Adyar
Pamphlet No 90, June 1918
The Count de
Saint-Germain and H.P.B.-
Two Messengers of the White
Lodge
By H.S. Olcott
[Reprinted from The Theosophist July
1905]
Theosophical Publishing House - Adyar, Chennai (Madras)
India
To me,
one of the most picturesque, impressive and admirable characters in modern
history is the wonder-worker whose name heads this article. The world does not
see him as a recluse of the desert or the jungle, unwashed, wrinkled, hairy and
clothed in rags, living apart from his fellow men and devoid of human
sympathies; but as one who amid the splendour of the most brilliant European
courts, equalled the greatest of the personages who move across the canvas of
history. He towered above them all -- kings, nobles, philosophers, statesmen and
men of letters, in the majesty of his personal character, the nobility of his
ideals and motives, the consistency of his acts and the profundity of his
knowledge, not only of the mysteries of Nature, but also of the literature of
all peoples and epochs. By reading all I could find about him, including the
instructive articles of Mrs Cooper-Oakley in The Theosophical Review (Vol
21 and 22) I have come to love as well as to admire him; to love him as did
H.P.B. ; and for the same reason --- that he was a messenger and agent of the
White Lodge, accomplishing his mission with unselfish loyalty and doing all that
lay within man’s power to benefit others.
The
recent reading of a biographical memoir under the form of an historical romance,
of the famous “Souvenirs” of the Baron de Gleichen; of an interesting article in
Vol 6 of Le Lotus Bleu; of the article on the Count in the
Encyclopedia Britannica and other publications, has freshened up all my
memories of what I had heard about him, and, more important still, has persuaded
me of his identity with one of the most charming of the Unseen Personages who
stood behind the masque of H.P.B. during the writing of Isis Unveiled.
The more I think of it, the more fully am I persuaded of the truth of this
surmise.
Before
going into these details, however, it will be well just simply to say that one
day, in the eighteenth century, he appeared in France under the name above
given. It is said that he had taken it from an estate bought by him in the
Tyrol. Mrs Cooper-Oakley gives, on the authority of Mme D’Adhémar, a list of the
different names under which this maker of epochs had been known, from the year
1710 to 1822. I cite the following: Marquis de Montferrat, Comte Bellamarre,
Chevalier Schoening, Chevalier Weldon, Comte Soltikoff, Graf Tzarogy, Prinz
Ragoczy, and finally, Saint-Germain, Mrs Cooper-Oakley, with the help of
friends, made an industrious search in the libraries of the British Museum and
in those of several European kingdoms. She patiently collated from various
sources bits of history which go to identify the great Count with the personages
known under these different titles. But it is conceded by all who have written
about him that the real secret of his birth and nationality was never
discovered; all the labours of the police authorities of different countries
resulted only in failure. Another fact of great interest is that no crime nor
criminal intention nor deception was ever proved against him; his character was
unblemished, his aims always noble. Though living in luxury and seemingly
possessed of boundless wealth, no one could ever learn whence his money came; he
kept no bank account, received no cash remittances, enjoyed no pension from any
government, refused every offer of presents and benefits made him by King Louis
XV, and other sovereigns, and yet his generosity was princely. To the poor and
miserable, the sick and the oppressed, he was an incarnate Providence ; among
other public benefactions, he founded a hospital in Paris, and possibly others
elsewhere.
Grim, in
his celebrated “Correspondance Litteraire,” which is described by the
Encyc Brit, as “the most valuable of existing records of any important
literary period,” affirms that St- Germain was “the man of the best parts he had
ever seen”. He knew all languages, all history, all transcendental science; took
no present nor patronage, refused all offers of such, gave lavishly, founded
hospitals, and worked ever and always unflaggingly for the benefit of the race.
One would think that such a man might have been spared by the slanderer and
calumniator, yet he was not; while yet living and since his death (or
disappearance, rather) the vilest insults have been showered upon his memory.
