The Mysterious Life and Transitions of the Cagliostro Jewel - Nell C. Taylor
Extracted from https://theohistory.org/issue-archive/volume-iii/vol-iii-no-3/
Imagine a silver and gold pendant shaped as a jeweled compass, surmounted by an emerald-studded crown, carrying between the arms of the compass a cross of rubies above a gold and silver pelican feeding its young in a nest. Imagine further that the gem stones in the emblem are living galvanometers responding to the vital vibrations of its owner. Such is a description of the mysterious 18th Degree Rosicrucian Jewel, formerly belonging to Cagliostro, but in recent times worn by H.P. Blavatsky. Set with yellow, green, white and red gems, the pure white stones “had the occult property of changing their color to a dark green and sometimes muddy brown, when she was out of health.”1
What do we know about the history of this remarkable jewel?2 Is it valuable because of the precious gems and metals comprising it? Is it coveted for its astonishing occult properties, or as a talisman? For its association with the Rosicrucians? With Cagliostro? With H.P.B? Perhaps all of these. But what is certain, and what is important is that the jewel is a historical landmark and belongs in the archives of the Theosophical Society.
H.P.B. wrote in her diary of 1878, on 2 December, “Found the Rosy Cross Jewel missing from the bureau drawer. Know who took it. It will come back.”3
And it did come back. The adept Serapis refers to it in a brief note to Olcott, “The lost one is restored in its proper place. The gueburs [mischievous elementals] made it invisible out of malice.”4 And other people have been solicitous for the keeping of this Jewel.
But first let us look at the physical structure of the jewel. Its most recent owner was Rukmini Devi Arundale, deceased 23 February 1986, the wife of Dr. George Arundale, third International President of the Theosophical Society.
The accompanying diagram was prepared from a sketch made by Joseph E. Ross in 1978, with her permission, and from notes on the gems he made at the time.
Meaning of the Symbol
To give the true esoteric meaning of the
Rosicrucian Jewel, of the unique selection and arrangement of its elements, an advanced occultist would be required.
Such an occultist was H.P.B., though she many times reiterated that she knew more than she was allowed to reveal. Also, she
states, “Symbols are meant to yield more than one meaning;”5 and further, that there are “seven keys...to every allegory.”6 Nevertheless, some interesting hints are given in various theosophical sources, and other meanings are probable.
H.P.B. calls the pelican “the most important” and “the best known of the Rosicrucians’ symbols.”7 In Hindu mythology, the swan (Hansa) is the symbol of the primordial Ray emanating from darkness. A universal matrix, water, is postulated for the reception of the one ray (the Logos) containing the other seven procreative rays. Thus, the swan, or any aquatic fowl—a pelican, as chosen by the Rosicrucians—represents the Spirit of the unrevealed, abstract Deity moving on the waters, and then from the water giving birth to other beings.
The true significance of the Eighteenth Degree of the Rose-Croix is precisely this, though poetised later on into the motherly feeling of the Pelican rending its bosom to feed its seven little ones with its blood.8
Manly P. Hall writes:
The familiar pelican of the Rose Croix degree, feeding its young from its own breast, is in reality a phoenix, a fact which can be confirmed by an examination of the head of the bird. . . . the head of the phoenix being far more like that of an eagle than of a pelican. In the Mysteries it was customary to refer to initiates as phoenixes or men who had been born again for just as physical birth gives man consciousness in the physical world, so the neophyte, after nine degrees in the womb of the Mysteries, was born into a consciousness of the spiritual world. 9
H.P.B. devotes considerable attention to the meanings of the cross and circle.10 The compass, being the instrument for constructing a circle, symbolizes the abstract Deity—thus, the rationale for including it in the 18th Degree Jewel. The equal-armed cross of rubies, represents man in incarnation, enclosed within the arms of the compass—the cross representing man’s divine aspect, the rose color, the symbol of Nature and virgin Earth, the celestial mother and nourisher of man.11 Above the compass is the crown, emblem of royalty, shedding its beneficent aura over all the symbols of the Jewel. In Oriental scriptures, the highest spiritual teachings are called “the Royal Secret Doctrine. 12
Who Was Cagliostro?
