Boethius as the Godfather of the Rosicrucian Movement

A Forgotten Source for the Chemical Wedding

In this blog post Masonic Rosicrucian Eugene Kuzmin shares his in-depth comparison which reveals, for the first time, a source for several motifs and sections of the Rosicrucian manifesto “The Chemical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreuz.” His research identifies Boethius’ “De Philosophiae Consolatione,” written around 525, as a key source for the “Chemical Wedding” itself.

This post reads very well together with our previous post by Christine Eike, which saw Heinrich Kunrath’s “Amphitheatrum Sapientiae Aeternae” as another source for several building structures mentioned in the “Chemical Wedding” itself.

There, Christine wrote, “The third Rosicrucian manifesto has some very distinct precursors.” Therefore, thanks to Eugene and Christine, Pansophers has acquired a two part series which uncovers the sources for this manifesto!

Eugene’s text now follows:

–

1. The Rosicrucian Revolution

The sudden spread of several brief Rosicrucian texts in the early 17^th century stirred a wide-ranging discussion in broad circles of intellectuals on religion, science, society and their relationships, resulting in a flood of commentaries and pamphlets. About 200 open answers to these succinct works were published up to 1622.[1] The discussion of the texts was clearly related to the considerable changes in science, society, and religious worldviews that took place at the beginning of the 17^th century. The publication of the Rosicrucian works, with their program of advancement of knowledge, might be unmistakably linked with the progress of the Scientific Revolution (1500-1800),[2] which drastically changed the European landscape.

The texts’ luminous manifestation is much darkened by their vague origin. The entire issue starts from four brief works. The flood of further Rosicrucian literature is a reaction to them. The original works are Allgemeine und General Reformation der gantzen weiten Welt and Fama Fraternitatis (first known editions include both texts bound together, both anonymous; Cassel, 1614), Confessio Faternitatis (1615) and Johann Valentin Andreae’s (1586-1654) Chymische Hochzeit Christiani Rosencreutz (1616). The first of them, Allgemeine und General Reformation, is a German translation of Advertisement 77 from the Centuria Prima of Rigguagli di Parnaso, the main work of the celebrated Italian satirist Trajano Boccalini (1556–1613). Its authentic authorship was initially established by Michael Maier (1568–1622), an alchemist and an early partisan of Rosicrucianism.[3] The identification of the Allgemeine und General Reformation as a Rosicrucian text was questioned at a very early date. The source of the text is the famous literary, initially not Rosicrucian or esoteric, religious book. But a joke might also be supposed to be at the base of the whole Rosicrucian issue – as will be shown in Section 4, another primal Rosicrucian book, the Chymische Hochzeit, was properly composed in the form of comedy. Its author tagged his works as a joke (‘ludibrium'”).[4]

Probably, the Fama Fraternitatis and the Confessio Faternitatis were also known from earlier dates. There is such evidence from Adam Haslmayr (1562–ca. 1630), who knew four manuscripts of Fama Fraternitatis in 1610.[5] Julius Sperber asserted in 1615, in his work Echo der von Gott hocherleuchteten Fraternitet, des löblichen Ordens R.C., that the content of two manifestos, the Fama and the Confessio, was known over nineteen years before their publication.[6] However, the question of their date is far from being finally resolved.

Although Andreae’s text was published later than the anonymous manifestos, it was written, and started to circulate in manuscript, much earlier. Evidently, it was composed in 1605[7] or 1607.[8] However, it is also possible that  Andreae wrote the text later, as an answer to the manifestos.[9]

The name of the author does not appear on the first editions of the Chymische Hochzeit (the Chemical Wedding). This fact provoked a tradition of refuting Andreae’s authorship and speculations on the possible author. On the other hand, today it is accepted by and large that Valentin Andreae did actually compose the book. This assumption is based on his own confidence in his autobiography.[10] The clear evidence that Andreae was the author of one of the Rosicrucian works fuels speculations as to his probable authorship of three of other primal texts (Fama Fraternitatis, Confessio Fraternitatis and Chymische Hochzeit) and, consequently, of the idea of the movement itself, including speculation on the possibility of Andreae’s authorship of all these texts and of the concept of the entire movement.[11]

Thus, as shown, this movement, so significant for the history of the 17th century, has very complicated origins. Therefore, the search for the sources and inspirations of the first Rosicrucian texts is extremely important.

Warwick Montgomery, who summarizes many commentaries on the Chymische Hochzeit, provides the reader with related data and bibliography with the text itself,[12] but finally complains about the pitiful situation of the interpretations of the text: “Surely Andreae has deserved better at the hands of his interpreters – whether friends or enemies – than he has received.”[13]

–

2. A principal philosophical text in the Middle Ages: Boethius’ De Philosophiae Consolatione

As has been already said, the Chymische Hochzeit has great significance for the history of Early Modern Europe. A similar role in the history of medieval philosophy might be ascribed to De Philosophiae Consolatione (The Consolation of Philosophy) by Anicius Manlius Torquatus Severinus Boethius (d. c. 524), a descendant of the noble Roman family of the Anicii and a renowned philosopher and statesman.

In medieval Europe, Boethius became a recognized authority in arithmetic, logic, music and theology. He composed almost twenty works on different subjects. In the 13^th century he was even canonized as martyr.[14] His final and most personal work De Philosophiae Consolatione was written in prison, just before his execution as a result of being accused of treason by King Theodoric (454-526, ruler of Italy – 493-526). This work acquired great popularity and recognition, and this relatively brief text was definitely one of the most read books throughout the European Middle Ages.

Although for some centuries after being composed it was forgotten, its popularity began at Charlemagne’s court. Alcuin (d. 804) discovered Boethius’  De Consolatione and made extensive use of the text[15] (This is deserving of a special study, see bibliography). Since then, De Consolatione acquired immense popularity. The quantity of manuscripts[16] and early printed books of this text grew immensely. Apart from the wide spread of the treatise in Latin,[17] it has a long tradition of translation into vernacular languages.[18] From the 9th century onwards, De Consolatione served as a school text in the monasteries of northern Europe.[19] It entered grammar schools and universities.[20] De Consolatione was the source of various inspirations and had considerable impact on literary fiction.[21] There also were lengthy traditions of commentaries to De Consolatione.[22]

Thus, De Consolatione was among the cardinal books of the Middle Ages. It was a commonly known, often referred-to and mentioned text. It was a book whose impact on the way of thinking was incredible. In the Renaissance, in the humanists’ circles, the authority and popularity of Boethius remained very high, but at the same time it was questioned.[23]

The interest in De Consolatione in 17^th-century Germany (when the Rosicrucian texts appeared) has not been sufficiently studied. Max Reinhart’s article on the topic is mostly about translations, rather than on the status of Boethius in German culture of that period.[24] Nonetheless, Reinhart notes that the “irenic spirit of the Consolatio found little resonance in confessionally torn Germany,” but it received “literary attention” from those engaged in neo-Latin poetics.[25] Near the middle of the century Reinhart notes a revival in interest. According to him, it came from two sources: the Sprachgesellschaften and the Sulzbach Christian cabbalists and Neo-Platonists, such as Christian Knorr von Rosenroth (1636–1689) and Franciscus Mercurius van Helmont (1614–1698).[26] The author omits any reference to the Rosicrucian movement, despite the simple fact that both sources of interest in Boethius had clear connections with it: 17^th-century literary societies, Sprachgesellschaften, were the similar type of organization,[27] and the Christian cabbalist van Helmont – in the realm of ideas. In both cases, this might be considered only as later developments of the reflections on the Rosicrucians.

Nicola Kaminski’s recent article discusses the religious situation in Germany in the same century very closely to understand the peculiarities of interest in Boethius.[28] He sees a clear development of religious worldviews, which was the reason for new translations, but he discusses mostly the relationships of Protestants and Catholics, without any reference to the Rosicrucians.

–

3. General Principles of Comparison

Although the two texts, the Hochzeit and De Consolatione, were written in quite different epochs and their main, basic ideas and themes are dissimilar, we feel that there is a clear formal affinity of details in both works. While this is a good reason for meticulous comparison, certainly such research raises methodological problems. Any kind of affinity in details is hard to prove. Indeed, the search for similar peculiarities may easily turn into the discovery of occasional coincidences and feeble argumentations. It seems that such a problem cannot be completely and unquestionably solved, thus it remains for us to highlight the fact that there are too many coincidences to be regarded as occasional.

As has been already noted, De Consolatione has a considerable tradition of commentaries. The analysis of this tradition may say much about the reception of Boethius’ ideas up to the early 17^th century. The search of Andreae’s possible inspirations from these commentaries is a very interesting direction for study. However, on the other hand, the intricate text of the article, if based on too many details from different works, may become ambiguous. We decided to analyze fewer pieces of evidence in exchange for greater lucidity.

It is completely impossible to present both texts in detail here. Thus, our inquiry is addressed to those who in general are familiar with the Hochzeit and De Consolatione.

There is also a long tradition of illustrating De Consolatione. It has never been properly studied,[29] because of the incredible quantity of manuscripts and printed books. Thus, although the analysis of the possible impact of illustrations to De Consolatione on the Hochzeit may be very suggestive, this work omits it.

The simple list of resemblances and coincidences appears to be too long and dull to be given in a form of table, passage opposite passage; therefore the comparisons are given in a simple text. Such a form is more easily readable and graspable.

The Mercurial Labyrinth. Pauli Maccii Emblemata Emblem 132

4. Affinities of the Chymische Hochzeit and De Philosophiae Consolatione

The Hochzeit and De Consolatione clearly show stylistic affinity. The text of De Consolatione is structured as an alternation of prose and poetic pieces. It is a “satura” of Menippean satire.[30] It is not a very common style, and all examples of its usage in antiquity are poles apart from Boethius’ very polished actual form and especially from the content of the De Consolatione.

The Hochzeit follows this model. It is written in the same style.[31] Thomas Willard names Lucian, a pupil of Menippus, and Erasmus, as Andreae’s possible sources.[32] The form of Menippean satire was widely known in early modern Europe.[33] There is also a peculiarity, which points to the text of Boethius as a source. De Consolatione consists of five main pieces (books), while there are seven main parts (days) in the Hochzeit. The first five parts of the Hochzeit are organized in the same manner as De Consolatione, as a Menippean satire, while the 6th and 7th parts of the Hochzeit, numerically unparalleled in De Consolatione, appear to be completely prose text, without any poetic pieces.

There is not only a stylistic coincidence. It is even more noteworthy that general topics are also very similar. The final goal, the ultimate good, of Boethius’ book is Wisdom. The protagonist does not only receive consolation from Philosophy, he is also shown Philosophy’s unique, exclusive and dominant status for Man. Thus, spiritual improvement has come through knowledge. It is obviously reminiscent of Andreae’s narrative.[34] His protagonist starts from diligent studies and through them (and through piety) he reaches the possibility of attaining the outstanding highest levels of wisdom; this entire personal progress coincides with his ascent towards God.

