial"? That might not be strictly accurate, and in any case, we don't we don't mean that it's intentionally one-sided; rather, it's something of that...There would rather be something of the fault so common among those who, having "specialized" in a certain order of study, are inclined to reduce everything to it, or to neglect that which cannot be reduced to it. That the Grail legend is Christian is certainly not in dispute, and Mr. Waite is right to affirm it; but does this necessarily prevent it from being something else at the same time? Those who are aware of the fundamental unity of all traditions will see no incompatibility here; but Mr. Waite, for his part, only wants to see what is specifically Christian, thus locking himself into a particular traditional form whose relationship with the others, precisely because of its "inner" side, seems to escape him.It's not that he denies the existence of elements of another origin, probably pre-dating Christianity, for that would be to go against the evidence; but he accords them very little importance, and seems to regard them as "accidental", as having been added to the legend "from outside", and simply as a result of the environment in which it developed. These elements are therefore regarded by him as belonging to what is commonly called folk-lore, not always out of disdain as the word itself might suggest, but rather to satisfy a kind of contemporary "fashion", and without always realizing the intentions involved; and it's perhaps worth stressing this point a little."..."The very concept of folklore, as it is usually understood, is based on a radically false idea, the idea that there are "popular creations", spontaneous products of the mass of the people; and we can immediately see the close relationship of this way of seeing things with "democratic" prejudices. As has been rightly said, "the profound interest of all so-called popular traditions lies above all in the fact that they are not popular in origin"; and we would add that, if they are, as is almost always the case, traditional elements in the true sense of the word, however distorted, diminished or fragmentary they may sometimes be, and things of real symbolic value, all this, far from being of popular origin, is not even of human origin. What can be popular is only the fact of "survival and, in this respect, the term folk-lore takes on a meaning quite similar to that of "paganism", taking into account only the etymology of the latter, and with less "polemical" and insulting intent. The people thus retain, without understanding them, the remnants of ancient traditions, even
Sometimes, these traditions go back so far as to be impossible to determine, and for this reason, they are often considered to belong to the obscure realm of "prehistory"; in this way, they fulfil the function of a kind of more or less "subconscious" collective memory, the content of which has clearly come from elsewhere. What may seem the most astonishing is that, when we get to the bottom of things, we find that what is preserved in this way contains above all, in a more or less veiled form, a considerable amount of esoteric data, i.e. precisely everything that is inherently less popular; and this fact suggests an explanation that we will limit ourselves to indicating in a few words. When a traditional form is on the verge of extinction, its last representatives may well voluntarily entrust to this collective memory what would otherwise be lost without return; in short, this is the only way to save what can be saved to a certain extent; and, at the same time, the natural incomprehension of the mass is a sufficient guarantee that what once possessed an esoteric character will not be stripped of it for that reason, but will remain only, as a kind of testimony of the past, for those who, in other times, will be able to understand it. Having said this, we see no reason to attribute to folk-lore, without further examination, everything that belongs to traditions other than Christianity, the latter alone being an exception; such seems to be Mr. Waite's intention, when he accepts this denomination for the "pre-Christian", and particularly Celtic, elements found in the Grail legends. In this respect, there are no privileged traditional forms; the only distinction to be made is between those that have disappeared and those that are currently alive; and, consequently, the whole question would come down to knowing whether the Celtic tradition had really ceased to live when the legends in question were formed. This is at least questionable: on the one hand, this tradition may have been maintained for longer than is generally believed, with a more or less hidden organization, and, on the other hand, these legends themselves may be older than the "critics" think, not because there were necessarily texts now lost, in which we have little more faith than M. Waite, but because they may first have been the object of oral transmission, which may have lasted several centuries. Waite, but because they may first have been the subject of oral transmission, which may have lasted for several centuries, which is far from exceptional. For our part, we see here the mark of a "junction" between two traditional forms two traditional forms, one ancient and the other new at the time, the Celtic
and the Christian tradition, a junction by which what had to be preserved from the of the former was incorporated into the latter, albeit modified to some extent to a certain extent, in outward form, by adaptation and assimilation, but not by being transposed onto another plane, as Mr. Waite would have us believe, for there are equivalences between all regular traditions.
than a simple question of "sources" in the scholarly sense. It
It may be difficult to pinpoint exactly where and when this junction took place, but this is of secondary interest and almost exclusively historical; it's easy to see, moreover, that these are the sort of things that leave no trace in written "documents". Perhaps the "Celtic" or "Culdean" Church deserves more attention in this respect than Mr. Waite seems inclined to give it; its very name might suggest as much; and there's nothing implausible in the fact that behind it there was something of another order, no longer religious, but initiatory, for, like everything that relates to the links existing between different traditions, what we're dealing with here necessarily belongs to the initiatory or esoteric domain. Exotericism, religious or otherwise, never goes beyond the limits of the traditional form to which it properly belongs; what goes beyond these limits cannot belong to a "Church" as such, but the latter can only be its external "support"; and this is a remark to which we shall have occasion to return later. We should therefore do here exactly the opposite of what Mr. Waite does, who, stopping at external and superficial explanations, which he accepts with confidence as long as it is not a question of Christianity, sees meanings radically different and unrelated to each other where there are only more or less multiple aspects of the same symbol or its
various applications; no doubt it would have been different if he had not been hampered by his preconceived idea of a sort of heterogeneity of Christianity in relation to other traditions. Likewise, Mr. Waite rightly rejects, with regard to the legend of the Grail, theories which appeal to so-called “gods of vegetation”; but it is regrettable that it is much less clear with regard to ancient mysteries, which never had anything in common with this “naturalism” of completely modern invention; the “gods of vegetation” and other stories of the same kind only ever existed in the imagination of Frazer and his ilk, whose anti-traditional intentions are not in doubt."...? "There is no doubt that Arthur Edward Waite was a master at symbolic interpretation of ancient symbolism, both pre christian and christian. The book of "The Holy Grail: History, Legend And Symbolism" is to accent the research that Waite has compiled on the search for the Holy Grail. An excellent work, well worth the effort for study and like Indiana Jones father, you can undertake the pursuit from this point." :) It is at the core of all Western culture: the story of the Holy Grail, the secret history of Christianity and the grand quest to find it that informs everything from tales steeped in centuries, such as the legend of King Arthur, to the most modern popular fiction, like The Da Vinci Code. In this highly readable but densely informative work, Waite, a preeminent 19th-century expert in esoterica, explores all the literature dedicated to this "legend of the soul" from both an intellectual and a spiritual perspective, seeking out the elemental through-lines of this most fundamental of stories as well as a mystical essence of Christianity itself. Students of folklore, readers of fantasy-quest fiction, and seekers after religious truth will all find this a vital resource. American-born British occultist and author ARTHUR EDWARD WAITE.
"The true legitimacies are for the most part in exile, or otherwise with their rights in abeyance. The real canons of literature can be uttered only behind doors or in the secrecy of taverns. The secrets of the great orthodoxies are very seldom communicated, even to epopts on their advancement. The highest claims of all are not so much wanting in warrant as wanting those spokesmen who are willing to utter them. We shall not be surprised, therefore, to find that the custodians of the Holy Graal, which was a mystery of all secrecy, "there where no sinner can be," despite the kingly titles ascribed to them, sometimes abode in the utmost seclusion. Let us seek in the first instance to realise the nature and the place of that Castle or Temple which, according to the legend, was for a period of centuries the sanctuary of the Sacred Vessel and of the other hallowed objects connected therewith. It is in the several locations of the Hallows that we shall come at a later time into a fuller understanding of their offices and of the meanings which may lie behind them. They are not to be regarded exactly as part of the mystery of the Castle; but at least this is more than a casket, and between the container and the things contained, distinct though their significance may be, there are points of correlation, so that the one throws light on the other. We have seen that the Vessel itself was brought from Salem to Britain, and it follows from the historical texts that the transit had a special purpose, one explanation of which will be found ready to our hands when the time comes for its consideration. The Castle is described after several manners, the later romances being naturally the more specific, and we get in fine a geographical settlement and boundary. In the Chrétien portion of the
p. 129 [paragraph continues] Conte del Graal, Perceval discovers the Castle in a valley, wherein it is well and beautifully situated, having a four-square tower, with a principal hall and a bridge leading up to the chief entrance. In some of the other legends the asylum is so withdrawn that it is neither named nor described. The Early History of Merlin speaks of it not less simply as the place where they had the Holy Vessel in keeping. According to the Didot Perceval, it is the house of the Rich King Fisherman; it is situated in a valley; it has a tower, and is approached by a bridge. It might be a tower merely, for the description is not less vague than many accounts of the Cup. One of the late Merlin texts says merely that the Holy Vessel is in the West--that is, in the Land of Vortigern, or that it abides in Northumbria. Another says that the Castle is Corbenic; but though we hear a good deal concerning it, there is no description whatever. The section of the Conte del Graal which is referable to Gautier de Doulens says that it is situated on a causeway tormented by the sea. The building is of vast extent and is inhabited by a great folk. We hear of its ceiling, emblazoned with gold and embroidered with silver stars, of its tables of precious metal, its images and the rich gems which enlighten it. In a word, we are already in the region of imaginative development and adornment, but it is all mere decoration which carries with it no meaning beyond the heavy tokens of splendour. Manessier furnishes no special account, and Gerbert, who has other affairs at heart than solicitude about a material building or desire to exalt it into allegory, leaves it unsketched entirely. The Book of the Holy Graal is the only French text which contains in a methodical account the building of the Holy House. The first wardens have passed from the land of the living, and Alain le Gros is the keeper of the Blessed Vessel. The actual builder is a certain converted king of Terre Foraine, and there is a covenant between him and Alain, one condition of which p. 130
is that the Graal shall remain in his kingdom. The Castle on its completion is given the mystic name of Corbenic, in obedience to an inscription which is found blazoned on one of the entrance gates. The name is said to signify the Treasury of the Holy Vessel. The Graal is placed in a fair chamber of the Castle, as if on an altar of repose, but, all his munificence notwithstanding and all the sacramental visions which he sees in the Holy Place, beating of birds' wings and chanting of innumerable voices, the king is visited speedily for his mere presence and receives his death-wound at the very altar: it is the judgment of the sanctuary on those who desecrate the sanctuary by carrying, however unwittingly, an unhallowed past therein, and it recalls the traditional conclusion of the Cabiric Mysteries, wherein the candidate was destroyed by the gods. Setting aside an analogy on which I am by no means insisting, the event was the beginning of those wonders which earned for Castle Corbenic the name of the Palace Adventurous, because no one could enter therein, and no one could sleep, its lawful people excepted, without death overtaking them, or some other grievous penalty. The prose Lancelot is in near correspondence with Chrétien, representing the Castle as situated at the far end of a great valley, with water encircling it. On another occasion it is named rather than described, and visited but not expounded, but we learn that it is situated in a town which has many dwellers therein. In the Quest of Galahad it is a rich and fair building, with a postern opening towards the sea, and this was guarded by lions, between which a man might pass only if he carried the arms of faith, since the sword availed nothing and there was no protection in harness. For the visitor who was expected or tolerated, it would seem that all doors stood open, except the door of the sanctuary. But this would unclose of itself; the light would issue from within; the silver table would be seen; and thereon the Holy Vessel, covered with drapery of samite. There also on a day p. 131 might be celebrated, with becoming solemnity, the Great Mass of the Supersanctified, and this even in the presence of those who were not clean in their past, so only that they had put away their sin when they entered on the Quest. It was thus beheld by Lancelot, though he lay as one dead afterwards, because of his intrusion. So also the welcome guest had reason to know that the court of King Pelles held a great fellowship in the town of Corbenic. But there were other visitors at times and seasons who saw little of all this royalty, like Hector de Marys, who--brother as he was to my lord Sir Lancelot--found the doors all barred against him and no warden to open, long as he hailed thereat. The most decorative of all the accounts is, however, in the Longer Prose Perceval, where the Castle is reached by means of three bridges, which are horrible to cross. Three great waters run below them, the first bridge being a bow-shot in length and not more than a foot in width. This is the Bridge of the Eel; but it proves wide and a fair thorough-way in the act of crossing. The second bridge is of ice, feeble and thin, and it is arched high above the water. This is transformed on passing into the richest and strangest ever seen, and its abutments are full of images. The third and last bridge stands on columns of marble. Beyond it there is a sculptured gate, giving upon a flight of steps, which leads to a spacious hall painted with figures in gold. When Perceval visited the Castle a second time he found it encompassed by a river, which came from the Earthly Paradise and proceeded through the forest beyond as far as the hold of a hermit, where it found peace in the earth. To the Castle itself there were three names attributed: the Castle of Eden, the Castle of Joy and the Castle of Souls. In conclusion as to this matter, the location, in fine, is Corbenic--not as the unvaried name, but as that which may be called the accepted, representing the Temple at its highest, and corresponding in French romance to Montsalvatch, in p. 132
[paragraph continues] German--which our late redaction of the Book of the Holy Graal mentions specifically, and which, all doubtful clouds of mystic adventure notwithstanding, looms almost as a landmark in the Lancelot and the Quest of Galahad.
