that the Templars knew from their travels in the Holy Land. Hence, it had nothing to do with secret Gnostic knowledge. To claim that this name, this word is the sign of a secret is to Herder nothing more than “die gemeinste Romanlüge und Pöbelsage”.4 Even though Herder’s often imprecise or even incorrect arguments deals with clearly historical questions, about of the Templars, their rituals and secrets, it soon becomes clear that he is not really interested in the real – historical and esoteric – content of the secret of the Templars – what they were really hiding – at least not in the way Nicolai is. If every secret, every practice of secrecy can be studied both in search of a content and in search of a function, Herder – this is at least my claim – is more interested in the functional
aspects. To Herder – it seems – secrecy is a function at work in history itself – a function that can be controlled and put to use for the purpose of Enlightenment. In the 18th century this functional approach to the problem of secrecy is by no means singular to Herder, but can also be found in other texts and debates – such as in C. M. Wielands brilliant essay “Geheimnis des Kosmopolitenordens” from 1776 as well as in the debate between the publisher Johann Erich Biester and the philosopher Christian Garve in the Berliner Monatsschrift in 1785. A good example of how Herder, in his letters against Nicolai, in fact analyzes the
functions of secrecy, is his discussion of the works by the Silesian theologian and author Johannes Valentin Andrea, who, in addition to his most famous work of utopian fiction, Christianapolis, wrote several books about the secret society of the Rosecruscians, Fama fraternitatis Roseae Crucis oder Die Bruderschaft des Ordens der Rosenkreuzer (1614), Confessio oder Bekenntnis der Sozietät und Bruderschaft Rosenkreuz (1615) and Chymische Hochzeit Christiani Rosencreutz Anno 1459 (1616). In Andrea Nicolai sees not only the founder of the order of the Rosecruscians, but indirectly, through his influence on Francis Bacon and the English societies, an important predecessor of Freemasonry. Herder, however, who had the greatest respect for Andrea, but more as a priest and a theologian, reads these books in quite a different way, namely as pure
Johannes Valentin Andrea
fictions: Also war seine Chymische Hochzeit bloß ein ludibrium, damit er die zahlreichen monstra seiner Zeit durchzog: er siehts selbst als eine Comödie oder Roman an, mit dem er sich seiner übermäßig gesammelten Lektur habe entledigen wollen.5
4 15, s. 84 5 15, s. 60
52
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