illuminati visits to french lodges

Illuminati of Bavaria 1

Introduction

1 Illuminati Visits To French Lodges

IntroductionDuring the period 1782-1787, Illuminati from Ger-

many made several visits to the Paris Amis Reunis lodge. This includes the following Illuminati in these years: Kolow-rat (1782),1 Costanza (1784),2 Dietrich (1784),3 Falgera (1784),4 Hilmer (1785),5 Kolowrat (1785),6 Dittfurth (1787),7 besides the well-known and famous visit of Bode and Busche in 1787.

Previously, those trying to identify the influence of the Illuminati on the French Revolution only knew of the 1787 visit of Bode and Busche. Barruel also mentioned Dietrich’s visit in 1784, but put no great emphasis on it.

1. Gustave Bord, La Franc-Maçonneríe en France; des origines a 1816: Les Ouvriers de l'Idéme Révolutionnaire (1688-1771) (Paris: Libraire Nationale, 1908) (reprinted Geneva-Paris: Slatkine, 1985) at 351.

2. Le Forestier, Les Illuminés, supra, at 658.3. Barruel, Memoires pour servir (1798), supra, Vol. V, at 80.4. Carlo Francovich, Storia della Massoneria in Italia Dalle Origini alla

Rivoluzione Francese (Florence: 1974) at 315; Richard von Dullmen, Geheimbund der Illuminaten (Stuttgart: Frommann-Holzboog, 1977) at 97.

5. Gustave Bord, La Franc-Maçonneríe en France; des origines a 1816: Les Ouvriers de l’Idéme Révolutionnaire (1688-1771) (Paris: Libraire Nationale, 1908) (reprint Geneva-Paris: Slatkine, 1985) at 353.

6. Gustave Bord, La Franc-Maçonneríe en France (1908) at 351.7. Le Forestier, Convent du Philalethes, supra, at 44-45, citing Franz

Dietrich von Dittfurth, Antwort an die Philalethen (Wolfstieg: 1906) at 43.

Create PDF files without this message by purchasing novaPDF printer (http://www.novapdf.com)

http://www.novapdf.com


Illuminati Visits To French Lodges


Hence, this gap in knowledge allowed those who did not wish to see any influence of the Illuminati over the French Revolution to wallow in their preconceptions.

Not only has scholarship established all these other visits, but now legitimate university professors who study this material have reprinted numerous documents relating to the 1787 visit of Bode. The Illuminati had long been nurturing this already inflamed spirit among the French. These histori-cal advances have been in the last one hundred years: • We now have a copy of the paper that Bode presented in 1787 to

the Amis Reunis on the origins of Freemasonry. Bode gave Freemasonry a spin that it had from inception a revolutionary purpose in matters of religion and government — to serve the Protestants need to combat Catholicism under a cloak. Bode’s thesis was a highly revolutionary thesis;

• Since 1994, we have had a published copy of the diary that Bode kept from the 1787 journey. This had been kept at the Dresden State Library for over 200 years;

• Since 1906, Engel made accessible the contents of the letters of Bode to his girlfriend Frau Hess which he sent her from Paris during the trip in 1787. These letters had been kept at the Dres-den State Library.

• Since 1906, we had in print the diary of Dittfurth who attended the 1787 world congress hosted by the Amis Reunis at Paris.

This goes to show that history often cannot be com-pletely understood until many decades later.





Amis Reunis of Paris & Link Back To Munich


The CB Lyons-Paris Link To The Illuminati’s Head Lodge at Munich: An Overview

In 1777, key members at a Munich lodge known as Loge Zum guten Rat joined the Illuminati of Weishaupt. In 1779, this lodge affiliated itself with the Chevaliers Bienfai-sants (CB Templars) lodge of Lyons — the mother lodge of the CB Templars. The same year, the Munich lodge changed its name to a French one — Loge St. Théodore au Bon Con-seil. The mother lodge at Lyons was operated by Willermoz. The Lyons system was in turn operated under the authority of the Strict Observance of Germany.

In time, this lodge Theodore at Munich became the headquarters of the Illuminati of Bavaria.

This is a key piece of evidence overlooked by many who study the impact of the Illuminati on the French Revolu-tion. Many of the leading actors in the French Revolution came from the Amis Reunis at Paris.

Le Forestier, a neutral historian privy to masonic records, explained the closeness of the Lyons and Munich lodges: “Lodge Theodore of Good Counsel at Munich was the most cherished daughter of the Lodge des Chevaliers Bienfasaints.”8 Identically, Albert Pike, head of American Freemasonry at one time who had similar access to masonic records, explained:

The Lodge des Chevaliers Bienfaisants de la Sainte Cité at Lyons, in France, was the most zealous and systematic of all the Cosmopolitan

lodges, and erected many Lodges in France,9

8. René Le Forestier, Les Illuminés de Bavière et la franc-maçonnerie allemande (reprint 1974) at 680 (“Loge Zum guten Rat Rath de Munich était la fille la plus chérie de la Loge des Chevaliers Bienfais-sants....”)






and granted constitutions to many in Ger-many....[O]ne of its daughter lodges, Theodor von der guten Rat, at Munich, was suppressed by the Elector of Bavaria in 1786. It had others

at Regensburg, Spire and Worms.10

John Adolphus (1768 - 1845), an English historian from London and attorney, pointed out in 1799 the links from Lodge Theodore at Munich back to Lyons, France:

Weishaupt was a member of a lodge of Freema-sons established at Munich in Bavaria called the Lodge Theodore of Good Counsel. This lodge corresponded with, and had formed a particular system of its own by instruction from the Loge des Chevaliers Biefaissans at

Lyons.11

Trevor McKeown, a Masonic historian, similarly explains this Munich “Lodge of [the] Strict Observance [was] Lodge Theodore of Good Counsel.”12 (The Chevaliers Bienfaisants was the French name of the Strict Observance operated by Willermoz.)

9. Robison indicated the Chevaliers Bienfaisants had lodges at Paris, Strasbourg, Lille and Toulouse with the mother lodge at Lyons. SeeErnest Nys, Idées modernes: droit international et franc-maçonnerie (M. Weissenbruch, 1908) at 74.

10.Albert Pike, Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry (1872)(reprint Kessinger Publishing, 2003) at 157. Robison had said likewise. While Lodge Theodore had a “constitutional patent from the Royal York at Berlin,” it had “formed a particular system of its own, by instruction from the Loge des Chevaliers Bienfaissants at Lyons, with which it kept up correspondence.” (Robison, Proofs of a Conspiracy (1798) at 57.)

11.John Adolphus, Biographical Memoirs of the French Revolution (T. Cadell, jun. and W. Davies, 1799) at 80.

12.Trevor W. McKeown, A Bavarian Illuminati primer (Grand Lodge of British Columbia and Yukon A.F. & A.M., 2009) http://freema-sonry.bcy.ca/texts/illuminati.html (accessed 7/14/09).






Later, in the next section, we will demonstrate that what transpired is that in 1779 Lodge Theodore separated itself for the most part from the Royal York of Berlin. It then adopted as its constitution that of the Chevaliers Bienfaisants of Lyons. At the same point, it changed its name from a Ger-man one — Loge Zum guten Rat — to a French name — Loge St. Théodore au Bon Conseil — and then transacted all official business in French.13

Then Lodge Theodore united itself with the Illuminati of Weishaupt, making this lodge a link back to France. The later French Revolutionary Mirabeau noted this significant transformation. Mirabeau wrote in 1788 in On the Prussian Monarchy how Lodge Theodore united itself with the Illumi-nati Order. After noting the “Illuminati of Bavaria” were men truly “virtuous, zealous for the good of humanity [who] arose in Bavaria,” Mirabeau says

the Loge St. Théodore au Bon Conseil at Munich [is] where we find these men [of virtue and zeal] at its head and heart... Their chiefs resolved to enter their branch with another association, the Order of the Illuminati.14

Thus, by this transformation, Weishaupt was put in touch with Willermoz’ Templar system in France, specifi-cally at Lyons. In turn, Willermoz was a link to a powerful masonic lodge at Paris known as the Amis Reunis. In 1779, Willermoz had created an alliance with the independent Free-mason lodge Amis Reunis, by the latter adding a Knights Templar Grade that linked back to the Chevaliers Bienfai-sants (Templars), as discussed above.15 This in turn permitted the Amis Reunis of Paris to consider Lodge Theodore at

13.See Footnote 27 on page 8 and accompanying text.14.Comte de Mirabeau, De La Monarchie Prussienne, sous Frederic Le

Grand Avec Un Appendice (London: 1788), Vol. V, at 96-98.15.See Footnote 652 on page 251 and accompanying text.






Munich as a daughter lodge of the Mother lodge at Lyons. As a result, as to the “Amis reunis” of Paris, a masonic history of 1856 explains that “one of its favourite [fellow] daughters [was] the Lodge Theodor von der guten Rath, at Munich....”16

We will see later what important names in history belonged to the Amis Reunis of Paris, and thus be able to bet-ter evaluate the influence Weishaupt could have from Munich direct to Paris.

Specific History of Lodge Theodore

In 1744, an irregular Freemason lodge known as the Pögnersche Lodge was founded at the Pögner Inn of Munich.17 In 1773, some members joined Minister of Cul-ture, Count Johann Theodor Morawitzky-Topor (1735-1810), in founding a Strict Observance lodge at Munich known as Loge Zur Behutsamkeit (The Prudence Lodge).18 “In it, Adam Weishaupt is recorded” as a member.19 His entry was in 1777.20 Morawitsky’s later Illuminatus alias was Yorik.21

In 1774, another splinter occurred from the Pögner-sche Lodge. The Electoral Chamber Counsellor Kaspar founded Loge Zum guten Rat at Munich.22

16.Universal Masonic Library (edited by Robert Macoy) (N.Y.: Ameri-can Masonic Agency, 1856) Vol. XVI at 23.

17.Geschichte der Munchener Logen http://www.freimaurerei.de/index.php?id=2035 (Grossloge der Alten Freien und Angenommenen Maurer von Deutschland, 2009 accessed).

18.Id.19.Id.20.“Weishaupt selbst wurde erst 1777 Freimaurer in der Loge Zur Behut-

samkeit in München und trug hier den Namen ‘Sanchoniaton’” http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Weishaupt (accessed 7/26/09), citing Ernst Hagmann, “Adam Weishaupt war Freimaurer,” Quatuor-Coro-nati-Jahrbuch 18 (1981) at 93-97.

21.Hermann Schüttler, Die Mitglieder des Illuminatenordens 1776-1787/93 (Munich: 1991) at 107.


http://www.freimaurerei.de/





Many key members of Lodge Theodore who joined the Illuminati were Costanza, Falgera, Montgelas and Savi-oli.23

In April 1779, Loge Zum guten Rat obtained a patent from the Royal York of Berlin. In that same year, “it changed its name” to a French one — Loge St. Théodore au Bon Con-seil24 — which change Le Forestier says was due to its recent affiliation with the Lyons Strict Observance of Willermoz. Le Forestier adds that after this point, all official writings of Lodge St. Théodore were in French.25 As mentioned before, Le Forestier, said: “Lodge Theodore of Good Counsel at Munich was the most cherished daughter of the Lodge des Chevaliers Bienfasaints.”26

During 1779, Lodge Theodore had, in fact, separated itself from the Royal York’s control and joined with the Lyons system. In F. T. B. Clavel’s Histoire pittoresque de la franc-maçonnerie et des sociétés secrétes anciennes et mod-ernes (Paris: Pagnerre, éditeur, 1843) at 194, Clavel explains:


23.Le Forestier, Les Illuminés, supra, at 392-93 n.5.24.“Patentierung der Loge Zum guten Rat durch die Loge Royal York in

Berlin, jetzt unter dem Namen St. Théodore du bon conseil (St. The-odor vom guten Rat.” Geschichte der Munchener Logen http://www.freimaurerei.de/index.php?id=2035 (Grossloge der Alten Freien und Angenommenen Maurer von Deutschland, 2009 accessed).

See also, Loge zur Kette, Freimaurer in München (Munich, 2003) at 9 (“1779 Patentierung der Loge Zum guten Rat durch die Loge Royal York in Berlin, jetzt unter dem Namen St. Theodore du bon conseil (St. Theodor vom guten Rat).”)

The Royal York patent was received in April 1779. See Verein Deutscher Freimaurer, Allgemeines Handbuch der Freimaurerei (1901) at 62 (“April 1779 errichtete hier die Loge Royal York, die hierzu eigentlich gar nicht berechtigt war, die Loge St. Theodor zum guten Rat”).

25.René Le Forestier, Les Illuminés de Bavière et la Franc-Maçonnerie allemande (Paris: 1915) at 198, 392.



http://www.freimaurerei.de/index.php?id=2035





The Loge St. Théodore au Bon Conseil, which was an asylum for the Enlightenment, was founded in 1775. [It was under the Mother Royal York lodge of Friendship of Berlin]. Its Venerable was Professor Baader. Soon they separated from the authority of [the Royal York] and formed a correspondence with the Chevaliers Bienfaisants of Lyons, which pro-fessed Martinism, and it adopted its system. This lodge of Chevaliers Bienfaisants had acquired, but we do not know in what capacity, a high preponderence of lodges in Germany. It was considered as one of the different factions of the Strict Observance, and among those who worked for it, either exclusively or part of the time, were part of the Templars with it [i.e., the Lyons lodge] as a mother lodge of the associa-

tion.27

Despite joining the Lyons system, the Loge St. Théodore au Bon Conseil did not disassociate entirely from the Royal York. Rather, it sought to derive as much advan-tage as possible from its earlier association. In 1781, Lodge Theodore received the Directional Right from the Berlin Royal York to found new Royal York lodges in Bavaria, Italy and Switzerland. Soon the lodge found new ones at Burghausen, Griesbach, Freising and Eichstätt.28

26.René Le Forestier, Les Illuminés de Bavière et la franc-maçonnerie allemande (reprint 1974) at 680 (“Loge Zum guten Rat Rath de Munich était la fille la plus chérie de la Loge des Chevaliers Bienfais-sants....”)

27.The Lyons system had a convention in 1780 chaired by Willermoz. Duke Ferdinand of Brunswick was named the Grand Master of the rec-tified system created at the conference. Martinism was to dominate in all the new rituals. They created a new rite within the lodges called Ordre des Chevaliers bienfaisants de la cité sainte. This new rite spread, according to Clavel’s history, “particularly in France, Switzer-land....” (F. T. B. Clavel, Histoire pittoresque de la franc-maçonnerie et des sociétés secrétes anciennes et modernes (Paris: Pagnerre, édi-teur, 1843) at 199-200.)






Illuminati members came to dominate Lodge The-odore. By 1781, as Mathiez commented in 1916, Weishaupt was the de facto “master of the Munich Loge St. Théodore au Bon Conseil.”29

And most significantly, because Willermoz allied his Lyons Strict Observance system known as the Chevaliers Bienfaisants (including his Munich affiliate) with the Amis Reunis of Paris, this meant Weishaupt had joined a lodge sys-tem in Munich which had a pipeline to Paris through Lyons.

Amis Reunis That Weishaupt Could Influence

Who were the persons Weishaupt could potentially influence by means of the Lyons-Paris link and alliance with the Lyons Chevaliers Bienfaisants? In Kloss’s Geschichte der Freimaurerei in Frankreich, 1725-1830 (Darmstadt: Jong-haus,1852), we learn that the Amis Reunis membership list of January 8, 1781 identifies the following members:

Court de Gebelin [1725-1784], Dutrousset

d’Hericourt,30 Landgraf Friedrich [Georg] Lud-wig [August] von Hessen[-Darmstadt, 1759-1808], [Danish diplomat] Baron [Karl Heinrich] von Gleichen, Abbé Rozier, [Friedrich] Rudolph Saltzmann, Savalette de Langes, Graf Stroganoff [i.e., a Russian ambassador], Tassin

de l’Etang, and J. Baptiste de Willermoz.31


29.See A. Mathiez, “Bibliographie...Le Forestier, Les Illuminés, etc.,” Annales Révolutionnaires VIII, at 433 (1916).

30.Joseph Dutrousset Herricourt was “the President of the Parliament of Paris [i.e., the judicial court]...and attended the Convent of Paris [of the Amis Reunis] of 1785 and 1787.” Kenning’s Masonic Encyclopedia, supra, at 178. He held this post as of 1778.