must speak very lightly of the German cycle, because, through all these branches, it is understood that I shall deal with it again. In the Parsifal and Titurel the Temple is completely spiritualised, so that it has ceased almost to be a house made with hands, though the descriptions on the external side are here and there almost severe in their simplicity. On that side it has the strength of a feudal fortress, turret by turret rising. In the master-hall of the palace there is something of Oriental splendour--carpets and couches and cushions, marble hearths burning strange fragrant woods, and a great blazing of lights. So far the Parsifal of Wolfram, but we must turn to other texts for the building of the Temple--which is after another manner than anything told of Corbenic in the Northern French cycle. The building was the work of Titurel, the first King of the Graal, and in answer to his prayers the High Powers of Heaven prepared the ground-plan of the Holy Place and furnished the raw material. Over the construction itself the powers of earth toiled by day and the Powers of Heaven by night. The floor was of pure onyx; at the summit of the tower there was a ruby surmounted by a cross of crystal, and carbuncles shone at the meeting-points of the great arches within. The roof was of sapphire, and a pictured starry heaven moved therein in true order. We are on a different level when we have recourse to the poem of Heinrich, which presents several anomalies in respect of the literature as a whole. The road leading to the Graal Castle was one of harsh and hazardous enterprise--world without end; but it brought the questing hero at some far point into a plenteous and gracious land, where rose the Palace of Desire, looking p. 133 beautiful exceedingly, with a meadow before it which was set apart for joust and tournament. A great concourse of knights and gentlewomen abode in the burg, and for the Castle itself we are told that there was none so fair. Though it will be seen that there is nothing distinctive in this account, as it is here reduced into summary, the design is among many things strange, for if it is not the Castle of Souls it is that of a Living Tomb, as the story concerning it will show at the proper time. So did the place of the mysteries, from a dim and vague allusion, become "A wilderness of building, sinking far
And self-withdrawn into a wondrous depth
Far sinking into splendour." [paragraph continues] We can scarcely say whether that which had begun on earth was assumed into the spiritual place, or whether the powers and virtues from above descended to brood thereon. I have left over from this consideration all reference to another spiritual place, in Sarras on the confines of Egypt, where the Graal, upon its outward journey, dwelt for a period, and whither, after generations and centuries, it also returned for a period. As this was not the point of its origin, so it was not that of its rest; it was a stage in the passage from Salem and a stage in the transit to heaven. What was meant by this infidel city, which was yet so strangely consecrated, is hard to determine, but its consideration belongs to a later stage. It is too early again to ask what are the implicits of the great prose Perceval when it identifies the Castle of the Graal with the Earthly Paradise and the Place of Souls; but we may note it as a sign of intention, and we shall meet with it in another connection where no one has thought to look for it.
THE INSTITUTION OF THE HALLOWS, AND, SECONDLY, THE VARIATIONS OF THE CUP LEGEND
We have seen that the secret of the Graal, signifying the super-substantial nourishment of man, was communicated by Christ to His chosen disciple Joseph of Arimathæa, who, by preserving the body of his Master after the Crucifixion, became an instrument of the Resurrection. He laid it in the sepulchre, and thus sowed the seed whence issued the arch-natural body. On Ascension Day this was removed from the world, but there remained the Holy Vessel, into which the blood of the natural body had been received by Joseph. Strangely endued with the virtues of the risen Christ and the power of the Holy Ghost, it sustained him spiritually, and by a kind of reflection physically, during forty years of imprisonment, through which period he was in that condition of ecstasy which is said by the Christian masters of contemplation to last for half-an-hour--being that time when there is silence in heaven. We find accordingly that Joseph had no sense of duration in respect of the years; he was already in that mystery of God into which the ages pass. After his release the Holy Vessel became a sign of saving grace, instruction and all wonder to that great company which he was elected to take westward. He committed it in fine to another keeper, by whom it was brought into Britain, and there, or otherwhere, certain lesser Hallows were added to the Hallow-in-chief, and were held with it in the places of concealment. Those which are met with most frequently, as we have p. 90 seen, are four in number, but the mystery is really one, since it is all assumed into that vessel which is known for the most part as the Cup of legend. It is understood that for us at least this Cup is a symbol, seeing that the most precious of all vessels are not made with hands. It is in such sense that the true soul of philosophy is a cup which contains the universe. We shall understand also the ministry of material sustenance, frequently attributed to the Holy Graal, after another manner than that which can be presumed within the offices of folk-lore. It is in this sense that the old fable concerning the Bowl of Plenty, when incorporated by the Graal Mystery, may prove to have a profound meaning. Some things are taken externally; some are received within; but the food of the body has analogies with that of the soul. So much may be said at the moment concerning certain aspects which encompass the literature of the Graal, as the hills stand round Jerusalem. The four Hallows are therefore the Cup, the Lance, the Sword and the Dish, Paten or Patella--these four, and the greatest of these is the Cup. As regards this Hallow-in-chief, of two things one: either the Graal Vessel contained the most sacred of all relics in Christendom, or it contained the Secret Mystery of the Eucharist. Now, the first question which arises is whether the general description which obtains concerning it--as I was almost about to say, in the popular mind--reposes on the authority of the texts. Here also will be found our first difficulty. I may not be pardoned such flippancy, but the Psalmist said: Calix meus quam inebrians est, and this has rather a bearing on the Graal chalice; for the variety of the accounts concerning it may produce in the mind a sense of having visited some inn of strange description where those who come to ask questions are served with strong measures, and full at that. There are three available sources of information concerning the Sacred Vessel, including those which are purely of the Eucharistic office. (1) The apocryphal p. 91 legends concerning Joseph of Arimathæa which are distinct from those that have been incorporated with the romances of chivalry and with the histories leading up to these. (2) The romances themselves and their prolegomena, which are the chief bases of our knowledge, but on the understanding that there is no criterion for the distinction between that which is traditional and that which is pure invention. (3) Some archæological aspects of sacramental practice. The apocryphal legends which connect Joseph with the cultus of the Precious Blood are late, and they lie under the suspicion of having been devised in the interests of Glastonbury, or through Glastonbury of ecclesiastical pretensions on the part of the British Church at or about the period of Henry II. Above these as a substratum of solid fact--I refer to the fact of the inventions--there has been of late years superposed an alleged dream of a pan-Britannic Church, which belongs, however, more particularly to the romance of history. The chivalrous romances themselves have so overlaid the Graal object with decorations and wonder-elements that the object itself has been obscured and its nature can, in some cases, be extricated scarcely. Eucharistic archæology remains as a source of information on which it is possible to rely implicitly, but while this can satisfy us as to the variations in the form and matter of the Sacred Vessel used in the Sacrifice of the Mass, it does not offer us, except indirectly, much or perhaps any assistance to determine the relic of legend.
The Evangelium Nicodemi, Acta [vel Gesta] Pilati, and some other oriental apocryphal documents are the authorities for the imprisonment of Joseph by the Jews because he had laid the body of Christ in the sepulchre. William of Malmesbury, John of Glastonbury and similar makers of chronicles are responsible for referring the first evangelisation of Britain to Joseph of Arimathæa. From these, however, we must except Geoffrey of Monmouth, and William of Malmesbury has nothing p. 92 to tell us of the Graal, though he has the story of two phials containing the Precious Blood. The reference to relics of any kind is also late in the chronicles. An English metrical life of Joseph, belonging to the first years of the sixteenth century, but drawing from previous sources, shows how the precious blood was collected by that saint and received into two cruets, which we find figuring at a later period in the arms of Glastonbury Abbey. One of these sources, though perhaps at a far distance, may have been the lost book attributed to Melkin or Mewyn, which gives an account of these cruets. The tradition supposes (1) that they were buried at Glastonbury, (2) that they will be discovered concurrently with the coffin of Joseph, and (3) that thereafter there will be no more drought in Britain. John of Glastonbury is one of the authorities for the existence of a book of Melkin--sometimes identified with the Chronicle of Nennius. The more immediate antecedent of the metrical story is, however, the Nova Legenda Angliæ of Capgrave, and it represents Joseph as living with twelve hermits at Glastonbury, where he also died and was buried. The Oxford Vernon MS., written in verse about 1350, shows that there was a sacred vessel containing blood. The Chronicle of Helinandus describes the Graal as a wide and shallow vessel, wherein meats in their juice are served to wealthy persons. The Historia Aurea, written by John of Tynemouth, connects Joseph with the Holy Vessel, which it describes as that large dish or platter in which the Lord supped with His disciples, with which concurs one entire cycle of the legend. It may be added, for what it is worth, that the Armorican Gauls seem to have had a sacred vessel used in certain rites from a very early period. An object of this kind is thought to be depicted on Armorican coins, being semicircular in shape, held by means of thongs and devoid of stem or base. Under Roman domination the vessel was figured with a pedestal.