Says the Encyc Brit, he was “a celebrated adventurer of the eighteenth
century who by the assertion of his discovery of some extraordinary secrets of
nature exercised considerable influence at several European Courts. . . .It was
commonly stated that he obtained his money from discharging the functions of spy
to one of the European Courts.”
The
identical opinion of him is echoed by Bouilferet in his Dictionnaire
d’Histoire et de Geographie, and by various other
writers.
We have
various descriptions of the personal appearance of Count St-Germain, and
although they differ somewhat in details, yet all describe him as a man in
radiant health, and of unflagging courtesy and good humour. His manners were the
perfection of refinement and grace. He seems to have been a remarkable linguist,
speaking fluently and usually without foreign accent the current languages of
Europe. One writer, signing himself Jean Léclaireur, says in an interesting
article on “Le Secret du Comte de Saint-Germain,” in the Lotus
Bleu, Vol VI, 314-319, that he was familiar with French, English, Italian,
Spanish, Portuguese, German, Russian, Danish, Swedish and many oriental
dialects. His accomplishments in this latter respect supply one of the points of
resemblance which are so striking between himself and H.P.B. For His Highness
the late Prince Emil de Sayn-Wittgenstein, A.D.C. to the Emperor Nicholas and an
early member of our Society, wrote me once that when he knew H.P.B. at Tiflis,
she was famed for her ability to speak most of the languages of the Caucasus —
Georgian, Mingrelian, Abhasian, etc., while we ourselves have seen her producing
literature of a superior class in Russian, French and English. But the more one
reads about Saint-Germain and knows about H.P.B. the more numerous and striking
are the resemblances between the two great occultists. Mrs Cooper-Oakley in her
careful compilation says (Theos. Rev Vol XXI, p 428): “It was almost
universally accorded that he had a charming grace and courtliness of manner. He
displayed, moreover, in society a great variety of gifts, played several musical
instruments excellently, and sometimes showed faculties and powers which
bordered on the mysterious and incomprehensible. For example, one day he had
dictated to him the first twenty verses of a poem, and wrote them simultaneously
with both hands on two separate sheets of paper -- no one present could
distinguish one sheet from the other.”
Mr.
Léclaireur, in the article above noticed, has summarized many points about Count
St-Germain which corroborate the foregoing and seem to be carefully compiled
from the literature of the subject. He says that: “His beauty was remarkable and
his manners splendid; he had an extraordinary talent for elocution, a marvelous
education and erudition. . . . An accomplished musician, he played on all
instruments, but was particularly fond of the violin; he made it vibrate so
divinely that two persons who heard him and afterwards the famous Italian
master, Paganini, placed the two artists on the same level.” Here we recall the
superb facility of H.P.B. as a pianist, her butterfly-like touch, her
improvisatorial faculty and her knowledge of technique. Baron Gleichen quotes
him as saying: “You do not know what you are talking about; only I can discuss
the matter, which I have exhausted, as I have music, which I abandoned because I
was unable to go any farther in it.” The Baron was invited to his house with the
ostensible object of examining some very valuable paintings, and the Baron says
that “he kept his word, for the paintings which he showed me had the character
of singularity or of perfection, which made them more interesting than many
pictures of the first rank, especially a holy family of Murillo which equalled
in beauty that of Raphael at Versailles; but he showed me much more than that,
viz., a quantity of gems, especially of diamonds, of surprising colour,
size, and perfection. I thought I was looking at the treasures of the Wonderful
Lamp. There were among others an opal of monstrous size and a white sapphire as
large as an egg, which paled by its brilliancy that of all the stones that I
placed beside it for comparison. I dare to profess to be a connoisseur in
jewels, and I declare that the eye could not discover the least reason to doubt
the fineness of these stones, the more so since they were not
mounted.”