As of 1789, Poirier identifies the members of the “Amis Reunis” lodge at Paris as:

Abbé Sieyès, d’Espagnac, Condorcet, Bar-nave, Le Chapelier, [Adrien] Duport de

Prélaville,32 the Lameth Brothers, Duc de Biron, the vicomte de Beauharnais, the duc de Rochefoucauld-Liancourt, Du Pont (de Nem-ours), Bureaux de Pusy,...Robespierre, Cabanis, Volney, the Abbé Grégoire, Chamfort, Delley d’Agier, the baron d’Allarde, Beaumar-chais, Roederer, and Le Coulteux de la Noraye. Chénier, Fourcroy, La Mettrie, Laclos, Marat, Mercier, Saint Just, and Babeuf would join

them later.33

Brother Leopold Wolfgang likewise identified the Amis Reunis in the years just prior to the Revolution as including “Brothers Condorcet, Marat, Mirabeau, Sieyès, Clavière, Boiffy, Dupont, Robespierre and Gregoire.”34

31.Georg Franz Burkhard Kloss, Geschichte der Freimaurerei in Frankreich, 1725-1830 (Darmstadt: Jonghaus,1852) Vol. I at 265. The parenthetical information derives from Wendelin von Winckelstein, Die Odyssee des Aristoteles, Eine Rezeptionsgeschichte der Neuzeit (Munchen: 2005), except von Hessen-Darmstadt’s information derives from Schüttler’s Journal von einer Reise von Weimar, supra, at 95. Masonic historians place him in the Philalethes as of 1776.

32.“Adrien Duport,” Wikipedia (“Initié à la loge des Amis réunis à Paris, il participa aux débats franc-maçonniques.”)

33.Jean-Pierre Poirier, Lavoisier: Chemist, Biologist, Economist (trans.Rebecca Balinski, Charles C. Gillispie) (University of Pennsyl-vania Press, 1996) at 441. At page 218, he identifies Duport de Prélaville as Adrien Duport, “a member of the Amis Reunis lodge.” Poirier mentions Duport was the founder of the Society of Thirty, an important society in the early stages leading up to the French Revolu-tion. It operated out of his house initially.

34.Brother Leopold Wolfgang, Revolutionen, Weltkrieg und Freimaure-rei, Heft 10 der Freimaurerzeitung Am Bau (München 1921) at 6.






Respectable historians on Buonaparte’s administra-tion acknowledge Buonaparte’s key advisor — “Talleyrand was a member as late as 1788 of the Lodge of the Amis Reu-nis,” and so were “the Duc de Liancourt, d’Aiguillon, Con-dorcet, Sieyès, La Fayette,” etc. 35

Ollivier, the respected biographer of Saint Just — the right-hand man of Robespierre — says Saint Just was a mem-ber of the Amis Reunis lodge prior to the Revolution.36 The “years 1786-1787 were the first contacts by Saint Just with the lodges.”37 Saint Just “had read” the Bible of that lodge — Claude Saint Martin’s Des erreurs et de la vérité.38 Billing-ton, the Librarian of Congress, mentions that Ollivier notes Saint Just observed there was a “German influence” over the Amis Reunis of Paris.39 It was in this period that Mirabeau [and Bonneville] hosted a lodge meeting at the Amis Reunis to accept their Illuminati brothers who had arrived from Ger-many.40

35.Barbara Norman Makanowitzky, Napoleon and Talleyrand: The Last Two Weeks (Stein and Day, 1976) at 76. As to Talleyrand’s member-ship, see also Émile Dard, Napoléon et Talleyrand (1935) at 85 (“Tall-eyrand figura encore en 1788 dans la loge des Amis Réunis et dans la Société des Trente.”)

36.Albert Ollivier, Saint Just et la force de choses (Gallimard, 1954) at 100 (“La loge des ‘Amis Réuns’...Saint Just ait appartenu á cette secte....”).

37.Ollivier, Saint Just etc., supra, at 102. See also, Albert Ladret, Saint-Just, ou, Les vicissitudes de la vertu (1989) at 239 (“Albert Ollivier fixe à 1786-1787 les premiers contacts de Saint-Just avec les loges. Il pense qu’il avait été initié à la loge Les Amis Réunis” at this time.)

38.Ollivier, Saint Just et la force de choses (1954) at 101.39.Billington, Fire in the Minds of Men (2004 edition), at 539 fn. 63, cit-

ing Albert Ollivier, Saint Just, supra, at 96-116, 149-50.40.Albert Ollivier, Saint Just et la force de choses (1954)(“C’est au

comité des Amis réunis que Mirabeau adressa ses frères arrivés d’Alle-magne....”)






Uniqueness of The History Presented HereNo one has previously assembled the materials con-

tained in this chapter in one place. For example, when John Robison wrote in 1797-1798, he only mentioned Bode’s visit to Paris in 1787. When Barruel wrote, he mentioned only the Paris visits of Bode (1787) and Dietrich (1785). Both Robi-son and Barruel stressed the impact of Bode’s visit of 1787 as being the decisive one. This, of course, belied any credence. They were both unaware of the several other visits by Illumi-nati to Paris.

As a result of their limited knowledge, many people accepted Mounier’s doubt expressed in 1801 that Barruel and Robison could invest so much importance in the 1787 visit by Bode in prompting a revolution. And at that time, Mounier’s point was far more plausible than that of Barruel or Robison. However, this chapter asks the question of how many con-tacts were there, and what impact did they in fact have.

Visits and Correspondence Carry Illuminati Message

The Illuminati’s internal papers reveal the role visits played in the Order’s strategy. Zwack wrote Weishaupt about penetrating Freemason lodges of Poland. Weishaupt, in his reply, gave Zwack specific directions about what to do. He told Zwack to tell the Polish Freemasons to use the first three degrees of Masonry, and to have as many superiors in each lodge as they pleased. He added that “all their union [with us] shall be carried out by the correspondence and visits of the brethren — If we can but gain that point, we shall have suc-ceeded in all we want; leave the rest to me.”41

41.Barruel, Memoirs of Jacobinism (Trans. Clifford) (1798), supra, IV, at 193.





Visits and Correspondence Carry Illuminati Message

This reveals the Illuminated used visits and corre-spondence to tie themselves to specific lodges. If the Illumi-nati penetrated France, we should look for similar activity.

In 1822 during his public address at the Council of Verona, counsellor C.A. Heinrich von Haugwitz spoke about his role at the Wilhemsbad Congress of 1782. In the same speech, he described the importance of correspondence and visits within secret societies. Haugwitz said:

I can not give any plausible explanations for the carelessness with which governments have enabled themselves to close their eyes to such disorder, a real State within the state. The lead-ers [of the secret societies] were assiduous [in spreading their influence] not only by means of correspondence but by employing particu-lar [notable] figures. And they also sent recip-rocal emissaries. To exert a dominating influence on thrones and sovereigns, such was our purpose, as it had been that of the [medi-

eval] Knights Templars.42

Hence, Haugwitz identified the principal tools of influence: 1. correspondence; 2. employing leading figures to influence other masons (e.g., Cagliostro, Mesmer, etc.) and 3. sending emissaries on ‘reciprocal’ exchanges. We know little of the correspondence, if any, that was sent between these groups. We have already mentioned the successful use of the charlatans Cagliostro and Mesmer in France. Now we focus on the emissaries sent by the Illuminati to Paris.

42.Wilhelm Dorow, Denkschrifften und Briefen zur Charakteristik der Welt und litteratur (Berlin: 1839) Vol. III at 216 (speech of Haugwitz in 1822 at Council of Veronna)(available at books.google.com).






Background On The Amis ReunisThe site of most of the Illuminati visits in Paris was at

the Lodge Amis Reunis. What made this lodge special? After the brief closure of the Neuf Souers lodge in 1781, its mem-bers generally moved over to the Paris lodge founded in 1771 known as the Amis Reunis. The Amis Reunis in 1778 had integrated the Chevaliers Bienfaissant rite of Lyon into their system.43

Members of The Amis Reunis

As discussed elsewhere,44 in Kloss’s Geschichte der Freimaurerei in Frankreich, 1725-1830 (Darmstadt: Jong-haus,1852), we learn that the Amis Reunis membership list as of January 8, 1781 includes the following members:

Court de Gebelin [1725-1784], Dutrousset

d’Hericourt,45 Landgraf Friedrich [Georg] Lud-wig [August] von Hessen[-Darmstadt, 1759-1808], [the Danish diplomat] Baron [Karl Hein-rich] von Gleichen, Abbé Rozier, [Friedrich] Rudolph Saltzmann, Savalette de Langes, Graf Stroganoff [i.e., a Russian ambassador], Tassin

de l’Etang, and J. Baptiste de Willermoz.46

43.See “Amis Reunis Partners With The French Templars On Common Philalethe Rite” on page 23 in the chapter on Secret Societies in France.

44.“Members of The Amis Reunis” on page 31 in the chapter on secret societies in France.

45.Joseph Dutrousset Herricourt was “the President of the Parliament of Paris [i.e., the judicial court]...and attended the Convent of Paris [of the Amis Reunis] of 1785 and 1787.” (Kenning’s Masonic Encyclopedia, supra, at 178.) He held this post as of 1778.





Members of The Amis Reunis

Also, from 1780 to 1784, the future Napoleon ally, Ludwig X of Hesse-Darmstadt, was an Amis Reunis at Paris, along with his relative, the previously mentioned Friedrich Ludwig.47

Later, according to Poirier (the biographer of Lavoisier, the famous chemist), the members of the “Amis Reunis” lodge in Paris at the juncture of 1789 with whom Lavoisier could have contact there were:

Abbé Sièyes, d’Espagnac, Condorcet, Bar-nave, Le Chapelier, [Adrien] Duport de

Prélaville,48 the Lameth Brothers Duc de Biron, the vicomte de Beauharnais, the duc de Roche-foucauld-Liancourt, Du Pont (de Nemours), Bureaux de Pusy,...Robespierre, Cabanis, Vol-ney, the Abbé Grégoire, Chamfort, Delley d’Agier, the baron d’Allarde, Beaumarchais, Roederer, and Le Coulteux de la Noraye. Chénier, Fourcroy, La Mettrie, Laclos, Marat, Mercier, Saint Just, and Babeuf would join

them later.49

46.Georg Franz Burkhard Kloss, Geschichte der Freimaurerei in Frankreich, 1725-1830 (Darmstadt: Jonghaus,1852) (books.google) Vol. I at 265. The parenthetical information derives from Wendelin von Winckelstein, Die Odyssee des Aristoteles, Eine Rezeptionsge-schichte der Neuzeit (Munchen: 2005), except von Hessen-Darms-tadt’s information derives from Schüttler’s Journal von einer Reise von Weimar, supra, at 95. Masonic historians place him in the Phila-lethes as of 1776.

47. Ligou mentions that Ludwig Friedrich von Hesse was a member of the Amis Reunis first, from 1779 to 1784. Then Ligou says the future Lud-wig X of Hesse-Darmstadt belonged to the Amis Reunis at Paris from 1780 to 1784. (See Ligou, Ed., Dictionnaire de la Franc-Maçonnerie (Paris: 1987) at 572.) On the important alliance Louis X (aka Louis I) gave Napoleon, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_I,_Grand_Duke_of_Hesse (accessed 12/28/08).

48.This is likewise confirmed in: “Adrien Duport,” Wikipedia (“Initié à la loge des Amis réunis à Paris, il participa aux débats franc-maçon-niques.”)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/





While all these names are significant, the bolded ones are recognizable as leaders of the Revolutions of either 1789 or 1792.

Heckethorn, another respected historian in many fields,50 identifies the members of the “United Friends” (Amis Reunis) to have included “Condorcet, Antoine Court de Gébelin,”51 besides Savalette de Langes, the national trea-surer of France.52 Honville too was a member.53

Also, the Paris Amis Reunis had an international char-acter. Prominent German occultists joined, such as the Land-grave of Hesse-Darmstadt who was active in this lodge at Paris from 1779 to 1784.54

49.Jean-Pierre Poirier, Lavoisier: Chemist, Biologist, Economist (trans.Rebecca Balinski, Charles C. Gillispie) (University of Pennsyl-vania Press, 1996) at 441. At page 218, Poirier identifies Duport de Prélaville as Adrien Duport, “a member of the Amis Reunis lodge.” Poirier mentions Duport was the founder of the Society of Thirty, an important society in the early stages leading up to the French Revolu-tion. It operated out of his house initially.

50.Heckethorn wrote many other works: Lincoln's Inn Fields and the Localities Adjacent (London: 1896); The printers of Basle in the XV & XVI centuries; their biographies, printed books and devices (1897); London Souvenirs (1899).

51.“Antoine Court de Gébelin,” Wikipedia (“Mitglied der Freimaurerloge Les Amis Réunis”).

52.Heckethorn, The secret societies of all ages and countries (London: 1875) Vol. 2 at 24.

53.“Armand-Jean Petit de La Honville, lieutenant particulier de la prévôté de Paris, le 6 février 1708, demeurant rue Saint-Antoine. Il était mem-bre de la loge les Amis réunis et président de la Chambre de Paris en 1776.” Assemblée électorale de Paris 18 Novembre 1790 — 15 Juin 1791 (Paris: 1890) at 218.





Visit of Kolowrat in 1782 To Amis Reunis

Visit of Kolowrat in 1782 To Amis ReunisIn 1782, Count Leopold Kolowrat (1726-1809) was

Supreme Chancellor to the Austrian king in Vienna. Count Kolowrat was alias Numenius of the Bavarian Illuminati as of 1782.

Klaus Epstein points out that immediately after Wil-hemsbad in 1782, Knigge appointed several national superi-ors (Nationalobere) in the Illuminati. Knigge made Count Kolowrat the Illuminati’s national superior of the Hapsburg Empire, i.e., Austria and Hungary.55

In 1782, Kolowrat went to the Parisian Amis Reunis (“A.R.”). This visit is described in a British Freemason jour-nal.56 Gustave Bord, a masonic historian, says Kolowrat vis-ited the Amis Reunis of Paris in the early months of 1782 —thus predating Wilhemsbad.57

Kolowrat likely went to Paris in 1782 to help prepare the Amis Reunis leaders to receive the upcoming secrets of Wilhemsbad.

However, the Freemason historian, W.K. Firminger, claims that Kolowrat’s visit did not help the Illuminati gain adherents in France.58 He argues: • The letters of Knigge and Weishaupt show they thought Kolow-

rat was not strong intellectually and favored “Theosophy;” and

54.The future Ludwig X of Hesse-Darmstadt belonged to the Amis Reu-nis at Paris from 1780 to 1784. His relative, Louis Frederick von Hesse was a member from 1779 to 1784. (See Ligou, Ed., Dictionnaire de la Franc-Maçonnerie (Paris: 1987) at 572.)

55.Klaus Epstein, The Genesis of German Conservatism (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1966) at 92.

56.W.K. Firminger, “The Romances of Robinson and Barruel,” Ars Quat-uor Coronatorum–Transactions of the Quatro Coronati Lodge, Vol. 50 (1937) at 31, 65.

57.Gustave Bord, La Franc-Maçonneríe en France; des origines a 1816: Les Ouvriers de l'Idéme Révolutionnaire (1688-1771) (Paris: Libraire Nationale, 1908) (reprinted Geneva-Paris: Slatkine, 1985) at 351.

58.Firminger, supra, Vol. 50, at 31, 65 (1937).






• Kolowrat caused divisions between Willermoz of Lyon and Sal-valette de Lange, the respective Grand Masters of the Lyon Templars of the Chevalier Bienfaissant Rite and the Parisian Amis Reunis who adopted the Chevalier Bienfaissant Rite in 1778.

Neither point, however, supports the conclusion that Kolowrat was not a useful agent of the Illuminati in Paris dur-ing 1782. First, the controversy caused by Kolowrat in Paris occurred in 1783 (discussed below), not during the 1782 trip. Second, Kolowrat’s appointment as national superior with the Illuminati shows he was a most trustworthy member. It also suggests a true closeness to Knigge and Weishaupt.

