Solemn Historical Dissertation on the Rosicrucians

Others trace the origin to the year 1612, such as the Abbot of Stuttgart, S. Georgianus, and Andreas Caroli in Memorabilia of the 17th Century, Book II, Chapter IV, p. 295, and Chapter XXV, p. 381, who are followed by the founders of the Universal Historical Lexicon, published in German at Leipzig, under the entry "Rosicrucian". Others restrict it to the 17th year, in which their name, fame, and writings were most prevalent, as among others, Paschius, Inventor of New and Old things, Chapter VI, § V, Leipzig edition, and M. Stockmann, Elucidarium of Heresies, p. 530. Arnold, however, in the work cited, § 1, writes confidently—and, as we shall see later, not incorrectly—the following: original: "Die gewisseste Nachricht ist / daß schon um das Jahr 1610 / und weiters hin / viel Redens von dergleichen Mystischen / Paracelsischen und Chymischen / Schrifften gewesen. Wie dann David Meder / in Iudicio Theologico von der Fama und Confession, berichtet / daß sie schon vor 5. Jahren in 5. Sprachen gedruckt und spargirt gewesen." The most certain report is that already around the year 1610, and further on, there was much talk of such mystical, Paracelsian, and chemical writings. As David Meder also reports in his Theological Judgment on the Fama and Confessio, they had already been printed and circulated in five languages five years prior. Hence, the same author confirms that at that same time, namely at the beginning of the 17th century, when Weigelius, Boehmius, Nagelius, Conradi, Sperber, etc., appeared on the stage, the Rosicrucians also sprouted up. Hoffmann, in the Universal Lexicon, says that this progeny emerged in Germany at the beginning of the previous century. If there is room for conjecture, which is customary in such matters, I would prefer, according to the meager knowledge with which I am provided, to refer the origin of this sect to the 16th century itself, specifically to those times when Aegidius Gutmann began to sow the seeds of his delusion, in such a way that I do not wish to contradict the men named earlier, as they speak not so much of the time of the first origin, but of that in which this group became known to almost the entire world. To demonstrate this, I first call into the matter the Venerable Ministerium of Tripoli, against the Gutmannian Patron of Revelation, p. 396, seqq., where it shows, from the confession of a certain servant as a witness, namely a Rosicrucian Brother, that Gutmann was a Rosicrucian. Furthermore, Arnold himself, Vol. IV, p. 765, no. 45, writes from Breklingius: original: "Aegidius Gutmann / ein Rosencreuzer / qui tamen uixit circa A. 1580." Aegidius Gutmann, a Rosicrucian, who nonetheless lived around the year 1580. But how could this man have been called a Rosicrucian if this Society had not yet existed? These reasons seem to have moved M. Fischlin, who, in Memoirs of the Theologians of Würtemberg, p. 208, touching upon this argument on the occasion of the life of I. Val. Andreae,