–

5. First Day (I. Dies)[35]

Both texts start with the troubles and actual complaints of the protagonists. In the Hochzeit, Christian Rosencreutz humbly prays and prepares a sacrifice, i.e. his Paschal Lamb. Hypothetically, an act of sacrifice might be interpreted either as a pious act and as a loss, a deprivation of something. Meanwhile, suddenly a horrible tempest has risen.[36] Similarly, Boethius begins his book with the words: “While I was thus mutely pondering within myself, and recording my sorrowful complaining with my pen…” (Haec dum mecum tacitus ipse reputarem querimoniamque lacrimabilem stili oficcio signarem…).[37]

A beautiful woman appears before the protagonist in both books. In De Consolatione she remains unrecognized for some time (Prose I, 3). Nonetheless, at the beginning, only two Greek letters, which were woven on her garment, hint at her real name.[38] In the Hochzeit the author proclaims: “…whereon a Name was engraved (which I could well read in) but am as yet forbidden to reveal it” (“…daran ein Nam gestochen gewest/ den ich wol lessen kund/ mir aber nochmahlem zu offenbaren verboten worden”).[39]

The sky or heaven is mentioned in the descriptions of the ladies in both books. In the De Consolatione: it appears as a characteristic of her height: “At one moment it exceeded not the common height, at another her forehead seemed to strike the sky; and whenever she raised her head higher, she began to pierce within the very heavens…” (“Nam nunc quidem ad communem sese hominum mensuram cohibebat, nunc vero pulsare caelum summi vertices cacumine videbatur; quae cum altius caput extulisset, ipsum etiam caelum penetrabat…”).[40] Andreae compares the woman’s garments with the sky or heaven: “…whose Garments were all Skye-colour, and curioully (like Heaven), bespangled with golden Stare” (“…deren Kleid ganz blaw/ und mit gulden Sternen/ wie d’Himmel zierlich versetzt gewesen”).[41]

Each of the women held in each of her hands two objects, one oblong and another not. In De Consolatione: “Her right hand held a note-book; in her left she bore a staff” (“Et dextra quidem eius libellos, sceptrum vero sinistra gestabat”).[42] In the Hochzeit the objects are different, but they possess similar forms: “…in her right Hand she bare a Trumpet of beaten Gold… In her left Hand she had a great bundle of Letters of all Languages.” (“In der rechten Hand trug sie ein ganz güldin Posann… In der lincken Hand hatte sie ein grosses büschel Brief/ von allerley sprachen”).[43] From this point on, the heroes of both books are guided and accompanied by the women.

In Boethius, this prose piece is followed by a poem, which starts with the word “heu”, that is alas, oh.[44] Meanwhile, in the Hochzeit, the protagonist opens a letter, brought by the abovementioned female. It contains a rhymed invitation to a wedding, which begins with the word  “heut”, that is today, this day.[45] Although the meanings of two words are poles apart, the actual graphical representations are very similar. So it might be an argument that Valentin Andreae, working on his own book, kept in mind or before his eyes the text of Boethius.

The seal on the letter with invitation is the “Hieroglyphic Monad,”[46] a symbol from the book (first published in 1564) with the same name by the famous English mathematician, alchemist and magus John Dee (1527-1607):[47]

The symbol has an astrological meaning, which Dee clearly expressed in his book, and, thus, there is no need to repeat the explanations here. For us the existence of such meaning is important as well as the fact that the top of the “Hieroglyphic Monad” is a union of the Sun and the Moon. Thus, it is also a symbolic representation of the alchemical wedding, which is usually described or depicted in this manner.[48]

Christian Rosencreutz relates his previous meditations on the wedding. They include astrological calculations.[49] Thus, Andreae emphasised this particular connotation of the ‘Hieroglyphic Monad’.

Such astrological notions have parallels in the poem I, 2 of De Consolatione:

 Hic quondam caelo liber aperto
Suetus in aetherios ire meatus
cernebat rosei lumina solis,
visebat gelidae sidera lunae
et quaecumque vagos stella recursus
exercet various flexa per orbes
comprensam numeris victor habebat.

Yet once he ranged the open heavens,
The sun’s bright pathway tracked;
Watched how the cold moon waxed and waned
Nor rested, till there lacked
To his wide ken no star that steers
Amid the maze of circling spheres.[50]

Suddenly, after obtaining this much-desired invitation, Christian Rosencreutz becomes confused. He realises his own spiritual and mental unworthiness, his not good enough deeds and his pitiful affection for carnal, worldly, temporal things. Rosencreutz understands that he should be cleansed.[51] The Prose I, 2 of De Consolatio resembles this text. Here Boethius cannot recognize Philosophy, because of an “illness of deluded mind” (“illusarum mentium morbum”). It was caused by “a veil of mortal things” (“mortalium rerum nube”).[52]

After all these considerations, Christian Rosencreutz falls asleep. In his dream he sees himself in a dark dungeon, fettered with chains.[53] This situation might be a reference to the De Consolatione. Here the protagonist remains in a prison throughout the entire book. We find the same images in the descriptions of their situations. The “Tower” (Thurn) is a term of the German text for a dungeon. The same term appears in Latin on the margins – Turris caecitatis, that is the Tower of Babel. It might echo a phrase of Boethius of the poem I, 4: “aut celsas soliti ferire turres/ ardentis via fulminis movebit” (“Nor the bolt that from the sky/ Smites the tower, can terrify”).[54] The words may be easily linked to God’s wrath, which resulted in the destruction of the Tower of Babel.[55]

Also in the description of his dream, Andreae emphasises that people in the dungeon do each other harm. Such obstacles prevent them from deliverance. In Prose I, 4, Boethius presents a similar situation of how men’s attitude to each other might be disastrous.[56] Andreae’s meaning of harm, possibly, stands for deceiving, misleading theories, which lead astray from salvation, since escape from the tower undoubtedly hints at it. In this case, it may be compared with another piece from Boethius: “Cuius hereditatem cum deinceps Epicureum vulgus ac Stoicum ceterique pro sua <Socrates>  quisque parte raptum ire molirentur meque <Philosophia>  reclamantem renitentemque velut in partem praedae traherent, vestem quam meis texueram minibus disciderunt abreptisque ab ea panniculis totam me sibi cessisse credentes abiere” (“And when, one after the other, the Epicurean herd, the Stoic, and the rest, each of them as far as in them lay, went about to seize the heritage he <Socrates> left, and were dragging me <Philosophy> off protesting and resisting, as their booty, they tore in pieces the garment which I had woven with my own hands, and, clutching the torn pieces, went off, believing that the whole of me had passed into their possession”).[57] Here Epicureans and Stoics grab pieces of Philosophy’s garments. They cannot or do not want to adopt the whole truth, so they become preachers of false philosophies that confuse people and lead them astray. In the Hochzeit it reminds one of the vain grasping at the cord in the dungeon to escape from the darkness.

In the Hochzeit, sometimes “the cover of the Dungeon was from above lifted up, and a little light let down onto us” (“der Deckel am Thurn oben auffgehoben/ und uns ein wenig Liechts zugelassen”).[58] This opened hole is the only way out. In De Consolatione Boethius escapes from his grieves through the Lady Philosophy. The beginning of her influence is described in such words: “Haud aliter tristitiae nebulis dissolutis hausi caelum” (“Even so the clouds of my melancholy were broken up. I saw the clear sky”).[59]

The deliverance from the dungeon in the Hochzeit is evidently caused by Christian Rosencreutz’s prayer (“call”, “Anruf”) to God.[60] The actual consolation of Boethus also starts from his prayer to God (Poem I, 5).[61]

So many details coincide in the two books. Even the main image of the Hochzeit appears in De Consolatione. Something very similar to the description of an abstract, symbolical marriage (chemical!) appears in the text of Boethius, albeit it is not his central idea:

Quod mundus stabili fide
concordes variat vices,
quod pugnantia semina
foebus perpetuum tenent,
quod Phoebus roseum diem
curru provehit aureo,
ut quas duxerit Hesperos
Phoebe noctibus imperet,
ut fluctus avidum mare
certo fine coerceat,
ne terries liceat vagis
latos tendere terminus,
hanc rerum seriem ligat
terras ac pelagus regens
et caelo imperitans amor.

Hic si frena remiserit,
quicquid nunc amat invicem
bellum continuo geret
et quam nunc socia fide
pulchris motibus incitant
certent solvere machinam.

Hic sancto populos quoque
iunctos foedere continet,
hic et coniugii sacrum
castis nectit amoribus,
hic fidis etiam sua
dictat iura sodalibus.

O felix hominum genus,
Si vestros animos amor
quo caelum regitur regat!

Why are Nature’s changes bound
To a fixed and ordered round?
What to leagued peace hath bent
Every warring element?
Wherefore doth the rosy morn
Rise on Phoebus’ car upborne?
Why should Phoebe rule the night,
Led by Hesper’s guiding light?

What the power that doth restrain
In his place the restless main,
That within fixed bounds he keeps,
Nor o’er earth in deluge sweeps?
Love it is that holds the chains,
Love o’ver sea and earth that reigns;
Love – whom else but sovereign Love? –
Love, high lord in heaven above!

Yet should he his care remit,
All that now so close is knit
In sweet love and holy peace,
Would no more from conflict cease,
But with strife’s rude shock and jar
All the world’s fair fabric mar.

Tribes and nations Love unites
By just treaty’s sacred rites;
Wedlock’s bonds he sanctifies
By affection’s softest ties.

Love appointeth, as is due,
Faithful laws to comrades true –
Love, all-sovereign Love! – oh, then,
Ye are blest, ye sons of men,
If the love that rules the sky
In your hearts is throned on high![62]

–

6. Second Day (Dies II)

Christian Rosencreutz departs for the Wedding. He must choose between three of four ways (the fourth is not for humans, it is practicable only for incorruptible bodies). This task is very important and dangerous.[63] There is no parallel in De Consolatione, which is constructed as a progressing dialogue between the author and Philosophy, while the Hochzeit has a very dynamic plot. However, it may be said with some reservations, that the same idea of choosing a direction or a path and the jeopardies of such a decision are mirrored in De Consolatione (Prose I, 5): “Sed tu quam procul a patria non quidem pulsus es sed aberrasti!” (“But how far indeed from thy country has thou, not been banished, but rather hast strayed”).[64]

Actually, all paths in the Hochzeit lead in the same direction. The goal is evidently perfection, beatitude, the knowledge of God and nature. This is not stated openly, because of the symbolic nature of the text. But, at least, the Christian religious, scientific alchemical, and astrological connotations of the Hochzeit are clear. They, with some hints throughout the text,[65] enable us to suppose a final goal. The quandary is in the ability of Man to follow the chosen way and to surmount it in a reasonable span of time. A very similar course of thinking also appears in De Consolatione, Prose III, 2: “Omnis mortalium cura, quam multiplicium studiorum labor exercet, diverso quidem celle procedit, sed ad unum tamen beatitudinis finem nititur pervenire” (“All mortal creatures in those anxious aims which find employment in so many varied pursuits, though they take many paths, yet strive to reach one goal – the goal of happiness” [rather “beatitude” – E.K.].[66]

Christian Rosencreutz selected and followed his path successfully. Valentine Andreae keeps silent with regard to another possibility. But what may happen in the case of a mistake? Evidently, hints at it may be found in De Consolatione, Poem I, 6:

Sic quod praecipiti via
Centum deserit ordinem
Laetos non habet exitus.