Moreover, what the Illuminati leaders actually said was only superficially critical of Kolowrat. Weishaupt wrote, “I must attempt to cure him [Kolowrat] of theosophy and bring him around to our views.”59 By theosophy, Weishaupt meant a belief in an eclectic religion. And Knigge wrote before Wilhemsbad, “Numenius [Kolowrat] is not yet of much use. I am only taking him up [to Wilhemsbad] so as to stop his mouth at the Congress; still, if he is well led we can make something out of him.”60

Firminger exaggerated the meaning of these remarks. They prove Kolowrat was an Illuminati agent in 1782. He still had to learn new lessons and unlearn old ones. But Firminger’s conclusion that these passages prove Kolowrat was of no use simply does not follow. The truth is, rather, when Kolowrat was in Paris, he was a high echelon player in the Illuminati serving their revolutionary goals.

Of note, Kolowrat’s visit to Paris was unknown to Barruel and Robison. In fact, no historian who argues in favor of the role of secret societies in the Revolution has ever men-tioned Kolowrat’s visit of 1782 to Paris.

59.Nachtrag von weiteren Originalschriften (Munich: 1787) Vol. I at 71.60.Nachtrag, id., at 109 (emphasis added).





1784 National Masonic Congress Of The Amis Reunis & Lyon Lodge of Willer-

1784 National Masonic Congress Of The Amis Reunis & Lyon Lodge of Willermoz

Kolowrat participated not only in the Paris Amis Reu-nis in 1782, but also in their 1784 world masonic congress hosted by the Amis Reunis at Paris. In 1783, Kolowrat’s activities produced good fruit. He had sown divisions within the Amis Reunis by suggesting that Savalette de Langes and his friends at Paris had set up various committees with the intent of making their own mark in Europe. This caused Will-ermoz61 to be worried as well as jealous.62 By Kolowrat’s sowing these seeds of distrust and disunion, Savalette and Willermoz on behalf of their respective Parisian and Lyo-naisse lodges agreed to a world congress to work out their differences. This was probably Kolowrat’s purpose from the beginning. Divide and conquer.

Soon Willermoz and Savalette forged a strategy of using a national congress to forward decisions agreed upon at the Wilhemsbad Congress. On June 10, 1783, Savalette wrote Willermoz that a congress of leaders of both the Amis Reunis and Strict Observance (the Templars, apparently ref-erencing the German strain) at Paris would allow the suppres-sion of the Strict Observance because of the enormous superiority of the numbers of members of the Amis Reunis.63 The leaders at Wilhemsbad had decided in 1782 that the French Templar Strict Observance system under Willermoz should take precedence over the Strict Observance of Ger-many. These two men, Savalette and Willermoz, were now trying to implement that decision.

At Willermoz’s direction, Chefdebien organized this meeting for 1784. Both Willermoz and Chefdebien had gone to the Wilhemsbad Congress of 1782 on behalf of their Tem-

61. He was the Grand Master of the Strict Observant/Chevaliers Bienfai-sants of Lyons whose rite the Paris Amis Reunis had adopted as their own in 1778. See “Amis Reunis Partners With The French Templars On Common Philalethe Rite” on page 23 et seq.






plar lodge system.64 The 1784 Congress was put on with the additional guidance of Charles-Pierre Savalette de Langes, the Grand Master of the Parisian Amis Reunis.

Biography of Savalette De Langes

Charles Pierre Savalette de Langes (1745-1797) from 1766-1774 was a lawyer before Parlement. In 1774 to 1788 he was the Royal Treasurer and Paymaster General for the Monarchy. After sharing the job for three years, in 1790 he was again made sole treasurer of state. In 1791, he was the leading member of the legislative committee of the new National Assembly in charge of national finances.65

Savalette was also an officer of the Grand Orient Freemasons since 1774. From 1774 to 1790, Savalette led more than 20 deputations that visited lodges outside Paris. From 1773 to 1776, Savalette was Master of Ceremonies, Orator and Secretary of the Chamber of Administration of the

62.On March 4, 1783, Savalette writes Kolowrat: “We have done nothing wrong to you, so we do not fear your threats. We have not wanted any-thing from you other than what we have obtained: your resignation. The brother de Lange and all his friends allow you to say and believe what you please about their regime of which you will not know any-thing, absolutely nothing, even its plan and its object. I will have no sorrow to prove your ignorance in this regard by publishing your corre-spondence, and I will do so to justify myself in the eyes of my friends, vis-a-vis that which you seek to indict me. I gave it [your correspon-dence] to seven members of the Twelfth grade of the Amis Reunis whose names are: d’Hericourt, de Cony, de Méry, Gébelin, Taillepied de Bondy, who are joined by the marquis of Chefdebien with me, who comprise this meeting of six or seven brothers that you refer to with a brotherly petty irony but also then in your letter to the brother l’Etang [you do so] again with a less charitable insinuation. But they do not govern at all; they work among those who are in good relations, not to dominate others in Europe, but to instruct them and other Amis Reunis in their grade in small circles where divine Providence has placed them.” Gustave Bord, La Franc-Maçonneríe en France; des origines a 1816: Les Ouvriers de l'Idéme Révolutionnaire (1688-1771) (Paris: Libraire Nationale, 1908) (reprinted Geneva-Paris: Slatkine, 1985) (original French) at 351-52.





Illuminati Who Attended The 1784 Congress of the Amis Reunis At Paris

Grand Orient (i.e., the central committee of the GO.) From 1776 to 1778, Savalette was Grand Secretary of the GO. And from April 1781 to April 1788, he was Grand Orator of the GO. The Dictionnaire de la Franc-Maçonnerie relates that Savalette was “among Masons the most jealous, the most curious and the most generous of his time. . . .”66

Illuminati Who Attended The 1784 Congress of the Amis Reunis At Paris

As a result of the work of Savalette and Willermoz, in August 1784 the Amis Reunis convened a special world masonic conference at Paris. The Illuminatus Falgera from Munich, a court musician, arrived as the Illuminati’s repre-sentative.67

63.Gustave Bord, La Franc-Maçonneríe en France; des origines a 1816: Les Ouvriers de l'Idéme Révolutionnaire (1688-1771) (Paris: Libraire Nationale, 1908) (reprinted Geneva-Paris: Slatkine, 1985) at 352.

64. Le Forrestier, Convent du Philalethes, supra, at 38. The correspon-dence between Savalette de Langes and Chefdebien was published for the first time in this century in Franciscus, Eques a Capite Galeoto by Benjamin Fabre. Mr. J.E.S. Tucket in the masonic periodical Ars Quat-uor Coronatorum, Vol. XXX, Part II, endeavored to show that the cor-respondence did not show any effort at revolution. Taken in isolation, Tucket may be correct. This is why the historical context, particularly the Wilhemsbad Congress, is vital to understanding the meaning of opaque language in these writings.

65.Nesta Webster, Secret Societies and Subversive Movements (8th Edi-tion) (London: Britons Publishing Co., 1964) at 170; see also Gustave Bord, La Franc-Maçonneríe en France; des origines a 1816: Les Ouvriers de l'Idéme Révolutionnaire (1688-1771), supra, at 342 (biog-raphy of Salvalette).

66.“Savalette de Langes,” Dictionnaire de la Franc-Maçonnerie (Ligou, Ed.), supra, at 1087.

67.Carlo Francovich, Storia della Massoneria in Italia Dalle Origini alla Rivoluzione Francese (Florence: 1974) at 315; Richard von Dullmen, Geheimbund der Illuminaten (Stuttgart: Frommann-Holzboog, 1977) at 97.






Falgera was preceded by two letters of introduction. First, a letter came from the lodge at Munich allied to the Chevalier Bienfaissants of Lyon — Lodge Theodore. This Munich lodge had become the headquarters of the Bavarian Illuminati. In August 1784, it sent a letter addressed to the “Amis Reunis of Paris” asking them to receive Falgera. Cos-tanza, an Illuminati leader at Munich, confessed during his later deposition to Bavarian authorities that this letter was sent in support of Falgera’s trip. Also, Weishaupt acknowl-edged the trip and the letter in his Apology for the Illuminati (1786).68

Second, because the Bavarian government did not know about the Illuminati’s control over Lodge Theodore at Munich, the Elector of Bavaria, Karl Theodore, himself sent a letter in August 1784 to the Amis Reunis of Paris in which he thanked the lodge for receiving Falgera.69

It is likely that Prince Henry of Prussia, another Illu-minatus, participated at this Paris Amis Reunis conference of 1784.70

68.Le Forestier, Les Illuminés de Baviere, supra, at 658 (citing Weishaupt’s Apologie der Illuminaten and the Deposition of Costanza at 234).

69.René Le Forestier, Les Illuminés de Bavière et la Franc-Maçonnerie allemande (Paris: 1915) at 658.

70. Prince Henry — the brother of King Frederick the Great of Prussia — came from Berlin to Paris in 1784. He perhaps participated in this Con-gress. See Memoires of Marquise de Custine (1912), supra, at 51 n.2. He was an avid Freemason.

Later, Prince Henry was an avid proponent of the French Revolution. During the Revolution, a French woman visiting Prince Henry in Ber-lin wrote, “He is so friendly towards France that I delude myself some-times with the belief that I am in my own dear country.” Memoires of the Marquise de Custine (1912), supra, at 170.





Costanza Visits Amis Reunis in 1784

Costanza Visits Amis Reunis in 1784Additionally, the Illuminati sent to Paris another one

of their Munich members, Costanza. Falgera, who previously arrived, introduced Costanza to the members of the Amis Reunis of Paris.71 Costanza’s visit also was unknown to Bar-ruel and Robison or any of those who have previously sought to trace the secret society role in the French Revolution.

Costanza carried with him some very important papers when he visited Paris. In 1785, Professor Cossandey testified to the Bavarian Court of Inquiry that Costanza had translated into French the Illuminati rituals. Johann S. Cos-sandey reprinted this testimony in 1786 — three years prior to the revolution at Paris.72 Thus, there could be no artifice in this claim to create a link to later French affairs.

Dietrich Attends The 1784 Amis Reunis Congress

Another Illuminatus, Dietrich, also participated in the 1784 Congress at Paris. Dietrich was a leading personality of Strasbourg from Alsace-Lorraine (France). He had been at the Wilhemsbad Congress of 1782 as a delegate from Alsace and Lorraine (France). He became a member of the Illuminati at the Wilhemsbad Congress.73 During the masonic confer-

71.Le Forestier, Les Illuminés, supra, at 658.72.Cossandey, et al., Gross Absichten des Ordens der Illuminaten, dem

patriotischenn Publikum vorgelegt von vier ehemaligen Mitgliedern. (Munich: 1786) at 1-5, cited in Le Forestier, Les Illuminés, supra, at 658.

73.Thomas Frost, The Secret Societies of the European Revolution 1776-1876 (London: 1876), Vol. I at 47.






ence of 1784 in Paris, Dietrich closely associated himself with Condorcet, a famous future leading French revolution-ary writer.74

Incidentally, the impact of Dietrich on Condorcet is evident in the fact that Grenoble historians, apparently unaware what the Illuminati represent, record that “in the ruins [of Propiac near Grenoble] were initiated...the sect of the Illuminati du Midi, under the active presidency of the doctor Nicolas (of Châtillon), student and friend of Mesmer, and with the support of Condorcet.”75

Continuing in our account of the 1784 congress, Dietrich thereafter became a secretary of the Freemason Lodge de la rue Sourdiere (Paris). Condorcet and Savalette de Langes were leading members of this lodge. This Paris lodge showed its Illuminati orientation when it once called upon Cagliostro, an Illuminatus, to make a presentation to the members.76

Frost mentions Dietrich’s later service for the Revolu-tion: “a few years later [Dietrich] figured prominently in the sanguinary events of the French Revolution.”77

Published Discussions at 1784 Congress

A circular of August 24, 1784 published the results of the 1784 congress. It was issued with the imprimatur of the Lodge of the Amis Reunis of Paris. This bulletin announced a decision to hold a further national convention in Paris. The purpose of the next conference would be to discuss the origin

74.Barruel, Memoires pour servir (1798), supra, Vol. V, at 80.75.Bulletin d’archéologie et de statistique de la Drôme (Valence, 1871)

Vol. 16 at 86. (Available at books.google.com). Cf. Pierre Palengat, La Drôme insolite (Editions E&R, 1991) at 381 (“Avec l’appui du philos-ophe Condorcet, il fonda à la Révolution la secte des ‘Illuminés du Midi’ dans les ruines du château.”)

76.Id. 77.Frost, supra, at 47.





Amis Reunis Announce World Masonic Congress for 1785

and purpose of the Freemasons of France. Mounier, the French revolutionary who defended the secret societies from attack in his book of 1801, described this bulletin. “They invited the brethren of all countries of Europe to communi-cate to them the result of their researches.” It was to be a fol-low-up in effect to the Wilhemsbad Congress.

Amis Reunis Announce World Masonic Congress for 1785

The Amis Reunis, and their Philalethe Rite, was a sin-gle lodge at Paris but it had influence in 20 other lodges who adopting their Philalethe rite. The Amis Reunis of Paris formed the elite of French government and social society. And since 1778, it formed an important alliance and cross-rit-ual connection to Willermoz’ Lyon Strict Observance (known by 1781 as Chevaliers Bienfaissants).

Thus, the Amis Reunis came to believe they were a leading lodge of France that were distinctly different than other Grand Orient lodges. This superior attitude was revealed in notices mailed out at the end of 1784. Savalette signed notices to every sect of Freemasonry to come for a world-union. Only the French Grand Orient Lodge — the head lodge over standard Freemasonry — would not be invited. Masonic historians in 2002, based on archives of the supreme rite, explained:

After believing they possessed information about all systems of mystical Freemasonry, the Philalethes [i.e., the Amis Reunis of Paris] came to the foreground, after having worked introvertly in their lodge until now. An announcement of August 24 1784, being sent on September 14 to persons of the most differ-ent masonic systems, was succeeded by another one of November 13. The contents of






the note was a summon to all Masons of all countries and systems, to give their view and knowledge of Freemasonry on the base of ten

questions.78

This was set forth in a circular of November 13, 1784. In it, the Amis Reunis invited masonic leaders around Europe to attend a convention on February 15, 1785. Its topics would include the review of the documentation of various systems, including, as Le Forestier quotes from the notice, “manu-scripts on secret sciences..., the greater part of Freemasons and masonic work that has become known in the past six years, above all the very precise notions of the Illuminati, the Martinists, the Rosicrucians: in the end, the review of the complete rituals and grades of Freemasonry of all lands.”79

The Amis Reunis thereby formally announced in 1785 that they would offer to the Freemasons of France a “very precise” notion of the Illuminati!

The circular of November 1784 also included ten Pro-ponenda (Proposals) for the meeting. These proposals reflected a major change from prior Freemason policy. The British founders of masonry proscribed discussion of religion or politics in the lodges. The Amis Reunis ignored that prohi-bition. Instead, the scheduled topics for the 1785 meeting included: (1) the Supreme Being; (2) immateriality and immortality of the spirit; (3) reality of pain and recompense in another life; (4) the effective value of an ancient science of man on earth, with the three blue grades of Freemasonry offering symbols for men to deposit traditions, knowledge and possessions, and where all men communicate to achieve

78.Rui A. Gabirro & Reginald G. Mc Bean, A Complete History of the Ancient and Primitive Rite... from the Archives...published by kind per-mission of his Grace, the Sovereign Grand Conservator General of the Rite (London: 2002) at 223.

79.René Le Forestier, “Les Convents des Philalethes,” Aspects de L'Illu-minisme au XVIII Siecle (H. Roudil, 1960) at 39. This disproves Firminger’s contention the agenda points to nothing political.





Amis Reunis Conference of 1785

the “greatest possible human happiness” perhaps best achieved by the sharing of virtuous and just men; and (5) the role of magic, theosophy, and the occult in the Order.80 The agenda also included discussion of what was the ideal form of masonic organization.81

We can see the latent purposes of these proposals from the subtle terminology they used. In substance, the Illu-minized Freemasons proposed to examine whether religion based upon a Supreme Being is valid, whether Hell exists in reality or in dreams, how men can be free ‘again’ if virtuous and good men should share their knowledge and goods to achieve these practical ends, and what importance the occult sciences have any longer in this mission. French Freemasons clearly were now examining what political and religious agenda they would pursue.