We come now to the putative historical romances and p. 93 the poems and tales of chivalry which contain the developed legend of the Graal. The Conte del Graal, which is the first text for our consideration, has many decorative descriptions of the Sacred Vessel, but they present certain difficulties, as will be exhibited by their simple recitation in summary. (1) It was covered with the most precious stones that are found in the world, and it gave forth so great a light that the candles at the table were eclipsed, even as are the stars of heaven in the glory of the sun and moon (Chrétien de Troyes). (2) It passed to and fro quickly amidst the lights, but no hand appeared to hold it (Gautier de Doulens, or, as he is now termed, Wauchier de Denain). (3) It was borne uplifted by a beautiful maiden, who was discounselled and weeping (Montpellier MS.). (4) It was carried to and fro before the table by a maiden more beautiful than flowers in April (second account of Gautier, with which compare the similar recital of Gerbert). (5) It was carried amidst a great light by an angel, to heal Perceval (Manessier). (6) It was carried in the pageant by a maiden through the castle chamber (ibid.). (7) It was carried openly at the coronation of Perceval, also by a maiden (ibid.). (8) It was, in fine, ravished with the soul of Perceval, and has never since been seen so openly:-- "Ne jà mais nus hommes qui soit nés" Nel vera si apiertement." [paragraph continues] What follows from these citations will have occurred to the reader--that in all these several sections of the Conte del Graal there is no intelligible description of the sacred object; that the writers knew of it at a far distance only; that some of their references seem to indicate a brilliant lamp rather than a chalice; and, when they allocated it to Christian symbolism, that they may have wavered in their meaning between the idea of the Paschal Dish and the Cup in which Christ consecrated the wine of the first Eucharist; but we cannot tell. I should p. 94 add that the prologue, which is certainly the work of a later or at least of another hand, and embodies some curious material, mentions, but very briefly, the pageant of the Graal procession, saying that the Vessel appears at the Castle without sergeant or seneschal, but again there is no description of the Vessel. In conclusion of this account, the alternative ending of Gerbert retells with variations part of the story of Joseph, and although there is once again no intimation as to the form of the Graal, an account of the service performed at an altar over "the holy, spiritual thing"--the Vessel more beautiful than eye of man has seen--is there recounted, while it leaves no doubt in the mind that this service was a Mass of the Graal. It is the only suggestion of the kind which is afforded by the vast poem, though the origin and early history of the sacred object is in accordance with the received tradition. The fuller memorials of this tradition are embodied, as we have seen, in two cycles of literature, but the text which is first in time and chief in importance is the metrical Romance of the Graal, or Joseph of Arimathæa, by Robert de Borron. A French and a German critic have said that this is the earliest text of the Graal literature proper, and an English writer has concluded, on the contrary, that it is not: mais que m’importe? I will not even ask for the benefit of the doubt, so far as enumeration is concerned. The metrical Joseph says that the Graal was a passing fair vessel, wherein did Christ make His sacrament. This is vague admittedly, and assuming a certain confusion in the mind of the writer, it might have been that Dish mentioned by John of Tynemouth in which the Paschal Lamb was eaten by Christ and His disciples. In place of the words mout gent, which are given by the original French editor of the only text, Paulin Paris, following I know not what authority, or imagining a variant reading, substituted the words mout grant, which might well apply to the Paschal Dish. But Robert de Borron certifies to his own meaning when he
p. 95 recites an utterance of Christ in His discourse to Joseph, for it is there said that the vessel which has served as the reliquary shall be called henceforth a chalice:--
"Cist vaisseau où men sanc méis,
Quant de men cors le requeillis,
Calices apelez sera."
[paragraph continues] It is impossible to read the later verses in which the Eucharistic chalice is compared with the sepulchre of Christ, the mass corporal with the grave-clothes, and the paten with the stone at the mouth of the tomb, without concluding that by the Graal was intended the first Eucharistic chalice, and the presence of this symbolism in the mind of Robert de Borron suggests a symbolical intention on his part in the whole legend which he presented. If it is said that his idea of a chalice does not correspond to a vessel the content of which is sacramental wine, it should be remembered that the ciborium which contains consecrated Hosts is still at this day replaced on occasion by a chalice of the ordinary form. The idea of the devotional poet, supposing it to have been as purely mystical as he was himself deeply religious, might have embodied an attempt to shadow forth in the perpetuation of the most precious of all reliquaries the sacramental mystery of the Real Presence. It seems certain, in any case, that when Robert de Borron speaks of the Graal as that vessel in which Christ made his sacrament, this must not be understood as referring to the Paschal Dish, though one probable derivation of the word Graal would support the latter view. In the dialect of Languedoc, Grazal signified a large vessel, usually of clay; in the dialect of Provence, Grasal was a bowl or platter; in Anglo-Norman, or its connections, Graal was a dish made of some costly material for the purpose of great feasts, which, as we have seen, is the description of Helinandus. With all this some of the later romancers were dissatisfied, and, following Robert de Borron, they exalted the vessel into a chalice, so p. 96 that they might bring it into line with the Eucharistic side of the legend, with which side a paschal dish--whether that of Christ or another--offered little analogy. The material of such a chalice would have been probably glass. It follows from Tertullian that in Rome at the beginning of the third century they used glass chalices; so did the Bishop of Toulouse at the end of the fourth century; and about A.D. 550 the same custom prevailed, as appears by the life of Cesarius, Bishop of Arles. A council of Rheims in the days of Charlemagne is said to have forbidden glass chalices because they were brittle. The Lesser Holy Graal does not depart from the rendering which I have here given in respect of the metrical romance, but it seems to make the assurance of the poet more certain by elucidating further the application of the secret words to the consecration and administering of the Eucharist. Where the poem says that there is a great book in which has been written the great secret called the Graal, the Lesser Holy Graal says: This is the secret uttered at the great sacrament performed over the Graal--that is to say, over the chalice. The vessel is otherwise described as the one in which Christ sacrificed, as if He actually celebrated the first Mass, and from the Eucharistic standpoint this seems much stronger than the corresponding feisoit son sacrement, which are the words of Robert de Borron. The repetition of the experience of the sacred table which is enjoined by Joseph in both texts is in both termed the service of the Graal, but in the prose version alone is it adjudged to the hour of tierce, as if the Mass of the day were celebrated, and as if certain persons, evidently in a state of grace, were sustained in the body by the sacramental nutriment of the soul. The Early Merlin and the Didot Perceval neither reduce nor increase the evidence; but it may be hazarded, for what it is worth, that the original disclosure of the secret words may have had some office in preserving the content of the great relic. In the Early Merlin there is no allusion to the office p. 97 of secret words, and no Graal Hallows are mentioned excepting the Cup, as it is obvious that we cannot include the sword of Merlin, through which Arthur was chosen to be king. It does not appear that this weapon had any antecedent history. In the Didot Perceval the rumour and the wonder of the Graal moves pageant-like through all the pages, but it is more shorn of descriptive allusions than anything that has preceded it in the quests. When the predestined Knight visits the castle, tower, or hold in which the Hallow has been preserved through so many centuries, he sees it plainly enough at the supper-table, along which it passes, carried with no ostentation by a mere page of the chamber; but he is said only to hold a vessel wherein the blood of our Saviour reposed. This is at the first visit, and at the second, when Perceval is initiated into the whole mystery and becomes the Lord of the Graal, the description is repeated merely, as if it were a counsel of perfection to maintain and even to increase in the third text of the trilogy whatsoever could be called vague and dubious in the first.
The Book of the Holy Graal, even when it reproduces with several variations the prose version of Robert de Borron's poem, gives, in some of its codices, an explanation of the Sacred Vessel which is the antithesis of his own. It is described as that Dish in which the Son of God partook of the Last Supper before He gave to the disciples His own flesh and blood. It was, therefore, the Paschal Dish. Certain manuscripts, however, differ so widely that it is difficult to determine the original state of the text. Another codex follows the account of the Lesser Holy Graal. According to a third codex, it was the content and not the Vessel which was called the Holy Graal; but, speaking generally, most versions concur in describing it as the Holy Dish. The connection with the Eucharist is, however, sufficiently close, for he who is elected to say the first Mass and to consecrate the unspotted elements is he also to whom by Divine instruction p. 98 [paragraph continues] Joseph surrenders the vessel. But the Blessed Reliquary would seem to have been rather the outward witness to the presence within those elements. For example, in the first unveiled vision of the Holy Graal which is granted to any one outside Joseph himself, we hear of an altar, on one side of which were the nails used for the Crucifixion, together with the hallowed Lance; on the other side was the Dish; and in the centre there was an exceeding rich vessel of gold in the semblance of a goblet--obviously the chalice of consecration: it had a lid after the manner of a ciborium. More astonishing still, the cup of the Eucharist is placed within the Graal during a ceremony which corresponds to the Mass. In a romance so overcharged with decoration and so lavish in episodes of wonder, we should expect, and shall not be disappointed, that many pageants and ornaments would collect about the Holy Vessel, and that it should work many marvels. The Sacrament consecrated within it reveals the mysteries of Christ openly to chosen eyes, but thereon can no man look until he is cleansed from sin. It gives also on occasion the vision of an Eternal Eucharist and a great company sitting at the high table in the Paradise which is above. So far as concerns the authority of the text itself, it would appear that the Mass of the Graal is not like that of the Church without--an office which recurs daily; it is rather an arch-natural sacrifice, at which the incarnate Christ figures as the sensible oblation and subsequently as the Melchisedech of the rite, communicating Himself to the witnesses, while a thousand voices about him give thanks to God amidst a great beating of birds' wings, and
"Young men whom no one knew went in and out
With a far look in their eternal eyes."