Every violent effort to upset His established order <in Latin “prescribed, ordered way”> will fail in the end. [67]

Finally, Christian Rosencreutz reaches the castle, where the Wedding is held. But it has become dark. Between the first and the fourth, final, gate, he followed the light of Virgo Lucifera. In the beginning the way was lit by her lamps (Laternen in the German text) or candles (in the English text) and afterwards he followed her torch.[68] This notion may have astronomical/astrological connotation, since the Latin word Lucifer originally refers to the morning star, i.e. Venus, which appears just before sunrise.[69] The appearance of Virgo Lucifera at the beginning of the night instead of its end (normal for Venus’ rise) is perplexing and gives rise to speculations, such as, for instance, that the beginning of night is a promise of a future day, or that this spiritual light leads through the feeble light to the true light (in the Castle), i.e. enlightenment. Here is an evocative point for the symbolic, vague, occult mood of the Hochzeit. But from the very beginning, from the title, from the notion of astrological calculations and Dee’s ‘Hieroglyphic Monad’, Andreae promises to produce a sober scientific context of the narrative. Possibly, he found approval for such an unusual time for Lucifer in De Consolatione, Poem I, 5:

Et qui primae tempore noctis
agit algentes Hesperos ortus
solitas iterum mutet habenas
Phoebi pallens Lucifer ortu!

‘Who at fall of eventide,
Hesper, his cold radiance showeth,
Lucifer his beams doth hide,
Paling as the sun’s light growth[70]

Albeit Lucifer (Venus) appears before sunrise, the change of day, night and another day is shown in the poem to occur very swiftly, and can justify the “compression” of the night.

Here it is necessary to break the normal order of the narrative and look forward to the next sections of Andreae’s text to develop the topic, which is important for various parts of the book. Virgo Lucifera plays a significant role in the leading, care, and wardship of the guests throughout the text. It may be said that she helps them to proceed to the truth or true knowledge, since Andreae everywhere emphasises the scientific activity, paralleled with the religious activity, of the guests. Such a role reminds the reader of Boethius’ Poem III, 1. Here Lucifer also leads to the ultimate truth:

Lucifer ut tenebras pepulerit,
Pulchra dies roseos agit eqous.
Tu quoque falsa tuens bona prius,
Incioe colla iugo retrahere:
Vera dehinc animum subierint.

Only after Hesperus <in Latin text Lucifer> has driven away the darkness does the day drive forward his splendid horses. Just so, by first recognizing false goods, you begin to escape the burden of influence; then afterwards true goods may gain possession of your spirit. [71]

Later, Christian Rosencreutz enters a “spacious Hall” (“grosser Saal”). There he finds all sorts of people. Among them are multitudes of unworthy men.[72] First of all, in conversation with Rosencreutz they mocked the “Grace of God”.[73] According to Andreae, this is a serious fault, which will be punished in the next part of the book (the third day).

Boethius in De Consolatione, Prose I, 6, proves that the world is not governed fortuitously and by chance, but is under the rational guidance of God.[74]

Among the people in the Hall, Andreae mostly depicts different deceivers, who boast of their supernatural abilities. However, their worthiness should be checked and cheaters would be punished.[75] This may be paralleled to a passage in De Consolatione I, 6: “…et eam mentium constat esse naturam ut, quotiens abiecerint versa, falsis opinionibus induantur, ex quibus orta perturbationum caligo verum illum confundit intuitum” (“…and that the mind is manifestly so constituted that when it casts off true opinions it straightway puts on false, wherefrom arises a cloud of confusion that disturbs its true vision”).[76]

In the Hochzeit guests are obliged to prove their worthiness. They will be checked by being weighed in the morning. Before this, they have to spend the night in bounds. Meanwhile, Christian Rosencreutz has a dream, in which he stands on a high mountain. A valley is before him. There are people in the valley. Each of them has at his head a thread, by which he is hung up toward Heaven, some of them high and some of them low. An “ancient man”[77] (alter Mann) flies through the air and cuts one or another thread. Those near the earth fall without noise, while from a lofty position, people go down with an earthquake.[78]

Actually, the entire book II of De Consolatione is written in similar mood. Here Boethius discusses unstable, capricious fortune in detail. A poem (I, 7) has dissimilar ideas, but analogous imagery:

montibus altis
defluus amnis
saepe resistit
rupe solute
obice saxi.

Tu quoque si vis
lumine claro
cernere verum,
tramite recto
carpere callem,
gaudia pelle,
pelle timorem
spemque fugato
nec dolor adsit.

Nubila mens est
vinctaque frenis
haec ubi regnant.

The flowing stream, tumbling down from the high mountain, is often blocked by the stone broken off from the rocky cliff. So it is with you. If you want to see the truth in clear light, and follow the right road, you must cast off all joy and fear. Fly from hope and sorrow. When these things rule, the mind is clouded and bound to the earth. [79]

Also a very distant affinity of both texts: two pages (in the English text) on children (Knaben in the German text), who play a prominent role from the Second Day, onward is a possible reflection of Boethius’ description of his two sons in Prose II, 3.

–

7. Third Day (Dies. III)

The day starts with the examination of the candidates’ worthiness. Each one of them must be weighed on a gold scales (Libra Aurea, “die Wag so ganz guldin gewesen”). Those who are light will be rewarded and the heavy ones will be punished. This image has a clear Biblical origin (Job 6:2, 31:6; Proverbs 16:11; Daniel 5:27; Revelation 6:5). Andreae speaks about the fortune and misfortune of the people, with different results, shown in this test:

And this I can boldly say, not with flattery, but in the love of truth, that commonly those persons who were of the highest Rank, best understood how to behave themselves in so unexpected a misfourtune. Their Treatment was but indifferent, yet with respect, neither could they yet see their Attendants, but to us they were visible, thereat I was exceeding joyful: Now although Fortune had exalted us, yet we took not upon us more than the rest, advising them to be of good Cheer, the event would not be so ill (Und kam ich nit umb schmeichlen willen/ sondern der warheit zu Lieb diß kecklich sagen/ daß sich gemeiniglich hohe peronen am besten gewust in solch unverhofften unfall zuschicken: Ihre Tractation war zimlich schlecht/ jedoch Ehrlich und kondten sie ire auffwärter noch nit sehen: uns aber waren sie sichtbar welches mich dann höchlich erfrewet. Darneben aber ob uns wol das Glück erhöhet/ liessen wir uns doch nit mehr als andere beduncken/ sonder spracheten mit den andern und hiessen sie ein gut Herz haben/ es wurde so ubel nit außschlagen). [80]

Such attention to fortune and misfortune, to unstable fortune, reminds us of the second book of De Consolatione, which is completely dedicated to this topic in a very similar manner.[81] In the second book of De Consolatione, Fortune principally asks Boethius (actually every man) to avoid his crying and complaints. In the Hochzeit Andreae emphasises the laments of those with bad fortune, who could not pass a test. There is a special section for the description of their behavior in this pitiful situation, which bears the title “Dolor de Sententia”.[82]

Andreae particularly emphasises the misfortune of many of emperors and kings (but not of all of them), their inability to pass the test.[83] Boethius’ message is of a more personal character. He concentrates on his own fortune, although he does give examples of some kings:

An tu mores ignorabas meos? nesciebas Croesum regem Lydorum Cyro paulo ante formidabilem mox deinde miserandum, rogi flammis traditum misso caelitus imbre defensum? Num te praeterit Paulum Persi Regis a se capti calamitatibus pias impendisse lacrimas? Quid tragoediarum clamor aliud deflet nisi indiscreto ictu fortunam Felicia regna vertentem? (Didst not know how Croesus, King of the Lydians, erstwhile the dreaded rival of Cyrus, was afterwards pitiably consigned to the flame of the pyre, and only saved by a shower sent from heaven? Has it ‘scaped thee how Paulus paid a meed of pious tears to the misfortunes of King Perseus, his prisoner? What else do tragedies make such woeful outcry over save the overthrow of kingdoms by the indiscriminate stroke of Fortune?) [84]

Those, who have passed the test, the outstanding persons, were honoured with a “Gown of red Velvet” (roth Sametin Rock),[85] and the “persons of quality” received a velvet robe (Sametin Kleyd).[86] It might be paralleled to:

Cum polo Phoebus roseis quadrigis
Lucem spargere coeperit

When, in rosy chariot drawn,
Phoebus ‘gins to light the dawn,[87]

Of course, the connection of the two texts is very uncertain in this particular case. Yet among so many similarities and affinities it attracts some attention as an additional detail.

Andreae relates that an emperor who deserved a punishment according to the test, was released as a result Christian Rosencreutz’s benevolent solicitude (he was given special permission to do so): “The choice was given me to release one of the Captives, whosoever I pleased; Whereupon I made no long deliberation, but elected the first Emperor whom I had long pittied, who was immediately set free, and with all respect seated amongst us.” (“…wird mir die wahl gegeben/ einen gefangenen/ wer mir gefiel/ zuerlösen. Deßwegen ich mich nit lang besonnen/ und den ersten Keiyser/ der mich lengsten erbarmet/ erwehlt welcher dann bald loß gelassen/ und zu uns mit allen Ehren gesetzt worden”).[88] However, this sudden deliverance does not repair the emperor’s nature. He continues to behave unworthily, also in his relations with his rescuer: “But how the Emperor whom I had released, behaved himself towards me, both at this time, as also before at the Table, I cannot, without slander of wicked Tongues, well relate” (“Wie shich nun der Keyser/ den ich erlößt/ damalen / wie auch zuvor ob der Taffel/ gegen mir erzeigt/ kan ich ohne böser Mäuler nachtheil nicht wol erzählen”).[89]  Such pious Christian speculations on sins might be paralleled to the story about a lion, which shows no mercy towards his benefactor, either:

Quamvis Poeni pulchra leones
vincula gestent manibusque datas
captent escas metuantque trucem
soliti verbera ferre magistrum,
si cruor horrida tinxerit ora,
resides olim redeunt animi
fremituque gravi meminere sui,
laxant nodis colla solutis
primusque lacer dente cruento
domitor rabidas imbuit iras.

Lo, the lion captive ta’en
Meekly wears his gilded chain;
Yet though he by hand be fed,
Thought a master’s whip he dread,
If but once the taste of gore
Whet his cruel lips once more,
Straight his slumbering fierceness wakes,
With one roar his bonds he breaks,
And first wreaks his vengeful fource
On his trainer’s mangled corse.[90]

In the Hochzeit the guests proceeds into the garden, where “was raised a wooden Scaffold, hung about with curiously painted figured Coverlets. Now there were four Galleries made one over another.” (“war ein hülzerin Gerüst auffgemacht/ mit schönen gemahlten Deckenin umbhenget. Es waren aber 4. Gängubereinander gemacht”).[91] This construction certainly plays a symbolic role, whose real meaning is hard to decipher. But it may correspond to the “world” in its completeness. At least it may be paralleled with the universe in the book of Boethius, on the basis of the use of the number “four” in both texts: “Huius igitur tam exiguae in mundo regionis quarta fere portio est, sicut Ptolomaeo probante didicisti, quae nobis cognitis animantibus incolatur.” (“Now, of this so insignificant portion of the universe, it is about a fourth part, as Ptolemy’s proofs have taught us, which is inhabited by living creatures”).[92]

–

8. Fourth Day (IV Dies)

In the morning, the guests go down into the garden. There is a fountain with a lion, which holds a tablet. The text of the tablet proclaims: “Hermes the Prince. After so many wounds inflicted on humankind, here by God’s counsel and the help of the Art flow I, a healing medicine. Let him drink me who can: let him wash who will: let him trouble me who dare: drink, brethren, and live” (“Hermes Princeps. Post tot illata generi humano damna, dei consilio: atris que adminiculo, medicina salubris factus heic fluo. Bibat ex me qui potest; lavet, qui vult: tubet que audit: Bibite fraters, et vivite”).[93] This invitation to healing is pronounced by the god Hermes, a patron of alchemy, and thus medicine, associated with ultimate wisdom by alchemists. A similar image appears also in De Consolatione. Boethius describes the mission of Philosophy in medical terms. Lady Philosophy has come to heal her patient (Prose I).