Amis Reunis Conference of 1785The Conference of 1784 also prepared a list of invi-

tees for the scheduled 1785 Congress. The 100 Freemason brethren invited to attend included many German Illuminati. The list included:• Dittfurth, the Illuminatus who spoke at Wilhemsbad• Johann C. Bode, the untiring Illuminatus who spoke to Karl von

Hesse about moving up in the Illuminati82

• Woellner, delegate at Wilhemsbad• Dr. Forster

80.René Le Forestier, “Les Convents des Philalethes,” Aspects de L'Illu-minisme au XVIII Siecle (H. Roudil, 1960) at 39.

81.Firminger, “The Romances of Barruel and Robison,” supra, at 56 n. 1.82.Bode’s name is identified as well in Rui A. Gabirro & Reginald G. Mc

Bean, A Complete History of the Ancient and Primitive Rite... from the Archives...published by kind permission of his Grace, the Sovereign Grand Conservator General of the Rite (London: 2002) at 224.






• Duke Ferdinand of Brunswick (Illuminatus)• Count de Bruehl of Dresden• Baron Dalberg of Mannheim (Illuminatus) • Stark• von Roeskamp of Heilbronn• von Theden of Berlin

• Bousie (Illuminatus of Berlin and Avignon)83 • d’Albarey, Dr. Giraud, and Diego Naselli (all from Italy)• Thoux de Salverte from Warsaw, Poland• Tieman, a Russian Major from St. Petersbourg, Russia• Baron de Toll, Adjutant General of the King of Sweden, trea-

surer of a chapter of the Illuminati.

Fifty-six others were invited. They principally were the Grand Masters of various lodges of France.84

Firminger, a Freemason historian who sought to dis-pel all evidence pointing to the Illuminati, confessed “we have a list of the persons who were invited to attend the [1785] Congresses [and] it does include the names of some foreigners who had been associated with Weishaupt....”85

In addition, the Amis Reunis invited many who had attended the Wilhemsbad Congress. Besides those noted above, these were: J.B. Willermoz, Virieu and Bernard and Jean de Turkheim.86

83.Some dispute whether the Illuminati of Pernetty at Berlin which later transposed itself to Avignon were of Weishaupt’s Order. In my opin-ion, they were affiliated.

84.René Le Forestier, “Les Convents des Philalethes,” Aspects de L’Illu-minisme au XVIII Siecle, supra, at 40.

85.Firminger, “The Romances of Barruel and Robison,” supra, at 56.86. Bernard de Turkheim presided at Paris over the Reverendissime Porta

Opato Lodge.






The Amis Reunis also invited many members of the Elus Coens sect of Freemasons, known often as Martinists because the doctrines of Claude Saint-Martin were integrated into the lessons taught in various rites. These included Bacon de la Chevaliere, l’abbe Rozier, the brothers Mallet, Moet of Versailles, de Pontcarre (the First President of the Parlement of Rouen), de Fremicourt of Eu, Champollon, and Vicomte Tavannes. They also invited Claude Saint-Martin to attend even though he was not actually even a Freemason.

The Illuminati of Berlin and Avignon were also invited. The invite-list included Baron d’Corberon, the Mar-quis de Thome, Count Gabrianka, and Dr. Chastanier.

The Amis Reunis also asked Cagliostro (Illuminatus-by-admission) and Mesmer (Illuminatus-by-admission) to attend.87

When this list is analyzed, the Paris Amis Reunis was seeking to forge unity among the various Templar and inde-pendent masonic-like sects as well as standard Freemason lodges. Bernard Fay points out they were: • The Egyptian Freemason lodges operated by Cagliostro (Illumi-

natus-by-admission)• The followers of St. Martin (who taught lessons similar to the

Illuminati anyway)• The lodges who followed Dr. Mesmer (Illuminatus-by-admis-

sion) • The Templar lodges based in Lyon with which the Amis Reunis

had formed a partnership in 1779; and • The regular Freemasons who were under the authority of the

Duke d’Orleans.88

87.Le Forestier, Convent du Philalethes, supra, at 40. On Mesmer’s con-nection to the Illuminati of Bavaria, see “Mesmer Lodges” on page 46 in the chapter on secret societies in France.

88. Bernard Fay, Franklin, The Apostle of Modern Times (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1929) at 479.






The 1785 conference had two distinct sessions — one in the foreground and one in the background, as we shall dis-cuss. The one that took place in the foreground — at the lodge itself — took place in 30 sessions between February 19 and May 26, 1785.89 Savalette de Langes was President of the Congress. Chefdebelin was its secretary.90

Attendants included the Count de Gébelin, Grand Master of the Neuf Soeurs.91

Illuminatus Kolowrat At 1785 Paris Amis Reunis Congress

Count Kolowrat, one of the four national superiors in Europe of the Bavarian Illuminati, also participated in the 1785 congress at Paris.92 Kolowrat had lobbied French lead-ers to sponsor these congresses to propagate Illuminist plans. Neither Barruel, Robison nor other proponents of the impor-tance of the secret societies in the Revolution mention Kolowrat’s 1785 trip.

Private Second Level Meetings At 1785 Congress

At the same time, there was a background congress that was outside the lodge. A smaller select group of the dele-gates attended more private meetings at Savalette’s house. This second background congress lasted from March 8, 1785 until June 8, 1785.93 Thus, it extended slightly longer than what we referred to as the foreground congress at the lodge.

89.Le Forestier, “Les Convents des Philalethes,” supra, at 42, 44 (hereaf-ter Les Convents des Philalethes).

90.Nesta Webster, Secret Societies, supra, at 234.91. Gustave Bord, La Franc-Maçonneríe en France; des origines a 1816:

Les Ouvriers de l'Idéme Révolutionnaire (1688-1771) (1908), supra, at 349. Other delegates were Loos, Salzac, Lamarque, Astier, and Labady. Id.

92.Gustave Bord, La Franc-Maçonneríe en France (1908) at 351. On his position in the Illuminati, see Index.






Furthermore, an Illuminatus named Baron de Hilmer — a baron of Austria and a prince of the Palatinate as well as head of a business in Warsaw — came to Paris. Gustave Bord, a masonic historian, says that Hilmer had a “strong influence” over Savalette de Langes, the grand master of the Parisian Amis Reunis lodge in the 1785 Congress.94

Background on Savalette — Chairman of 1785 Congress of Amis Reunis

As became a pattern among French Illuminists, Saval-ette soon became wedded to Mesmer’s lodges and their teachings. He set up the Olympic Society (L’Olympique de la Parfaite Estime) to receive women. Savalette was Adminis-trator, Secretary and Commissar over this lodge. Savalette began filling the ladies’ heads with “animal magnetism.” In 1786, the Olympic Society had 400 members.95 This explains why in 1787, Bode writes to his girlfriend that he intended to go to Strasbourg after his visit to Paris was complete to inves-tigate whether animal magnetism was for real. Bode could see obviously how attached his friend Savalette had become to the system.

93.Firminger, “The Romances of Barruel and Robison,” supra, at 62. Sal-valette wrote someone at the time that he discontinued these private sessions at his home for lack of interest by the brethren in them. Firminger does not provide either a cite nor any context to understand the reliability of his source. Id.

94.Gustave Bord, La Franc-Maçonneríe en France; des origines a 1816: Les Ouvriers de l’Idéme Révolutionnaire (1688-1771) (Paris: Libraire Nationale, 1908) (reprint Geneva-Paris: Slatkine, 1985) at 353.

95.Willermoz wrote Tieman in 1785, Savalette “has lost his head... Within the Olympic Society,... he receives women as masons. From there, he makes them believe in [animal] magnetism.” See Gustave Bord, La Franc-Maçonneríe en France; des origines a 1816: Les Ouvriers de l'Idéme Révolutionnaire (1688-1771), supra, at 354. On other details of the Olympic Society, see “Savalette,” Dictionnaire de la Franc-Maçonnerie (1987) (Ligou, ed.), supra, at 1087.






Results of 1785 Congress of Amis ReunisThe 1785 conference officially decided: (1) Theoso-

phy was the preferred religious science of masonry;96 (2) the Jewish priests had been the first repositories of the esoteric tradition, but the brotherhood of Freemasons were now the indisputable possessors of this truth (very akin to Cagliostro’s teaching); and (3) Freemasonry should try to know the truth of God, man and the universe.97 Also, the Order decided to seek extensive unification of all lodges.

One French Freemason expressed the new guidelines in 1785: “Every member of the Order has the right of entry within every other lodge of the world.”98 This policy opened the door to Illuminist emissaries to enter any lodge of France.

In sum, the French Freemasons, by 1785, while not yet instruments, were under the potential influence of Weishaupt’s Illuminati. The Amis Reunis lodge which arranged the conferences was in intimate contact with the Illuminati. Its Amis Reunis affiliate in Munich had become the headquarters of the Illuminati. The Illuminati Falgera, Dietrich, Hilmer, Costanza and Kolowrat each made several visits to France by 1785. Each was on a mission to serve the Illuminati’s plans which several attendants at Wilhemsbad revealed was a plan to overthrow France.

Next, we shall see the invasion of Illuminism in France continued unabated after 1785.

96. The reader should recall that De Luchet advised in 1789 that the Illu-minati strategy was to introduce Theosophy which is what so con-cerned De Luchet.

97.Le Forestier, Convents des Philalethes, supra, at 44.98.Bernard Fay, La Franc-Maçonnerie et la Révolution intellectuelle du

XVBIIIe siècle (reprint of 1935) (Paris: La Librairie Francaise, 1961) at 159.





Illuminati Visit to Paris Meeting of Amis Reunis in 1787

Illuminati Visit to Paris Meeting of Amis Reunis in 1787

On July 16, 1785, Brother Tassin de l’Etang from Lausanne suggested the need to have another national con-vention. (Tassin in 1787 would be recruited by Bode into the Bavarian Illuminati.) It was agreed to have another at Paris in 1787. The circular for this next conference was, according to Le Forestier, “made the most mysterious on the direction that the Philalethes [that is, the Amis Reunis] intended to give... to their investigations.”99

The debate at the next meeting centered, in part, on the policies of the Illuminati which operated at Avignon, France.

A group calling itself the Illuminati in 1784-1785 set up a lodge at Avignon.100

Was this a part of Weishaupt’s Illuminati? The answer turns into a quibble of sorts because the Avignon Illu-minati’s tactics and agenda were identical to Weishaupt, as its papers too were uncovered. The Illuminati of Avignon devel-oped specific tactics to undermine the Catholic church in France and Italy. Its leaders claimed revelation from angels showed that God mandated a revolution in France; and that God wanted to punish the Catholic Church for its apostasy, and He willed its destruction. The use of phony inspiration to appeal to the people of France was the innovative idea of Per-netty, the leader of the Illuminati at Avignon.101

This explains then why he Amis Reunis circular call-ing for the 1787 masonic conference revealed a primary area of study would be “the nature of intermediary beings between God and man, and the possibility to speak with them. . . .”102 This session likely studied the benefits of using

99. Le Forestier, Convent du Philalethes, supra, at 44.100. See Indices in this series.101. See Indices in this series.






angelic revelations to carry concealed subversive messages. Madame Labrousse emerged later from these same masonic circles and claimed after the Revolution that the angels told her the Revolution would come. In the midst of this, she “prophesied” the destruction of the Catholic Church. God wanted to restore simple Christianity, she preached. The 1787 masonic Congress was thus making a study of how to use these claims about angels and spirit-guides to foster a revolu-tionary spirit, and disarm its opponents.

Dittfurth Comes To 1787 Amis Reunis Main Conference

Dittfurth, the Illuminatus who convinced the atten-dants at Wilhemsbad in 1782 to accept the Illuminati propos-als, came to Paris to attend the 1787 conference. He arrived at the start of the congress.

Dittfurth mentions in his diaries — published only in this century — that he went to Paris to oppose any tendency of religious mysticism of the French Freemasons.103

Dittfurth may have been pointing at the mysticism invented by his Illuminati branch under Pernetty in the south of France. If so, then Pernetty was being asked to defend this strategy. In light of the revolutionary direction of this mysti-cism after the congress, it appears Pernetty’s group convinced Dittfurth to let them continue trying it as long as it could stir revolutionary fervor.

102. Le Forestier, Convents des Philalethes, supra, at 44.103.Le Forestier, Convent du Philalethes, supra, at 44-45, citing Franz

Dietrich von Dittfurth, Antwort an die Philalethen (Wolfstieg: 1906) at 43. Dittfurth’s book is also discussed by René Le Forestier, Antoine Faivre, La franc-maçonnerie templière et occultiste aux XVIIIe et XIXe siècles (Aubier-Montaigne, 1970) at 790.





The 1787 Congress & Bode’s Participation In June-July 1787 At The Amis

Dittfurth’s presence during this Congress of 1787 has escaped the notice of most historians on the issue of the Illu-minati’s importance. Neither Robison, Barruel nor Stark knew of Dittfurth’s presence. It was only with the publication of Dittfurth’s memoirs in 1906 that the world learned of his presence at the Paris Amis Reunis Congress during March 1787. These memoirs were: Franz Dietrich von Dittfurth, Antwort an die Philalethen (Wolfstieg: 1906). The title referred to the Philalethe rite within the Amis Reunis system at Paris. Le Forestier, a respected scholar, extensively dis-cusses this information.104

The 1787 Congress & Bode’s Participation In June-July 1787 At The Amis Reunis After the Congress

The records of the Amis Reunis show Bode (the Illu-minatus) spoke at a session of the lodge Amis Reunis of Paris in July 1787. The main congress was already over. If this was the only date Bode was present at the Amis Reunis, then it must have been Dittfurth who did the Illuminati’s bidding at the 1787 international congress at the Amis Reunis. Dittfurth by all accounts was an even more significant member than Bode. Dittfurth represented the Illuminati at the Wilhemsbad Congress in 1782 where four memoirs reveal an agreement was reached to cause a revolution in France. Hence, Dittfurth had to be the most illuminized of Illuminati to carry such a mission and message to Wilhemsbad. Thus, his role in the 1785 international congress at Paris of the Amis Reunis had to be equally important.

104.See Footnote 103 on page 34.






Details of the International Convent of The Amis Reunis 1787

The earlier Convent of the Amis Reunis began March 8, 1787. Savalette de Langes, the Grand Master of the Amis Reunis of Paris, gathered the delegates at a salon at a hotel on the Rue Saint-Honoré.105 The head Jacobin society would later operate from this very same street.

The Amis Reunis leaders put forth a plan to reform Freemasonry. Chefdebelin explained it to the attendants. We should note Chefdebelin had been at the Wilhemsbad Con-vent of 1782 too. And he wrote a masonic colleague privately in 1806 that Wilhemsbad is where had initiated a plan to overthrow France using Freemasonry.106 Hence, his being present with Dittfurth at the 1787 Congress, like both had been at Wilhemsbad, portends a similar plan was being advanced at this major conference.

Then several delegates spoke up at the Paris Congress of 1787 to support other masons accepting the leadership of the Chevaliers des Bienfaissance (“C.B.”) system of Willer-moz from Lyon, France.

To reiterate, this Lyon system was tied directly with the Illuminati at Munich. The C.B. of Lyons had issued a pat-ented to what later became the headquarter lodge of the Illu-minati at Munich — the Lodge St. Theodore. And Willermoz had stayed in Germany primarily visiting a Munich C.B. lodge from September 1782 to May 1783107 — evidently lodge Theodore.

At the 1787 Congress at Paris of the Amis Reunis, a vote was taken on making the French Templars/the C.B., the supervisory body over all French Freemasons. Le Forestier

105. Le Forestier, Convents des Philalethes, supra, at 45.106. See Index.107. On Lodge St. Theodore, see Index. On Willermoz in Germany, see

“French Templars in Bavaria” on page 44 et seq., in the chapter on secret societies in France.





Bode’s Arrival At Paris Is For A Post-International Conference Meeting Of Just

does not tell us the result of the vote. Apparently it is unknown. However, we may presume the C.B. substantially won again in France as it had at Wilhemsbad.

This national masonic congress had ended on May 26, 1787. Dittfurth was the Illuminati representative throughout that congress.

Bode’s Arrival At Paris Is For A Post-International Conference Meeting Of Just Amis Reunis Lodge Members

What Truly Was Bode’s Rank?

How important was Bode truly within the Illuminati? French scholars believe “Amelius Bode [was] successor to Weishaupt....”108

For the trip to Paris, “high brothers” are solicited by Professor Busche to help pay Bode’s way to Paris at the last minute — when Bode is stuck in Leipzig, as he tells his girl-friend Frau Hess. This makes it sound like Bode, if a leader, was himself dependent on the Order for finances.