Many
years ago my sister, Mrs Mitchell, feeling indignant at the base slanders that
were being circulated against H.P.B. and myself, and wishing to place on record
some of the facts that came under her own notice while occupying, with her
husband and children, a flat in the same building as ourselves, published in a
London journal an article in which the following incident among others is given:
“ One day she said she would show me some pretty things; and going to a small
chest of drawers that stood beneath one of the windows, she took from them many
pieces of superb jewelry; brooches, lockets, bracelets and rings, that were
ablaze with all kinds of precious stones, diamonds, rubies, sapphires, etc. I
held and examined them, but on asking to see them the next day I found only
empty drawers.” My sister thought they must have been worth a great many
thousands of dollars. Now as I happened to know that H.P.B. had no such
collection of precious stones nor even a small portion of them, my only possible
inference is that she had played on my sister’s sight one of those optical
illusions which she described as psychological tricks. I am inclined to believe
that St-Germain did the same to Baron Gleichen. True, these wonder workers can
at their pleasure turn such an illusion into a reality and make the gems solid
and permanent. Take, for instance, my “rose-ring” (see O.D.L., I 96) which she
first made to leap out of a rose which I was holding in my hand, and, eighteen
months later, while my sister held it, caused three small diamonds to be set in
the gold in the form of a triangle. Many persons in different countries have
seen this ring, and some have seen me write with it on glass, thus proving the
stones to be genuine diamonds. The ring is still in my possession, and during
the intervening thirty years has not changed its character at all. Moreover,
there are the cases of her duplication of a yellow diamond for Mrs Sinnett at
Simla, of sapphires for Mrs Carmichael and other friends at different places,
her making her mystic seal-ring, now in Mrs Besant’s possession, by rubbing
between her hands my own intaglio seal-ring; and the hybrid silver sugar-tongs,
and, first and last, many articles of metal and stone which, having been duly
described in my O.D.L., need not be here recapitulated. The reader will see that
the respective phenomena of St-Germain and H.P.B. complement and corroborate
each other, and that they go to show that among the branches of occult science
that are familiar to adepts and their advanced pupils, is to be included an
intimate knowledge of and control over the mineral kingdom. St-Germain told
somebody that he had learnt from an old Hindu Brahmin how to “revive” pure
carbon, that is to say to transmute it into diamond; and Kenneth Mackenzie is
quoted as saying (in his Royal Masonic Cyclopedia, p 644): “In 1780,
during his visit to the French ambassador to the Hague, he smashed with a hammer
a superb diamond which he had produced by alchemical means; the mate to it, also
made by him, he had sold to a jeweler, for the price of 5.500 louis
d’or.”
We have
nothing in any of these accounts going to show whether any of the gems made by
him remained solid or whether they dissolved back into the astral matter out of
which they had been composed, except in the specific cases where a gem had been
given to some individual, or in that where one had been sold to a jeweler. To me
it is unthinkable that he should have sold the diamond for the sake of raising
5,500 louis, for the fact of his having apparently unlimited command of
money shows that he could not have needed so small a sum.
We have
spoken above of the dissolution of a gem magically created. If the reader will
refer to O.D.L., I, 197 and 198, he will see that the first picture of
“Chevalier Louis,” precipitated by H.P.B. on a certain evening, had faded out by
the next morning, but that when she again caused it to appear, at Mr. Judge’s
request, she had “fixed” it so that it remains unchanged to the present time of
writing. My explanation of that is that it depended entirely upon the adept
operator whether he should make a fugitive precipitation of the thought-picture,
leaving it to be acted upon and dissipated by the attraction of space, or on
making the deposit of pigment, cut off the current which connected it with space
and so leaving it a permanent pigmentary deposit on the paper or other surface.