Many events occur through the day, including a comedy, which was performed for the guests. It starts from a deplorable event – the king of the Moors had deprived a good king of his country and “extinguished all the Royal Seed”.[94] This play, which we do not intend to reproduce here, precedes the real events. Afterwards, three kings and three queens are beheaded (to be resurrected in the future) by a black man, who was also beheaded afterwards.[95] It may be paralleled to De Consolatione, Prose III, 5, where the inconstancy of kings’ fate is mourned.

–

9. The Fifth Day (V. Dies)

On the fifth day, Rosencreutz’s page leads the protagonist “down certain steps under ground” (“als bald etliche Stiegen unter die Erd”),[96] to the sepulcher of Lady Venus, the goddess of Lust. This journey will bring trouble to Christian Rosencreutz. In the end of the book he becomes a guard, because of this visit. This occupation is obviously undesirable to him according the text (see also below, section 10). A similar way down, associated also with lust as a path which leads away from spiritual progress, is shown also in the text of Boethius:

Hunc omnes partier venite capti,
quos fallax ligat improbis catenis
terrenas habitans libido mentes:

…

Hoc, quicquid placet excitatque mentes,
infimis tellus aluit cavernis;
splendor quo regitur vigetque caelum
vitat obscuras animae ruinas;
hanc quisquis poterit notare lucem
candidis Phoebi radios nagabit.

Hither come, all ye whose minds
Lust with rosy fetters binds –
Lust to bondage hard compelling
Th’ earthy souls that are his dwelling –

…

But they rather leave the mind
In its native darkness blind.
For the fairest beams they shed
In earth’s lowest depths were fed;
But the splendour that supplies
Strength and vigour to the skies,
And the universe controls,
Shunneth dark and ruined souls.
He who one hath seen this light
Will not call the sunbeam bright.[97]

The dangerous visit to the sepulcher of Venus promises lofty knowledge: “The Page answered me, That I had good reason to be thankful to my Planet, by whose influence it was, that I had now seen certain pieces which no humane Eye else (except the King’s Family) had ever had a view of” (“Darauff antwortet mir der Knab:/ Ich hätte mich billich gegen meinen Planeten zu bedancken / auß welches Influentz mir nun mehr etliche Stuck zusehen worden/ so keines Menschen Aug sonsten jemalen gesehen/ ausser deß Köngs Gefinde”).[98] Nonetheless, as we remember, acquired knowledge will cause harm to the protagonist at the end of the book. After seeing the corpse of Venus, Christian Rosencreutz discovers (with the assistance of his page) an ancient prophecy: “When the Tree… shall be quite melted down, Then shall Lady Venus awake, and be the Mother of a King.” (“Wann der Baum… wirt vollendts verschmeltzen/ so wirdt Fraw Venus wider erwachen/ und sein ein Mutter eines Königs”).[99] Three important points of this story remind us of similar ideas in Boethius’ interpretation of the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice (Poem III, 12):

1. In both cases the protagonist goes down to find the dead Lady.
2. There are expectations for resurrection in both cases.
3. Vain knowledge only harms the hero.

The last point sounds very distinctively in De Consolatione:

Vos haec fibula respicit
quicumque in superum diem
mentem ducere quaeritis;
nam qui Tartareum in specus
victus lumina flexerit,
quicquid praecipuum trahit
perdit dum videt inferos.

Ye who the light pursue,
This story is for you,
Who seek to find a way
Unto the clearer day.
If on the darkness past
One backward look ye cast,
Your weak and wandering eyes
Have lost the matchless prize.[100]

Later, in the Hochzeit everybody sail on seven ships from the castle to the isle, where the Tower of Olympus stands.[101] They take with them the Moor’s head and pretend to be transporting the bodies of kings and queens, which in reality had been secretly conveyed to the island the night before.[102] Nymphs, sirens and sea-goddesses (Sirenen, Nyphen, Mörgöttin) attend the ships.[103] Nymphs sing. Andreae recollects Ulysses: “I no more Wondered at Ulisses for stopping the Ears of his Companions” (“nam mich nimmer wunder/ warumb Ulysses seinen Gesellen die Ohren verstopfft”).[104] Boethius also discusses Ulysses’ journey (Poem IV, 3). Here the meaning and accents are transparent. Boethius highlights the history of how the witch Circe turns Ulysses’ companions into pigs. It illustrates the idea of wicked, sinful Man’s degradation to the stage of the beast.[105] Thus, there is no palpable coincidence of meanings. Andreae’s symbolism is very intricate and its denotation is not always apparent. Yet, the imagery in both texts is similar. Andreae may have kept the text of Boethius in mind, when composing his description of the journey.

When nymphs sing, five ships stand in the form of a pentagon, while the sixth and seventh are situated in the center.[106] There is also a depiction of their arrangement:

This might be a hint that there are 5+2 books in the Hochzeit, the five books of Boethius and two additional ones.

The Tower of Olympus, the guests’ destination, is surrounded by a wall. Christian Rosencreutz, after his arrival, goes up to the top of the wall. He looks at the sky and “thus having good opportunity to consider better of Astronomy, I <Christian Rosencreutz> found that this present Night there would happen such a conjunction of the Planets, the like to which was not otherwise suddenly to be observed” (“weil ich <Christian Rosencreutz> also gute gelegenheit hette der Astronomi besser nach zudencken/ befand ich/ daß auff gegenwertige Nacht ein solche Conjunction der Planeten geschehe/ dergleichen nicht bald sonsten zu observieren”).[107] This is not the sole reference to astronomy and astrology in the book. Clear references to it have been previously shown in this paper. There are many astronomical passages in the text of Boethius, too. Some cases have already been mentioned in this article. The passage cited here may be noted for its unusual attention to the direct observation of the planets. A similar piece appears in De Consolatione, Prose III, 8: “Respicite caeli spatium, firmitudinem, celeritatem, et aliquando destinite vilia mirari. Quod quidem caelum non his potius est quam sua, qua regitur, ratione mirandum” (“Look upon the infinitude, the solidity, the swift motion, of the heavens, and for once cease to admire things mean and worthless. And yet the heavens are not so much to be admired on this account as for the reason which guides them”).[108]

–

Sixth Day (VI. Dies)

In the morning, the Old Man (der alte Mann) appears. He asks everyone to choose one of three kinds of items: ladders, ropes and large wings (Leytern, Seyler, grosse Flügel).[109] Everyone chooses something proper to him, without consideration, that their choice sets their future fate, their ability to climb to another level. This sounds like a response to God’s selection of individual fates in De Consolatione: “Qui cum <God> ex alta providentiae specula respexit, quid unicuique conveniat agnoscit et quod convenire novit accommodate. Hic iam fit illud fatalis ordinis insigne miraculum, cum ab sciente geritur quod stupeant ignorantes” (“And He <God> looks forth from the lofty watch-tower of His providence, perceives what is suited to each, and assigns what He knows to be suitable. This, then, is what that extraordinary mystery of the order of destiny comes to- that something is done by one who knows, whereat the ignorant are astonished”).[110] Thus, these two pieces leave an impression of a dialogue between Boethius and Andreae. For Boethius the topic is cardinal, the entire progression of his plot leads the reader from speculation on fate to declarations about Providence. The position of humans is mostly passive in this scheme. They can triumph over the situation by knowledge, and here the role of Philosophy becomes extremely important. In his turn, Andreae insists on the significance of the active vital position of Man. God produces actual situations, and the options are only three, likewise in this case and in the second part of the book (referred above), when Christian Rosencreutz has to choose his path (it is only partly a conscious choice).[111] However, Man may choose his own fate from the existing possibilities.

In fact, the guests were engaged in alchemical activity in the tower of Olympus. The description of the alchemical deeds comprises most pages of the “Sixth Day”. In the end, it becomes clear that the ultimate goal is the revival of the King, the groom and the Queen, the bride. Virgo Lucifera supervises the entire process. At the final stage of the process, Cupid appears. He plays an important part in the revival of the King and the Queen. The roles of Lucifer (the morning star) and Cupid (symbol of creative love) may be paralleled to Poem IV, 6:

revehitque diem Lucifer almum.
Sic aeternos reficit cursus
Alternus amor…

Lucifer the morning light.
Love, in alternation due,
Still the cycle doth renew[112]

Finally, in the text, the alchemical nature Andreae proclaims in the title (Chymische Hochzeit), the transmutations into gold has finally appeared.[113] At the end of the alchemical activity on the “Sixth Day”, it becomes apparent that the ultimate goal is the revival of the groom, the King and the bride, the Queen. Although the ultimate goal is the revival of the groom, the King and the bride, the Queen, some alchemists worked on gold; despite it not being a most essential part of the art:  “Now was it also time for the Virgin to see how our other Artists behaved themselves, they were well pleased, because (as the Virgin <Virgo Lucifera> afterwards informed me) they were to work in Gold, which is indeed a piece also of this art, but not the most Principal, most necessary, and best” (“Nun war es auch zeit/ daß die Jungfraw sehe/ wie sich unsere andere Künstler heilten: Die waren wolzumuht/ dann wie mich die Jungfraw nachmahlen berichtet/ musten sie in Gold laborieren: Welches wol auch ein stuck dieser Kunst/ aber nit das fürnembst/ nöttigst und beste ist”).[114]

Boethius throughout in his book depreciates the role of material success. He insists on the illusory, unreliable and unsteady character of individual fate. In book V he declares that there is no place for fortuitousness. Anything that we may regard as happening by chance is a result of various causes. The example, which illustrates such ideas includes “gold”: “…si quis colendi agri causa fodiens humum defossi auri pondus inveniat. Hoc igitur fortuitu quidem creditor accidisse, verum non de nihilo est; nam proprias causas habet, quarum improvisus inopinatusque concursus casum videtur operatus. Nam nisi cultor agri humum foderet, nisi eo loci pecuniam suam depositor obruisset, aurum non esset inventum” (“…if a man is digging the earth for tillage, and finds a mass of buried gold. Now, such a find is regarded as accidental; yet it is not ‘ex nihilo’, for it has its proper causes, the unforeseen and unexpected concurrence of which has brought the chance about. For had not the cultivator been digging, had not the man who hid the money buried it in that precise spot, the gold would not have been found”).[115]

The two usages of “gold” are quite different in the two texts. But there are some clear parallels:

1. Gold is not the ultimate goal.
2. Gold is a symbol of worldly things. It provides nothing for the knowledge of God. At least Boethius uses this symbol against the idea of fortuitousness in Section V, where the author speculates on the God’s Providence. Similarly, Andreae speaks about the knowledge of God by alchemical art and about the unworthiness of alchemical transmutations into gold.

–

10. Seventh Day (VII Dies)

In Andreae’s text, on the seventh day all the guests are declared to be Knights of the Golden Stone. Afterwards they sail back to the castle. After supper a page reads articles that the guests are to swear to. Some of these articles may be paralleled to Boethius’ text.