Regardless of his status or power, J.C. Bode was an important Illuminatus. He arrived June 24, 1787 at Paris. He was introduced to the Lodge Amis Reunis at Paris by certain special and important people who were later involved in the French Revolution. What makes the story of Bode just as important as the fact as Dittfurth’s presence is the names of (a) who introduced Bode to the lodge and (b) who attended his speech. The names read like a roll-call of the Revolution of 1789 and 1792.

108.Henri Welschinger, La Mission Secrete de Mirabeau A Berlin, 1786-1787; d’apres les documents originaux des Archives des Affaires fetrangeres, avec introduction et notes (Paris: Plon, Nourrit et Cie. 1900) at 40 n. 1.






Mirabeau Presents Bode To the Lodge Amis Reunis in 1787

Reliable masonic historians record that Mirabeau and Bonneville introduced Bode to the members of the Lodge Amis Reunis in 1787.109 Bonneville was fluent in German and French, and likely was Bode’s translator.

Bode Misses The International Conference By Amis Reunis Paris

This Amis Reunis international conference ended May 26, 1787. Bode wrote his girlfriend that he was stuck in Leipzig on May 26, 1787 when Professor Busche and certain “high brothers” offered to pay his finances to Paris. He then concludes this letter saying he arrived on the “20th” at Paris, which in context would mean June 20th. Engel’s own note, however, says the arrival date was June 24th.

Engel obtained this letter of Bode to Frau Hess from the Royal Library of Dresden.110 Boettiger had begged her in 1795 to allow the release of this letter, but she had refused him. Now we can read it. Bode’s letter to Frau Hess explained:

I had started off on May 4th to Leipzig. On the 21st of May, I had my clothes completely col-lected at Herrnhut. I arrived at Leipzig by May 26th. There, a Friend, Mr. von Busche, a rather rich gentleman to me, told he about his times in the wars. When I told him about my planned trip through Silesia, he wanted to go with me. I

109. Bourdin, a first-rate scholar, specialized in studies of popular societ-ies at Paris. She said that Bonneville and Mirabeau introduced both Bode and Busche at the Lodge Amis Reunis, citing a friend-of-masonry —Le Couteulx de Canteleu. See Isabelle Bourdin, Les Sociétés Populaires a Paris Pendant La Révolution (Paris: Libraire du Recueíl Sirey, 1937) at 53 (citing Le Couteulx de Canteleu in his work Les sectes et les Societes Secretes, supra, at 168).

110.Stauffer, New England, etc., at 173 fn. 1, citing Engel, supra, at 409-15.





Bode’s Arrival At Paris Is For A Post-International Conference Meeting Of Just

then told him that I had no [money]. We are to go to the Convent of Freemasons at Paris, who were meeting under the name of Philalethen. I was to speak on a paper I had written in the winter and I had already sent ahead to these supremely good and honest people to bring them back from harmful teachings. When Mr. B. von d. [Busch] read this Paper, he said, I would benefit much by going to Paris where the meetings were still continuing. I had received a new invitation letter. [In reply] I apologized that I think the cost of travel for My bag would be too difficult. However, he insisted that he join the trip, and he would bear the cost going and returning, and that I should only live on my own money while in Paris...He also presented my case to some high brother. Bey joined him in providing for me.... So I had to give in and we travelled from May to the

20th in Paris.111

Then in a letter from approximately July 24, 1787 while still in Paris,112 Bode speaks of the success he had:

My main purpose here has succeeded. Since I arrived here, what I had written... was read twice. This Convention has brought an end to searching for alchemy, Cabala, theosophy, Theurgy and the more subtle occult sci-ences....and are determined to use their time and mental faculties on such things as to what reach out and are useful to human society. So my travel has been totally satisfying. You, do

111.Leopold Engel, Geschichte des Illuminaten-ordens (H. Bermühler verlag, 1906) at 411.

112.It appears Bode left Paris and returned again for the July 1787 meet-ing. Billington refers to the June 1787 visit as the “first of two visits” of Bode to Paris. (Billington, supra, at 96 (“first of two visits to Paris (June of 1787)”).






not speak of this to the Profane Freemasons [i.e., those not Illuminized]. You understand me.... I hope.... I also have an opportunity in Strasbourg and [wish] to pursue with all dili-gence observing Animal Magnetism....So far, it has been so much talked and written about, that even though I am not into miracles and

miracle cures [I would look into it.]113

Notice that in having enlisted the Amis Reunis to reject alchemy, Cabala, theosophy, Theurgy and occult sci-ences, Bode did not say he caused them to abandon animal magnetism by Mesmer. Rather, Bode plans on passing through Strasbourg to first-hand examine whether it really works.

Is It Surprising That Mirabeau Is Identified As Present At This Amis Reunis Lodge in June-July 1787 to Present Bode?

Some may be skeptical that Mirabeau was present for the June-July 1787 presentation of Bode.

However, the very day the international conference at Paris broke up earlier on May 26, 1787 is the identical date that historians record Mirabeau left France for Germany before returning in the summer. That seems an odd coinci-dence. It bespeaks the strong possibility that Mirabeau attended the Amis Reunis Conference which ended May 26, 1787. (At issue, however, is whether Mirabeau returned and introduced Bode to the Amis Reunis after Bode arrived in June 1787.)

113.Leopold Engel [founder revived Illuminati], Geschichte des Illumi-naten-ordens (H. Bermühler verlag, 1906) at 411-412. This letter is also quoted by Bro. Firminger, “The Romances of Barruel and Robi-son,” supra, at 62, citing Engel, Geschichte de Ill., supra, at 410-15. Firminger misnoted the year as 1785; Engel speaks of 1787.





Is It Surprising That Mirabeau Is Identified As Present At This Amis Reunis

Then there are other earlier links of Mirabeau to the Amis Reunis that historians note which then makes the intro-duction-claim for 1787 more plausible.

In late 1785, Mirabeau had been strongly supported by the Amis Reunis in getting his appointment to Berlin, as proven below. As a result of this appointment, Mirabeau was now in touch with the German Illuminati — a year prior to this Amis Reunis world congress of 1787. Thus, it makes per-fect sense that he would introduce Bode sometime between June and July 1787 to the lodge.

In an article by R.M. Johnston, a highly reputable scholar on the French Revolution,114 entitled “Mirabeau’s Secret Mission to Berlin,” in the American Historical Review (1900), he discusses how this foreign affairs mission was arranged for Mirabeau in late 1785. It was done through the auspices of the Amis Reunis lodge:

Mirabeau, with his powerful backing, was in a position to make terms. It was decided that he should leave Paris;... This was what the bank-ers’ group, or let us say Panchaud, Claviere, Talleyrand, Lauzun, arranged, with the con-sent of the pamphleteer. He was to go to Berlin where, through the relations of the Amis Reu-nis, a sect of Freemasons concerning which something more will appear presently, they

had a secret means of acting.115

Mirabeau’s link in 1785 to the Amis Reunis at Paris put him in touch with the German Illuminati. How so?

114.He also wrote: R.M. Johnston, The French Revolution (N.Y.: Henry Holt & Co., 1909); The French Republic (N.Y.: 1909); The Napoleonic Empire In Southern Italy And Rise Of The Secret Societies (MacMillan 1904)(2 vols.)

115.R.M. Johnston “Mirabeau’s Secret Mission to Berlin,” American His-torical Review Vol. VI (October 1900 to July 1901) 235, 241.






To repeat, the Amis Reunis of Paris were directly tied to the Chevaliers Bienfaissants of Lyon by sharing since 1779 a common grade of “Knights Templar.”116 Then this Lyon lodge had a daughter lodge it patented at Munich.117 All its proceedings thereafter were in French. By 1779, its official name was, in keeping with its French patent, Loge St. Théodore au Bon Conseil. Gradually, this became the Illumi-nati headquarters.118 As Mirabeau in 1788 mentioned, this Templar-patented lodge allied itself with the Illuminati:

Precisely in the time, the Logé Théodore du bon Conseil in Munich found some men at their head and heart who were tired of being disappointed by the vain promises and quarrels of Masonry. These leaders resolved to enter their branch with another secret association to which they gave the name of Illuminati Order.119

In light of this, we can now understand why Johnston explains the Amis Reunis of Paris put Mirabeau in direct touch with the Illuminati of Germany such as Nicolai, de Luchet and Mauvillon. Johnston explains:

116.See “Amis Reunis Partners With The French Templars On Common Philalethe Rite” on page 23 et seq.

117.René Le Forestier, Les Illuminés de Bavière et la Franc-Maçonnerie allemande (Paris: 1915) at 198, 392.

118.René Le Forestier, Les Illuminés de Bavière et la Franc-Maçonnerie allemande (Paris: 1915) at 198, 392. See also, Leopold Engel who dis-cusses the lodge in Geschichte des Illuminaten-Ordens, supra, at 269-90. More details can be found at http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Geschichte_des_Illuminaten-Ordens/Die_Loge_Theodor_vom_guten_Rat._Die_Aussagen_zweier_Priester.

119. Mirabeau’s De la monarchie prussienne sous FRÉDÉRIC LE GRAND; AVEC UN APPENDICE Contenant des Recherches sur la situation actuelle des principales Contrées de l’Allemagne (London: 1788) at 97. This is available through books.google.com.


http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/




Is It Surprising That Mirabeau Is Identified As Present At This Amis Reunis

It is more than probable that Mirabeau was furnished with at least equally important rec-ommendations from the French bankers to their German correspondents and from the Amis Reunis to the highest masonic and other secret circles at Berlin. Besides this, he was already in close relations with Major Mauvil-lon, with whom he was collaborating a history of Frederick the Great; this officer was a promi-nent “Illumine,” and it is noticeable that among others of the Frenchman's earliest acquaintances in Germany may be noted the names of such well-known “Illumines” as Charles von Struensee, Nicolai, Luchet, and others; it was the latter who wrote the Essai sur les Illumines that has been wrongly ascribed to Mirabeau. In addition to these already suffi-cient openings, the French pamphleteer may be guessed to have had easy access to the circle in which Earth, Nicolai and Walther were con-spicuous, or in other words, to the “German

Union.”120

As a result of these contacts, other serious scholars who have specialized in studying Mirabeau’s Berlin period conclude Mirabeau apparently joined Weishaupt’s Illuminati as of 1786. Welschinger, a specialist on this period, writes:

It appears that during his stay in Prussia, Mira-beau had been initiated into the mysteries of the sect of the Illuminati directed by Weishaupt and that upon his return to France, he was introduced within a lodge that belonged to those who practiced these mysteries....Later, Amelius Bode, successor to Weishaupt, and the

120.Johnston, id., 241-42. Mirabeau returned to Paris in June 1786, but by September 1786 was in Dresden. Id., at 247.






Baron Busch worked a union between German

Illuminism and French Freemasonry.121

Hence, it makes perfect sense that Mirabeau would introduce Bode to the Amis Reunis of Paris during their national congress that ended May 27, 1787.

Mirabeau Discusses in 1788 Bode in On The Prussian Monarchy

Another point that confirms Mirabeau introduced Bode is that Mirabeau makes a highly personal remark about Bode in his book On The Prussian Monarchy which was pub-lished in 1788. Mirabeau comments that the name of Bode — a small-time publisher and translator — “should be dear to humanity.”122

How did Mirabeau form such an opinion of Bode? Obviously a personal encounter is the best explanation. As a result of all these facts, it is very hard to believe Mirabeau did not personally meet Bode and introduce him at this Amis Reunis lodge meeting during June-July 1787.

121.Welschinger, id., at 40 fn. 1.122.Mirabeau, De La Monarchie Prussienne (1788), supra, Vol. V, at 74.

Speaking of J.C.Bode’s Examen impartial du livre intitulé: des Erreurs...; par un frère laïque en fait de science (1782), Mirabeau remarks as to Bode, “Un homme dont le nom deviendra cher à l’humanité....” Id. (On Bode as the author, see La bulletin du biblio-phile Belge (Brussels: Olivier, 1869) at 26.)





July 24, 1787 Amis Reunis Lodge Meeting (Paris)

July 24, 1787 Amis Reunis Lodge Meeting (Paris)

According to masonic records, J.C. Bode (1730-1793) attended a meeting of the Amis Reunis Paris lodge that took place on July 24, 1787.123 He was accompanied by Professor Busche. This is not to say Bode did not appear earlier. This is simply the date masonic records confirm.

Biography of Professor Busche

Busche was a wealthy man who mostly paid for the trip. Busche was a professor of astronomy who in 1765 had taken an affinity to the brother of J.C.Bode, one John Elert Bode (1765-1826). In 1765, J.E. Bode had made amateur efforts at astronomy. In 1768, J.E. Bode wrote Introduction to the Starry Heaven, and Professor Busche wrote the introduc-tion. This book was highly popular.124J.E. Bode’s writings are the origin of what was once a popular theory known as Bode’s law — an estimator about planetary distance from the sun.

Hence, obviously the reason Professor Busche accom-panied J.E.’s brother J.C.Bode to Paris was partly out of con-sideration for J.E. Bode, the famous astronomer. Yet, as J.C. Bode’s letter to his girlfriend reveals, Professor Busche also thought the paper to be delivered had an important message.

123. Le Forestier, Convents des Philalethes, supra, at 46. 124.Rose, “John Elert Bode,” A New General Biographical Dictionary

(London: 1853) Vol. IV at 341. He had been for many years Royal Professor of Astronomy at the Academy in Berlin until he retired in 1825.






Bode’s Speech Is Now RecoveredIn 1996, Professor Potret republished the actual

speech of Bode in 1787 at the Paris Amis Reunis/Phila-lethes.125

Its title was Essai sur l’Origin de la Franch Maconne-rie...presente aux R.R.F.F. Philalethes assembles au Convent de Paris 1787. Professor Potret obtained it from the Bibliote-que du Grand Orient de Pays-Bas as “manuscrit, fonds Kloss.” He adds “la Landesbibliothek de Dresden possesses another copy of the text which [Professor Pierre] Yves-Beau-repaire kindly communicated to me.”126

Professor Potret mentions that the “text was not entirely unknown previously as J.J. Mounier gave a summary of it in De l’influence.... at 130-33.”127

Professor Potret summarizes it:• Freemasonry was the means that Protestants were able at first to

contest the authority of the Pope.• It had to advance by means of a mask by having fellow mem-

bers recognize one another by allegory, hieroglyphics, etc.• Bode then quoted from Saint-Martin’s Of Errors and Truth, to

“join all in unity.”

125.Charles Potret, Les Philalèthes et les Convents de Paris: Une poli-tique de la folie (Paris: H. Champion, 1996) at 225-227, cited in Charles Porset, “Jésuites et franc-maçons. Un dossier revisité,” Esotérisme, gnoses et imaginaire symbolique: Mélanges offerts à Antoine Faivre (Peeters, 2001) at 461 fn.7 (available at books.goo-gle.com).

126.Charles Porset, “Jésuites et franc-maçons. Un dossier revisité,” Esotérisme, gnoses et imaginaire symbolique: Mélanges offerts à Antoine Faivre (Peeters, 2001) at 461 fn.7 (available at books.goo-gle.com).

127.Charles Porset, “Jésuites et franc-maçons. Un dossier revisité,” Esotérisme, gnoses et imaginaire symbolique: Mélanges offerts à Antoine Faivre (Peeters, 2001) at 461 fn.7 (available at books.goo-gle.com).





Bonneville of Paris Unquestionably Linked to Bode’s 1787 Visit

• The ritual was to instill the sense that we are seeking the lost, and we partake the role of missionaries.

• The origin of the legend of Hiram is obscure. • The allegory of Hiram was an “ingenious allegory of the Refor-

mation.” Hiram is fighting hierarchy. The master is seated. Hiram is in the temple with two of his rebellious companions. These two secretly represent Luther and Calvin. These two act out in this allegory the killing of the master.128

Obviously, this message would tell Freemasons that from inception they were holding secrets that were rebellious to church and state. In that era, rebellion against Catholicism put one simultaneously at odds with both government and church. Bode’s explanation then made all the symbolism have a dualistic meaning — one innocuous, almost childish, and the second, one revolutionary or politically/religiously progressive.