For readers unacquainted with the history of the Rosicrucians or Cagliostro, the Brotherhood of the Rosy Cross, H.P.B. says, was founded in the mid-thirteenth century by a German knight named Rosencranz.13 As the Christian religion is divided into various sects, so the Rosicrucian sect subsequently gave birth to other Cabalistic branches of Masonry.
Of the life of Count Alessandro di Cagliostro, little is known, but much is presumed. Most of his biographers depict him as quite a scoundrel and connect him with a Giuseppe Balsamo, a native of Sicily. H.P.B. remarks in her article “Was Cagliostro a ‘Charlatan’?” that this was a symbolic name, likely given to him by his adept teacher, as was customary for disciples destined to work in the world.14 Validity for his title, however, can be traced to a distant relative through his maternal grandmother’s family. Dates of his life are estimated to be 1743 to 1795.
After a somewhat stormy youth, the still young Cagliostro went to Malta and there studied the Mysteries. He always told people he was born in Malta, meaning that he was there born into the spiritual life, there first initiated into magical rites.
Ordinarily he was the most captivating and charming of gentlemen, kind to the afflicted and generous to the indigent. But when hypocrisy goaded him too much, he could exhibit a violent temper.
In the early 1770s, while living in England, Cagliostro and his wife Serafina were very poor, and at first earned their living by selling his drawings. Later they lived in wealth. Cagliostro was reputed to be able to enlarge pearls and to transmute base materials into gem stones and precious metals. In London, he was initiated into Freemasonry in the Scottish rite. Cagliostro travelled to many cities in Europe, some in Russia, in each place establishing Masonic lodges. His powers of healing were spectacular. Wherever he travelled his reputation preceded him, and large crowds sought his drawing room. He never took money for treatment and was persecuted by the medical authorities for practicing medicine without certification. When life became too complicated in one place, he moved to another.
In France, Cagliostro was held in great esteem by many noblemen and royalty. Goethe and Schiller were among his admirers. A scheming Countess de la Motte implicated him in a scandal involving a diamond necklace allegedly ordered by Marie Antoinette. For this, both Cagliostro and his wife were for a time incarcerated in the Bastille until he could prove their innocence. His indiscretion in demonstrating his alchemical powers—making diamonds and gold “out of nothing”—perhaps, one may surmise, led to these quick karmic results.
Cagliostro was a clairvoyant who predicted many incidents which actually came to pass. Furthermore, other remarkable predictions from mediumistic children he utilized in his masonic lodges also came to pass. Among those attending his meetings were priests and high churchmen, including Cardinal de Rohan, himself of the royal family. But Cagliostro’s being a Mason and an occultist and knowing “many secrets—deadly to the Church of Rome”15 brought him the persecution of the Jesuits.
He worked, in 1785, in the Lodge of Philalethes along with Mesmer and other professional, literary, legal, financial, and clerical men. He attempted to bring into it the Eastern teaching of the divine and intermediate principles in man. But they refused to give up their traditional forms. He remained a Mason, but created his own ritual in the Egyptian tradition.
A letter of 1789 refers to the Count di Cagliostro and his wife arriving in Italy, having great wealth and being sought by many for private interviews. In 1790, he, his wife and a Capuchin monk were arrested and brought before the Inquisition. On April 7, 1791, he was condemned to death after a lengthy trial, lengthy because they could find no suitable evidence to prove his guilt. His books and family possessions were burnt in a public square.
As he was about to be turned over to civil authorities, a stranger appeared at the Vatican and demanded a private audience with the Pope, sending him a word instead of a name. He was received immediately by the Pope and shortly after, the Pope commuted the sentence to life imprisonment in the Castle of San Leo. He was reported to have died in prison, but some say he escaped and that the jailors, to save face, had to pretend that he died and was buried below the Castle.