The first of them is: “You my Lords the Knights, shall swear, that you shall at no time ascribe your order either unto any Devil, or Spirit, but only to God your Creator and his hand-maid Nature” (“Ihr Herzen Ritter solt schweren/ daß ihr ewern Orden/ keinem Teuffel oder Geist/ sondern allein Gott/ Ewerm Schöpffer/ und dessen Dienerin der Natur jederzeit wöllen zuschreiben”).[116] This is certainly inspired by the Bible, by the first of Ten Commandments, as possibly the entire list of articles reflects the entire Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:1-17; Deuteronomy 5:4-21). However, it also sounds similar to: “Hoc tantum perspexisse sufficiat, quod naturarum omnium proditor dues idem ad bonum dirigens cuncta disponat, dumque ea quae protulit in sui similitudinem retinere festinate, malum omne de rei repblicae suae terminis per fatalis seriem necessitates eliminet” (“Let us be content to have apprehended this only – that God, the creator of universal nature, likewiseth disposeth all things, and guides them to good; and while He studies to preserve in likeness to Himself all that He has created, He banishes all evil from the borders of His commonweal through the links of fatal necessity).”[117] There is no reason to insist on the sole direct impact of De Consolatione on the Hochzeit in this particular case. If Andreae applied the text of Boethius to writing his own, it may be supposed that De Consolatione provoked the insertion of this article in the Hochzeit.

At the end of the Hochzeit a clear link between its guidelines and the story of Boethius suddenly appears. There is a correlation between the general directions of both narratives. Christian Rosencreutz is mostly thriving throughout the book, he shows lofty intelligence and piety, he gains the King’s favour. But his curiosity leads him to a great mistake; he uncovered Venus on the fifth day. His punishment, which is described as mostly unpleasant, is his new obligation to be a gatekeeper or porter (Hüter) until somebody else will free him. Thus, grace is superseded by disgrace, and the final disgrace is not undeniably awful. At least, Christian Rosencreutz obtains consolation from the King.

The text of De Consolatione shows the fate of the author, his glorious life (particularly Prose I, 4), which will now end in execution, preceded by imprisonment. However, Lady Philosophy consoles the author.

The uncovering of Venus was discovered by the stargazing of the previous porter, a famous astrologer,[118] who realises the fact before he can see it in reality. It resembles foreknowledge, i.e. knowledge of facts that cannot be observed yet. It seems that such a narrative negates the idea of free will. Such a position is very proper to a Lutheran.[119] However, Boethius in book V also discusses free will, foreknowledge and Providence. In Prose V, 3 he emphasises the impossibility of changing anything foreknown by God. It does not contradict the idea of free will. God, in His ultimate wisdom, may foreknow things without their predestination.

The uncovering of Venus may signify corporeal love. Andreae clearly shows the physical, bodily beauty of the goddess. Moreover, this story can reflect an autobiographical incident, namely Andreae’s conflict with the authorities of Tübingen University. Probably, Andreae was expelled for a time from the university, because of his association with some others who had congress with prostitutes.[120] By contrast, Christian Rosencreutz was guided by Virgo Lucifera on the way of spiritual progress. Virgo Lucifera leads with lights in the upper direction (Tower of Olympus), while Venus is situated underground. “Lucifer” originally means the “Morning Star”, that is, Venus seen just before sunrise. Thus, there are two embodiments of Venus in the Hochzeit, Venus and Virgo Lucifera. One leads downwards, while another leads upwards. The word Virgo, i.e. “Virgin”, emphasises the innocence of Virgo Lucifera. Such a direction of thinking, the necessity of avoiding the passions, is very peculiar to Christian culture in general. Thus, Venus and Virgo Lucifera signify two different kinds of love, earthly and heavenly. In astrology they both have the same star, but in different positions. As  noted, by discovering earthly love instead of heavenly love, Christian Rosencreutz had to become a porter and lost his freedom.

Boethius articulates very similar ideas. For instance: “…humanas vero animas liberiores quidem esse necesse est cum se in mentis divinae speculatione conservant, minus vero cum dilabuntur ad corpora, minusque etiam cum terrenis artubus colligantur; extrema vero est servitus cum vitiis deditae rationis propriae possessione ceciderunt. Nam ubi oculos a summae luce veritatis ad inferiora et tenebrosa deiecerint, mox inscitiae nube caligant, perniciosis turbantur affectibus, quibus accedendo consentiendoque quam invexere sibi adiuvant servitutem et sunt quodam modo pripria libertate coptivae” (“Human souls must needs be comparatively free while they abide in the contemplation of the Divine mind, less free when they pass into bodily form, and still less, again, when they are enwrapped in earthly members. But when they are given over to vices, and fall from the possession of their proper reason, then indeed their condition is utter slavery. For when they let their gaze fall from the light of highest truth to the lower world where darkness reigns, soon ignorance blinds their vision; they are disturbed by baneful affections, by yielding and assenting to which they help to promote the slavery in which they are involved, and are in a manner led captive by reason of their very liberty”).[121]

Certainly, the root of this concept in European culture is Plato’s Symposium. Regine Frey-Jaun paid much attention to the probable sources of Andreae without a detailed study of the history of the problem. She noted Boccaccio’s concept of two Venuses (in Ameto), as symbols of earthly and heavenly love respectively. This might be among Andreae’s sources. Evidently, Boccaccio’s idea is a reaction to Dante’s concept of love in the Divine Comedy, which text was also probably known to Andreae. The author of the Hochzeit was also acquainted with the Hyperotomachia Poliphili (first edition in 1499) by Francesco Colonna. In this text the idea of two Venuses, based both on Dante and Boccaccio, also appears. However, after her discussion, Frey-Jaun clearly mentions only one Venus in the Hochzeit.  Frey-Jaun does not suppose that Virgo Lucifera might be regarded as another Venus.[122] Kienast noted that Venus often appears as a symbol of the Virgin Mary: “Übrigens wird die heidnische Venus häufiger als die christliche Jungfrau Maria gedeutet”.[123]

Receiving armour from Venus. Pauli Maccii Emblemata Emblem 294

11. Conclusion: An Old Story in a New Context

Thus, it seems that a text written at the very beginning of the Middle Ages, De Consolatione Philosophiae by Boethius, inspired a product of the intellectual life of the early 17^th century and the principal Rosicrucian work, the Chymische Hochzeit Christiani Rosencreutz by Andreae. Both texts have many affinities. Knowledge of this fact may surely open a new perspective on the elucidation of the Hochzeit and our understanding of the interpretation and impact of De Consolatione in 17^th-century Germany. For instance, if somebody interprets Andreae’s text as a joke (“ludibrium”),[124] such a reading of De Consolatione is also probable, at least in 17^th-century Germany.

Also, as was previously shown, one of two translations of De Consolatione into the German language was made by two persons, closely associated with the occult movement of Rosicrucianism: Christian Knorr Rosenroth and Mercurius van Helmont (see section 2). That the text of Boethius was so important for such persons is very significant and deserves much attention.

Now we have shown that De Consolatione may also be considered as one of possible sources of Rosicrucianism. However, Boethius attracts nearly no attention from modern scholars of the occult. Probably, there was something in the reading of De Consolatione in the 17^th century, which is lost today.

There is also a very significant evidence of succession in the history of literature. It reminds one of a relay-race. A text, popular in medieval Europe, which served as an agenda for that period, loses its popularity during and after the 17^th century. But it became a point of departure for the fashionable new text, the Hochzeit, which appealed to people with a new worldview, peculiar to the time of the Scientific Revolution (see section 1). The main conclusion of this study is that Boethius may be called the godfather of the Rosicrucian movement, since one of the primary Rosicrucian texts heavily relied on him.

On behalf of Pansophers.com and all our fans:

Thank you Eugene for this insightful and in-depth research!

Readers, we recommend you read Christine Eike’s related post on Heinrich Kunrath’s “Amphitheatrum Sapientiae Aeternae” which covers it as another source for several building structures mentioned in the “Chemical Wedding!”

Footnotes:

[1] Claus Priesner, “Alchemie im Zeitalter der Aufklärung: Geheimgesellschaften und Adeptengeheimnisse”, Archiv für Kulturgeschichte 93:2 (2011): 385–413, on 393.

[2] The term was coined in Alexander Koyré, Études galiléennes (Paris: Hermann, 1939). The literature on the subject is vast. For general introductions, see Rupert A. Hall, The Scientific Revolution, 1500–1800: The Formation of the Modern Scientific Attitude, 2^nd ed. (Boston: Longmans, 1962); Thomas Samuel Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962); Richard S. Westfall, The Construction of Modern Science: Mechanisms and Mechanics (New York: Wiley, 1971); Steven Shapin, The Scientific Revolution (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1996). The connection of the Scientific Revolution with religious and magical interests was clearly emphasised by Frances Yates in her books: Frances A. Yates, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1962); idem, The Art of Memory (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1966); idem, The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1979). One of her books is especially dedicated to the Rosicrucian problem: F.A. Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment (London and Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1972).

[3] See Arthur Edward Waite, The Brotherhood of the Rosy Cross: Being Records of the House of the Holy Spirit in its Inward and Outward History (London: William Rider and Son, 1924), 113-142; Hereward Tilton, The Quest for the Phoenix: Spiritual Alchemy and Rosicrucianism in the Work of Count Michael Maier (1569-1622) (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2003).

[4] Friedrich Heinrich Rheinwald, ed. Vita, ab ipso conscripta (Berolini: H. Schultze, 1849), 10. Actually, in every even brief notion of Hochzeit, the term “ludibrium” is discussed, since it is a characteristic of the text (Hochzeit), given to it by its author himself (Andreae). There are different interpretations of this Latin term. “Joke” is only one of many options. There is no need to reproduce the entire bibliography, which coincides with the complete bibliography on the Hochzeit.

[5] Carlos Gilly, Adam Haslmayr: Der erste Verkünder der Manifeste der Rosenkreutzer (Amsterdam: In de Pelikaan, 1994).

[6] John Warwick Montgomery, Cross and Crucible: Johann Valentin Andreae (1586-1654), Phoenix of the Theologians (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1973), vol. 1, 210.

[7] The evidence for the date of composing the text may be found Valentin Andreae’s autobiography (Vita, 10). Andreae lists his works in certain periods of life, and the succession of titles enables us to suppose the year of writing Hochzeit. For the evidence that the text was composed in 1605, see Richard Kienast, Johann Valentin Andreae und die vier echten Rosenkreutzer-Schriften (Leipzig: Mayer & Müller, 1926), 238 (it seems to be the first work with this date); Montgomery, Cross and Crucible, vol. 1, 36, 38, 54; Thomas Willard, “Andreae’s ludibrium: Menippean Satire in the Chymische Hochzeit“, in Laughter in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Times: Epistemology of a Fundamental Human Behavoir, its Meaning, and Consequences, ed. Albrecht Classen (Berlin and New York: De Gruyter, 2010), 767-787, on 770, n.14).

[8] Carlos Gilly, Cimelia Rhodostaurotica: Die Rosenkreuzer im Spiegel der zwischen 1610 und 1660 entstandenen Handschriften und Drucke (Amsterdam: In de Pelikaan, 1995), 82. His dating is based on the witness of Carl Widemann. Tilton accepts Gilly’s theory. See Tilton, The Quest for the Phoenix, 128.

[9] Roland Edighoffer, Rose-Croix et Société Idéale selon Johann Valentin Andreae (Neuilly sur Seine: Arma Artis, 1982), 230-234; Martin Brecht, “Johann Valentin Andreae. Weg und Programm eines Reformers zwischen Reformation und Moderne”, in Theologen und Theologie an der Universität Tübingen, ed. Martin Brecht (Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1977), 270-343, on 288.