The texts of the later Merlin have several references to the Graal, and it is the chief purpose which moves through the dual romance, leading up, as it does obviously, to a Quest of the Sacred Vessel; but what is p. 99 understood thereby must be gathered chiefly from its reflections of the Joseph legend. We shall see that in certain codices the account differs from that of Robert de Borron. The Vulgate Merlin has one very remarkable passage, which tells how the tidings of the Holy Graal spread through the realm of King Arthur, and how the Graal was that Vessel in which Joseph of Arimathæa received the blood from the side of Jesus Christ when He hung upon the Cross. It represents, therefore, a tradition which is familiar enough not only in the literature of romance, but in that of religious legend, though it is the antithesis of the account given in the Lesser Chronicles, wherein we are told that the blood was drawn into the Vessel after Joseph and Nicodemus had taken down the Body of the Lord. Secondly, the Graal was that Holy Vessel which came from Heaven above into the city of Sarras. We have here a reflection only, and that at a far distance, of the Book of the Holy Graal in the form which is now extant. Thirdly, and to us most important, the Graal was that Vessel in which Christ first sacrificed His Blessed Body and His Flesh by the mediation of His bishop, the Second Joseph, whom He ordained with His own hands. According to the Huth Merlin the Graal was that Vessel in which Jesus and His Apostles ate the Last Supper. It was again, therefore, the Paschal Dish. The Longer Prose Perceval has many descriptions of the vessel, all of which are designed to connect it with the chalice, but they are highly mystical in their nature. As one of the most express attempts to relate the Graal with the Eucharist, it must be regarded as important for the subject of the Hallow-in-chief. This romance and the great Quest of Galahad are both texts of transubstantiation, and they must rank also among the latest documents of the literature. The Lesser Chronicles, even in the prose version of De Borron's poem, offer no suggestion concerning this doctrine, the Graal Vessel being simply a Hallow containing a precious relic. About p. 100 the period of the Quest and the High History, the tide of ecclesiastical feeling, which long previously had set towards the definition of the dogma, must have permeated the mind of the laity, prepared as it also was by the desire of things sensible and tangible in matters of religion. It was, this notwithstanding, still long to the establishment of the high, symbolical festival of Corpus Christi, which provided an external epilogue to the closed canon of the Graal, as if by a final substitution that which was taken away, or at least ex hypothesi, was to be in perpetuity memorialised about the precincts of the gate by the wardens thereof. In connection with transubstantiation, it may be remarked that the religious office of Knighthood was above all things to hear mass, and, next, to confess sins. There are few records in the Graal romances that the chivalry of Logres communicated, except in the Quest of Galahad, and then only in the case of the elect knights. All high festivals were observed, all penances fulfilled; but to participate in the Eucharistic mystery seemed apart from the life of the world and withdrawn into the sphere of sanctity. However this may be, the Longer Prose Perceval has two cryptic descriptions of the Graal Vessel, which, on account of their complexity, but for the moment only, I must present as they stand actually in the story. (1) It is said concerning Gawain, when he looked at the Graal in his wonder, that it seemed to him a chalice was therein, "albeit there was none at this time." It was, therefore, an ark or a tabernacle which was designed to contain a cup, but when the latter was removed it still held the shadow or semblance thereof. (2) In the course of the same episode a change was performed in the aspect of the external object, and it appeared to be "all in flesh," meaning that it was transformed into a vision of Christ crucified. Towards the close of the story, when a certain Queen Jandree relates her visions to Perceval, she sees, in one of these, an image of the crucifixion from which people collect the Blood into a most Holy Vessel, elevated p. 101 for that object by one of them. There are no names mentioned, but for purposes of simplicity we may assume that they were Joseph and Nicodemus. In the castle of King Fisherman the office of the Cup was to receive the Blood which fell from the point of the Sacred Lance. The priest who officiated at the Graal service is said to begin his sacrament, with which expression we may compare the words feisoit son sacrement, which are those of Robert de Borron. There is indubitably reference to the Eucharist in both cases, and perhaps the Graal Mass Book was a traditional version of the Mass, supposed, ex hypothesi, to follow the Last Supper. Speaking generally, the historical account of the Cup follows the Book of the Holy Graal rather than De Borron's poem, for the blood which flowed from the wounds of Christ when He was set upon the Cross is said to have been received into the Sacred Vessel. There is no ministry in respect of material sustenance attributed to the Graal in this spiritual romance. It is, therefore, in one sense the antithesis of the Quest of Galahad, which dwells with equal fulness on the food giving properties of the Vessel and on its connection with the mystery of such a mass and such an office of the Eucharist as never before or after was said in the wide world, apart from this sacred object. When the Holy Graal enters the court of King Arthur and into the banqueting-hall it is clothed in white samite, but neither the Vessel nor the bearer are visible to human eyes. On a later occasion it manifests as a Holy Vessel on a table of silver in an old chapel. Elsewhere it is observed that the Flesh and Blood of God are present in the Graal. When it appears to Lancelot in the Castle of Corbenic, it is still upon a table of silver, but this time the object is covered with red in place of white samite, and it is surrounded by angels. In the course of the ceremony Lancelot sees three men, who represent the Trinity, exalted above the head of the officiating priest. Two of them place the youngest between the hands of p. 102 the priest, who again exalts him. On another occasion a child enters visibly into the substance of the Mass-bread. A man is also elevated, bearing the signs of the Passion of Christ, and this Personage issues out of the Vessel, coming subsequently among the knights present, and causing them to communicate sacramentally. It is after this episode that the Graal is removed to the spiritual city of Sarras. There Christ appears to Galahad and his companions, and this is the last manifestation in connection with the Sacred Vessel. It is the viaticum of the haut prince, who thereafter exercises the high option which has been granted previously and demands that he should be taken away. As the chief Hallow in the Parsifal of Wolfram differs from all the other romances, it will be left for more full consideration in dealing with the German cycle; but seeing that in this cycle there are correspondences outside this great poem with the Northern French accounts, one of these may be placed here so as to illustrate the Germanic allusions to the Sacred Vessel in the general understanding thereof. Diu Crône, the poem of Heinrich, says that it was borne on a cloth of samite and had a base of red gold, on which a reliquary of gold and gems was superposed. It was carried by a crowned maiden. There is here, however, a fresh departure from the Graal in Christian symbolism, for as, on the one hand, it is the quest of a feigned and impossible hero, so, on the other, the content ascribed to the reliquary is not the true content. It holds the semblance of bread, as if that of the Divine Body, but the wine or royal blood, which corresponds to the second element of the Eucharist, is distilled from the Lance of the legend. We are now approaching the term of the inquiry allocated to this section, and it will be seen on reflection that we have three possible hypotheses regarding the precious vessel: (1) that it was a cruet or phial, wherein the blood of Christ was reserved permanently--in which case we can understand the legend on the score of comparative p. 103 possibility; (2) that it was an open platter or bowl, which, it is obvious, could have had no permanent content, much less the precious or indeed any other blood; (3) that it corresponded to the notion of a chalice, but probably with a cover, after the manner of a ciborium. It is in late texts that the vessel appears most indubitably in connection with the sacrifice of the Mass; it was and could be only that which was recognised by Diu Crône of Heinrich and by John of Tynemouth--namely, a reliquary; but the mystic side of the legend, reflecting in the minds of the romancers many conflicting issues, took it over to the Eucharist, influenced by the irresistible connection between the sacramental blood and the sang réal poured out at the Crucifixion. There is evidence that this view is almost coincident with the marriage of the legend to romance. The mind of romance connected the vessel and its office with secret words of consecration and a wonderful grade of priesthood, the root-matter of which must have been drawn from some source wherein relics could have counted for little in the presence of the higher secrets of sanctity. In conclusion as to this matter, the Holy Graal, according to the Greater Chronicles, was not the only Hallow which was brought into Britain by those whose mission was to preach first the gospel therein, but it was more especially the exotic of the legend, as this was developed in Northern France. In several cases the other Hallows, as we shall see, were either present in Britain or arrived some centuries later. As regards the Lesser Chronicles, it is warrantable to decide that, in the mind of Robert de Borron, the Sacred Vessel was a ciborium or covered chalice, and that in some manner which is not clearly declared it was connected with a sacramental service performed in great seclusion. As regards the Greater Chronicles, it was originally a Dish, and that Dish in which the Paschal Lamb was eaten at the Last Supper; but from the very beginning of this ascription the notion of a cup was essential to the Eucharistic office p. 104 which also resided in the Vessel; in the Book of the Holy Graal a cup is inserted therein, but in later texts of the cycle the Dish sometimes undergoes transmutation and reappears as a chalice.
Waite is best known as the co-creator of the Rider-Waite-Smith, Waite-Smith or Rider-Waite (en) tarot deck, widely used in the English-speaking world mainly for divinatory purposes, and as the author of the accompanying manual, Pictorial Key to the Tarot. To design the deck, he collaborated with symbolist artist Pamela Colman-Smith, also a member of Golden Dawn. The Waite-Smith is known as one of the first tarot decks to have all 78 cards fully illustrated, unlike almost all traditional decks1 where only the 22 major arcana are illustrated. The Rider-Waite tarot was first offered for sale in 1910. This Tarot is renowned for being one of the first to have all 78 cards fully illustrated, unlike almost all traditional decks where only the 22 major arcana are illustrated. It is certainly a Tarot that allows you to decode the divinatory meaning of the arcana with great acuity, especially the Minor Arcana. As far as the Minor Arcana are concerned, these are personalized interpretations, which do not necessarily translate the meaning found in the Marseilles Tarot. Waite has fixed the meaning of the arcana, and the illustrations with which he has endowed them, eloquent though they may be, leave little room for imagination, for pure inspiration... And... There's another snag... Waite has inverted the arcana "8" and "11", and in this Tarot we find JUSTICE to be arcana "11" and FORCE to be "8".
Golden Dawn Or Or aurore
Waite joined the Outer Order of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn in January 1891 after being introduced by E.W. Berridge. In 1893, he withdrew from the Golden Dawn. In 1896, he rejoined the Outer Order of the Golden Dawn. In 1899, he joined the Second Order of the Golden Dawn. He became a Freemason in 1901,[6][2] and joined the Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia in 1902. In 1903, Waite founded the Independent Rectified Order R. R. and A. C. This order was dissolved in 1914. The Golden Dawn was torn apart by internal quarrels until Waite left in 1914; in July 1915, he formed the Fellowship of the Rosy Cross, not to be confused with the Societas Rosicruciana. By this time, there were half a dozen offshoots of the original Golden Dawn, which never re-established itself in its entirety self-destroyed.
A utility box painted in an ancient Egyptian motif, located across the street from the Rosicrucian Egyptian Museum in San Jose. Artist is Michelle Waters.
Toyo 45AX Field with Rodenstock Grandagon-N f/6.8 90mm MC. Efke 25 1/60 s f 32.0. 1:100 Rodinal standing tank 45 minutes. Scanned with Epson V750.
Love the all-seeing eye.
A suspended 'G' in the centre of the lodge above the Masonic Altar.
The Masonic letter ‘G’.
Source: Masonic Vibes
by Paul Foster Case
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. St. John 1:1.
All in all that is all there is to the letter G. But I have found that if you make things to simple people tend to take them as unimportant.
I have not been able to determine when the letter G was introduced into Speculative Masonry as a symbol.
The letter G is not derived from the Operative Masons of the Middle Ages, and formed no part of the architectural decoration of old cathedrals.
Whether it entered the symbolism under the influence of those Rosicrucian’s and Qabalists who joined the Order during the last half of the 17th century, or whether it was introduced at some time subsequent to 1717, when the first Grand Lodge was established at the Apple-tree Tavern in London, is impossible to tell.
The letter G is the initial of Geometry. This makes it a symbolic summary of the entire Masonic system. The heart of Freemasonry is a doctrine founded on the science of geometry. In the old Masonic Constitutions it is specifically stated that Masonry and Geometry are one and the same.
It is no secret that the letter G is a symbol for the Deity. It so happens that God is the English name of the Grand Architect of the Universe. The fact that G is the first letter of God is not the only connection between the symbol and the Deity.