Cagliostro, along with his contemporary, the Count de St. Germain, was believed to have discovered the secret of longevity and thus appeared again in 1861.16 H.P.B. says, “The Count de Saint-Germain is, until this very time, a living mystery... The countless authorities we have in literature, as well as in oral tradition (which sometimes is the more trustworthy) about this wonderful Count’s having been met and recognized in different centuries, is no myth.”17 And quoting Eliphas Levi that “Cagliostro, who died forsaken in the cells of the Inquisition,” H.P.B. in a footnote says, “This is false, and the Abbe Constant (Eliphas Levi) knew it was so.” 18
Chronology of the Jewel
To outline the transitions of ownership of the Cagliostro Jewel during the past one hundred and more years, we have seen that H.P.B. in 1878 noticed it gone from her bureau drawer, and that it came back to her. How she came to have it initially, Rukmini Arundale, interviewed by Joseph Ross, said, “During the French Revolution, Cagliostro was really very busy and working with the Master, the Prince [Count Saint Germain]. I don’t know how H.P.B. got it, but she saw him on the physical plane. He was evidently still living somewhere. So, he gave it to her, for the real Masonic Order is there. And she gave it to Dr. Besant.”19
Annie Besant said late in 1893 that she saw evidence supporting the rumors that William Q. Judge had forged messages from the Master.20 In 1894, she issued a “Statement Prepared for the Judicial Committee” containing six charges of untruthfulness in his claimed communications with the Master. Charge Ill was titled “Deception Practised Toward H.S. Olcott with regard to the Rosicrucian Jewel of H. P. B. “ 21
Mrs Besant described the Jewel incident in her pamphlet on the case, published in 1895:
... at Colonel Olcott’s request she [H.P.B.] lent it to him, and it remained in his possession when H.P.B. finally left India in 1885.
In 1888, when Colonel Olcott came to England, he brought over a number of H.P.B.’s things for her, this Rosicrucian Jewel among them, and handed it over to her at 17, Lansdowne Road. She sometimes wore this Jewel afterwards, and it was among H.P.B.’s things after her death. Mr. Judge saw it among them when he came over to London in May, 1891.
In August, 1891, after Mr. Judge had returned to New York, I received a letter from him, on which was written an order in the Mahatma M’s script desiring me to send this Rosicrucian Jewel to Mr. Judge. I accordingly sent the Jewel carefully packed in a sealed packet to New York by Colonel Olcott (the Colonel knowing nothing of the contents of the packet), he handed the packet to Mrs. J.C. Ver Planck, who wrote to me acknowledging the receipt, and said she would lock it away. I also wrote Mr. Judge, telling him that I had sent the Jewel by Colonel Olcott.
On September 12th, 1891, Mr. Judge, writing in the train, and dating ‘In Wyoming on the R.R.’, wrote me: —
“Yes, it is the silver phoenix. I will tell J.C.V.P. to keep the package in my safe.”... In October, 1891, when Colonel Olcott was at the house of Dr. J. Anderson, in San Francisco, he was telling Dr. A. about H.P.B.’s Rosicrucian Jewel and the mysterious property possessed by the stones in it, of changing colour with the state of her health. In this connection the Colonel remarked that he had the Jewel at Adyar, and when he got back there would look and see if the stones had changed colour since H.P.B.’s death. Mr. Judge was present at this conversation. On hearing this last remark he said to Colonel Olcott:
“Olcott, the Master tells me to say that He has taken the Jewel away from Adyar, and that when you get back you will find it gone. Let this be a proof to you of the genuineness of the communications that I receive from the Mahatmas.”
After his return to Adyar, Colonel Olcott recounted what had occurred to B. Keightly, who thereupon said that he had seen the Colonel give the jewel to H.P.B. in London in 1888 or 1889. His servant Babula corroborated, saying that he had himself put the jewel in the Colonel’s trunk .”22
In the same pamphlet, similar evidence is given in a statement by Bertram Keightley:
... in 1888, I was present in H.P.B.’s room when H.S.O. gave to H.P.B. the Rosicrucian-Jewel...” and that in 1891, “while driving up to Adyar Headquarters from the harbour on his return H.S.O. related to me his conversation with W.Q.J. in San Francisco... I at once reminded H.S.O. that he had given the Rosicrucian Jewel to H.P.B. as above described in 1888 in London. I was also present when Babula reminded H.S.O. that he (Babula) had himself packed the Jewel in H.S.O.’s trunk when H.S.O. was going to Europe in 1888.23
On July 18, 1894, a joint statement by Judge and Olcott give conflicting reports of the incident of 1891:
William Q. Judge & Col. H.S. Olcott hereby together agree in writing that the following states what ...Judge said ...in Oct. 1891 at Dr. Anderson’s house.
W.Q. Judge says: “Col. Olcott having stated that the Jewel was at Adyar, I went into my room adjoining. In a few moments I came back to Col. Olcott’s room and said to him, ‘Col., Master says I may tell you that the Jewel is not at Adyar and you will not find it there.’ No more was said and not a single word was uttered by me to the effect that Master had taken the Jewel away.”