In fact I strongly advise anyone who wants to get at the mysteries of Count
St-Germain, Cagliostro and other wonder-workers, to read in connection with them
the various accounts of H.P.B’s phenomena which have been published by credible
witnesses. Take for example the quotation made by Mrs Cooper-Oakley from the
“Souvenirs de Marie-Antoinette.” by the Countess d’Adhémar, who had been
an intimate friend of the Queen and who died in 1822. She is giving an
interesting account of an interview between Her Majesty, the Count de Maurepas,
herself and St-Germain. The last-named had paid Mme D’Adhémar a visit of
momentous importance to the Royal family and to France, had departed and the
minister, M. de. Maurepas, had come in and was slandering St-Germain
outrageously, calling him a rogue and a charlatan. Just as he had said that he
would send him to the Bastille, the door opened and St-Germain entered, to the
consternation of M. de Maurepas and the great surprise of the Countess. Stepping
majestically up to the Minister, St-Germain warned him that he was ruining both
monarchy and kingdom by his incapacity and stubborn vanity, and ended with these
words: “Expect no homage from posterity, frivolous and incapable Minister! You
will be ranked among those who cause the ruin of empires.” . . . “M. De
Saint-Germain, having spoken thus without taking breath, turned towards the door
again, shut it and disappeared. . . All efforts to find the Count failed,”
Compare this with the several disappearances of H.P.B. in and near Karli Caves
and elsewhere, and see how the two agents of the Brotherhood employed identical
means for making themselves invisible at the critical
moment.
He kept
house sumptuously and accepted invitations to dinner from kings and other
important persons, but always with the understanding that he should not be
expected to eat or drink with the company; and, in fact, he never did, giving as
his excuse that he was obliged to follow a special and very strict regimen. It
was said that he kept his body strong, young and healthy by taking elixirs and
essences, the composition of which he kept secret; it is alleged that his
visible diet was only what we might call oatmeal porridge, and that also was
prepared by himself. M. Léclaireur says that he “often retired very late, but
was never exhausted; he took great precautions against the cold. He often threw
himself into a lethargic condition which lasted from thirty to fifty hours, and
during which his body seemed as if dead. Then he reawakened, refreshed and
rejuvenated and invigorated by this magical repose, and stupefied those present
by relating all important things that had passed in the city or in public
affairs during the interval. His prophecies as well as his foresight never
failed.”
This
recalls the story told by Collin de Planey (Dictionnaire Infernal, Vol
II, 223) about Pythagoras who, on returning from his journeyings on the astral
plane “knew perfectly all that had happened on earth during his
absence”.
To
continue our comparison of the two “messengers,” friends and co-workers, we see
that H.P.B. did not confine herself to porridge or even a non-flesh diet, but,
like the Count, she too would fall into these states of lethargy when she was
oblivious to surrounding things, but would come back full of her experiences
during the interval of her temporary physical abstraction. In the first Vol of
O.D.L. these “brown study” states are described, as also the changes in her
moods and manners as one Master after another came “on guard”. It is also
recorded how the new entity coming in had to pick up out of the brain of the
body the register of what had just been transpiring; sometimes making palpable
mistakes. Unfortunately we have no record of the effect produced on St-Germain
by suddenly awaking him out of this recuperative trance condition, probably
because he always took precautions against such a thing happening; but in the
case of H.P.B. I have described the great shock that she experienced when
suddenly and unexpectedly dragged back into physical consciousness; more than
once she held my hand against her heart to let me feel it beating like a
trip-hammer, and she told me that, under certain circumstances, such a thing
might be fatal. I am not alluding to those cases where she would leave her body
for one or more hours to be worked by one or other of the Masters who were
superintending the production of Isis Unveiled, but only to those brief
withdrawals from the external to the internal plane of
consciousness.
In
another point there was a great difference between the two messengers.
St-Germain would, very often, when the conversation turned upon any given epoch
of the past, describe what had happened as though he had been present, and, as
Baron Gleichen tells us, “would depict the most trifling circumstances, the
manners and gestures of the speakers, even the room and the place in it they had
occupied, with a detail and vivacity which made one think that one was listening
to a man who had really been present . . . He knew, in general, history
minutely, and drew up mental pictures and scenes so naturally represented, that
never had any eye-witness spoken of a recent adventure as did he of those of the
past centuries.” The revelations of psychometry have made it perfectly easy for
us to understand how a man of St-Germain’s evident adeptship could recall out of
the “galleries of the astral light the incidents of any given historical epoch,
even to the details of house construction, furnishing and decoration, and the
appearance, actions, speech and gestures of the inhabitants; and by spreading
out his observations like a spider’s web in different directions, get at any
facts going on. Without having been incarnate at that remote time, he would thus
make himself in very truth an eye-and ear-witness of the period in question.”