Its Greek equivalent is the initial of Gaia, the earth Mother, eldest born of Chases, whose name is the root of the noun geometria, geometry.
Gimel, the Hebrew correspondence to G, is the initial of gadol, majesty, and of gebur, strong, words used to designate the Deity throughout the Hebrew sacred writings. Gimel itself is regarded by the wise men of Israel as being the alphabetical sign of the sacred wisdom which is founded on the science of geometry.
So basically we are back to St. John 1:1. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
When I was raised to a Master Mason, I was told to learn the following lesions:
The Pot Of Incense Symbolizes man, the pot being the physical body, the Incense being the mind of man, and when they are lit, the heat given off being the spirit of man as given to him by God.
The Beehive Symbolizes unity of purpose, with just one leader, for life and just one goal, the betterment of the hive.
The Anchor And Ark The Anchor is an emblem of Jesus Christ who gave his life to ensure us a safe harbor to find rest in. The Ark is an emblem of God, that divine ark that carries us through a lifetime of trials and tribulations, and finally to our Heavenly home.
The 47th Problem of Euclid Is commonly excepted to represent the physical body, the psyche, and the spiritual, and this figure being the complete man. Let us just suppose the 47th problem of Euclid represented the life spirit, the human spirit, and the divine spirit. The life spirit being Friendship, the human spirit being Morality, and the divine spirit being Brotherly Love. This figure could represent the perfect man.
The Hour Glass Is an emblem of human life. Like the hour glass, when the first grain of sand falls it is a fact that the last grain of sand will fall too. When man is born it is a fact that he will also die. The difference being that man has control over how he lives his life and the sand only falls down.
The Sword Reminds us that we should be ever watchful and guarded in our thoughts, words, and actions, because all of these will be recorded in the Great Book of Life, that all men are judged by when" they die.
The Scythe Is used as an emblem of Death but it is in reality an emblem of transition from one life to another. Because as this mortal life comes to an end it brings with it the beginning of a spiritual life.
When I went through York Rite Masonry, it was explained to me the meaning of all these lesions.
When I went through my reception into Scottish Rite Masonry, even more lesions were taught and explained to me.
When I was admitted to the Thirty-Third Degree, came the Surprise of my life. No more lesions, no more explanations, I was only told to remember a few simple facts and to do one thing, which changed my whole outlook on life.
1. Any man who fails, in his duties to God, fails mankind and himself.
2. While you live, you should work to secure for all people their rights and voice in its government.
3. You must labor to enlighten and teach mankind.
4. To teach the people their power and their rights.
5. To let the enemies of mankind be your enemies.
6. Come to no terms with them, but complete surrender of their ways.
7. That even though I been exalted to the Thirty-Third Degree, I would still be among my equals in every Blue Lodge and that all “worthy” Master Masons are my Brothers.
Now the one thing that changed my life was, I was informed that it was not enough to just know or just understand the lessons of Masonry, I had to live the lessons of Masonry.
Believing this I feel that I will be “A life time Apprentice” my whole life. When the time comes to return this physical body back to the ground from wince it came.
The sprit that lived in this body will be returned to God as a “Fellow Craft” and then at the feet of God the labors of my sprit will be judged by God.
Then and only then, if God finds the work of my sprit as “true work, good work”, will my sprit be raised from a dead level to a living perpendicular on the angle of a square by God.
In this belief, I will live my life as “A life time Apprentice”, always trying to subdue my passions and learning to improve myself.
The Masonic letter G reminds us that our every act is done in the sight of the Great Architect of the Universe.
"By letters four and science five, this “G” aright doth stand, in due Art and Proportion; you have your answer, friend.”
What are the "letters four"? It is believed that they stand for "YHWH", the name of the Great Architect of the Universe (pronounced "Yahway". (sometimes pronounced Jehovah) in the ancient Hebrew language, from which the Bible was translated:
Which is the 5th science? Geometry.
The Letter G stands for "Geometry", which is the mathematical science upon which Architecture and Masonry were founded.
When did the letter G become part of the Square and Compass? No one knows exactly, but it is believed to be somewhere between 1730 and 1768, here in the United States. The "G" is not used in the center of the square and compasses in all jurisdictions around the world.
Letter G
In Hebrew, the language our Bible was originally written in, it is called Gheemel (or Gimel) and has a numerical value of 3.
Throughout history, we see reference to the number 3 when we speak of the Supreme Architect of the Universe... no matter which language we speak!
Gimel (in slightly different forms) is the 3rd letter of many Semitic languages including Phoenician, Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew, and Syriac.
Phonecian: Gimel (11th century BCE)
Greek: Gamma (9th century BCE)
Aramaic: Gamal (800 BCE to 600 CE) (800 years Before Common Era
to 600 years after Common Era)
Hebrew: Gimel (3rd century BCE)
Syriac: Gomal / Gamal (2nd century BCE)
G Throughout the Centuries
B.C.E. means "Before Common Era". The Common Era (C.E.), also known as the Christian Era and sometimes as the Current Era, is the period beginning with the year 1 onwards.
The term is used for a system of reckoning years that is chronologically equivalent to the Anno Domini (A.D.), which is Latin for "In the year of our Lord".
Therefore, the 3rd letter of the Phonecian alphabet, "gimel", was in use 11 centuries Before the Common Era, which is 8 centuries before the Hebrew language...give or take a few hundred years.
Why give or take a few hundred years? While scholars who study languages are very thorough; we have to remember that they have very little from which to study.
Much of our knowledge of ancient languages comes from the study of hieroglyphics carved into stone and the subsequent attempt to determine which time frame they were carved; from mummies and their accompanying sarcophagi (carved wooden coffins), etc.
Note, however that while the letter G is the 7th letter in the English, Latin and Romanic alphabets, in Russian, and some others, it is 4th; in the Arabic the 5th, and in the Ethiopian language, the 20th.
These languages are much "younger" than the "ancient" languages and most, therefore, are propagations (changes that occurred) to the ancient languages throughout the centuries due to many factors.
The letter G in Freemasonry stands for both the Great Architect of the Universe and Geometry....or, to be more technically correct, it stands for Geometry under the Great Architect of the Universe.
Just as the Supreme Architect of the Universe watches the revolutions of the planets and stars in the sky, so does HE, who placed each of us here, watch each of our movements, hears not only our words, but our thoughts, as well ...and it is to HIM that we are ultimately responsible.
The Theosophical Society, founded in New York in 1875, includes a Rosicrucian current that sees the Rosy Cross as ‘the divine light of self-knowledge’ (Franz Hartmann, 1838-1912). Yet there are no commentaries specifically dedicated to the Chymical Wedding in the theosophical literature. Like Helena Blavatsky (1831-1891), the co-founder of the Theosophical Society, the Austrian theosopher Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925) was convinced that the mysteries of the Rosy Cross were ‘solely passed on through oral tradition’ (1906). Steiner became the Secretary General of the German branch of the Theosophical Society in 1902. He expected to discover authentic Rosicrucian rituals when he joined the Freemasons as his mentor Goethe had. But like the theosophers, he observed that the true spirit of the Rosy Cross was no longer to be found in the secret societies of his day. In 1906, the ‘Rosy Cross of the Theosophical Society’ began presenting the ‘Mystery of Golgotha’ as an entirely unique event in the history of mankind, at odds with the Theosophical Society’s custom of granting equal importance to all religions. In 1917, ten years after leaving Annie Besant’s Esoteric School and five years after founding the Anthroposophical Society, Steiner published a study on the Chymical Wedding in Berlin. The present article shows that this written commentary was a means for him to situate himself in the continuity of the Rosicrucian tradition of esoteric Christianity while introducing his own theosophy, which he called ‘anthroposophy’ or ‘spiritual science’, as the heir of the authentic Rosicrucians. The reference to the authoritative text allowed him to illustrate and justify his former assertions on 1) the actual existence of Christian Rosenkreuz and the Rosicrucian order, 2) the seven stages of Rosicrucian initiation, 3) Rosicrucianism as the best way of initiation for modern European man, 4) the “etheric vision” of Christ based on the action of Christian Rosencreuz’s “etheric body”. These ideas influenced a number of Western esotericists, including Neville Meakin (†1912), Max Heindel (1865-1919) and Jan van Rijckenborgh (1896-1968).
1 Chymical Wedding by Christian Rosencreutz has been the subject of an important reception1 within certain modern Western esoteric currents2, in particular since the end of the 19th century. In a context of criticism of positivism and enthusiasm for spiritualism from the United States, occultism was on the rise in Europe around 1900, and the Rosicrucians were a fashionable subject. In France, for example, the Martinist writer Joseph Péladan (1858-1918) organized between 1892 and 1897, in Parisian art galleries, several Salons de la Rose-Croix in which symbolist artists known as the Belgian painter Fernand Khnopff took part. . In this contribution, I will focus mainly on the period from 1875 – the date of the founding of the Theosophical Society in New York by the Russian occultist Helena Blavatsky, Colonel Henry Steel Olcott and a few others – to 1917, the year of the publication in Berlin of the Commentary on the Chemical Wedding of Christian Rose-Croix by the Austrian occultist Rudolf Steiner. The aim will be to understand Steiner's commentary from the inside, to reconstitute its internal logic from an emic perspective3, and to perceive in doing so the construction of the Rosicrucian myth specific to this esoteric4 vision of the world that is anthroposophy. . It will also be a question of resituating this commentary in the theosophical literature which preceded it and of bringing to light its influence on later esoteric literature.
Theosophical literature and the Chemical Weddings (1877-1902)
5 Franz Hartmann: Unter den Adepten und Rosenkreuzern (Leipzig n.d.). Berlin 1963, p. 96.
2The Theosophical Society is an international association teaching a religious syncretism of occultist and esoteric inspiration with a strong oriental flavor, particularly Buddhist and Hindu. Theosophical literature does not include a commentary dedicated specifically to the Chemical Wedding, but rather scattered reflections emphasizing the importance of Rosicrucianism as a Western path of self-knowledge leading to the knowledge of God. The German theosophist Franz Hartmann (1838-1912) states for example: “Es wird uns klar sein, daß es den Rosenkreuzern nicht so sehr um intellektuelle Forschung und Vielwisserei, als vielmehr um die göttliche Selbsterkenntnis zu tun war und um die Kraft des wahren Glaubens , der zu dieser Gotteserkenntnis führt. 5 The Theosophical Society does not regard any religion as superior to others; all express, according to her, an aspect of a universal truth. According to the famous motto of the Society, “there is no religion superior to truth”. According to Helena P. Blavatsky, the true spirit of the Rose-Croix no longer animates the Rosicrucians of her time:
6 Helena Petrovna Blavatsky: Isis unveiled. Key to the Mysteries of Ancient Science and Theology (...)
The Rose-Croix Brothers, mysterious practitioners of the Middle Ages, still exist, but only in name. They may 'shed tears over the grave of their revered Master Hiram Abiff', but they will search in vain for the true place 'where the acacia branch was placed'. The dead letter remains alone, the spirit has fled.6
3 This spirit is, according to her, much more preserved in literature – and Blavatsky explicitly quotes the famous initiatory novel by the British novelist Edward Bulwer-Lytton Zanoni7 – than in the various lodges and groups claiming Rosicrucianism in his time in Europe and in the USA. None seem to find favor in his eyes. We can think of the Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia, a Rosicrucian order founded in London in 1865 by master masons William J. Hughan and Robert W. Little, or L'Aube Dorée, The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, a secret society (whose rituals are inspired by the Golden Rose-Cross, at least for the distribution of degrees) founded in London in 1888 by Samuel Liddell Mathers and William Wynn Westcott, both members of the Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia. Note that Westcott later became theosophist. These groups multiplied at the end of the 19th century. In France, the Kabbalistic Order of the Rose-Croix founded in 1888 by Stanislas de Guaita (1861-1897) and Joséphin Péladan (1858-1918) had the role of perfecting the training of Martinists and included the French doctor and occultist Gérard Anaclet Vincent Encausse (1865-1916), known as Papus, among its members. In Germany, the Ordo Templi Orientis (O.T.O.), a para-Masonic organization oriented towards magic, was animated by a member of the Societas Rosicruciana in Germania, the German-English occultist Theodor Reuß, who in 1902 obtained the right, with the German theosophist Franz Hartmann, to practice the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite and the Rite of Memphis-Misraïm.
