Like most people we did not at first think of Botticelli in occult or esoteric terms. But recent scholars of the Renaissance—Edgar Wind, for instance, and Frances Yates—have effectively argued an esoteric predisposition in him, and we deferred to the persuasiveness of their conclusions. Botticelli does seem to have been an "esotericist," and the greater part of his work reflects an embodiment of esoteric principles. The earliest known deck of tarot cards is ascribed to either Botticelli or his tutor, Mantegna. And the famous painting "Primavera" is, among many other things, an elaboration on the theme of Arcadia and the esoteric "underground stream."
LEONARDO DA VINCI. Born in 1452, Leonardo was well acquainted with Botticelli—in large part through their joint apprenticeship to Verrocchio. Like Botticelli he was patronized by the Medicis, the Estes, and the Gonzagas. He was also patronized by Ludovico Sforza, son of Francesco Sforza, one of René d’Anjou’s closest friends and an original member of the Order of the Crescent.
Leonardo’s esoteric interests and orientation, like Botticelli’s, have by now been well established. Frances Yates, in conversation with one of our researchers, described him as an early Rosicrucian. But in Leonardo’s case esoterica would appear to extend even further than in Botticelli’s. Even Vasari, his biographer and contemporary, describes him as being of "an heretical cast of mind." What precisely might have constituted his heresy remains unclear. During the last few years, however, certain authorities have ascribed to him an ancient heretical belief that Jesus had a twin. Certainly there is evidence for this contention in a cartoon sketch called "The Virgin with Saint John the Baptist and Saint Anne," and in the famous "Last Supper"—where there are, in fact, two virtually identical Christs. But there is no indication of whether the doctrine of Jesus’ twin is to be taken literally or symbolically.
Between 1515 and 1517 Leonardo, as a military engineer, was attached to the army of Charles de Montpensier and de Bourbon, constable of France, viceroy of Languedoc and Milan. In 1518 he established himself at the Château of Cloux, and again seems to have been in proximity to the constable, who was living nearby at Amboise.
CONNETABLE DE BOURBON. Charles de Montpensier and de Bourbon, duke of Châtellerault, constable of France, was probably the single most powerful lord in France at the beginning of the sixteenth century. Born in 1490, he was the son of Claire de Gonzaga; and his sister married the duke of Lorraine, grandson of Iolande de Bar and great-grandson of René d’Anjou. Among Charles’s personal entourage was one Jean de Joyeuse, who, through marriage, had become lord of Couiza, Rennes-le-Château, and Arques, near where the tomb identical to the one in Poussin’s painting stands.
As viceroy of Milan, Charles was in contact with Leonardo da Vinci, and this contact seems to have continued later, near Amboise. In 1521, however, Charles incurred the displeasure of François I of France, and was forced to abandon his estates and flee the country incognito. He found a refuge with Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, and became a commander of the imperial army. In this capacity he defeated and captured the French king at the Battle of Pavia in 1525. Two years later he died while besieging Rome.
FERDINAND DE GONZAGUE. Ferrante de Gonzaga, as he is more commonly known, was born in 1507, the son of the duke of Mantua and of Isabella d’Este—one of Leonardo’s most zealous patrons. His primary title was count of Guastalla. In 1527 he assisted his cousin, Charles de Montpensier and de Bourbon, in the latter’s military operations. Some years later he seems to have been covertly in league with François de Lorraine, duke of Guise, who came within a hair’s breadth of seizing the French throne. Like virtually all the Gonzagas of Mantua, Ferrante was an assiduous devotee of esoteric thought.
He also confronted us with the only fragment of ostensibly wrong information we encountered in the whole of the "Prieuré documents." According to the list of Sion’s grand masters in the Dossiers secrets, Ferrante presided over the order until his death in 1575. According to independent sources, however, he is believed to have died near Brussels in 1557. The circumstances surrounding his death are extremely vague, and it is possible, of course, that he did not die in 1557 at all but merely went to ground. On the other hand, the date in the Dossiers secrets may be a genuine error. What is more, Ferrante had a son, César, who did die in 1575 and who may somewhow have become confused with his father—deliberately or otherwise. The point is that we found no other such apparently glaring inaccuracies in the "Prieuré documents" even when the subject was far more obscure and susceptible to contradiction from independent sources. It seemed almost inconceivable to us that an error in this particular instance could occur through mere carelessness or oversight. On the contrary, it was almost as if the error, by so flagrantly confuting accepted accounts, was intended to convey something.
