of Thomas Vaughan is pretty clearly shown by the fact that it
is not corroborated in a single particular by any of the new facts about
him that have come to light since this probable date of its
composition.[36] The fabricator put Thomas Vaughan's birth-place in
Monmouth instead of Brecon, because he had never seen Dr. Grosart's
_Fuller Worthies_ Edition of Henry Vaughan. He makes no mention of any
of the facts contained in Sloane MS. 1741, because that MS. was still
unknown. And, most fatal of all, he puts Thomas Vaughan's birth in 1612
instead of 1621-2, because Foster's _Alumni Oxonienses_ being yet
unpublished, he was ignorant of the record of that date preserved in the
University Registers. But we can go a step further. We can confute him,
not only by pointing to the books he did not use, but by pointing to
those he did. It has already been shown that the ascription to Vaughan
of the English translation of Maier's _Themis Aurea_ is due to a
misunderstanding of a phrase used by Anthony a Wood. The _Athenae
Oxonienses_ then was one source of the compilation. Another was the
_Histoire de la Philosophie Hermetique_, written by Lenglet-Dufresnoy in
1742. Here is the proof. Miss Vaughan supports her statement as to the
birth-date in 1612 by a quotation from the _Introitus Apertus_, in which
the writer states it to have been composed "en l'an 1645 de notre salut,
et le trente-troisieme de mon age." This she professes to translate from
the _editio princeps_ published by Jean Lange in 1667. As a matter of
fact it is taken from the version given in Lenglet-Dufresnoy's book. And
Lenglet-Dufresnoy followed, not the edition of 1667, but the later
edition published by J. M. Faust at Frankfort in 1706. In this the words
are "trigesimo tertio," whereas in the _editio princeps_ they are
"vicesimo tertio," and in W. Cooper's English translation of 1669, "in
the 23rd year of my age," thus bringing the date of the birth of
Eirenaeus Philalethes not to 1612, but to 1622. The "legend of
Philalethes" need detain us no longer. Miss Vaughan's narrative is a
very insufficient basis for regarding the pious minister and mystic
which Thomas Vaughan appears to have been as a secret enemy of
Christianity and a worshipper of Lucifer.

But when the legend is set aside, there still remain certain questions
suggested by it which may be considered without much reference to the
statements of Miss Vaughan. Was Thomas Vaughan a Rosicrucian? And was
he,