Such is the splendid potentiality of Buchanan’s epoch-making discovery. Do we
not find in Denton’s Soul of Things scores of cases where trained
psychometers did this very thing? And if the members of Denton’s family
could do so much without previous occult training, why should not so grandiose a
being as St-Germain have been able to do much more?
We have
seen above that he persistently mystified those inquisitive persons of all ranks
--- royal, noble and plebeian --- who tried to penetrate the secret of his
birth, country and age. Have we not also seen H.P.B. playing the same trick on
her troublesome inquisitors? Sometimes she would say that she was eighty years
old, sometimes that she was born in the eighteenth century, and we have on
record the testimony of a newspaper correspondent who, after watching her
throughout the evening, said and wrote that she seemed at one moment an old
woman and at the next a young girl, while more than one person saw her physical
appearance change from one to the other sex. Then we have the case where, when
she and I were alone in the room of our “Lamasery” at New York, she attracted my
attention and I saw rise out of her body that of a Master with his Indian
complexion and black hair, thus for the moment extinguishing the woman of
Caucasian type, blue eyes and light hair, who sat before
me.
Léclaireur says, in proof of the Count’s prodigious
memory, that “he could repeat exactly and word for word the contents of a
newspaper which he had skimmed over several days before; he could write with
both hands at once; with the right a poem, with the left a diplomatic paper,
often of the greatest importance. Many living witnesses could, at the beginning
of this century (18th), corroborate these marvelous faculties. He
read, without opening them, closed letters, and even before they had been handed
him.” Here, again, we are made to recall the feats of the same sort which H.P.B.
did in the presence of witnesses, myself included. She, too, would not only read
closed letters before touching them, but also pick up a pencil and write their
contents, as in the cases of Mr. Massey and others at New York, and that of the
Australian Professor Smith at Bombay, which latter was interesting. One morning
Damodar received four letters by one post, which contained Mahâtmic writing, as
we found on opening them. They were from four widely separated places and all
post-marked. I handed the whole mail to Prof. Smith, with the remark that we
often found such writings inside our mail correspondence, and asked him first to
kindly examine each cover to see whether there were any signs of its having been
tampered with. On his returning them to me with the statement that all were
perfectly satisfactory, so far as could be seen, I asked H.P.B. to lay them
against her forehead and see if she could find any Mahâtmic message in either of
them. She did so with the first few that came to hand, and said that in two
there was such writing. She then read the messages clairvoyantly and I requested
Prof. Smith to open them himself. After again closely scrutinizing them, he cut
open the covers, and we all saw and read the messages exactly as H.P.B. had
deciphered them by clairvoyant sight.
A form of
phenomenon, however, which we do not find recorded of St-Germain, was that of
the interception of letters in the post, which in my opinion is among the most
remarkable things that I ever witnessed. The whole story is told in O.D.L.,
First Series, pp 35, 36, 37, but it may be summarized in a few words. I had come
over from New York to Philadelphia on a visit to H.P.B., as I was giving myself
a short rest after seeing Eddy’s book, People from the Other World, out
of the press. Intending to stay only two or three days and not knowing what my
Philadelphia address would be, I had left no instructions for the forwarding of
my postal matter; but finding that she insisted on my making a longer visit, I
went to the Philadelphia Post Office, gave the address of her house and asked
that if anything came for me, it should be sent there. I was expecting nothing,
but somehow or other I was impelled to do as I did. That very afternoon, letters
from South America, Europe and some of the Western States of the Union were
delivered at the house by the postman, H.P.B’s house address being written in
lead pencil on each cover. But, and this is what gives the stamp of evidential
value to the phenomenon, the New York address was not crossed off, nor did the
post-mark of the New York Post Office appear on the backs of the covers, as
proof that they had reached the destination intended by my several
correspondents. Anybody with the least knowledge of postal matters will see the
great importance of these details. Now, on opening the letters which came to me
in this fashion during my fortnights visit to my colleague, I found inside many
of them, if not all, something written in the same handwriting as that in
letters I had received in New York from the Masters, the writing having been
made either in the margins or any other blank space left by the writers. The
things written were either some comments on the character or motives of the
writer, or matters of general purport as regards my occult
studies.