LOUIS DE NEVERS. Louis, duke of Nevers, was, in fact, Louis de Gonzaga. Born in 1539, he was the nephew of Ferrante de Gonzaga, his predecessor on the list of Sion’s grand masters. His brother married into the Hapsburg family and his daughter married the duke of Longueville, a title formerly held by Blanche d’Evreux; his great-niece married the duke of Lorraine and devoted considerable interest to the old sacred site of Sion-Vaudémont. In 1622 she had a special cross installed there, and in 1627 a religious house and school were founded.
During the Wars of Religion Louis de Nevers was closely allied to the house of Lorraine and its cadet branch, the house of Guise—who effectively exterminated the old Valois dynasty of France and nearly obtained the throne for themselves. In 1584, for example, Louis signed a treaty with the duke of Guise and the cardinal of Lorraine, pledging mutual opposition to Henri III of France. Like his colleagues, however, he became reconciled to Henri IV and served as superintendent of finances to the new monarch. While acting in this capacity he would have functioned in close concert with Robert Fludd’s father. Sir Thomas Fludd was treasurer of the military contingent sent by Elizabeth I of England to support the French king.
Louis de Nevers, like all the Gonzagas, was deeply versed in esoteric tradition and is believed to have associated with Giordano Bruno—who, according to Frances Yates, was involved in certain secret Hermetic societies that anticipated the Rosicrucians. In 1582, for example, Louis was in England, consorting with Sir Philip Sidney (author of Arcadia), and John Dee, the foremost English esotericist of his age. A year later Bruno visited Oxford and consorted with the same people and, Frances Yates maintains, furthered the activities of their clandestine organization.
ROBERT FLUDD. Born in 1574, Robert Fludd inherited John Dee’s mantle as England’s leading exponent of esoteric thought. He wrote and published prolifically on a broad spectrum of esoteric subjects and developed one of the most comprehensive formulations of Hermetic philosophy ever written. Frances Yates suggests that some of his work may be "the Seal or secret code of a Hermetic sect or society." Although Fludd himself never claimed to be a member of the Rosicrucians then causing a sensation on the continent, he warmly endorsed them, declaring that the "highest good" was the "Magia, Cabala and Alchymia of the Brothers of the Rosy Cross."
At the same time Fludd rose to an esteemed position in the London College of Physicians and his friends included William Harvey, who discovered the circulation of the blood. Fludd also enjoyed the favor of James I and Charles I, both of whom granted him rent from lands in Suffolk. He was among the conclave of scholars who presided over the translation of the King James Bible.
Fludd’s father had been associated with Louis de Nevers. Fludd himself was educated at Oxford, where John Dee and Sir Philip Sidney seem to have established an enclave of esoteric interests a few years before. Between 1596 and 1602. Fludd traveled extensively in Europe, consorting with many people subsequently involved in the Rosicrucian furor. Among these was one Janus Gruter, a close personal friend of Johann Valentin Andrea.
In 1602 Fludd received an interesting and, for our purposes, significant commission. He was specifically called to Marseilles to act as personal tutor to the sons of Henry of Lorraine, particu
larly Charles, the young duke of Guise. His association with Charles appears to have continued as late as 1620.
In 1610 Charles, duke of Guise, married Henriette-Catherine de Joyeuse. The latter’s possessions included Couiza, at the foot of the mountain on which Rennes-le-Château is situated. And they in- cluded Arques, site of the tomb identical to the tomb in Poussin’s painting. Some twenty years later, in 1631, the duke of Guise, after conspiring against the French throne, went into voluntary exile in Italy, where he was soon joined by his wife. In 1640 he died. But his wife was not allowed to return to France until she consented to sell Couiza and Arques to the crown.2
JOHANN VALENTIN ANDREA. Andrea, the son of a Lutheran pastor and theologian, was born in 1586 in Württemberg, which bordered on Lorraine and the Palatinate of the Rhine. As early as 1610 he was traveling about Europe and was rumored to be a member of a secret society of Hermetic or esoteric initiates. In 1614 he was ordained deacon of a small town near Stuttgart and seems to have remained there, unscathed, through the turmoil of the Thirty Years War (1618-48) that followed.