[10] It was not published by Andreae. The first edition of the original Latin text is Rheinwald, ed. Vita, 10. The translation of the original text appeared earlier: D.Ch. Seybold, ed., Selbstbiographie. Aus dem Manuscripte übersezt und mit Anmerkungen und Beilagen begleitet (Winterthur: Steiner, 1799). This book was published as the second volume of the Selbstbiographien Berümter Männer.

[11] A summary of early texts on the Rosicrucians’ origins with discussion of Andreae’s authorship of early Rosicrucian texts is Christoph Gottlieb von Murr, Ueber den wahren Ursprung der Rosenkreuzer und des Freymaurerordens (Sulzbach: Siedel, 1803). A tabular summary of the key authors from 1700 to 1928 who expose their position on whether Andreae composed founding documents of Rosicrucianism, can be found in Will-Erich Peuckert, Die Rosenkreutzer: Zur Geschichte einer Reformation (Jena: Diederich, 1928), 400-402. This list was revised in Hans Schick, Das ältere Rosenkreuzertum: Ein Beitrag zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Freimaurerei (Berlin: Nordland, 1942), 64, n. 151. An attempt to resolve the problem from the philological aspect, by comparison of thee primary Rosicrucian texts is Kienast, Johann Valentin Andreae. Kienast’s conclusion – Andreae is the author of Hochzeit, but not of the manifestos. Some other very influential works on the subject are: Ferdinad Katsch, Die Enstehung und der wahre Endzweck der Freimaurerei, auf Grund der Originalquellen (Berlin: E.S. Mittler, 1897), 223-71; Jvan Kvačala, Johann Valentin Andreä’s Anteil an geheimen Gesellschaften (Jurjew: Mattiesen, 1899); Waite, The Brotherhood, 182-214. Although a huge critique of scholarly inaccuracy was made of the book of Paul Arnold, its discussion of the evidence on the pre-Rosicrucians presents some very important facts: Paul Arnold, Histoire des Rose-Croix et les origins de la Franc-Maçonnerie (Paris: Mercure de France, 1955). A relatively recent summary of the discussion on Andreae’s authorship with very decisive new attempt at it is Montgomery, Cross and Crucible, vol. 1, 158-255; Tilton, The Quest for the Phoenix, 127-31. Apart from various theoretical speculations on the possibility of Andreae’s authorship of the entire first Rosicrucian texts, there is a reference to a letter, which mentions Andreae’s own admission that he with some of his friends published Fama Fraternitatis: Gottfrid Arnold, Unparteyische Kirchen- und Ketzer- Historie (Frankfurt am Main:  Thomas Fritsch, 1700), vol. 4, 624 (repr. Genschmar : Gruber, 2004). On the refutation of Arnold’s testimony, see John Warwick Montgomery, Cross and Crucible, vol. 1, 212-213. Andreae’s close friend Melchior Breler also affirmed Andreae’s collaboration in the writing of Fama: Melchior Breler, Mysterium iniquitatis Pseudoevanlicae: Hoc est: Dissertatio apologetica pro doctrina beati Joannis Arndtii (Goslariae: typis Vogti, sumptibus J. & H. Sternen, 1621), 100-101. A passage in Andreae’s Vita also may hint at the fact that he composed these manifestos in collaboration with Hess and Hoelzel (p. 20). Such authorship was accepted in Richard van Dülmen, Die Utopie einer christlichen Gesellschaft. Johann Valentin Andreae (1586-1654) (Stuttgart: Frommann-Holzboog, 1978), 78; Regine Frey-Jaun. Die Berufung des Türhüters: Zur “Chymischen Hochzeit Christiani Rosencreutz“ von Johann Valentin Andreae (1586-1654) (Bern, Frankfurt am Main, New York, Paris: Peter Lang, 1989), 16. According to these testimonies it appears that the Fama is a collective work. At the very least, Andreae cannot be regarded as its sole author. However, it is quite probable that the personage of Rosencreutz was produced by Andreae’s imagination. It appears so according to an inscription of Christoph Besold, a friend of Andreae, made on the manuscript of Fama discovered by van Dülmen (see note 6 to the chapter “Christoph Besold, Jurist und Theologe” in Utopie), which was referenced and developed with some other evidence and arguments by Frey-Jaun,  Die Berufung des Türhüters, 16-18. The famous researcher of Rosicrucians, Christopher McIntosh, points to the group in Tübingen, which includes Andreae, as authors of the first two Rosicrucian manifestos and to Andreae as an author of the Hochzeit in his The Rosicrucians: The History, Mythology, and Rituals of an Esoteric Order (York Beach, Me.: S. Weiser, 1997). Susanna Akerman looks at the whole issue in a wide context, trying to analyze the political and religious situation, possible interrelations between different prominent figures in early Rosicrucianism. It is certainly an answer to the speculations of Francis Yates on the political foundation of the issue (see her The Rosicrucian Enlightenment). Akerman concludes that Andreae is the author of three primal Rosicrucian works, namely Fama, Confessio and Hochzeit, but he “is not responsible for what the other writers wanted to use the Rosicrucian format”. See her Rose Cross Over the Baltic: The Spread of Rosicrucianism in Northern Europe (Leiden, Boston, Köln: Brill, 1998), 68-124, 241.

[12] Montgomery, Cross and Crucible. The second volume of the book contains the entire text of the 17^th -century English translation with Montgomery’s commentaries, accompanied by his extensive reference to predecessors. There is also a special section on the history of the interpretations of the Chemical Wedding in that volume (pp. 264-272).

[13] Montgomery, Cross and Crucible, vol. 2, 272.

[14] Nigel F. Palmer, “Latin and Vernacular in the Northern European Tradition of the De Consolatione Philosophiae”, in Boethius, His Life, Thought and Influence, ed. Margaret Gibson (Oxford: Blackwell, 1981), 362-409, on 383, 487, n. 64; Nicola Kaminski, “Hellwig-Vallinus-van Helmont / Knorr von Rosenroth: Boethius’ Consolation Philosophiae im Fadenkreuz einer konfessioalisierten Philologie”, in Boethius Christianus: Transformationen der Consolatio Philosophiae in Mittelalter und Früher Neuzeit, eds. Reinhold F. Glei, Nicola Kaminski and Franz Lebsanft (Berlin and New York: De Gruyter, 2010), 261-301, on 283.

[15] Pierre Courcelle, La Consolation de Philosophie dans la Tradition Littéraire: Antécédents et Postérité de Boèce (Paris: Études Augustiniennes, 1967), 29-66 (very detailed on Alcuin’s interpretation of Boethius, and its role for medieval tradition); In Rudolf Peiper’s edition of the text – Philosophiae Consolationis, Libri Quinqve, Accendvnt Eiusdem Atque Incertorum (Leipzig: Teubner, 1871), XVII (the manuscript which Alcuin found may be the archetype for all surviving manuscripts of the text); D.K. Bolton, “The Study of the Consolation of Philosophy in Anglo-Saxon England”, Archives d’histoire doctrinale et Littéraire du Moyen Âge 44 (1977):33-78, on 34; Jacqueline Beaumont, “The Latin Tradition of De Consolatione Philosophiae”, in Boethius: His Life, Thought and Influence, 278-305, on 279; Stephen Varvis, The “Consolation” of Boethius: An Analytical Inquiry into His Intellectual Processes and Goals (San Francisco: Mellen Research University Press, 1991), 64; Lodi Nauta, “The ‘Glosa’ as Instrument for the Development of Natural Philosophy: William of Conches’ Commentary on Boethius”, in Boethius in the Middle Ages: Latin and Vernacular Traditions of the Consolatio Philosophiae, eds. Maarten J.F.M. Hoenen and Lodi Nauta (Leiden, New York, Köln: Brill, 1997), 3-39, on 9; Winthrop Wetherbee, “The Consolation and Medieval Literature”, in The Cambridge Companion to Boethius, ed. John Marenbon (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 279-302 on 279.

[16] An attempt at cataloguing the manuscripts is the continuing edition of Codices Boethiani: A Conspectus of the Works of Boethius. The first volume appeared in 1995 (manuscripts in the Great Britain and the Republic of Ireland), with the second (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland) and third (Italy and the Vatican City) in 2001. See also G.M. Cropp, “Les Manuscripts du Livre de Boece de Consolacion”, Revue d’histoire des texts, 12-13 (1982-3), 263-352; and a list of manuscripts in Medieval French in Richard A. Dwyer, Boethian Fictions: Narratives in the Medieval French Versions of the Consolatio Philosophiae (Cambridge, Mass,: The Medieval Academy of America, 1976), 129-131. The common impact of Boethius in general is also described in Howard R. Patch, The Tradition of Boethius: A Study of His Importance in Medieval Culture (New York: Oxford University Press, 1935); John Marenbon, Boethius (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), 164-182 (section “Boethius’s Influence in the Middle Ages”).

[17]The text was so widespread, that a complete history of it became a very complicated task. Thus, there are many works on the problem, but none can be regarded as comprehensive.  See bibliography to 1967 in Courcelle, La Consolation de Philosophie dans la Tradition Littéraire, 383-402. Bibliography to 1992: N. H. Kaylor Jr., The Medieval Consolation of Philosophy. An Annotated Bibliography (New York, 1992). Bibliography to 1997: Maarten J.F.M. Hoenen and Lodi Nauta, eds., Boethius in the Middle Ages, 327-358; Jacqueline Beaumont, “The Latin Tradition of De Consolatione Philosophiae”, 278-305.

[18]Friedrich Karl Freytag, ed. and trasl. Trost der Philosophie aus dem Lateinischen des Boethius mit Anmerkungen und Nachrichten die Geschichte des Originals und das Leben des Verfassers betreffend (Riga, 1794), 32-38; A. van de Vyver, “Les Traductions du De consolatione philosophiae de Boèce en littérature compraée”, Humanisme et Renaissance 6 (1939): 247-73; V.L. Dedek-Héry, “Boethius’ De Consolatione by Jean de Meun”, Medieval Studies 14 (1952): 165-275; Barnet Kottler, “The Vulgate Tradition of the Consolatio Philosophiae in the Fourteenth Century”, Medieval Studies 17 (1955): 209-214; F. Anne Payne, King Alfred and Boethius (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1969); idem, Chaucer and Menippean Satire (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1981); Dwyer, Boethian Fictions; Palmer, “Latin and Vernacular”, 362-409; idem, “The German Boethius Translation Printed in 1473 in its Historical Context, ” in Boethius in the Middle Ages, 287-302; Tim William Machan, Techniques of Translation: Chaucer’s Boece (Norman, Oklahoma: Pilgrim Books, 1985); J.K. Atkinson and G.M. Cropp, “Trois Traductions de la Consolatio Philosophiae de Boèce”, Romania 106 (1985): 198-232; A.J.Minnis, ed., The Medieval Boethius: Studies in the Vernacular Translations of De Consolatione Philosophiae (Cambridge: Brewer, 1987); A.J. Minnis, ed., Chaucer’s ‘Boece’ and the Medieval Tradition of Boethius (Cambridge: Brewer, 1993); Mariken Goris and Wilma Wissink, “The Medieval Dutch Tradition of Boethius’ Consolatio Philosophiae”, in Boethius in the Middle Ages, 121-165; Ian Johnson, “Placing Walton’s Boethius”, in Boethius in the Middle Ages, 217-242; Glynnis M. Cropp, “The Medieval French Tradition”, in Boethius in the Middle Ages, 243-265; idem, “Boethius in Translation in Medieval Europe”, in Übersetzung: Ein internationales Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung, eds. Harald Kittel, Juliane House and Brigitte Schultze (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2007), vol. 2, 1329-1337 (a brief and clear summary of the medieval European translations); Thomas Ricklin, “…Quello non conosciuto da molti libro di Boezio Hinweise zur Consolatio Philosophiae in Norditalien”, in Boethius in the Middle Ages, 267-286; Stephan Müller, “Boethius im Klassenzimmer. Die Bearbeitung der Consolatio Philosophiae durch Notker den Deutschen”, in Boethius Christianus, 333-353.