“Col. Olcott says: ‘My recollection of the incident differs from the above. At the same time, as no notes of the conversation were made by me at the time, it is but fair to say that my memory is as likely to have misled me as Mr. Judge’s or Dr. Anderson’s to have misled them. The scene occurred, to the best of my recollection, in Mr. Judge’s bedroom...; the persons present were Dr. Anderson, Mr. Judge and myself... I described to Dr. Anderson the well-known Rosicrucian jewel... I said that on returning to Adyar I should ...see whether the crystals had resumed their proper hue or perhaps turned black since H.P.B.’s death. Judge, who was standing next me...said, ‘Olcott, the Master tells me that you will not find the jewel at Adyar...’ ...l should be disposed ...to indicate that the Master had taken it away, but my memory fails me in this respect and I will not venture to say that such words were spoken. The clear impression made on me, however . . .is that Judge was giving me a test of his power to get communications from the Masters; and. ..as soon as I got to Adyar I hunted for the jewel, and then discovered that I had myself taken it to London in 1888 and returned it to H.P.B. herself. [Signed] H.S. Olcott, London 18 July 1894.24
In preparation for his defense against charges brought against him to the General
Council, Judge telegraphed to Dr. Anderson, June 18, 1894, that one charge was that Judge told Olcott the Master said the Jewel was not at Adyar, and asks Anderson to mail at once an affidavit whether this was true or false. Surprisingly, Anderson’s notarized reply stated:
There did not to the best of my recollection and belief, occur in my presence any conversation between them relative to the Rosicrucian jewel of the late Madame H.P. Blavatsky, nor was there in my presence any statements to the effect that “Judge told him (Olcott) Master then said that the Jewel was not at Adyar,” as quoted in a telegram hereunto attached, nor was there any reference to said jewel nor to Master in this or any cognate connection.... That the conversation referred to in the telegram hereunto attached did not occur, and that there is no lapse on the part of my memory will be appreciated when I state that this was the first time I had ever had the pleasure of meeting Col. Olcott, and the first time I had ever had the opportunity of conversation with Mr. Judge, and, owing to the prominent connection of both with the Society, I was both attentive and watchful for any hint as to the Society, generally, and any mention of the Masters, particularly, as I was most intensely eager for information concerning the latter. [Signed] Jerome A. Anderson, M.D.”25
Now follows a gap of nearly three years wherein the writer has not been able to trace the actual location of the Jewel. It is of record that Mr. Judge or Mrs. Ver Planck had it in September 1891. Mrs. Ver Planck wrote to Mrs. Besant, 23 September 1891:
I note your instructions re packet. Mr. Judge has told me to place it, endorsed, in the safe of Mr. Neresheimer, as our own here is used by several persons.
And again on 26 September 1891:
Col. H.S. Olcott handed me the parcel from you, Mr. Neresheimer being present, and as the Col. left the room, & Mr. Neresheimer remained, I put the whole into one of our large linen envelopes, sealed it, and Mr. Neresheimer endorsed it for Mr. Judge & took it at once to his safe. It occurred to me afterwards, that had you been so gracious as to send me a line within the outer envelope addressed to me, I have now to wait till Mr. Judge returns for the contentment of reading it!!” 26
It is also of record that Colonel Olcott or Mrs. Besant had it in July 1894. The Archivist of the Theosophical Society, Pasadena, California, made a search for any reference in Judge’s papers to the return of the Jewel to Mrs. Besant, and reported “for the present... we have no information to send you. 27 No response has been received from Radha Burnier at the Theosophical Society, Adyar, India, regarding anything among Mrs. Besant’s or Olcott’s papers relating to the return of the Jewel. Perhaps some day a document will be found to clarify this period in the Jewel’s chronology.