The
histories of the times all speak of St-Germain and of the important part played
by him in current politics of more than one reign. Thus he is said to have had
much to do with the accession of the Empress Catherine to the throne of Russia.
He was the intimate friend of Frederick the Great of Prussia, of Louis XV of
France, of the Landgraf von Hessen, and of various princes and other great
nobles. For many years he occupied a great place in the public thought of
various courts and nations, but, of a sudden, in the year 1783, he disappeared
from public view with the same mystery attending his exit from the scene as
attended his appearance. We have no record whatever of his fate, beyond the
statement of his friend, the Prince of Hesse Cassel, that he died in 1783, while
making some chemical experiments in Eckrenford, near Schleswig. There is
absolutely no historical record of the last illness or death of this man who,
for many years, agitated the courts of Europe, nor one word about the disposal
of the alleged colossal fortune, in gems and gold, that he had always with him.
As Léclaireur says: “A man who had so brilliant a career cannot be extinguished
so suddenly as to fall into oblivion.”
Moreover,
as the same author says: “It is reported that he had a very important interview
with the Empress of Russia in 1785 or 1786. It is related that he appeared to
the Princess de Lamballe when she was before the revolutionary tribunal, shortly
before they cut off her head, and to the mistress of Louis XV, Jeanne Dubarry,
while she was awaiting the fatal stroke, in 1793. The Countess d’Adhémar, who
died in 1822, left a manuscript note, of date May 12th, 1821, and
fastened with a pin to the original MS., in which she says that she saw M. de
Saint-Germain several times after 1793, viz., at the assassination of the
Queen (Oct 16th, 1793); the 18th Brumaire (Nov
9th, 1799); the day following the death of the Duke d’Enghien (1804);
in the month of January, 1813; and on the eve of the murder of the Duke de Berri
(1820). “It is to be observed in this connection that these later visits to his
friend, the Countess, after his disappearance from Hesse Cassel and his supposed
death, may have been made in the same way as that of a Master to myself at New
York --- in the projected astral body; for we have, in Mrs Cooper-Oakley’s
article, a quotation from Grafer’s “Memoirs,” the statement that St-Germain told
him and Baron Linden that he should disappear from Europe at about the end of
the 18th century, and betake himself to the region of the Himalayas,
adding: “I will rest; I must rest. Exactly in eighty-five years will people
again set eyes on me. Farewell, I love you.” The date of this interview may be
deduced approximately from another article in the same volume, where it is said:
“St-Germain was in the year 1788, or 1789, or 1790, in Vienna, where we had the
never-to-be-forgotten honour of meeting him.” If we take the first date, then
eighty-five years would bring us to 1873, when H.P.B. came to New York to find
me; if the second, then the eighty-five years would coincide with our meeting at
Chittenden; if the third, that marks the date of the foundation of the
Theosophical Society and the commencement of the writing of Isis
Unveiled, in which work, as above stated, I am persuaded that St-Germain was
one of the collaborators.
I have
thus very briefly, yet in good faith, traced the connection between these two
mysterious personages, St-Germain and H. P. Blavatsky, messengers and agents of
the White Lodge, as I believe. The one was sent to help in directing the
convergent lines of karma that were to bring about the political cataclysm of
the 18th century with all its appalling consequences, to let loose
the moral cyclone which was to purify the social atmosphere of the world; the
other came at a time when materialism was to meet its Waterloo and the new reign
of spiritual high-thinking was to be ushered in through the agency of our
Society. |