[19] Palmer, “Latin and Vernacular”, 362-63.

[20] Palmer, “Latin and Vernacular”, 363, 380-81; idem, “The German Boethius Translation Printed in 1473 in its Historical Context”, in Boethius in the Middle Ages, 295; R. Black and G. Pomaro, Boethius’ ‘Consolation of Philosophy’ in Italian Medieval and Renaissance Education: Schoolbooks and their glosses in Florentine manuscripts (Florence: Sismel, 2000); Lodi Nauta, “A Humanist Reading of Boethius’ Consolatio Philosophiae: The Commentary by Murmellius and Agricola (1514)”, in Between Demonstration and Imagination: Essays in the History of Science and Philosophy Presented to John D. North, edited by Lodi Nauta and Arjo Vanderjagt (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 313-338 (author shows affinity between these commentaries to the glosses of Italian schoolboys and places it in the context of teaching practice in the Renaissance).

[21] Courcelle, La Consolation de Philosophie dans la Tradition Littéraire, 177-184; Michael A. Means, The Consolatio Genre in Medieval English Literature (Gainsville: University of Florida Press, 1972); Alastair Minnis, “Aspects of the Medieval French and English Traditions of the De Consolatione Philosophiae”, in Boethius: His Life, Thought and Influence, 312-61 (mostly on Jean de Meun, Geoffrey Chaucer, John Walton); G.M. Cropp, “Les Manuscripts du Livre de Boece de Consolacion”, Revue d’histoire des texts, 12-13 (1982-3), 263-352; Winthrop Wetherbee, “The Consolation and Medieval Literature”, in The Cambridge Companion to Boethius, 279-302; Thom Mertens, “Consolation in Late Medieval Dutch Literature”, in Boethius in the Middle Ages, 105-120; Thomas Ricklin, “…Quello non conosciuto da molti libro di Boezio Hinweise zur Consolatio Philosophiae in Norditalien”, in Boethius in the Middle Ages, 267-286.

[22] Diane K. Bolton, “Remigian Commentaries on the Consolation of Philosophy and their Sources”, Traditio 33 (1977): 381-94; Courcelle, La Consolation de Philosophie dans la Tradition Littéraire, 239-332; Beaumont, “The Latin Tradition of De Consolatione Philosophiae”,, 278-305; Minnis, “Aspects of the Medieval French and English Traditions”, 312-61; Rolf Bergmann and Stefanie Stricker-Bamberg, “Die althochdeutschen Boethiusglossen: Ansätze zur einer Überliferungstzpologie” Amsterdamer Beiträge zur Alteren Germanistik 43-44 (1995): 13-47; Nauta, “The Consolation: the Latin Commentary Tradition, 800-1700”, in The Cambridge Companion to Boethius, 255-278; idem, “Platonic and Cartesian Philosophy in the Commentary on Boethius’ Consolatio Philosophiae by Pierre Cally”, British Journal for the History of Philosophy 4 (1996): 79-100 ; idem, “The ‘Glossa’ as Instrument for the Development of Natural Philosophy. William of Conches’ Commentary on Boethius” and “The Scholastic Context of the Boethius Commentary by Nicholas Trevet”, in Boethius in the Middle Ages, 3-39, 41-67; idem, “‘Magis sit Platonicus quam Aristotelicus’: Interpretations of Boethius’s Platonism in the Consolatio Philosophiae from the Twelfth to Seventeenth Century”, in The Platonic Tradition in the Middle Ages: A Doxographic Approach, eds. S. Gersh and M. Hoenen (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2002), 165-204; idem, “A Humanist Reading of Boethius’s Consolatio Philosophiae: The Commentary by Murmellius and Agricola (1514)”, in Between Demonstration and Imagination, 313-338; Marguerite Chappuis, “La traité de Pierre d’Ailly sur la Consolation de Boèce, question 2. Étude préliminaire”, in Boethius in the Middle Ages, 69-86; Maarten J.F. Hoenen, “The Transition of Academic Knowledge: Scholasticism in the Ghent Boethius (1485) and Other Commentaries on the Consolatio”, in Boethius in the Middle Ages, pp. 167-214.

[23] Anthony Grafton, “Epilogue: Boethius in the Renaissance”, in Boethius: His Life, Thought and Influence, 410-415; Varvis, The “Consolation of Boethius”, 117-125 (here Varvis specially proves that Lorenzo Valla misunderstands Consolatio, but he also earlier described Dante’s quite different attitude towards Boethius); Nauta, “A Humanist Reading of Boethius’ Consolatio Philosophiae, 313-338 (author emphasised role of Boethius in the education of that period); idem, “The Consolation: the Latin Commentary Tradition, 800-1700”, 255-278 (the humanistic nature of some “humanistic commentaries” might be questioned, because they are completely rooted in medieval tradition, but the main changes in the attitude to Boethius are expressed very vividly, clearly and accurately); Max Reinhart, “De Consolatione Philosophiae in Seventeenth-century Germany: Translation and Reception”, Daphnis 21:1 (1992): 65-94, on 67-68 (based on Anthony Grafton, but with suggestive additions).

[24] Reinhart, “De Consolatione Philosophiae in Seventeenth-century Germany”, 65-94.

[25] Reinhart, “De Consolatione Philosophiae in Seventeenth-century Germany”, 69.

[26] On the translation of De Consolatione by von Rosenroth and van Helmont see the article of Reinhart and Allison P. Coudert, The Impact of the Kabbalah in the Seventeenth Century (Leiden, Boston and Köln: Brill, 1999), 58-59 (on translation in general), 102 (the world as a prison, cf. below Andreae’s image of the dungeon), 140-141 (female figure on the frontispiece of Cabbala Denudata resembles Boethius’ Lady Philosophy); Kaminski, “Hellwig-Vallinus-van Helmont / Knorr von Rosenroth”, in Boethius Christianus, 261-301 Van Helmont (formally a Catholic) translated verses, while von Rosenroth (formally a Protestant) translated prose.

[27] On Andreae’s contribution to the development of secret societies: Richard van Dülmen, Die Utopie einer christlichen Gesellschaft: Johann Valentin Andreae (1586-1654) (Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog, 1978); Donald D. Dickson, “Johannes Saubert, Johann Valentin Andreae and the Unio Christiana”, German Life and Letters 49:1 (January 1996): 18-31. A wider discussion of the development of the societies, including secret organisations, appears in Dülmen’s Die Gesellschaft der Aufklärer: Zur bürgerlichen Emanzipation und aufklärerischen Kultur in Deutschland (Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag, 1986). The book was translated into English by Anthony Williams under the title: The Society of the Enlightenment: The Rise of the Middle Class and Enlightenment Culture in Germany (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 1992). Here van Dülmen does not discuss the roots and development of the Rosicrucians, who are only slightly mentioned in different contexts; however, van Dülmen scrupulously studies Sprachgesellschaften.

[28] Kaminski, “Hellwig-Vallinus-van Helmont / Knorr von Rosenroth”,  261-301.

[29] A classic study, albeit by no means a comprehensive one, is Courcelle, La Consolation de Philosophie dans la Tradition, pp. 233-238 and pictures without pagination.

[30] H.F. Stewart, Boethius: An Essay (Edinburgh: Blackwood, 1891), 76; Henry Chadwick, Boethius: The Consolations of Music, Logic, Theology, and Philosophy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981), 223-224 (names some serious, non-satiric works, written in that style in addition to the commonly noted Martianus Capella); Varvis, The “Consolation of Boethius”, 4, n. 5 (slight mention); Reinhart, “De Consolatione Philosophiae in Seventeenth-century Germany, 66 (a brief summary); P.G. Walsh, “Introduction”, to Boethius, The Consolation of Philosophy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999), xxxvii-xli. Klinger discussed the problem in detail, emphasising Boethius’ mixed inspiration, including Menippean satire, probably adopted through Fulgentius: Fritz Klingner, De Boethii Consolatione Philosophiae (Berlin: Weidmann, 1921; repr.: Zurich-Dublin: Weidmann, 1966), 112-118; for even more detail on the style: Courcelle, La Consolation de Philosophie dans la Tradition Littéraire, 17-28; frequently cited work, specially dedicated to literary form of the text: Anna Crabbe, “Literary Design in the De Consolatione Philosophiae” In Boethius: His Life, Thought and Influence, 237-277, see esp. pp. 238, 264 (n. 12-13); for a thorough discussion on the stylistic tradition with analysis of the metric of verses, see Joachim Gruber, Kommentar zu Boethius De Consolatione Philosophiae (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1978), pp. 16-19; poetry is specially studied in Helga Scheible,  Die Gedichte in der ‘Consolatio Philosophiae’ des Boethius (Heidelberg: Winter, 1972).  Joel Relihan is the main partisan of the idea that De Consolatio is not simply structured as a Menippean satire, but that it is a satiric work, full of humour. His main work to date is The Prisoner’s Philosophy: Life and Death in Boethius’s Consolation (Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 2007), preceded by his “Old Comedy, Menippean Satire, and Philosophy’s Tattered Robes in Boethius’ Consolation”, Illinois Classical Studies 15 (1990): 183-194; the same idea was also expressed in Anne Payne, Chaucer and Menippean Satire (Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1981); Ann W. Astell describes the style of De consolatione as “prosimetrical epic imitations in the form of Menippean satire in her Job, Boethius, and Epic Truth (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1994), 16; for a long but lucid summary of the debate on the description of the style of Consolation as Menippean Satire, see Danuta Shanzer, “Interpreting the Consolation”, in The Cambridge Companion to Boethius, 228-254 See also resent article: Antonio Donato, “Boethius’s Consolation of Philosophy and the Greco-Roman Consolatory Tradition”, Traditio 67 (2012):1-42. On the genre in general, see H.K. Riikonen, “Menippean Satire as a Literary Genre”, Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 83 (1987), 9-36; Northrop Frye, Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1971), 308-314; Joel C. Relihan, Ancient Menippean Satire (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1993); idem, “Menippus from Antiquity to the Renaissance”, in The Cynics: The Cynic Movement in Antiquity and Its Legacy, eds. R. Bracht Branham and Marie-Odile Goulet-Cazé (Berkley: University of California Press, 1996), 265-93; Peter Dronke, Verse with Prose from Petronius to Dante: The Art and Scope of the Mixed Form (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1994); Bernhard Pabst, Prosimetrum: Tradition und Wandel einer Literaturform zwischen Spätantike und Spätmittelalter, 2 vols. (Cologne: Böhlau, 1994), criticism of Joel Relihan’s interpretation of Boethian style on vol. 1, 3-4; W. Scott Blanchard, Scholar’s Bedlam: Menippean Satire in the Renaissance (Lewisburg, Pa.: Bucknell University Press, 1995).