ROBERT BOYLE. Robert Boyle was born in 1627, the youngest son of the earl of Cork. Later he would be offered a peerage of his own and decline it. He was educated at Eton, where his provost, Sir Henry Wotton, was closely connected with the Rosicrucian entourage of Frederick of the Palatinate.
In 1639 Boyle embarked on a prolonged European tour. He spent some time in Florence—where the Medicis, resisting papal pressures, continued to extend support for esotericists and scientists, including Galileo. And he passed twenty-one months in Geneva, where he acquired a number of esoteric interests, including demonology. During his sojourn in Geneva he obtained a work, "The Devil of Mascon," which he had translated by one Pierre du Moulin, who was to become a lifelong friend. Du Moulin’s father was personal chaplain to Catherine de Bar, wife of Henri de Lorraine, duke of Bar. Subsequently the elder du Moulin obtained the assiduous patronage of Henri de la Tour d’Auvergne, viscount of Turenne and duke of Bouillon.
On his return to England in 1645 Boyle immediately established contact with the circle of Samuel Hartlib, Andrea’s close friend and correspondent. In letters dated 1646 and 1647 he speaks repeatedly of the "Invisible College." He declares, for example, that "the cornerstones of the Invisible or (as they term themselves) the Philosophical College, do now and then honour me with their company."
By 1654 Boyle was at Oxford, where he consorted with John Wilkin, former chaplain to Frederick of the Palatinate. In 1660 Boyle was among the first public figures to offer allegiance to the newly restored Stuarts, and Charles II became patron of the Royal Society. In 1668 he established himself in London, living with his sister, who was related by marriage to John Dury, another friend and correspondent of Andrea. At his London premises Boyle received numerous distinguished visitors—including Cosimo III dé Medici, subsequently ruler of Florence and grand duke of Tuscany.
During these years Boyle’s two closest friends were Isaac Newton and John Locke. He is said to have taught Newton the secrets of alchemy. In any case the two of them met regularly to discuss the subject and study alchemical works. Locke, in the meantime, shortly after making Boyle’s acquaintance, embarked for a lengthy stay in the south of France. He is known to have made special visits to the graves of Nostradamus and René d’Anjou. He is known to have wandered in the vicinity of Toulouse, Carcassonne, Narbonne—and quite conceivably Rennes-le-Château. He is known to have associated with the duchess of Guise. He is known to have studied Inquisition reports on the Cathars as well as the history of the legends according to which the Magdalen brought the Holy Grail to Marseilles. In 1676 he visited the Magdalen’s alleged residence at Saint Baum.
While Locke explored the Languedoc, Boyle maintained a voluminous correspondence with the continent. Among his papers there are letters comprising half of a sustained exchange with an elusive and otherwise unknown individual in France—one Georges Pierre, quite possibly a pseudonym. These letters deal extensively with alchemy and alchemical experimentation. More important, however, they speak of Boyle’s membership in a secret Hermetic society— which also included the duke of Savoy and Pierre du Moulin.
Between 1675 and 1677 Boyle published two ambitious alchemical treatises—Incalescence of Quicksilver with Gold and A Historical Account of a Degradation of Gold. In 1689 he published an official statement declaring he could not receive visitors on certain days that he had set aside for alchemical experimentation. This experimentation, he wrote, was to He adds that he intends to speak as plainly as he can, "though the full and complete uses are not mentioned, partly because, in spite of my philanthropy, I was engaged to secrecy."4
comply with my former intention to leave a kind of Hermetic legacy to the studious disciples of that art and to deliver candidly in the annexed paper some processes, chemical and medical, that are less simple and plain than those barely luciferous ones I have been wont to affect and of a more difficult and elaborate kind than those I have hitherto published and more of a kind to the noblest Hermetic secrets or as Helmont styles them "arcana majora."
