questions, had written a rather fierce critique of one of Herder’s first experiments in the philsophical genre, Aelteste Urkunde des Menschengeschlechts, from 1773 and 1776. In spring and summer 1782, shortly after the death of their common mentor and intellectual father-figure Lessing, the two former friends went at it again. Once more, the context was the problem of Enlightenment, its goals and means; the topic, however, was the history and the practices of secrecy. In the beginning of 1782 Nicolai had published a book in Berlin, with the title:


Versuch über die Beschuldigungen, welche dem Tempelherrenorden gemacht worden, und über dessen Geheimnis; nebst einem Anhang über das Enstehen der Freimäurergesellschaft. Only a few months later, first in March and then in April and June, Herder published five letters in the Teutsche Merkur, in which he criticizes Nicolai’s book. Upon a closer look these letters consist in a full-fledged attack on Nicolai. In part they can be read as Herder’s attempt to vindicate himself after Nicolai’s criticism of his Aelteste Urkunde – but obviously there is something else at stake as well. During most part of his life Nicolai was a practicing Freemason. He was


a prominent member of the Berlin lodge “Zu den drei Weltkugeln” as well as the founder of the “Mittwochsgesellschaft”. Furthermore, he had a scholarly interest in the history and rituals of Freemasonry, as can be seen in the book on the Knights Templar. As the title shows, Nicolai is out to answer two questions, one regarding the accusations made against the order of the Templars by the Inquisition in the 14th century, and the other regarding the origin of Freemasonry. On the one hand, Nicolai wants to show that the accusations against the Templars were in fact not fabricated, as had been claimed in a recently published book by Karl Anton, but true, to the extent that the Templars were indeed a kind of Gnostic sect worshipping an arcane and esoteric knowledge, “ein Weisheitsgeheimnis”.3 Secondly, he reconstructs a complex genealogy for 18th century Freemasonry, going back to the order of the Rosecrucians founded by the famous Silesian author Johannes Valentin Andrea in the 17th century. Other scholars commenting on Herder’s critique have all concluded that Herder generally makes a fool out of himself, unable to match Nicolai’s rhetorical powers and knowledge of the subject. However, the question I want to ask is what Herder is trying to do in writing these letters against Nicolai and in what sense they can be said to anticipate his reflexions on Freemasonry.In his letters, Herder – it would seem – is out to disprove all of Nicolai’s attempts to find the historical and esoteric content of the secret of the Templars: Neither the Gnostic secret of wisdom – “eine geheime Tinktur der Weisheit” – or the alchemic secret of gold-making – “die Goldtinktur” – have – according to Herder – any reality or relevance for the history of the order. To illustrate how Nicolai have been fooled, Herder considers the etymology of the name “Baphomet” that appears several times in the documents from the case against the Templars. Nicolai takes this name and the bearded head, to which it refers, to be a symbol of a secret, a piece of secret knowledge, common to Templars and Gnosticists. Against this idea, Herder argues – over several pages – that “Baphomet” was just another version of the name of the Muslim prophet “Mohamed”


3 Herder, 15, s. 82 51


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130