So, from Judge’s or Mrs. Ver Planck’s possession, the Jewel came back somehow to Mrs. Besant. C. Jinarajadasa, fourth International President of the Theosophical Society, referred to two paintings of the Cagliostro Jewel:
The first one is painted and signed by John Varley on July 28, 1894, and is witnessed at back “as being a fair representation” by Mrs. Varley and countersigned with Col. Olcott’s signature of the same date. The second painting a week before was painted by Mrs. Isabel Cooper-Oakley and witnessed by H.S. Olcott, G.T. Campbell and A.J. Willson. If H.P.B. gave it to Amma [Mrs. Besant before her death in 1891, it must have been in her possession and she must have lent it to Col. Olcott for the paintings. Furthermore, evidently Col. Olcott was under the impression when he made his will that the jewel was with him in Adyar.28
Colonel Olcott’s Will,29 dated Adyar, 11 January 1907, states:
The Rosicrucian jewel and Master M.’s portrait (painted by Mrs. Jibhart) now loaned to Annie Besant, are to be returned to the curios [sic] at Headquarters after her death.
Jinarajadasa wanted to have a bust made of Mrs. Besant, not when she was old but in the year 1902. He wrote to Rukmini Arundale:
. . . in the year 1902 ... a photograph of her [Besant was taken in Florence by an Italian painter... In this photograph Amma [Besant] is wearing H.P.B.’s Rosicrucian Jewel. You will recall my sending you the part of the Will of Colonel Olcott where he leaves the Jewel to the Society. It is now with you and you said sometime you would return it. I presume Amma herself did not recall this clause in the Colonel’s Will, so that when she made her own Will... she did not mention the jewel... I presume it is locked up with your other jewels ...and if so I would like you to hand the jewel over to me and take a receipt from me. I can then see to the cast being made for the bust and that the jewel is placed in Amma’s safe in her room.”30
Mrs Arundale recounted how the Jewel came to her:
And one day, Dr. Besant called Dr. Arundale over to her room and invited me also to come. Then she put this around his neck and said, “1 want you to wear this.” Then, next minute she smiled at me and she said, “Of course, it’s also for Rukmini.” She said, “And so she can wear it any time.” So I kept it.”31
When Jinarajadasa insisted on her returning it because Colonel Olcott wrote in his Will that the Jewel should go to the Society after his death, Rukmini Arundale said to him:
“How can that be true? Because, here Dr. Besant gave it directly to us, and how could he have said that in his will? And she said H.P.B. gave it. She couldn’t have told an untruth.” And then he looked still further and discovered that this was worn by Dr. Besant before Colonel Olcott died. 1902, and Colonel Olcott died in 1907. So then, he wrote to me saying, “You are quite right. So Colonel Olcott must have made a mistake.” He [Olcott] probably thought, having seen this rare thing, “You see, we don’t know what will happen. It should go to the Society.” But not meaning that legally it was his property, he must have put it that way.32
Rukmini Arundale responded to Jinarajadasa’s letter, saying:
Two years ago I started travelling by aeroplanes, and at the suggestion and with the help of Henry Hotchener I made a will. Knowing the value of the Cagliostro jewel I have left it to the Theosophical Society at my death with many other valuable possessions.”33
The fascinating Cagliostro Rosicrucian Jewel no doubt is, or was, a highly magnetized object. It’s significance when worn by a person of the 18th Degree may not be so much in the attainment of occult status as in the work the wearer is intended to do. Seven people have possessed it since Cagliostro—HPB, bringer of light; Olcott, spreader of light; Besant, expositor of light; Ver Planck, keeper of light; Judge, counsellor of light; George and Rukmini Arundale, devotee and transformer of light. All these have made significant contributions to the theosophical movement. Whether or not the Cagliostro Jewel is destined to further assist humanity’s evolution remains to be seen.
* The author gratefully acknowledges her indebtedness to Joseph E. Ross for the use of his unique archives and for his valuable comments and suggestions during the preparation of this article.
- Henry Steel Olcott. Old Diary Leaves, Fourth Series, 1887–1892. Vol. IV (London: Theosophical Publishing Society, 1910), 395.
- In the terminology of Masonic and other secret orders, the symbol representing a stage, de-gree, or function of an office is called a “Jewel,” whether or not it contains one or more precious gems.
- Boris de Zirkoff, comp., H.P. Blavatsky Collected Writings: Volume 1. 1874–1878. Second ed. (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1977), 425.
- C. Jinarajadasa, Letters From the Masters of the Wisdom: Second Series. Transcribed and Annotated by C. Jinarajadasa (Chicago; The Theosophical Press, 1926), 54.