Rudolf Steiner, the “Rose-Croix” of the Theosophical Society (1902-1906)
8 Gary Lachmann: Rudolf Steiner, a biography. Paris 2009.
9 Rudolf Steiner: Mein Lebensgang. Eine nicht vollendete Autobiography [1925], Rudolf Steiner Gesam (...)
10 Hartmann: Unter den Adepten, quoted by Friedrich Lienhard: Unter dem Rosenkreuz: ein Hausbuch aus (...)
4It was also in 1902 that Rudolf Steiner, an Austrian born in 1861 in a small village in Croatia (which was then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire), became Secretary General of the German section of the Theosophical Society, multiplying the conferences across Germany and beyond8. Steiner states in his autobiography that he became close to the Theosophists because, like them, he was convinced of the existence of a “spiritual world”9. At the beginning of the 20th century, Steiner gave less importance to the Rosicrucian manifestos than to an oral Rosicrucian tradition which would have remained intact within secret societies. He asserted in December 1906 that nothing of authentic Rosicrucianism would be found in the Rosicrucian writings of the early seventeenth century. Steiner endorses the argument of theosophists like Franz Hartmann who describe the essence of the authentic Rose-Croix as "the divine light of self-knowledge"10 and who are convinced that the mysteries of the Rose-Croix are only transmitted orally:
But you can see how difficult it has always been to get to know Rosicrucianism from the fact that Helmont, Leibniz and others were unable to find out anything about the Rosicrucians. The Rosicrucian initiation is historically traced back to a book from the beginning of the 17th century, which states, among other things, that the Rosicrucians dealt with alchemical things, as well as with other things, for example with higher education and so on. So it is written in the Fama Fraternitatis. / Nothing can be found there either about what really is Rosicrucianism, because the mysteries of the Rosicrucians have only been handed down through oral tradition. What has externally attached itself to the name Rosicrucian is very little suitable for fathoming the nature of the Rosicrucians.11
5 Steiner is also nourished by another tradition, in this case German thought and its “great geniuses”, which, according to him, must fertilize theosophy. Steiner thinks in particular of Goethe, whose thought cannot be grasped, according to him, without a deep understanding of its occult foundation. After having studied philosophy in Vienna and read in particular Kant, Fichte, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, after having defended in 1891 a doctoral thesis in philosophy at the University of Rostock, Steiner worked in Weimar on the edition of the scientific work of Goethe, and gave numerous lectures on Goethe to members of the Theosophical Society. Thus, in the lecture “Die okkulte Grundlage in Goethes Schaffen” (1905), he refers to Goethe’s poem Die Geheimnisse (1785), which according to him expresses the mysteries of the Rose-Croix12. Steiner takes Goethe for a Rose-Croix initiate. In 1780, the German poet was initiated into Freemasonry in the Amalia lodge in Weimar, and received in 1783 into the Order of the Illuminated under the name of Abaris. Speeches and many poems bear witness to this interest in Freemasons, but also several passages from Wilhelm Meister, from Dichtung und Wahrheit (Poetry and Truth) as well as Das Märchen (The Fairy Tale of the Beautiful Lily)
6 Steiner attempts to revitalize the Rosicrucian tradition not only by relating himself to the Rosicrucian inspiration of Goethe, but also by concretely seeking authentic Rosicrucians and rituals; he thinks he can do this by joining Freemasonry, like his mentor Goethe. It was in 1904-1905 that Steiner began to participate in Masonic activities, hoping to introduce the occult teachings of Theosophy into them. In 1905, he was initiated by Theodor Reuß into the Rite of Misraïm, with his wife – which cost him dearly, as noted by the German historian Helmut Zander14 –, and in 1906 became President of the “Chapter and Mystical Temple” Mystica Aeterna, in Berlin. In January 1906, he obtained permission from Theodor Reuß to bring into this Freemason Chapter as many members of the Theosophical Society (and other people) as he wished15. But he is somewhat wary of Reuß: “Reuß ist kein Mensch, auf den irgendwie zu bauen wäre. […] Wir haben es mit einem ‘Rahmen’, nicht mit mehr in der Wirklichkeit zu tun. Augenblicklich steckt gar nichts hinter der Sache. Die okkulten Mächte haben sich ganz davon zurückgezogen. 16 According to Helmut Zander, there is no historical proof that Steiner belonged to another Masonic society. In 1907, Steiner was appointed Grand Master of the Rite of Misraïm and led initiation ceremonies in this capacity. The First World War, however, marked the end of Steiner's Masonic activities. Between 1902 and 1906, Steiner developed his Christology independently within the Theosophical Society without this posing any particular problem. His relationship with Annie Besant is excellent: he is part of her Esoteric School and comments glowingly on the German translation of his work Esoteric Christianity published in 1903.
The gradual break with the Theosophists and the founding of the Anthroposophical Society (1906-1912)
18 Steiner, “Die drei Einweihungspfade”, lecture given in Basel on September 19, 1906 before (...)
19 Ibid., p. 92: “der größte der Religionslehrer”.
20 On the action of the Buddha, carried out at the request of the servant of Christ, Christian Rose-Croix, see (...)
7 It was in 1906 that Steiner distinguished for the first time three forms of initiation: the Eastern path, which presupposes the absolute obedience of the student to a guru, the Christian path, which would no longer be adapted to modern man due to the evolution of science and culture, and the Rosicrucian path, which would be free from any enslaving master-disciple relationship18. Alongside this hierarchy of initiatic schools, the "mystery of Golgotha" was mentioned for the first time, at the end of 1906, a concept which would become central to Steiner's Christology: Christ, considered as "the greatest religious teacher"19, embodies in an earthly physical body the solar macrocosmic Christ principle. He gives "the greatest impulse that the soul is able to assimilate" by coming from other worlds to unite with the earth. The Christ impulse, what Steiner calls the "mystery of Golgotha", is for him a completely unique and exceptional fact in the history of humanity. It is no coincidence that in several of his lectures, Steiner emphasizes that the life of Christ goes further than that of the Buddha, since it reaches the resurrection while that of the Buddha ends in the transfiguration20. By focusing his thought on the figure of Christ, Steiner approaches European theological traditions which consider Christ as a personal figure; but he distances himself from the theosophists of Adyar who give equal importance to all religions and consider Jesus as a “great initiate” among others. It was in this context that Annie Besant was elected President of the Theosophical Society in 1907. The same year, Steiner left the Esoteric School of Besant to found an independent esoteric school, teaching a Rosicrucian path rooted in a specifically European esoteric tradition. .
8 According to Helmut Zander, it was above all in opposition to Annie Besant that Steiner increasingly sought, from 1906-1907, to situate himself in a Rosicrucian tradition and to “Christologize” his thought21. The fact that in 1903 Steiner did not mention Christian Rose-Croix in his list of great initiates shows, according to Zander, that the Rosicrucian tradition was built gradually. It is also with the aim of building this European tradition that Steiner would have integrated Christian Rose-Croix in a series of reincarnations: Lazare, Hiram Abiff, the Count of Saint-Germain, etc. When Steiner and Besant agreed at the Munich Congress in May 1907, it was decided that Steiner would teach the Western, "Rosicrucian" path, and Besant the Eastern path. According to Zander, this agreement is superficial and hides a settlement of power. The day after the Congress, Steiner begins the cycle of lectures entitled Die Theosophie des Rosenkreuzers in which he emphasizes the superiority of the Rosicrucian path, and therefore, according to the German historian, his personal superiority over Besant. Zander is of the opinion that in these lectures, in particular in the last lecture of the cycle entitled "Theosophy according to the Rosicrucian method", the Rosicrucian reference would be applied like a thin superstructure on specifically Theosophical themes and, given its vague in the occultist circles of his time, would serve as an empty frame that Steiner could fill as he pleased with content from Christian and European esotericism22. This theory only seems partly relevant because the reference to the Rosicrucians is present long before the break with Besant and anchored in the German tradition, in Goethe in particular. From 1903-1904, Steiner presented Christian Rose-Croix and Jesus as the "two great Masters of the West", thus minimizing the influence of the Eastern Masters. In 1906 Steiner described the seven stages of the Rosicrucian path23, also present or explained in other texts, as in the Science of the Occult (1910) for example.
9 The fundamental disagreement concerns the theory of the return of Christ developed by Besant after the Munich Congress and explains that Steinerian Christology developed with increased speed after 1907. In 1908, Steiner clearly asserts the superiority of Christianity: “[… ] das Christentum ist größer als alle Religion! Das ist die Rosenkreuzerweisheit. 24 In 1911 he held conferences on Christian Rosicrucians at the newly created Rosicrucian branch of the Theosophical Society, where the disagreements appeared more and more evident. Unlike the Theosophists, Steiner considers Christian Rose-Croix as a personality who really lived in the 13th century, and the Rosicrucian order as an organization that really existed. The influence of the spiritual entity that is Christian Rose-Croix would be exerted mainly from his “etheric body”25, incarnated or not26. The action of Christ can take place according to Steiner only from the "etheric"27, that is to say from a subtle field of life forces made up of four ethers and located between the material and the astral plane. For Steiner, there can be no return of Christ to the physical plane, as the Theosophists assert. When leaders of the Theosophical Society believe they have found a new Messiah in the person of the young Hindu Jiddu Krishnamurti, Steiner separates definitively from the Theosophical Society to found, at the end of 1912, the Anthroposophical Society.
