dds: "This legend is not accepted by all the Elect Mages; there are
those who regard it as fabricated by my grandfather James of Boston, who
was, they believe, of Delaware origin, or, at any rate, a half-breed;
and they even assert that, in the desire to Anglicize himself, he
invented an entirely false genealogy, by way of justifying his change of
the Lennap name Waghan into Vaughan. Herein the opponents of the
Luciferian legend of Thomas Vaughan go too far" (p. 181).

[36] I have already pointed out that Miss Vaughan is quite possibly a
myth. But, if she exists, I do not see any reason to suppose that she
personally invented the "legend of Philalethes." It lies between Leo
Taxil and his friends in 1895, and the alleged founders of Palladism in
or about 1870, that is Albert Pike and Miss Vaughan's father and uncle.
And, so far as it goes, the ignorance shown in the legend of all books
published in the last twenty years is evidence for the earlier date, and
therefore, to some extent, for the actual existence of Luciferianism.

[37] _Cf._ A. E. Waite, _Real History of the Rosicrucians_, p. 274.

[38] The principal writings ascribed to Eirenaeus Philalethes are
_Introitus Apertus in Occlusum Regis Palatium_ (1667), _Tres Tractatus_
(1668), _Experimenta de Praeparatione Mercurii Sophici_ (1668), _Ripley
Revived_ (1678), _Enarratio Trium Gebri Medicinarum_ (1678). The works
of Eirenaeus Philoponos Philalethes (George Starkey?) are often
attributed to him in error. The B. M. Catalogue, s.vv. _Philaletha,
Philalethes_, is a mass of confusions. Lenglet-Dufresnoy, _Histoire de
la Philosophie Hermetique_ (iii. 261-266), gives a long list of printed
and manuscript works. Most of these he had probably never seen. He
probably took many items in his list from one in J. M. Faust's edition
of the _Introitus Apertus_ (Frankfort, 1706); and this, in its turn, was
based on what Eirenaeus Philalethes himself says he has written in the
preface to _Ripley Revived_. He there says, after naming other works:
"Two English Poems I wrote, declaring the whole secret, which are lost.
Also an Enchiridion of Experiments, together with a Diurnal of
Meditations, in which were many Philosophical receipts, declaring the
whole secret, with an Aenigma annexed; which also fell into such hands
which I conceive will never restore it. This last was written in
English." Can this Enchiridion and Diurnal be Sl. MS. 1741? I find no
"Aenigma." Can Starkey have stol