Reliable historians record that Bonneville along with Mirabeau introduced Bode and Busche to the members of the Lodge Amis Reunis during 1787.129

128.Charles Porset, “Jésuites et franc-maçons. Un dossier revisité,” Esotérisme, gnoses et imaginaire symbolique: Mélanges offerts à Antoine Faivre (Peeters, 2001) at 461 et seq. (available at books.goo-gle.com).

129. Bourdin specialized in studies of popular societies at Paris. She said that Bonneville and Mirabeau each introduced Bode at the Lodge Amis Reunis, citing a friend-of-masonry — Le Couteulx de Canteleu. See Isabelle Bourdin, Les Sociétés Populaires a Paris Pendant La Révolu-tion (Paris: Libraire du Recueíl Sirey, 1937) at 53 (citing Le Couteulx de Canteleu in his work Les sectes et les Societes Secretes, supra, at 168).






There really is no way to deny an intimate connection between Bonneville and Bode formed in 1787. Bonneville and Bode collaborated on several works from 1788 forward, including Bonneville’s work Jesuits Chased from Freema-sonry.130 In Jesuits Chased, Bonneville in 1788 writes about the Order he serves as spread over Europe:

In France, in Italy, in Germany, and above all in Russia, they are cherishing the hope of one day being admitted into the miraculous secrets by the beneficent superiors who watch over all

members of the society.131

This collaboration over Jesuits Chased began when Nicolas de Bonneville in 1788 published at Paris Jesuits Chased From Freemasonry which later in 1788 Bode trans-lated into German and published at Leipzig.132

130.The link between this book and Bode’s speech to the Amis Reunis is self-evident in Professor Porset’s speech of March 16, 2000 at the Grand Orient, entitled “Jésuites et Francs-Maçons…L’Essai sur la Franc-Maçonnerie de Bode (1787), un dossier revisité.” For back-ground on this work of 1787 is explained by Charles Porset, “Jésuites et franc-maçons. Un dossier revisité,” Esotérisme, gnoses et imagi-naire symbolique: Mélanges offerts à Antoine Faivre (Peeters, 2001) at 459-469 (available at books.google.com).

131.Les Jesuites chassés de la Maçonnerie & leur poignard brisé par les maçons, L, 1788, I, 27, quoted in Billington, Fire in the Minds of Men (2007 reprint) at 41.

132. See Charles Porset, “Jésuites et franc-maçons. Un dossier revisité,” Esotérisme, gnoses et imaginaire symbolique: Mélanges offerts à Antoine Faivre (Peeters, 2001) at 461 (available at books.google.com). See also, Stephan Füssel, Verlagsbibliographie Göschen 1785 bis 1838 (1998) at 28 (part one part included an article on “the Company of Ignatius,” and was translated by Bode into German); Edward Bat-ley, Reforming the Whole World (Symposium Fife Research Lodge, 2003) at 16 fn. 19 (Company of Ignatius portion translated by Bode); see also, “Bonneville, Nicolas de,” La Grand Encyclopedie (Paris: 1873) Vol. VII at 346 (Bode translated portion).






This book proclaimed a mysterious “new order opposed to tyrants and priests” successfully had expelled Jesuits from Freemasonry.133 No doubt, Bode intended the reader to know the Illuminati represented this new order.

Bonneville included in part two of Jesuits Chased134 from 1788 a work dedicated to discussing the Knights Tem-plar. This French work by Bonneville was then translated by Bode into German and Bode arranged for his publisher, Göschen, in 1788 to publish Bonneville’s work at Leipzig.135 (Mirabeau in 1788 then gave highest praises to Mr. Bonnev-ille for his work on Templar Freemasonry136 while at the same time giving Mr. Bode highest praise for another work on Masonry that he wrote.)137

There is confusion over who authored Jesuits Chased. However, Bonneville wrote it, and it was translated into German by Bode.138

Yet, for our overall point, who wrote or translated either work is of little importance. The fact remains these two men are intimately associated with one another.

133.Billington, Fire in the Minds of Men (2007 reprint) at 97.134.Bonneville’s books often have a part one and part two with separate

pagination. Mackey observes that Jesuits Chased is in two distinct other sections. (“Bonneville,” An Encyclopædia of Freemasonry (Phil-adelphia, 1879) at 122.) This is evident in the sub-parts of Jesuits Chased, etc.: [1] Orient de Londres: La Maçonnerie écossoise com-parée avec les trois professions & le secret des Templiers du 14e Siecle. Premiere Partie. 144 S. [2] Mêmeté des quatre Voeux de la Compagnie de S. Ignace & des quatre Grades de la Maçonnerie de S. Jean. Seconde Partie. 1788. 136 und 54 S. 8° See, Der Schmutztitel für beide Theile heisst: Les Jesuites chassés de la Maçonnerie & leur poignard brisé par les maçons. (http://zs.thulb.uni-jena.de/receive/jportal_jparticle_00003933.)

In the German edition of this entire book, part one and part two are sepa-rately noted as translated by Bode. See Stephan Füssel, Verlagsbib-liographie Göschen 1785 bis 1838 (1998) at 28 (part one); Edward Batley, Reforming the Whole World (Symposium Fife Research Lodge, 2003) at 16 fn. 19 (part two, Company of Ignatius portion).


http://zs.thulb.uni-jena.de/receive/





The Masonic Records of the Attendees of Bode’s Speech At The Amis Reunis Lodge

The same Masonic records, according to Isabelle Bourdin, show that those in attendance for Bode’s speech at the Amis Reunis in 1787 were: Condorcet, Hébert, Noel (later known as Babeuf), Barnave, Sieyès, Danton, Santerre, Savalette de Langes, Petion, Saint-Just, Camille Desmoulins, Gregoire, Garat, the Duke d’Orleans, Marat, Chenier and many others later famous in the Revolution.139

All these men were later integral to the French Revo-lution.

Because this was a regular lodge meeting, and not the world congress previously hosted by the Amis Reunis in 1787, one should recognize these men were all members of the Amis Reunis.

135. Nicolas Bonneville wrote La Maçonnerie écossaise comparée avec les trois professions et le secret des Templiers (1788). It was translated in 1788 by Bode into German, and published as Die Schottische Maur-erey verglichen mit den drey Ordens-Gelübden und das Geheimniss der Tempelherrn aus dem 14. Jahrhundert [trans. Johann Joachim Christoph Bode] (Leipzig: Göschen, 1788.) See http://zs.thulb.uni-jena.de/receive/jportal_jparticle_00004535.

136.After citing La Maçonnerie écossaise comparée avec les trois profes-sions et le secret des templiers du quatorzième siècle, and discussing its points on the Templars, in particular of modern Germany, Mirabeau writes: “Cet ouvrage qui fait beaucoup d’honneur aux connoissances, à la sagacité, et même au courage de M de Bonneville, n’est pas, comme on-pourra le croire en France, un systême. C’est un rapprochement très complet et très-exact des principaux faits qui ont conduit en Alle-magne, à l’importante découverte sur laquelle nous appelons l’atten-tion de tous les bous esprits et des vrais amis de l’humanité.” (De la monarchie prussienne, sous Frédéric le Grand (London: 1788) Vol. III at 477.)

137.After citing to Jesuits Chased From Freemasonry, Mirabeau says that the name of Mr. Johann Bode, its author, “should be dear to human-ity.” Mirabeau, De La Monarchie etc. (1788) at 74-75.


http://zs.thulb.uni-




The Masonic Records of the Attendees of Bode’s Speech At The Amis Reunis

John Robison was not privy to this conference atten-dance list when he wrote in 1798. Nevertheless, he examined the membership list supplied by the Amis Reunis as of 1785 to the Enlightenment journal of liberal Johann Erich Biester (1749-1816) — Berlinische Monatsschrift. After reviewing their names in the 1785 volume, John Robison exclaimed that we find in one place “all the first actors in the French Revolu-tion.”140 Indeed, when we see the names on the actual list of listeners to Bode in 1787 we cannot help but see the Revolu-tion’s main authors!

Menzel who wrote a highly respected history of Ger-many describes in that work the role of the Duke d’Orleans in this 1787 conference. Menzel describes the response to Bode: “Philip, Duke of Orleans... received them [Bode and Busche] with open arms.”141 D’Orleans was one of the leading insti-gators, along with Mirabeau, of the street agitation at Paris during 1789.

138. For example, Epstein incorrectly attributes both the French and Ger-man version of Jesuits Chased to Bonneville’s authorship. (See Klaus Epstein, The Genesis of German Conservatism (Princeton, N.J.: Princ-eton University Press, 1966) at 99 n. 30.)

139.Isabelle Bourdin (a first-rate scholar), Les Sociétés Populaires a Paris Pendant La Révolution (Paris: Libraire du Recueíl Sirey, 1937) at 54.

140. John Robison, Proofs of a Conspiracy (N.Y: 1798), supra, at 228. The the Berlinischer Monatscrift was a Berlin monthly directed to the general public. Kant was one of its contributors in a 1784 issue.

141.Wolfgang Menzel, Germany from the Earliest Period (trans. Mrs. George Horrocks) (N.Y.: Peter Fenelon Collier, 1899), Vol. III, at 1331.






Mounier’s Denial Of Importance of Bode’s Visit

Mounier’s 1801 work attempted to deflect the charges of an Illuminati role in the Revolution. Mounier says he asked Bode’s friends at Weimar about what happened in Paris. They told Mounier that Bode was unhappy with the results of his 1787 trip to Paris. Bode arrived with the intention, Mou-nier says, of gaining adherents but “was quickly obliged to give up all hopes.” Mounier adds: “His friends attest that he was very much dissatisfied with his connexion with the Free-masons of Paris.”142

Mounier, it turns out, was utterly gullible, and contro-verted by contemporary memoirs of Bode himself and objec-tive observers such as Schiller.

First, as we just saw, Bode told his girlfriend some-thing quite different:

So my travel has been totally satisfying. You, do not speak of this to the Profane Freema-sons [i.e., those not Illuminized]. You under-stand me.... I hope....

Second, Schiller provides a similar glimpse at Bode’s thoughts, as discussed next.

Schiller’s Correspondence On Bode’s VisitSchiller, a world renowned playwright and man of lib-

eral sentiments, wrote to friends about Bode’s trip. This was based on his friend Bode telling him soon after his return

142.Jean-Joseph Mounier, On the Influence Attributed to Philosophers, Free-Masons, and to the Illuminati on the Revolution of France. A Fascimile Reproduction with an introduction by Theodore A. Di Padova. (Originally published 1801) (Scholars’ Fascimile & Reprints, 1974) at 220.





Schiller’s Correspondence On Bode’s Visit

from Paris how it went. Schiller contradicts what Mounier was told. Schiller wrote Koerner on September 18, 1787 that Bode was very enthusiastic about the results of his mission at Paris, but Schiller thought it could not possibly have gone as well at Paris as Bode had thought. Schiller says:

Bode, it seems to me, has given me a very par-tial description of France. He had too little time at Paris to understand more than one party, and you can easily imagine over there all are parties. I suppose that he frequented above all with Savalette de Langes, chief of a Lodge where he [Bode] was received [i.e., the Amis

Reunis].143

In context, Schiller is saying that Bode was boasting of a fruitful time in Paris. Schiller expresses doubt that Bode could have done so much in so little time due to the multiplic-ity of lodges in Paris. And Bode spent most of his time with Savalette de Langes at the Amis Reunis — where, as noted, the leaders of the Revolution emerged later. Hence, Bode had a positive although maybe too excited impression of his suc-cess at Paris.

Someone lied to Mounier, and he gullibly accepted it. Could the fact Mounier was a teacher in a school with his sal-ary paid for by an Illuminatus duke have influenced him to take such opinion at face value?144

We should pause and note one other important fact from Schiller’s letter. It is absolutely confirmed by Bode’s diary recently published Journal. Bode told Schiller that he

143. Le Forestier, Les Illuminés, supra, at 668 n.3; see also Daniel Jacoby, “Der Stifer des Illuminatenordens und eine Briefstelle Schill-ers an Körner,” Euphorion (Leipzig: 1903) at 91. See also, Firminger, supra, at 62.

144. See Index.






spent most of his time in the company of Savalette. This con-firms Bode recruited Savalette, which Bode’s Journal con-firms (discussed below).

Gustave Bord, a masonic historian, thought similarly, and said in 1908: “later it is believed he [Savalette] pro-gressed within the masonic science and adopted the theories of the Illuminati of Germany.”145 This is significant because Savalette was the Grand Master of the Paris Amis Reunis.

In the next quote, Schiller also notes Bode’s view on the prospect for future upheaval in France. Schiller says: “Bode draws a sorry picture of Paris. He says that the nation has lost all its energy and is rapidly approaching its decay.”146

This is a positive statement in terms of the prospect for a revolution in France. Bode regarded France was in stage of collapse. Of course, one wishing to overthrow a country would view such a circumstance as positive.

Private Diary of BodeFurthermore, we have the private diary notes of Bode.

Leopold Engel was the first scholarly apologist for the Illumi-nati to examine these papers. Without publishing them, in 1906 Engel concluded from them that Bode was successful in Paris in 1787. Engel said Bode’s notes reveal the Amis Reu-nis and Illuminati agreed to join forces towards more reason-able ends useful for society in conformance with Illuminati strategy.147

145. Gustave Bord, La Franc-Maçonneríe en France; des origines a 1816: Les Ouvriers de l'Idéme Révolutionnaire (1688-1771) (Paris: Libraire Nationale, 1908) (reprinted Geneva-Paris: Slatkine, 1985) at 347.

146. Firminger, “The Romances of Barruel and Robison,” supra, at 62 (italics added) citing L. Simpson, Correspondence of Schiller with Körner, I, at 142.





Private Diary of Bode

1994 Publication of Bode’s Diary

Finally, in 1994, Bode’s diary was published in Ger-many in a book entitled:

Journal von einer Reise von Weimar nach Frankreich im Jahr 1787 (ed. Hermann Schüt-tler)(Munich: Ars Urna, 1994).

The original manuscript was in the Saxon State Library at Dresden which is available to only a few experts.148 Thus, obviously Schüttler’s source was the same as Engel’s source.

Schüttler, the Munich publisher, agrees on Bode’s importance within the Illuminati. Research scholars believe that when Bode left Gotha, the Illuminati were “run by a management team controlled from Weimar and the principal-ity of Gotha.”149

Schüttler said that while this diary provides signifi-cant evidence of recruitment at Paris for the Illuminati, it should not be overblown into necessarily only an Illuminati conspiracy. Schüttler stresses caution: “These relationships [i.e., of Freemasonry or Illuminati] can be read into every-thing, even one could say Weishaupt, Knigge, and Bode were the leaders of Germany’s Strict Observance fulfilling a long planned conspiracy on the establishment of the Republic in France.”150

147.Leopold Engel, Geschichte des Illuminaten-Ordens (Berlin: 1906) at 407.

148.“Der große Drahtzieher 1787 – zwei Jahre vor der Revolution – reiste der Chef eines deutschen,” Focus Magazine (ed. Roger Thiede) (1994) No. 14 (online edition at http://www.focus.de/kultur/leben/geschichte-der-grosse-drahtzieher_aid_146269.html)(accessed 12/20/2008).



http://www.focus.de/kultur/leben/geschichte-






With such caution in mind, the diary gives us a more precise time-line. Bode started the trip to Paris on May 1, 1787, as we already knew, and he left Paris on August 4, 1787.151

Bode’s notes of early July after some time at Paris were: “I have the pleasure to see that I have not worked in vain.”152 His last letter of August 4th said: “My business is done.”153

Bode viewed the purpose of his trip primarily to lead the brethren back on the right path of reason. As the synopsis of the diary was put forth in Germany’s leading news maga-zine, Focus:

Bode’s intervention in France sought to bring back the Paris brethren to the Illuminati project of concrete improvement along the right path

of reason and humanity.154

The diary clearly reveals Savalette was enlisted as an Illuminatus by Bode. Professor Porset reviews the recent pub-lication of the Journal of Bode, and says it reveals that




153.Id., Focus Magazine (ed. Roger Thiede) (1994) No. 14.154.“Der große Drahtzieher 1787 – zwei Jahre vor der Revolution – reiste

der Chef eines deutschen,” Focus Magazine (ed. Roger Thiede) (1994) No. 14 (online edition at http://www.focus.de/kultur/leben/geschichte-der-grosse-drahtzieher_aid_146269.html)(accessed 12/20/2008).