The "annexed paper" to which Boyle alludes was never found. It may well have passed into the hands of Locke or, more likely, Newton. On his death in 1691 Boyle entrusted all his other papers to these two confidants, as well as samples of a mysterious "red powder" that figured prominently in much of Boyle’s correspondence and in his alchemical experiments.
ISAAC NEWTON. Isaac Newton was born in Lincolnshire in 1642— descended from "ancient Scottish nobility," he insisted, although no one seems to have taken this claim very seriously. He was educated at Cambridge, elected to the Royal Society in 1672, and he made Boyle’s acquaintance for the first time the following year. In 1689-90 he became associated with John Locke and an elusive, enigmatic individual named Nicolas Fatio de Duillier. Descended from Genevan aristocracy, Fatio de Duillier seems to have wafted with cavalier insouciance through the Europe of his time. On occasion he appears to have worked as a spy, usually against Louis XIV of France. He also appears to have been on intimate terms with every important scientist of the age. And from the time of his appearance in England he was Newton’s single closest friend. For at least the next decade their two names were inextricably linked.
In 1696 Newton became warden of the Royal Mint and was subsequently instrumental in fixing the gold standard. In 1703 he was elected president of the Royal Society. Around this time he also became friendly with a young French Protestant refugee named Jean Desaguliers, who was one of the Royal Society’s two curators of experiments. In the years that followed Desaguliers became one of the leading figures in the astonishing proliferation of Freemasonry throughout Europe. He was associated with such leading Masonic figures as James Anderson, the Chevalier Ramsay, and Charles Radclyffe. And in 1731, as master of the Masonic lodge at The Hague, he presided over the initiation of the first European prince to become a member of "the craft." This prince was François, duke of Lorraine—who after his marriage to Maria Theresa of Austria became Holy Roman Emperor.
There is no record of Newton himself having been a Freemason. At the same time, however, he was a member of a semi-Masonic institution, the Gentleman’s Club of Spalding—which included such notables as Alexander Pope. Moreover, certain of his attitudes and works reflect interests shared by Masonic figures of the period. Like many Masonic authors, for example, he esteemed Noah more than Moses as the ultimate source of esoteric wisdom. As early as 1689 he had embarked on what he considered one of his most important works, a study of ancient monarchies. This work, The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended, attempted to establish the origins of the institution of kingship as well as the primacy of Israel over other cultures of antiquity. According to Newton ancient Judaism had been a repository of divine knowledge, which had subsequently been diluted, corrupted, and largely lost. Nevertheless, he believed that some of it had filtered down to Pythagoras, whose "music of the spheres" he regarded as a metaphor for the law of gravity. In his a
ttempt to formulate a precise scientific methodology for dating events in both Scripture and classical myth, he employed Jason’s quest for the Golden Fleece as a pivotal event; and like other Masonic and esoteric writers, he interpreted that quest as an alchemical metaphor. He also endeavored to discern Hermetic "correspondences" or correlations between music and architecture. And like many Masons he ascribed great significance to the configuration and dimensions of Solomon’s temple. The dimensions and configuration of the temple he believed to conceal alchemical formulas; and he believed the ancient ceremonies in the temple to have involved alchemical processes.
Such preoccupations on Newton’s part were something of a revelation to us. Certainly they do not concur with his image as it is promulgated in our own century—the image of the scientist who, once and for all, established the separation of natural philosophy from theology. In fact, however, Newton, more than any other scientist of his age, was steeped in Hermetic texts and, in his own attitudes, reflected Hermetic tradition. A deeply religious person, he was obsessed by the search for a divine unity and network of correspondences inherent in nature. This search led him into an exploration of sacred geometry and numerology—a study of the intrinsic properties of shape and number. By virtue of his association with Boyle, he was also a practicing alchemist—who in fact attributed a paramount importance to his alchemical work.5 In addition to personally annotated copies of the Rosicrucian manifestos, his library included more than a hundred alchemical works. One of these, a volume by Nicolas Flamel, he had laboriously copied in his own hand. Newton’s preoccupation with alchemy continued all his life. He maintained a voluminous and cryptic correspondence on the subject with Boyle, Locke, Fatio de Duillier, and others. One letter even has certain key words excised.
Holy Blood, Holy Grail Page 49