[31] Thomas Willard, “Andreae’s ludibrium: Menippean Satire in the Chymische Hochzeit”, in Laughter in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Times, 767-787. Peuckert mentions it briefly: Will Erich Peuckert, Die Rosenkreutzer: Zur Geschichte einer Reformation (Jena: Eugen Diederichs Verlag, 1928), 97-98; Frey-Jaun, Die Berufung des Türhüters, 167-189 (wideranging discussion of humour, the level of earnestness and Manippean style in the Hochzeit).

[32] Willard, “Andreae’s ludibrium: Menippean Satire in the Chymische Hochzeit”, 779.

[33] Howard D. Weinbrot, Menippus: From Antiquity to the Eighteenth Century (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2005), 23-111.

[34] Certainly, the irony might be supposed in both texts, because they are written in the form of Menippean comedy. But there is no need to refer repeatedly to such possibility. In our case the plot itself is more important than its interpretations.

[35] The Hochzeit consists of seven parts (days). The material in the article is arranged accordingly to enhance the usage of the pieces of our text as commentary to the Hochzeit.

[36] It was not a simple task to choose a source for quotations. There are many editions of the book, both old and new. There is no text, which might without hesitation be considered primary. In 1616 there were four editions of the book. Two of them were published by Lazarius Zetzner, and they contain 146 pages. Another was published by his heirs in the same year, of 143 pages. The fourth edition is of an unknown publisher. See Kienast, Johann Valentin Andreae, 152-153; Montgomery, Cross and Cricible, vol. 2, 257-259; Gilly, Cimelia Rhodostaurotica, 82. German citations and pagination according the Strasbourg edition, 1616 (with 143 pages), 3 (hereafter Hochzeit). For English pagination and quotations the translation of E. Foxcroft (London: A. Sowle, 1690) was used: 3-4 (hereafter Wedding). As the needed page in English source of quotations is much easier to detect, than in German, priority was bestowed to the English text, it goes first.

[37] The Latin text cited after: Boethivs, De Consolatione Philosophiae. Opvscvla Theologica, edited by Claudio Moreschini (Monachii, Lipsiae: Saur, 2000), 4 (Prose I, 1). Below it will be referred as De Consolatione. There are many English translation of the text. They all have advantages and disadvantages. The source of the English quotations in our text is mostly an old, but very fine translation of H. R. James (London: Routledge, 1901), 5 (hereafter Consolation). Sometimes the English version of poetic pieces is too far from the original Latin text. In these cases we applied prose translations of poetry, made by Richard H. Green and edited by Douglas C. Langston (New York and London: W.W. Norton, 2010; hereafter Consolation II). Here the meaning is more close to the original, but this translation does not follow the stylistic features of De Consolatione. The reader, in turn, may easily find a relevant quotation in any other translation, since we refer in our main text to the proper section of the book. Such situation is a reason of the order of the quotations – first, the Latin text and, after, the English translation.

[38] Consolation, 5-6; De Consolatione, 5.

[39] Hochzeit, 4; Wedding, 4.

[40] Consolation, 5-6; De Consolatione, 5.

[41] Hochzeit, 3-4; Wedding, 4. It should be noted that a woman holding a star in her hand is printed on the last page of the first edition of Dee’s Monas (1654). This fact deserves at least attention, but is beyond the scope of our research.

[42] Consolation, 6; De Consolatione, 5.

[43] Hochzeit, 4; Wedding, 4.

[44] Consolation, 7; De Consolatione, 7.

[45] Hochzeit, 5; Wedding, 6.

[46] Hochzeit, 5; Wedding, 6.

[47] For discussion of Andereae’s direct or indirect (through Heinrich Khunrath) adaptation of the symbol, see Susanna Akerman, Rose Cross Over the Baltic, 30. Andreae could be unaware of Dee’s interpretation of the symbol. However, its graphical representation clearly shows the union of the Sun and Moon. Thus, even without any knowledge of Dee’s text, Andreae certainly can interpret this symbol in a very close manner to that of Dee.

[48] The classical summary of the evidence for the chemical marriage, represented as union of the Sun and Moon is: Carl Gustav Jung, Mysterium Coniunctionis: An Inquiry into the Separation and Synthesis of Psychic Opposites in Alchemy (Zürich: Rascher, 1956). This book was many times reissued. Jung was inspired by Herbet Silberer’s Problems of Mysticism and Its Symbolism.  Although Jung and Silberer are not historians and they applied alchemical texts for their psychoanalytical purposes, the facts compiled by them are of great value. The bibliography of the long discussion around Jung’s role in the study of alchemy with information on its many supporters and critics deserves much more attention than a brief reference. A brief summary might be found in: Tilton, The Quest for the Phoenix, 1-34.

[49] Hochzeit, 5-6; Wedding, 6-7.

[50] Consolation, 7; De Consolatione, 7.

[51] Hochzeit, 6-7; Wedding, 7-9.

[52] Consolation, 9; De Consolatione, 8.

[53] Hochzeit, 7-13; Wedding, 9-17.

[54] Consolation, 13; De Consolatione, 11.

[55] A curious fact – Andreae’s special work on the Rosicrucian question bears the name The Tower of Babel – Turris Babel sive Judiciorum de Fraternitate Rosaceae Crucis Chaos (Argentorati: Zetzner, 1619).

[56] Consolation, 14-21; De Consolatione, 11-18.

[57] Consolation, 11-12; De Consolatione, 10.

[58] Hochzeit, 8; Wedding, 10.

[59] Consolation, 11; De Consolatione, 9.

[60] Hochzeit, 10; Wedding, 13.

[61] Consolation, 21-23; De Consolatione, 18-20.

[62] Consolation, 55-56; De Consolatione, 55-56.

[63] Hochzeit, 14ff.; Wedding, 19ff.

[64] Consolation, 24; De Consolatione, 20.

[65] The numerous examples deserve a special study. Let us give only one instance: One of four ways is that of matter, which clearly stands for the alchemical perfection of metals.

[66] Consolation, 73; De Consolatione, 59-60. H.R. James translates the word “beatitudiness” as “happiness”. But it seems that “beatitude” is better in this context.

[67]Consolation II, 14; De Consolatione, 23.

[68] Hochzeit, 19-23; Wedding, 26-31.

[69] Kienast interprets the lamps of Virgo Lucifera as stars, without supposing that Virgo Lucifera herself may signify Venus. See: Kienast, Johann Valentin Andreae und die vier echten Rosekreutzer Schriften, 47. See also section 10 below.

[70] Consolation, 22; De Consolatione, 19.

[71] Consolation II, 34; De Consolatione, 59.

[72] Hochzeit, 25; Wedding, 32-33.

[73] Hochzeit, 25; Wedding, 33.

[74] Consolation, 27-29; De Consolatione, 23-25. Book V of De Consolatione is completely dedicated to the discussion of God’s providence, but in this particular context it is unimportant. In this peculiar case we need a discussion of the existence of providence, rather than debate on its essence.

[75] Hochzeit, 26ff.; Wedding, 34ff.

[76] Consolation, 29; De Consolatione, 25.

[77] The “ancient” instead of “old” appears in the English translation of Hochzeit.

[78] Hochzeit, 34-35; Wedding, 44-45.

[79] Consolation II, 16; De Consolatione, 26.

[80] Hochzeit, 43; Wedding, 56-57.

[81] Book II of De consolatione had a great impact on the concept of fortune in European culture throughout the Middle Ages. See: Courcelle, La Consolation de Philosophie dans la Tradition Littéraire, 101-158; Jerold C. Frakes, The Fate of Fortune in the Early Middle Ages: The Boethian Tradition (Leiden, New York, København, Köln: Brill, 1988).

[82] Hochzeit, 48; Wedding, 64.

[83] Hochzeit, 38-39; Wedding, 49-51.

[84] Consolation, 38; De Consolatione, 32.

[85] Hochzeit, 38; Wedding, 51.

[86] Hochzeit, 39; Wedding, 52.

[87] Consolation, 42; De Consolatione, 36.

[88] Hochzeit, 41; Wedding, 54.

[89] Hochzeit, 49-50; Wedding, 66.

[90] Consolation, 76-77; De Consolatione, 62-63.

[91] Hochzeit, 49; Wedding, 65.

[92] Consolation, 59; De Consolatione, 50.

[93] Hochzeit, 73; Wedding, 98. The English translation of the originally Latin inscription is taken from Montgomery, Cross and Crucible, vol. 2, 389.

[94] Hochzeit, 83; Wedding, 113.

[95] Hochzeit, 91-92; Wedding, 122-123.

[96] Hochzeit, 95; Wedding, 126.

[97] Consolation, 108-109; De Consolatione, 86.

[98] Hochzeit, 96; Wedding, 128.

[99] Hochzeit, 98; Wedding, 130.

[100] Consolation, 123; De Consolatione, 98.

[101] Hochzeit, 99-101; Wedding, 132-34.

[102] Hochzeit, 93-94; Wedding, 125.

[103] Hochzeit, 101-102; Wedding, 135.

[104] Hochzeit, 104; Wedding, 138.

[105] See Prose IV, 3 and 4.

[106] Hochzeit, 102; Wedding, 134-35.

[107] Hochzeit, 106; Wedding, 141.

[108] Consolation, 92; De Consolatione, 74.

[109] Hochzeit, 107-8; Wedding, 143-44.

[110] Consolation, 159; De Consolatione, 125-126. The entire section, Prose IV, 6 is relevant, in fact; cf. also next section (Prose IV, 7).

[111] Hochzeit, 16-18; Wedding, 21-25.

[112] Consolation, 164-65; De Consolatione, 130.

[113] Hochzeit, 126; Wedding, 204.

[114] Ibid.

[115] Consolation, 174-75; De Consolatione, 136-37.

[116] Hochzeit, 138; Wedding, 219.

[117] Consolation, 163; De Consolatione, 129.

[118] Hochzeit, 135-36; Wedding, 216.

[119] The problem of free will was among the central issues in the split between Lutherans and Catholics. It starts from the debate between Martin Luther (1483-1546) and Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam (c. 1466-1536). See E. Gordon Rupp and Philip S. Watson, ed., Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation (Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster Press, 1969); C.P. Burger “Erasmus’ Auseinandersetzung mit Augustin im Streit mit Luther”, in Auctoritas Patrum. Zum Rezeption der Kirchenväter im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert, eds. Leif Grane, Alfred Schindler and Markus Wriedt (Manz: Philipp von Zabern, 1993), 1-13.

[120] For this interpretation with arguments and bibliography, see Stanley W. Beeler, The Invisible College: A Study of the Three Original Rosicrucian Texts (New York: AMS Press, 1991), 20. Cf. Akerman, Rose Cross Over the Baltic, 72.

[121] Consolation, 177-78; De Consolatione, 139.

[122] Frey-Jaun, Die Berufung des Türhüters, 45-46, 48, 142-144 (on two Venuses), pp. 43-48 (cf. 79-80, 85), 62-63 (on the impact of Boccaccio and Dante). Frey-Jaun proves that the main source of the narrative concerning Venus in the Hochzeit is Hyperotomachia Poliphili by Francesco Colonna, which was produced on the base of Boccaccio’s Ameto and presents two images of Venus. See Frey-Jaun, Die Berufung des Türhüters, 48-51, 142-144. On two Venuses see also Robert Hollander, Boccaccio’s Two Venuses (New York: Columbia University Press, 1977).

[123] Kienast, Johann Valentin Andreae, 79. Frey-Jaun also develops this idea.

[124] It was previously noted that the term has different interpretations.