Private Diary of Bode

“Savalette was gained to the ranks of the Illuminati on August 1, 1787 along with four others, including Rottiers de Montaleau and [Pierre-Marie] Taillepied de Bondy.”155

According to Bode’s journal, Bode and Savalette (the Grand Master of the Amis Reunis) agreed to hide the Illumi-nati Order at the Amis Reunis under the cover of the name Philadelphes. The initial Minerval grade of the Illuminati Order would be hidden under the cover name of Adspirans. Professor Porset relates that Bode’s Journal says “for France, it will adopt the name of Philadelphes in lieu of Illuminati, and in lieu of M[inervaux?], that is to say the preparatory class, the [name of] Adspirans.”156

Professor Porset, by examining the archives of Kloss as well as the names in Bode’s Journal, was able to determine the eleven Illuminati in the Amis Reunis:• [Francois Antoine] d’Aubermesnil [or Daubermesnil] [1748-

1802]157

• Rottiers de Montaleau158

• [Pierre-Marie] Taillepied de Bondy159

• Le Sage• Savalette de Langes• Chefdebien

• [Friedrich Rudolf] Saltzmann (1740-1821)160

• de Gleichen• the brothers Tassin [i.e., Louis-Daniel Tassin, a banker, and

Tassin de l’Etang, a high-level activist in the Amis Reunis]161

• Tiéman

155.Charles Porset, Les Philalèthes et les Convents de Paris: un politique de la folie (Paris: Honoré Champion, 1996) at 230 citing Johann Joachim Christian Bode, Journal von einer Reise von Weimar nach Frankreich. Im Jahr 1787 (ed. by Hermann Schüttler) (München: ars una, 1994) at 78 n. 49.

156.Charles Porset, Les Philalèthes et les Convents de Paris: un politique de la folie (Paris: Honoré Champion, 1996) at 230.






• Stroganoff

157.François-Antoine Daubermesnil was a deputy in the national legisla-ture during the time of the Brissotins’ power. He stopped attending the Legislature in January and “in June was forced to resign.” (Alison Patrick, The Men of the First French Republic (John Hopkins Press, 1972) at 13.) Daubermesnil was the “député du Tarn à la Convention et aux Cinq-Cents: 26 fructidor an VII” (1798).

In year IV (1795), Daubermesnil was the founder of Les adeptes de la théophilanthropie, and Le culte des Adorateurs. This was similar to the temples of reason. He launched the idea with a book entitled: Rappel du peuple français a la sagesse et aux principes de la morale. This was described in the journal the Ami des Lois (13th of Ventose, year IV): “We have been praying, for eight months, to be informed as to the morality by which we might once more become the honour and the admiration of Europe, and rid ourselves of Catholicism, Mahometan-ism, Protestantism and other religions fabricated by the hands of men and presented under a celestial covering. We have prayed all good citizens to busy themselves with this important work, and to bring each one a stone for the erection of the edifice of theism and philanthropy.” (A. Aulard, The French Revolution: A Political History 1789-1804 (N.Y.: Scribner’s 1910) Vol. IV at 66-67 n.) The first meeting of the Theolophilantropists was held on the 26th of Nivose in Year V (Janu-ary 15, 1797). They believed in the “God of reason.” Id., at 67. The ceremonies began with an invocation to the God of nature. Id., at 68. The elite of the nation joined: Dupont d’Nemours, the painter David, M.J. Chenier, etc. Id., at 69.

“The government protected the Theophilantropists; sometimes privately, sometimes in public.” Id., at 69. The Directory secretly funded the Theophilanthropists. Id., at 69-70. They were granted the use of eigh-teen churches. Id., at 70. “An attempt was made to declare Theophilan-thropy the State religion.” Id., at 70. Leclerc (old Cercle Social member) advocated this on 9th of Fructidor in year V. This was ignored.

Thomas Paine (Cercle Social leader) upon return to the USA in 1802 tried spreading Theophilanthropy here. He started up a journal Theophilan-thropist. (Moncure Daniel Conway, William Cobbett, The Life of Tho-mas Paine (Knickerbocker Press, 1908) Vol. II at 426.)

François-Antoine Daubermesnil was one of those who signed the decree accomplishing the revolution of November 10,1799 — the 19th of Brumaire in year 8. It replaced the executive directory with a consular executive commission, and the Council of Five Hundred and of the Anciens with two commissions composed of twenty-five members. (Collection complète des lois, décrets, ordonnances, réglemens et avis du Conseil-d’Etat (Paris: 1826) Vol. 12 at 18.)





Historical Consensus on The Impact of Bode’s Trip of 1787

• Louis de Hesse-Darmstadt.162

The revelations of Bode’s journal were recently dis-cussed in the German popular magazine Focus. It mentions that Bode’s diary reveals Bode caused Savalette des Langes to have “formally joined the Order.”163 And Bode and Savalette agreed that they would not use the name Illuminati, but instead use as a cover a different name — the Philadel-phen (Philadelphes in French).164

Importance of Recruiting Savalette

In light of the recruitment of Savalette in particular, Focus Magazine of Germany in 1994 said:

However, this [evidence] now establishes that the earlier research is no longer valid which sought to deny that there was the slightest con-nection between Bode’s trip/the Illuminati, and

the French Revolution.165

Historical Consensus on The Impact of Bode’s Trip of 1787

What is the opinion of liberal well-informed scholars on this trip of Bode?

158.Rottier de Montaleau is regarded as the “Maçon fondateur de rites et ‘père’ du GODF [Grand Orient de France] moderne…et fidèle partisan du “Petit tondu.” See http://www.napoleontrois.fr/site/index.php?2006/03/26/39-le-marechal-magnan.) Rottier was involved in running French GODF Freemasonry, Scottish Rite, under Napo-leon’s regime. http://sog1.free.fr/ArtGuglielmi204Concordat.htm

159.Pierre-Marie Taillepied de Bondy “in 1792 became the director of the manufacture of the assignats” — the paper money of France. See http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre-Marie_Taillepied_de_Bondy (accessed 2/21/09).


http://www.napoleontrois.fr/site/

http://sog1.free.fr/ArtGuglielmi204Concordat.htm





Heckethorn, a scholar who liked much of the Illumi-nati program and thought they finally deserved credit for the good effects of the French Revolution, concluded Bode dur-ing his 1787 trip to Paris “continued the work of initiation, choosing adepts chiefly in the masonic lodges.”166

Likewise, Henri Martin, a prominent Freemason with the Grand Orient at Paris, as well as famous historian, acknowledged in 1866 “the relations [which] the other lead-ers of the Illuminati, [Weishaupt’s] successors [i.e., Bode], formed with Parisian Freemasonry, may indeed have intro-duced in [the Paris Freemasons] some measures adapted to concentrate and strengthen the unity of action of the [masonic] order.”167

The Anti-Revolution Writers Effort At Exposure Caused Hunker-down Mentality

The only reason to have resisted admitting the impor-tance of this visit was that it gave canon-fodder to writers from 1798 onward to attack the French Revolution.

160.Saltzmann was a member of the Amis Reunis since 1781. See page 32 on the chapter on Secret Societies in France. Frédéric-Rodol-phe Saltzmann was from the Alsace. In 1785, he became a follower of Mesmer’s system. Saltzmann was also the leader of the mesmerite-lodge de la Candeur in Strasbourg. (Mario Matucci, Lumières et Illu-minisme actes du Colloque international (France, 1985) at 136.) Lafayette was a famous member of the Lodge de la Candeur. (Gaston Martin, La Franc-Maçonnerie Française et La Préparation de la Rev-olution (Paris: Less Presses Universitairies de France) at 50.)

At Strassburg, Rudolf Saltzmann was the owner of an academic library. A biography of Saltzmann is found in Jules Keller, Le théosophe alsacien

Frédéric-Rodolphe Saltzmann et les milieux spirituels de son temps: contribution à l’étude de l’illuminisme et du mysticisme à la fin du XVIIIe et au début du XIXe siècle (New York, 1985).





The Anti-Revolution Writers Effort At Exposure Caused Hunker-down Mental-

However, when the Bode trip was first the subject of exposure, it came from two liberal lips based on their per-sonal inside-knowledge. They were both concerned about the illiberal turn of the French Revolution of 1792. Both writers were in favor of the democracy of 1789, and its liberal reforms.

The first exposure about this 1787 trip was in 1792 by Dr. Girtanner.168 He explained that he joined the Freemasons of France, and attended the clubs and lodges of Paris as the revolution of 1789 progressed. He said a key force was estab-

161. Gabriel Tassin de l’Etang was a banker and “dignitary of the Grand Orient [i.e., the head organization of regular Freemasonry in France]. (Jean-Denys Devauges, Le voyage en France, 1750-1914: colloque de Compiègne, 30 et 31 mai 1997 (Musée national de la voiture et du tourisme, 2000) at 65.) In the 1780’s, many G.O.D.F documents involving the Scottish Rite in France were co-signed by Savalette and Gabriel Tassin de l’Etange. See Acta Latomorum: ou chronologue de l’histoire de la Franche-maconnerie (G.O.D.F. 1815) at 212, 214.

Gabriel Tassin de l’Etang was “chief of the battalion of the National Guard of Paris” while his brother Louis Daniel Tassin “was an officer of the National Guard of Paris.” (François-Xavier Feller, Supplément au dictionnaire historique (1820) at 284.)

Louis-Daniel was a banker, and in 1789 “named to the Estates General for the Third Estate of Paris....” (Maurice Tourneux, Bibliographie de l’histoire de Paris pendant la Révolution française (Paris: 1906) at 592; Feller, supra, at 284.)

Gabriel and Louis-Daniel Tassin were among the national guard members from the battalion Filles-Saint-Thomas (500 men) who defended the Tuilleries on the nights of August 9th and August 10, 1792. (Tourneux, supra, at 592.) On the latter evening, the monarchy was overthrown upon the seizure by the mobs of the king.

After the king’s execution in January 1793, Robespierre alleged that Louis-Daniel and Gabriel were royalists due to their defense of the king from the mobs on August 9th-10th 1792. As a result, they were both executed on May 2, 1794 at the behest of Robespierre. (Albert Mathiez [Professor of the Faculty of Letters of Dijon], Robespierre ter-roriste (Paris: La Renaissance du Livre, 1911) at 54; Feller, supra, at 284.)

Their execution, however, coincided with Robespierre’s execution/arrest of all the Illuminized-forces in the Revolution, e.g., Cloots, Brissot, Bonneville, Fauchet, etc.






lished in 1786. In that year, Sieyès and Condorcet had founded within the Amis Reunis Lodge of Paris a Committee of Propagande. This committee coordinated production of tracts and books intended to promote the final overthrow of the French Monarchy. After seeing the murder and mayhem during later events, Dr. Girtanner felt compelled to criticize the role of the secret societies behind all this. We have else-where discussed his objectivity and support for the revolu-tion, as well as his inside position to know such details.169

The second exposure of the Bode trip of 1787 based upon personal knowledge was the anonymous Neueste Arbei-tung des Spartacus and Philo (Munich, 1793) at pages 151-154. This book was apparently written by Hoffman, as even Robison appears to acknowledge.170 Hoffman, like the anon-ymous author, was an Illuminatus at Vienna at one time.

162.Charles Porset, Les Philalèthes et les Convents de Paris: un politique de la folie (Paris: Honoré Champion, 1996) at 234-35 (“I have deter-mined in 1788, the Amis Reunis set up a chapter — eleven Illuminati who belonged. This began as a twelfth class within the lodge....[T]his was represented by....[names in text then follow].”)


164.“Allerdings gestattete Bode dem Franzosen Savalette gnädig, daß er für Frankreich statt des Namens, Illuminaten ‘den Namen, Philadel-phen’ annehmen wird.’” (From “Der große Drahtzieher 1787 – zwei Jahre vor der Revolution – reiste der Chef eines deutschen,” Focus Magazine (ed. Roger Thiede) (1994) No. 14 (online edition at http://www.focus.de/kultur/leben/geschichte-der-grosse-drahtzieher_aid_146269.html)(accessed 12/20/2008).)


166.See Charles W. Heckethorn, The Secret Societies of All Ages and Countries (Original edition: 1875) (New Hyde Park: University Books, 1966) Vol. 1, at 312.



http://www.focus.de/kultur/leben/geschichte-der-grosse-





The Anti-Revolution Writers Effort At Exposure Caused Hunker-down Mental-

Hence, the uncanny similarity of background combined with the fact Professor Hoffman’s publicly later continued similar exposures identifies him as the most likely author.171

However, contrary to popular misconception which the Illuminati spread in its defense, Leopold A. Hoffman (1748-1806) was not an anti-revolutionary voice.

Rather, Hoffman said nothing negative about the rev-olution of 1789. Instead, beginning in 1793, Hoffman became the very first person to openly assert the French Revolution of 1793 (with no intent to smear the one of 1789) was a co-production of the Illuminati172 along with Freemason groups it influenced. Hoffman was never an enemy of the liberal French revolution of 1789. He only first voiced objections in 1793 after the revolution began to suppress religious free-doms and freedom of speech.173 As far as research allows, Hoffman did not oppose democracy nor did he favor state religion. Furthermore, this book was simply hostile to the Illuminati, and not Freemasonry of which Hoffman had been a leading member.

167. Henri Martin, History of France from the Most Remote Period to 1789 (Boston: Walker, Fuller & Co., 1866) Vol. 16, at 484.

168.Robison in 1798 cites Historische Nachrichten uber die Franc Revo-lution 1792, by Girkinner [sic: Girtanner]. See Robison, Proofs, supra, at 228 fn.

169.See “Christoph Girtanner, February 1791” on page 39 in the chapter on Liberal Exposures on the Illuminati.

170.Robison while discussing it shifts and says “Hoffman continues....” (See Robison, Proofs, supra, at 240-41.)

171.Another alternative author would be Grolman who likewise had a lib-eral outlook.

172.“The journalist Hoffman was one of the first propagators of the Illu-minati revolutionary legend.” http://www.ilab.org/db/detail.php?lang=de&booknr=347312523

173.Hoffman never attacked the French Revolution of 1789. Nettl, no friend of Hoffman, himself notes Hoffman’s criticisms began only in 1792. (Paul Nettl, Mozart and Masonry (N.Y.: Philosophical Library, 1957) at 83.)


http://www.ilab.org/db/





Hoffman’s background was formidable. Hoffman was a Professor of the University of Of in Budapest. Later in his career, Hoffman became the secretary to Mozart and Baron von Gemmingen. It was Gemmingen who “introduced him into the circle of the...Illuminati.”174 Then Baron von Swi-eten (Illuminatus) procured for him a professorship of the German language at the University of Pest, which post he held until 1790.175

Thus, both of the earliest revelations about this trip in 1787 were from liberal voices who spoke as eye-witnesses. Thus, it was not solely those seeking to regress affairs back to monarchy and church-domination who identified this detail about Bode. Instead, we see that the mention of Bode’s trip was first made by liberal voices who had personal knowledge that this 1787 trip had taken place. They were no liars, as the trip is confirmed by Bode’s diary, his correspondence with Frau Hess, as well as Schiller’s correspondence, etc.

Hoffman Reveals To Us How The Illuminati In France Hid Themselves

Of note, because on this Paris trip of 1787 we know Bode used Philadelphes as a cover name for his Illuminati recruits of France, we should examine the prediction of Hoff-man on where to find Bode’s recruits. In Neueste Arbeitung, the anonymous author (Hoffman likely) collected the formu-lized strategy of the Illuminati program from among the papers in the Bavarian archives. He reprinted them word-for-word at length in the Neueste Arbeitung des Spartacus and Philo (Munich, 1794).176 There at page 165, we read his

174.See Paul Nettl, Mozart and Masonry (N.Y.: Philosophical Library, 1957) at 4, 25-26 (secretary positions); 134 (introduced to Illuminati). Hoffman had been a member in 1784 of the a member of the lodge Zur Wohltatigkeit, and at one point was lodge secretary.

175.Nettl, id., at 134.176.The 1794 edition is available through books.google.com.





Was The Duke d’Orleans Recruited Into The Illuminati At This Time?

quote of the Illuminati instructions: “Hence we must always hide ourselves under the name of another society.” Indeed, this is what Bode did at Paris in 1787. Hoffman knew this would be the method without being told that Bode’s diary confirmed what he assumed would be the case.