Rudolf Steiner anthroposophist: the role of the Chemical Weddings in the construction of a Rosicrucian tradition (1912-1917)
28 Rudolf Steiner: The Chemical Wedding of Christian Rose-Croix 1459, recorded by J. V. Andreae, Stud (...)
29 Rudolf Steiner: Die Theosophie des Rosenkreuzers, Vierzehn Vorträge, München 22. May bis 6. June 1 (...)
11 Steiner no doubt chose to comment on the Wedding because it was the Rosicrucian text he knew best31, but that is not the only reason. The importance he attached to this commentary is evident in the fact that, unlike many other things he has said about Christian Rose-Croix at conferences, it is a written study that he wrote himself. This is indicative of a change in initiatory method in modern times:
32 Bettina Gruber: “Überlegungen zu einer Begriffsdiskussion”. In: Moritz Baßler / Hildegard Châtel (...)
33 Aurélie Choné: Rudolf Steiner, Carl Gustav Jung, Hermann Hesse, Passeurs between East and West. (...)
As the written expression of the traditional teaching transmitted from master to disciple, the book increasingly replaces the oral transmission of knowledge within secret societies, and becomes what connects the instructor and the reader, or more precisely, the Real. and the reader. Reading thus becomes the occasion for a practice, that of a conscious relationship. This ‘self-initiation through reading’32 is a characteristic trend of modernity, perceptible as early as the 19th century. It is based on respect for the subject and his autonomy of thought, but in return requires significant self-discipline and a very firm will.33
30 Rudolf Steiner: Das rosenkreutzerische Christentum. Stuttgart 1950.
10 In 1917, five years after the foundation of the Anthroposophical Society, Steiner published in Berlin a study devoted to the Chemical Weddings28. A series of questions does not fail to arise: how to explain that Steiner felt the need to give a commentary on the Weddings when he did not comment on either the Fama or the Confessio? How to explain that he found it necessary to write a study insisting on the importance of this text eleven years after having affirmed that the oral tradition was more important than the Manifestos? Why did you publish this commentary precisely in 1917, more than a century ago, when he had already given several lectures in previous years on the Rosicrucian path, in particular ten years earlier, in 1907, Die Philosophie des Rosenkreuzers29 and in 1911-1912, on Rosicrucian Christianity30? And finally, for what purpose does he write this comment?
12 As secret societies no longer conveyed the authentic message according to Steiner, it no doubt seemed necessary to him, sensing the end of his life approaching, to write down what he knew of this original message. We will show that this written commentary was a means for him, at a time when he needed to affirm the identity of his movement in the face of the theosophists, to situate himself in the continuity of the Western tradition of Christian esotericism and to present anthroposophy as the heiress of the authentic Rosicrucians. If he appeals to an authoritative text, Les Noces Chymiques, it is to illustrate and justify his previous remarks:
on the real existence of Christian Rose-Croix and the Rosicrucian Order,
on the content of the Rosicrucian initiatory path,
on the superiority of the Rosicrucian path at the present time,
on the etheric vision of Christ thanks to the action of Christian Rose-Croix from the "etheric world".
The real existence of Christian Rose-Croix and the Order of the Rose-Croix
34 On this subject, see the article by Stefania Salvadori in this volume.
13 For Steiner, Johann Valentin Andreae (1586-1654) is the author of Les Noces Chymiques and he wrote the work in 1603, thirteen years before its publication in Strasbourg in 1616. It should be noted that these dates are roughly in line with the assertions of the most current researchers. Steiner does not seek to challenge by means of historical arguments the assertions of historians who hold the work to be “a kind of literary deception” (NC, 264). But he considers it impossible that a young man of seventeen had “the maturity required to ridicule the evaporated minds of his time, by presenting them with a phantasmagoria under the name of the Rosicrucian current”. Moreover, the spiritually very high content of Les Noces is not for him contradictory with the young age of the author. In his eyes, Andreae wrote under the dictation of “great intuitive forces” (NC, 269). Later, having become a pietistic theologian, Andreae would have lost this intuition, which explains why he was able to deny his story afterwards. Steiner points out that in transcribing the experiences of Christian Rose-Croix, the young Andreae encountered strong resistance, in this case “events similar to those which led to the Thirty Years’ War” (NC, 8). By comparing this situation to the one he knew himself, at a time when the development of anthroposophy was hampered by opposing forces, he clearly places himself in the continuity of the Rosicrucian current.
14 In his commentary, Steiner begins by explaining how the work should be approached, devoting several pages to the “method”, or rather to the attitude to adopt when faced with the text. Because it is precisely not an intellectual, scientific method in the usual sense of the word. Humility, self-knowledge and purification of the soul are the necessary conditions for the spiritual world to be able, through the text, to speak to the soul in the form of images, symbols, "secret figures" such as those of the Geheime Figuren der Rosenkreuzer35. A rather similar attitude of attentive listening with regard to images (and the products of the unconscious) characterizes the psychology of the depths of C. G. Jung (in particular the active imagination): it is not a question of seeking to understand intellectually the image that presents itself, but rather to let it act, to mature in the soul, to brood over it in oneself, until its meaning becomes clear; this requires great patience and the awareness that, as in any deep esoteric text, the message is never completely unveiled, deeper layers always remaining hidden.
15 The key to Steiner's argument therefore rests on a precise method, which he claims to deduce from the attitude and mode of perception of Christian Rose-Croix himself, as described in the novel. The historical method seems to him inappropriate for clarifying overly complicated controversies. “Spiritual Science” is presented as the most adequate way to deduce from the text itself the authenticity of the experiences described, and therefore the reality of the existence of Christian Rose-Croix as well as of the Rosicrucian current. It is not for him an allegory, but a true story, which confirms what he affirmed in his lectures of 1911 on the historical, and not mythical, figure of Christian Rose-Croix.
The content of the Rosicrucian initiatory school
16 In his commentary of 1917, Steiner explains, through the lived experience of Christian Rose-Croix, the seven stages of the Rosicrucian path which he had already exposed ten years earlier, in Die Theosophie des Rosenkreuzers: the study, the imagination, inspiration, the preparation of the Philosopher's Stone, the correspondences between macrocosm and microcosm, diving into the macrocosm and bliss. The seven days correspond to the stages of the initiatory path of Christian Rose-Croix towards the suprasensible worlds and reflect a process of alchemical transformation which leads him towards his spiritual rebirth.
17 From the first day, it is a question of an “imaginative vision” that Christian Rose-Croix had seven years earlier, which announced to him that he would be invited to the “Chymic Wedding”. Another imagination has him “see” a young woman in a blue dress studded with stars – the “manifestation of an entity from the spirit world” (NC, 195) according to Steiner. Another imagination reveals to him a portal, the threshold of the suprasensible world according to Steiner, and a castle, place of spiritual experience. Then comes the fourth day, with the presentation to the Kings and their decapitation: these symbols are for Steiner “authentic imaginations, in conformity with the laws which govern the evolution of the soul” (NC, 243). The ordeals that kings undergo foreshadow what must happen to Christian Rose-Croix himself. He feels the tragedy of the royal hall “as if his own soul lived it: Decapitation is a stage in his own evolution. (NC, 244) According to Steiner, the whole alchemical process described highlights "the mystery of psychic metamorphosis" (NC, 263), namely "the way in which the forces of knowledge, developed by the organism in the ordinary course of life, are transformed into forces of supersensible investigation. (NC, 253) The term "power of knowledge" is imbued with the philosophy of life (Lebensphilosophie) present at the time of Steiner, but it is a question of directing this vitalism towards a spiritualism by transforming sensitive knowledge in supersensible knowledge, which is possible only on condition "of being penetrated by the forces of death." (NC, 247) Thus Christian Rose-Croix contemplates the death of the "kings" in his soul, namely the death of "his means of knowledge, such as they result from the metamorphosis of the material processes of his organism, without himself intervenes. (NC, 248-249) By passing from natural alchemy to the art of alchemy, he will be able to confer on his ordinary faculties of knowledge a particular character which the processes of organic evolution have removed from them. The purpose of the fifth day is precisely, according to Steiner, to complete the natural alchemy. Christian Rose-Croix directs his gaze towards the “laboratory” of nature, where it “gives birth to the vital element of growth” (NC, 249). In the Tower of Olympus, during the preparation of the Stone of the Sages, the inanimate forces of knowledge are brought to life.
18 The seventh day describes the accomplishment of the alchemical work and the promotion of Christian Rose-Croix to the rank of “Knight of the Stone of Gold”. The man whose forces of the soul – thought, feeling, will – are transformed, is as if born again: he becomes the “father” of his own faculties of knowledge. It is a true gnosis in the sense of knowledge, the birth of new forces of supersensible knowledge. This also explains the Steinerian interpretation of the end of the story: Christian Rose-Croix expects to expiate the "fault" of having succumbed to the temptation by looking at Venus naked on the fifth day, and to be condemned to the charge of guardian; but this is not the case, because this guardian turns out in fact to be only a part of himself that he is able to distinguish from himself; and here we are almost approaching a Jungian interpretation of The Wedding , except that the existence of a spiritual world is clearly posed in Steiner: “He becomes the guardian of his own psychic life; but this office in no way prevents him from maintaining free relations with the world of the spirit. (NC, 260-261)
The Rosicrucian path, the initiatory school most suited to modern Europeans
19 Steiner also explains in his commentary on the Marriage why the Rosicrucian way is the most suitable for modern Western man.
20 First, it does not involve blindly following a guru as in the Eastern path as Steiner imagines it, or having absolute faith in the personality of Jesus Christ as in the Christian path. The Rosicrucian path gives less importance to feelings than to facts that can be observed and studied. The first stage of the journey, study, demonstrates the importance of a scientific approach. Steiner emphasizes that Christian Rose-Croix was versed in the knowledge provided by the study of the “Liberal Sciences and Arts” of his time and that he sought to unite knowledge and faith. This is also, according to Steiner, the objective of anthroposophy and as he can situate it in the continuity of the Rosicrucian current: neither religion nor philosophy, the Science of the mind (Geisteswissenschaft) aims to know the worlds suprasensibles with the same rigor as science studies the phenomena of the physical, sensible world.
36 Steiner: “The mission of Christian Rose-Croix, his character and his task. The mission of Gautama Bu (...)
21 This is only possible through the knowledge of nature, the very object of natural alchemy. In his commentary on the Wedding, Steiner clearly opposes the paths of mysticism and alchemy: “The alchemist seeks a knowledge of nature which opens the way to a true knowledge of man. (NC, 214) as the mystic turns inward. According to Steiner, it is quite revealing that the Rosicrucian current was born in the 15th century – a very dark period marked, according to him, by the appearance of the materialist current, which played a major role in scientific theories, especially in matters astronomy; with the beginnings of modern science – Copernicus (1473-1543), Galileo (1564-1642), Kepler (1571-1630), etc. – developed, according to him, “a vision of the world which saw in the macrocosm only an immense machinery composed of material globes”36. A new science must bring the necessary corrective to this materialistic tendency; and Steiner sees it represented in the Weddings through the figure of the Virgin whose name is Alchemy: "this suprasensible science comes from the spiritual worlds whereas the knowledge of the Seven 'Liberal Arts' is acquired on the sensible plane" (NC, 236).