- Boris de Zirkoff, comp., H.P. Blavatsky Collected Writings: Volume XIV: Miscellaneous. Compiled by Boris de Zirkoff. Second ed. (Wheaton IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1985), 59. Also, Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine: The Synthesis of Science, Religion And Philosophy: Volume 5. Fourth ed. (Adyar, Madras: The Theosophical Publishing House, 1938), 85.
- H.P. Blavatsky Collected Writings, XIV: 200. The Secret Doctrine V: 201.
- Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. The Secret Doctrine: The Synthesis of Science, Religion and Philosophy, Vol. I, Cosmogenesis (Pasadena, Theosophical University Press, 1988), facsimile of the original edition, 19. Also, see the Adyar edition, Vol. I, 4th ed. (Adyar, Madras: Theosophical Publishing House 1938), 84.
- The Secret Doctrine (Pasadena edition), 1: 80; Adyar ed., 1: 146.
- Manly P. Hall, An Encyclopedic Outline of Masonic, Hermetic, Qabbalistic and Rosicrucian Symbolic Philosophy; Being an interpretation of the secret teachings concealed within the rituals, allegories and mysteries of all ages (Los Angeles: The Philosophical Research Society, 1977), [Reduced facsimile of 1928 ed.], 39.
- Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine: The Synthesis of Science, Religion and Philosophy, Vol. II, Anthropogenesis (Pasadena, Theosophical University Press, 1988), 54562. Also, Adyar edition, Vol. 4. 4th ed. (Adyar, Madras; Theosophical Publishing House 1938), 115–32.
- H.P. Blavatsky Collected Writings XIV: 292; The Secret Doctrine, Adyar ed., V: 293.
- Bhagavan Das, trans., Mystic Experiences Tales of Yoga and Vedanta from the Yoga Vasishtha. Third ed. (Varanasi. The Indian Bookshop, 1959), 36.
“And for the Science was first given to kings, it has come down under the name of Raja-vidya, Raja-guhya, Science of Kings and King of Sciences, the Royal Secret Doctrine.”
- H.P. Blavatsky Collected Writings 1: 104-5.
- Boris de Zirkoff, comp., H.P. Blavatsky Collected Writings: Vol. XII: 1889–1890. (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1980), 79. The entire article (78–88) appeared first in Lucifer.
- H.P. Blavatsky Collected Writings: Vol. XII: 81.
- H.P. Blavatsky Collected Writings 1:161.
- H.P. Blavatsky Collected Writings: Vol. 1:109.
- H.P. Blavatsky Collected Writings 1:1 61.
- Rukmini Devi Arundale. Tape-recorded interview. April 8, 1978. Joseph E. Ross private ar-chives.
- Annie Besant, The Case Against W, Q. Judge (Publ. at the offices of the Theosophical Publishing Society 7, Duke St. Adelphi, W.C., 1895), 14.
- Annie Besant, The Case Against W, Q. Judge, 23–26.
- Annie Besant, The Case Against W, Q. Judge, 44–45.
- Annie Besant, The Case Against W, Q. Judge, 77.
- Archives, Theosophical Society (Pasadena).
- Letter of Jerome A. Anderson, M.D., “To Whom it May Concern,” 18 June 1894, Archives, Theosophical Society (Pasadena).
- Letters to Mrs Besant, 23 September and 26 September 1891. Archives, Theosophical Society (Pasadena).
- Letter from The Archivist of the Theosophical Society (Pasadena), Kirby Van Mater, 6 March 1990.
- Letter from C. Jinarajadasa to Srimati Rukmini Devi Arundale, 2 June 1948. Joseph E. Ross pri-vate archives.
- Copy of Colonel Olcott’s will, dated 11 January 1907, certified by T.S. (Adyar) Treasurer A.J. Hamerster, Adyar, 20 October 1933, that this is a true copy of the original Will and Codicil deposited in the Registry of the High Court at Madras, certified by the 2nd Assistant Register, 24 April 1912. Joseph E. Ross private archives.
- Letter from C. Jinarajadasa to Rukmini Devi Arundale, 26 May 1948. Joseph E. Ross private archives.
- Arundale, Rukmini Devi. Tape-recorded interview, 8 April 1978. Joseph E. Ross private ar-chives.
- Arundale, Rukmini Devi. Tape-recorded interview, 8 April 1978.
- Letter from Rukmini Devi Arundale to C. Jinarajadasa, 28 June 1948. Copy in Joseph E. Ross private archives.