And what importance did Bode’s contact with the Duke d’Orleans have in Bode’s 1787 visit to the Paris Amis Reunis? The diplomatic correspondence in 1791 of the Bavarian government mentions d’Orleans was among the names mentioned in the Illuminati papers as either Illuminati or Freemasons. This list was given to Austria by Bavaria in 1791, along with the mention of members/collaborators throughout Europe–Hungary, Transylvania, Austria, Prussia and France.177 Hence, one of the key opening actors of the French Revolution — d’Orleans — was identified as a col-laborator identified in the papers of the Illuminati.

An event in 1790 makes this a virtual certainty.

The 1790 National Exposure of D’Orleans As Illuminatus By Two Ladies

The Duke d’Orleans membership in the Illuminati enjoys an extraordinary corroboration by an exposure of his “Illuminati” ties which was openly raised as part of 1790 news accounts. These news stories were covering a criminal case involving a trespass of the King’s quarters. Yet, despite

177. L. Forestier, Les Illumines, supra, at 654. Others identified as Illumi-nati in this diplomatic letter were Mirabeau, Lafayette and Brissot. Id. See the mention of this also in Bernard Vincent, The Transatlantic Republican: Thomas Paine and the Age of Revolutions (Rodopi, 2005) at 52 fn 53.






this news event being an important part of French national history, as the case was taken up by the national legislature, it is ignored today by most historians.

In July 1790, at St. Cloud, France, four persons were arrested for allegedly seeking to invade the king’s bedroom. This was extensively covered by the pro-Monarchy press as a sign of some subterranean plan to hurt the king.

Brissot, a d’Orleans secret ally, commented on this in his daily newspaper, Patriot française, on July 3 & 5, and August 2 and 6th of 1790.178

In these accounts, Brissot says what had happened is that two men wanted to get close enough to the king to mes-merize him and thereby imbue him somehow with their mes-merist political program. Madame Thomassin cooperated in this venture, but the four were arrested when they approached the king to “imprint” their program on the king’s mind at St. Cloud. Madame Thomassin then swore out an affidavit that said D’Orleans, Mirabeau, the Duke de Liancourt, as well as Alexandre and Charles Lameth were conspiring to overthrow France with the “Illuminati.”179

Madame Thomasin’s charge was supported by another woman member of the Mesmerist lodge. Both their charges were then presented to the French National Assem-bly.180

178.This affair, and Brissot’s account of it, is detailed in Robert Darnton’s Mesmermism and the End of the Enlightenment in France (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1968) at 130-31.

179.Jules and Edmond De Goncourt (or Goncord), Histoire de la societé française pendant la Révolution (1854: Paris) at 143, as cited by Renzo de Felice, Note e Ricerche sugli “Illuminati” e il misticismo rivoluzi-onario (1789-1800) (Roma: Edizioni di storia e Lettera, 1960) at 49, 61. Felice's cite apparently is to the wrong page of Goncord’s book. See also for an account of this scandal, Robert Darnton, Mesmermism and the End of the Enlightenment in France (Cambridge, Mass.: Har-vard University Press, 1968) at 130-31.






Brissot, an ardent Mesmerist himself, used his daily paper to thwart a correct understanding about this affair. He, of course, never disclosed he was on the paid, inner staff of the Duke d’Orleans.181 Brissot’s columns of 1790 tried to imply the Illuminés, which he said were growing in numbers every day, were actually a counter-revolutionary organiza-tion in cahoots to restore the old regime. Brissot wrote:

The sects of Illuminés are increasing instead of diminishing; is this not perhaps a result of France’s political circumstances, which rally to their mysterious doctrine the men who are unhappy with the new order of things [i.e., the progress of 1789] and who hope to find in it the

means for destroying [it].182

As a good spin doctor, he was suggesting that the Illuminés were actually supporters of the Crown. The moder-ate French, hearing this, assumed nothing need be done

180.C. Du Bos, Stanislas de Clermont-Tonnerre e l’echec de la révolution monarchique (1757-1792) (Paris: 1931) at 285-297 (cited in Felice, supra, at 61 n. 49).

181. Brissot from 1784 onward was on staff to the Duke d’Orleans. In 1784, Brissot’s wife was governess to D’Orleans’ children. When her husband, J.P. Brissot was arrested in 1784, D’Orleans helped Brissot obtain release. Thereafter, Brissot went to work for D’Orleans, serving first as the secretary to Ducrest, the Chancellor for the Duke D’Orleans. (Louis Philippe, Memoires, supra, at 315 n.) In fact, later historians found a letter of Brissot's to Ducrest in 1787 where Brissot said he supported the Duke d'Orleans acting as the leader of a radical movement, which he said would use the rallying cry of “a Constitution for France.” Brissot said he agreed that they must plan to obtain popu-lar control over taxation. Brissot added that the means to achieve this would be the use of the duke’s money bags. See J.M. Thompson, Lead-ers of the French Revolution (N.Y.: 1989) at 73.

182.Quoted in Robert Darnton’s Mesmermism and the End of the Enlight-enment in France (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1968) at 131. I have taken the liberty of using the original French term “illu-minés” in place of “illuminist” for sake of accuracy. On Brissot’s affil-iation with the Illuminés and Mesmer's lodges, see Chapter Vol. II, Chapter Nineteen.






because such people were not anxious to hurt the king. Bris-sot’s strategy worked because subsequently, nothing was done about this charge against the Illuminati of 1790.

Yet, historians looking back can now see through Brissot and realize why nothing was done. And the bar of his-tory can now judge the report of these two women who said the Duke d’Orleans was working with the Illuminati for a revolution. It appears valid enough, particularly since we now know, as mentioned above, d’Orleans was part of the wel-coming party of Bode in 1787.

The Importance of D’Orleans As An Illuminatus

What did enrolling d’Orleans gain for the Illuminati if indeed these women are correct? The Duke of Orleans was the most important masonic leader in the French nation. He was the supreme Grand Master of the Grand Orient. In the 1780s, the Grand Orient had 81 lodges alone at Paris, 16 at Lyon, 7 at Bordeaux, 5 at Nantes, 6 at Marseilles, 10 at Mont-pellier, 10 at Toulouse, etc. By 1785, it had over 255 lodges in France — clearly the pre-eminent masonic system in France. This body had other lodges outside France. For example, the French Grand Orient patented and supervised lodges at Chambéry and Locle in Switzerland, at Brussels, Cologne, Spa, Liége (Belgium), at Warsaw (Poland), as well as Saint-Petersburg and Moscow in Russia.183

The Grand Orient was by far the leading organization of France and the largest and most influential in Europe. Bode’s visit of 1787, no doubt, cemented d’Orleans as an ally. By gaining his support, the Illuminati had influence within 255 masonic lodges which held 20,000 to 30,000 members throughout France.

183.Armand Neut, De La Nécessité D’ètudier La Franc-Maçonnerie (Paris: Grand & Burges, 1870) at 65.





Measuring The Success of Bode’s 1787 Trip

Measuring The Success of Bode’s 1787 TripIn sum, even if we ignore all the other Illuminati con-

tacts and only focus on Bode’s trips, we recognize that he surely recruited or further cemented the membership of d’Orleans and Savalette de Lange as well as many in atten-dance. This, of course, means Bode’s visit of 1787 was highly successful. Mounier’s view that Bode’s single trip of 1787 was incapable of influencing those attending toward revolu-tionary aims now appears weak. Bode’s trip is proof of con-tact and access, at a high level of the Illuminati, with the very same men who caused the Revolutions of 1789 and 1792. Today, historians who previously were reluctant to admit an Illuminati influence appear to have come around to acknowl-edge the obvious importance of the Illuminati.

How have some historians deflected this information? Firminger, a Freemason historian anxious to dispel

the theories of Barruel and Robison, says: “It cannot be said that Busche and Bode came to Paris as a deputation on behalf of the Illuminati, for in 1784 Weishaupt had parted company with Knigge, the master organizer of his system, and also in the year following the secrets of the Illuminati had been revealed to an indignant public, several of its leaders prose-cuted, and its chief had become a fugitive.” (Firminger, “The Romances of Barruel and Robison,” supra, at 61.)

None of the cited reasons are applicable. The Illumi-nati had far more resilience than Firminger gave them credit for.

First, Bode’s diary journal proves he recruited Saval-ette and several others into the Illuminati. This was 1787. They agreed to use the cloak of another name for this associa-tion — Philadelphes. This means the Illuminati were still in operation in 1787, but always using cloaks of the name of a different society so as to conceal their identity. It works, because you see historians are still led off track by such tac-tics.






Second, Knigge by 1787 was working with Bode. They together formed a new front in non-Bavarian Germany called The German Union.184 This was like the Philadelphes of Paris — just another name to hide their true identity.

Moreover, not all the secrets of the Illuminati were revealed in the police raids. Otherwise, there would not be this debate about its plans for France. Furthermore, the only European government by 1787 which tried suppressing the Illuminati was Bavaria. And by 1787, Weishaupt was not liv-ing on the run like a fugitive, as Firminger suggests, but was in the lap of luxury as a highly paid ducal minister at Gotha. He was even a neighbor of Bode who lived nearby in Weimar, which is why Bode is likely operating at an impor-tant level within the Illuminati.

This explains why Brother Wilson in reply criticized Firminger for his faulty logic: “One can admire the success with which Bro. Firminger fashions his bricks with odds and ends of clay, with the minimum of straw, and lobs them skill-fully at the defendants in the dock [i.e., Barruel and Robi-son];... and this task he performs with the greatest ingenuity, wrapping up his suggestions in masses of petty detail, the unsoundness of which is trivial in itself, but which merge tri-umphantly in a cumulative effect, to deal adequately with which would require a paper at least twice as long as his own.” (See Wilson, “Mirabeau's Plan for the Political Pene-tration of Freemasonry,” supra, at 173.)

Furthermore, the head of American Scottish Rite Freemasonry, Albert Pike, revealed in 1871 the nature of the transformation of the French Templar Freemasons at Paris (i.e., the Amis Reunis) at the time of Bode’s visits. Pike’s book Morals and Dogma, self-styled as the American Masonic Bible was published in 1871 under the auspices of the Supreme Council of the 33rd degree of the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry.185 In it, Pike says the “registers of the Order

184.See Indices in this series.





Measuring The Success of Bode’s 1787 Trip

of Templars” (which included the Paris Amis Reunis after 1778)186 revealed they wanted revenge on the French monar-chy in 1789 for the destruction of the Templars by King Philip Le Bel in 1301. Pike said Cagliostro was their agent. Pike then says one Parisian Templar lodge “became the cen-ter of the revolutionary movement in France, and a Prince of the blood-royal [i.e., the Duke D’Orleans] went thither to swear the destruction of the successors of Philippe le Bel on the tomb of Jacques de Molai.”187 Morals and Dogma con-tinues:

The registers of the Order of Templars attest that the Regent, the Duc d’Orleans, was Grand Master of that formidable Secret Society,... The Templars compromitted the King; they saved him from the rage of the people...; it was a scaf-fold that the vengeance of the Templars demanded. The secret movers of the French Revolution had sworn to overturn the Throne and Altar upon the Tomb of Jacques de Molai [i.e., the ancient Grand Master of the Tem-plars]. When Louis XVI was executed, half the work was done; and thenceforward the Army of the Temple was to direct all its efforts against the Pope...Royalty was regenerated on the scaffold of Louis XVI, the Church trium-phant in the captivity of Pius VI, carried a

185. By 1889, Pike was the head of American Masonry and was titular head of world Freemasonry. Officially, in 1889, he was Grand Master of the Central Directory of Washington, D.C., Grand Commander of the Supreme Council of Charleston (the leading lodge for American Masonry) and Sovereign Pontiff of Universal Freemasonry.

186.At Paris, the Amis Reunis were Templars because in 1778 they inte-grated a “Knights Templar” grade into one of the grades of the Phila-lethe rite. The purpose was to unite itself thereby with the Lyon Templar Strict Observance.

187.Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma (1871) at 823.






prisoner to Valence,188 and dying of fatigue

and sorrow....189

Pike is ackowledging that the Templars, including D’Orleans, took an oath to overthrow Louis XVI. He refer-ences “registers” of the Templars in his possession. He claims the oath taken was upon the tomb of Jacques de Molai, the Grand Master of the 14th Century Templars who was slain at Paris. This Templar lodge at Paris must have been the Amis Reunis lodge which Bode visited in 1787. Since 1779, it had used in its Philalethe Rite a grade “Knights Templar” so as to unite with Willermoz’s Lyon Strict Observance.

When respected Freemason historians themselves boast of such things, and cite internal documents, are we not justified then, besides proof from independent sources, to concur? And if Pike’s boast is true, then it makes sense to infer Bode shared with the Duke d’Orleans and the Templars of the Amis Reunis the plan agreed upon at Wilhemsbad to overthrow France.

188.Pike’s mention of the pope being dragged to Valence where he died is a reference to Napoleon’s seizing Pope Pius VI (Luigi Breschi) when Napoleon conquered Rome in 1798. Napoleon took the pope prisoner. While in a Valence prison during 1799, the pope died.

189.Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma (1871) at 823-24. This was person-ally seen by myself from the 1871 volume. Interestingly, this same passage appears on page 823 of the Kessinger 2002 reprint; on pages 700-01 of the NuVision 2007 reprint; on page 451 of the 2008 reprint by Bibliobazaar; and on page 694 of the 2008 Forgotten Books reprint. This suggests to me that only the Kessinger reprint of 2002 is a true reprint.





1787 Changes in French Freemasonry after Visits

1787 Changes in French Freemasonry after Visits

Not surprisingly, immediately after Dittfurth’s and Bode’s visit of 1787, a new excitement stirred in the French lodges. The first change took place within the Grand Orient of France. As mentioned, it was under the Duke d’Orleans’ authority. The Grand Orient decreed each lodge would create a political committee. The Grand Orient’s own political com-mittee would stay in touch with all other lodges and settle all political principles. This is confirmed by the ex-Illuminatus who wrote Neuste Arbeitung des Spartacus und Philo (1793). He said he “was thoroughly instructed in this, that it was given in charge to these committees [in France] to frame gen-eral rules, and to carry through the general plan (grand oevre) of a general overturning of religion and government.”190

Next National Masonic ConferenceAfter the 1787 convent, another Freemason confer-

ence was planned.191 Freemason sources do not discuss this next conference. Did it take place? If so, what happened there? Either it was so secret that no record was made, or it never took place.

What we know happened next is two-fold. First, Bord says in 1788 the Paris Amis Reunis by an internal regulation, which he describes as article VII, “formed as [a] permanent commission... the most important masonic group at Paris.” It had officers assigned to it, such as a treasurer and control-ler.192 This sounds very much like the Amis Reunis created a council to supervise all the other masonic lodges of Paris. It

190.Neuste Arbeitung des Spartacus und Philo (Munich: 1793) at 151-54, quoted in John Robison, Proofs of a Conspiracy (N.Y.: 1798) at 231.

191.Le Forestier, Convent du Philalethes, supra, at 46.






would regulate their decisions henceforth. Because the same step took place at the Grand Orient lodges, it is predictable the Amis Reunis would do the same.

Second and lastly, we have already shown that the Illuminized forces of France next created a national network of patriotic societies as fronts for a masonic-like core group that controlled them. Eventually they became known as the Jacobin societies. This process took place in 1788 and early 1789.193

In sum, France was changed by the Illuminati from 1782 to 1787 through a series of visits to a specific leading Templar lodge at Paris. Weishaupt had directed that corre-spondence and visits were the main tools to league such a lodge with them, and this strategy was aggressively carried out in France.

192.Gustave Bord, La Franc-Maçonneríe en France; des origines a 1816: Les Ouvriers de l'Idéme Révolutionnaire (1688-1771) (Paris: Libraire Nationale, 1908) (reprinted Geneva-Paris: Slatkine, 1985) at 361. This group remained active until the Revolution of 1792. As Bord adds: “the Amis Reunis were still strong in 1792." Id. at 362.

193. See the chapter entitled “The Jacobins’ Connection To The Secret Societies” on page 1.




illuminati visits to french lodges

Documents

illuminati visits

following illuminati

reprinted genevaparis

paris amis reunis lodge

french revolution

reprint genevaparis

francmaonnere en france

gustave bord