22 In the same spirit, Agrippa von Nettesheim (1487-1535) and Paracelsus (1493-1541) sought, according to Steiner, to explore the laws of nature and access the superior worlds from the natural sciences, through the study of the five elements . The alchemist learns to know his soul as well as nature and discovers that the same forces act there. This is the fifth stage of the Rosicrucian path, the correspondences between macro- and microcosm. The contemplation of natural processes like dissolution and putrefaction becomes meditation, fervent prayer, and arouses a sense of devotion. According to Steiner, the sanctity of nature is at the center of Les Noces, the mission of Christian Rose-Croix being to discover the spirit in nature. As a Knight of the Stone of Gold, he will have to live in accordance with the two mottos inscribed on the medal he receives, as well as the other Knights, on the seventh day: "Art is the servant of nature" and “Nature is the daughter of time. (NC, 259)
37 Antoine Faivre: Access to Western esotericism. Paris vol. I 1986, vol. II, 1996.
23 Steiner presents the Science of the Spirit as the heir to the Rosicrucian current in that it seeks to rediscover the religious character that the study of nature had in the Middle Ages, to reveal the spiritual reality behind the veil of nature. At the same time, he seeks to show the evolution of the Rosicrucian teaching. Mainly based on the natural sciences in the Middle Ages, in connection with alchemy, it became in its time "Science of the mind" in connection with the natural sciences in the Goethean sense of the term. The great Rosicrucian meditation on the symbol of the cross surrounded by seven roses, described for example in 1910 in Die Geheimwissenschaft (Science of the Occult), is deeply linked to living Nature, one of the criteria of esotericism according to Antoine Faivre37, since it is first of all a question of representing a plant which opens out, its roots which plunge into the darkness, its stem which rises towards the light. It involves the transformation of the forces of life into spiritual forces by a process of transmutation of the "etheric" into supersensible energy: this inner alchemy constitutes the very essence of the new Rosicrucian mysteries according to Steiner.
38 Johann Valentin Andreae: The Chemical Wedding of Christian Rose-Croix. In: Bernard Gorceix: The bi (...)
24 Finally, Steiner wishes to show through the experiences of Christian Rose-Croix and his companions that the Rosicrucian initiation is a personal path at the service of society: “The presence of such men in the social order will be a leaven for those who it and will help clean it up. (NC, 261) On reading Les Noces, it clearly appears that Christian Rose-Croix will play a special role because he is led to see more marvels38 than his companions who "only perceive what is shown to them, without the intervention of their personal will. (NC, 230) By continuing to serve as a guardian after receiving the supreme reward, he does not return to his solitary life, out of the world; he sees himself obliged to link spiritual life and social life in the service of others (karma-yoga, one would say in the Indian tradition), which is characteristic of a modern initiation. Steiner situates anthroposophy in the continuity of this tradition by insisting on education for freedom and by showing the importance of the concrete societal applications of its ideas in fields as diverse as pedagogy, agriculture, medicine and science. 'architecture.
25 In his commentary on Les Noces, Steiner particularly insists on the visions and imaginations of Christian Rose-Croix, which would be produced by the action of his “etheric body”. On Easter Friday, Christian's supersensible perception allows him to have the vision of the woman in the blue dress: "This activity of the etheric body can be compared to the bringing into action of a radiant light. (NC, 195-196) It is this activity that every human being is called upon to develop thanks to a daily meditative practice allowing the metamorphosis of his soul and the development of faculties of supersensible perception. Through this central practice in the Rosicrucian initiation as Steiner understands it, the student feels the influence of the etheric body of Christian Rose-Croix and can perceive the appearance of Christ in his own etheric body, that is, say realize the Christ in himself, the inner Christ, without going through a guru or other spiritual master. According to Steiner, all of humanity would be called to live this experience of the road to Damascus, and not only the circle of Rosicrucian initiates. The mission of the "Science of the Spirit" would be to divulge the Rosicrucian mystery to as many people as possible today.
39 On this subject, see Véronique Liard's contribution: “Carl Gustav Jung and the Chymic Weddings. Alc (...)
40 I refer here to chapter 10 of C. G. Jung's Psychological Types: Psychologische Typen. Zurich (...)
41 However, this interpretation should be qualified. Indeed, experience plays a very important role (...)
26We can see a certain affinity between the Steinerian commentary and the Jungian reading39 of the Wedding: in both cases, the initiatory journey of Christian Rose-Croix expresses the “mystery of psychic metamorphosis” (NC, 263). The big difference comes from the way of thinking of Jung and Steiner, and their opposite attitude towards reality. From a Jungian perspective,40 one could perhaps qualify Steiner’s philosophical temperament as “extroverted” and that of Jung as “introverted” (this is moreover how he saw himself); indeed, the anthroposophist links his thought closely to real objects while the founder of depth psychology is above all concerned with his inner world. Steiner is an idealist in that the spiritual world has for him a character of truth and absolute in the same way as the objects which are in front of him, without possible contestation, while for Jung, nourished by Kant, thought partially derives from subjectivity, which places all metaphysics beyond the reach of human understanding and establishes an empirical approach to reality. Jung needs to look within himself for landmarks to evolve in his inner world, without resorting to metaphysics to name things outside of him; he tends to see in him realities which, for the extrovert, are external.
42 We can think in particular of biodynamic agriculture – the processes of decomposition, putr (...)
43 See the third stage of the conjunction described at the end of Carl Gustav Jung: Mysterium conjunct (...)
44 On the comparison of these paths, see Aurélie Choné: Rudolf Steiner, Carl Gustav Jung, Herman (...)
27 Steiner considers the mystical path (introverted attitude according to the Jungian typology) unsuited to the materialistic modern age, and considers the alchemical path (extroverted attitude according to the Jungian typology) which passes through the knowledge of nature, as the most appropriate today. today. Could this be the reaction of an extrovert who does not understand the other attitude? Jung also uses alchemy, but more in the psychological sense of an inner psychic transformation; he emphasizes the writings that translate external experiences into symbolic processes revealing the archetypes of the collective unconscious, which he wants to find in order to shed light on his journey and that of his patients. But if Jung seems to be more interested in the interior side (oratory) and Steiner in the operative side of alchemy42 (laboratory), the fact remains that the psychiatrist also integrates a much broader dimension through the notion of unus mundus43, and that the anthroposophist pays great attention to inner processes, emphasizing the passage from natural alchemy to the Science of the mind. Anthroposophy, which seeks to develop our perception of the supersensible world, and depth psychology, which aims to approach the Self in order to reach the totality of our being, have important similarities in the journey they offer towards greater freedom. and autonomy.
28 If Les Noces has caught the attention of such different thinkers, it is undoubtedly because this writing offers a fine example of a balanced appreciation between the two points of view. The oratory is as important there as the laboratory. There is both the experimental side (Tower of Olympus) and the importance of moral purification (weighing test, vault of Venus). Extroverts tend to make it a laboratory affair by denying the other side, while introverts stress the projection of psychic contents onto matter and make it a process of individuation, neglecting the experimental side which is very vague in the definitions of the materials, which vary from one to another. But the secret undoubtedly lies in the right balance between extroversion and introversion, science and faith, laboratory and oratory.
Assessment and posterity of the anthroposophical reception of Les Noces until today
29 All the arguments deployed in Steiner’s extremely dense Commentary combine to demonstrate that the Weddings are “an objective relationship of an authentic quest” (NC, 263). Steiner felt the need to give a commentary on the Wedding - rather than on the Fama or the Confessio - because this story contains a wealth of images and symbols which make visible, in the form of evocative imaginations, the passage from sensitive to supersensitive. This commentary aims to anchor Steiner's theosophy, which he calls anthroposophy, in the Rosicrucian tradition of esoteric Christianity. Steiner thus stands out from the Theosophical Society and Eastern initiation by proposing a “Rosicrucian initiation” adapted to modern man in that it brings together faith and science, knowledge and contemplation of nature. Starting from the Manifesto, he seeks to prove what he has asserted in previous conferences and to give greater authority to his words through the exegesis of the source text itself. In doing so, he presents himself as the successor to the Rosicrucian current, which is supposed to express the quintessence of the great previous religions, and therefore the cutting edge of all spiritual teachings.
30 His reception of Les Noces will find an important echo in the anthroposophical milieu, among students and close friends like Michael Bauer46 (1871-1929), who was a member of his esoteric School. Today, the Rosicrucian reference is still very present among anthroposophists. According to the Dutch writer Jelle van der Meulen, for example, Steiner was initiated by Christian Rose-Croix47. The links between Anthroposophy and Rosicrucianism have been studied by engineer Viktor Stracke (1903-1991) and physician Peter Selg (1963- )48. Les Noces gave rise to a new commentary by Bastiaan Baan, director of the seminary of the Fellowship of Christians in North America, and former Waldorf school teacher. Overall, the interpretation of Les Noces is the object of a deepening in two main directions: meditation50 and cosmology51.
52 The outer order of the Stella Matutina was known as the Mystic Rose or Order of the M.R. i (...)
53 Crispian Villeneuve: Rudolf Steiner in Britain: A Documentation of His Ten Visits, 1902‑25, vol. 1 (...)
54 The Table Round (Ordo Tabulae Rotundae) is a neo-Arthurian mystical order that Felkin also exported (...)
55 Zander: Anthroposophy in Deutschland. t. I, p. 844.
56 See the contribution of Sébastien Gregov in this volume.
31 We also mention the influence of Steiner on the English doctor Robert Felkin, who in 1903 created the magical order Stella Matutina (Morning Star)52 in England, a splinter group from the Golden Dawn, and on Neville Meakin53, a member of the Stella Matutina. They saw in him an authentic representative of the Rosicrucian tradition, the missing link in the chain of the Rose-Croix dating back to the 17th century. Known by the initials EOL (Ex oriente Lux), Grand Master of the neo-Arthurian Order Ordo Tabulae Rotundae54, Meakin met Steiner in 1910 and 1912, received the initiation of adeptus minor in the Chapter Mystica aeterna and embarked in 1911 for Constantinople, traveling in the footsteps of the pilgrimage described in the Fama Fraternitatis. Steiner's ideas on the real existence of Christian Rose-Croix and his Order, as well as on the different incarnations of Christian Rose-Croix, will influence Max Heindel (1865-1919), who was vice-president of theosophy of Adyar in California in 1904-1905 and student of the Esoteric School of Steiner in 1907-1908. In 1909 Heindel created the Rosicrucian Fellowship in California. Steiner would accuse him in 1913 of having plagiarized several of his lectures55. Finally, let us mention the obvious influence of the Steinerian reading of the Wedding on the Dutch Rosicrucian Jan van Rijckenborgh, a former disciple of Heindel who founded the Lectorium Rosicrucianum in the 1920s.