fortunes, and less humiliation. These phantasies [“vertiges”] will fanaticise the people, who will flatten out all resistance. What matter the victims and their numbers? spoliations, destructions, burnings, and all the necessary effects of a revolution? nothing must be sacred and we can say with Machiavelli: “What matter the means as long as one arrives at the end?”
Were all these the ideas of Mirabeau, or were they, like the other document of the Illuminati found amongst his papers, the programme of a conspiracy? I incline to the latter theory. The plan of campaign was, at any rate, the one followed out by the conspirators, as Chamfort, the friend and confidant of Mirabeau, admitted in his conversation with Marmontel:
The nation is a great herd that only thinks of browsing, and with good sheepdogs the shepherds can lead it as they please… Money and the hope of plunder are all-powerful with the people…
Mirabeau cheerfully asserts that with 100 louis one can make quite a good riot.
Another contemporary thus describes the methods of the leaders:
Mirabeau, in the exuberance of an orgy, cried one day: “That ‘canaille’ well deserves to have us for legislators!” These professions of faith, as we see, are not at all democratic; the sect uses the populace as revolution fodder [“chair a revolution”], as prime material for brigandage, after which it seizes the gold and abandons generations to torture. It is veritably the code of hell.
It is this “code of hell” set forth in the “Projet de Revolution” that we shall find repeated in succeeding documents throughout the last hundred years—in the correspondence of the “Alta Vendita”, in the “Dialogues aux Enfers entre Machiavel et Montesquieu” by Maurice Joly, in the Revolutionary Catechism of Bakunin, in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and in the writings of the Russian Bolsheviks today.
Whatever doubts may be cast on the authenticity of any of these documents, the indisputable fact thus remains that as early as 1789 this Machiavellian plan of engineering revolution and using the people as a lever for raising a tyrannical minority to power, had been formulated; further, that the methods described in this earliest “Protocol” have been carried out according to plan from that day to this. And in every outbreak of the social revolution the authors of the movement have been known to be connected with secret societies.
It was Adrien Duport, author of the “‘Great Fear”’ that spread over France on July 22, 1789, Duport, the inner initiate of the secret societies, “holding in his hands all the threads of the masonic conspiracy”, who on May 21, 1790, set forth before the Committee of Propaganda the vast scheme of destruction:
M. de Mirabeau has well established the fact that the fortunate revolution which has taken place in France must and will be for all the peoples of Europe the awakening of liberty and for Kings the sleep of death.
But Duport goes on to explain that whilst Mirabeau thinks it advisable at present not to concern themselves with anything outside France, he himself believes that the triumph of the French Revolution must lead inevitably to “the ruin of all thrones… Therefore we must hasten among our neighbours the same revolution that is going on in France.”
The plan of illuminized Freemasonry was thus nothing less than world-revolution.
At the beginning of the Revolution, Orleanism and Freemasonry thus formed a united body. According to Lombard de Langres:
France in 1789 counted more than 2,000 lodges affiliated to the Grand Orient; the number of adepts was more than 100,000. The first events of 1789 were only Masonry in action. All the revolutionaries of the Constituent Assembly were initiated into the third degree. We place in this class the Duc d’Orleans, Valence, Syllery, Laclos, Sieyes, Petion, Menou, Biron, Montesquieu, Fauchet, Condorcet, Lafayette, Mirabeau, Garat, Rabaud, Dubois- Crance, Thiebaud, Larochefoucauld, and others.
Amongst these others were not only the Brissotins, who formed the nucleus of the Girondin party, but the men of the Terror—Marat, Robespierre, Danton, and Desmoulins.
It was these fiercer elements, true disciples of the Illuminati, who were to sweep away the visionary Masons dreaming of equality and brotherhood. Following the precedent set by Weishaupt, classical pseudonyms were adopted by these leaders of the Jacobins, thus Chaumette was known as Anaxagoras, Clootz as Anacharsis, Danton as Horace, Lacroix as Publicola, and Ronsin as Scaevola ; again, after the manner of the Illuminati, the names of towns were changed and a revolutionary calendar was adopted. The red cap and loose hair affected by the Jacobins appear also to have been foreshadowed in the lodges of the Illuminati.
Yet faithfully as the Terrorists carried out the plan of the Illuminati, it would seem that they themselves were not initiated into the innermost secrets of the conspiracy. Behind the Convention, behind the clubs, behind the Revolutionary Tribunal, there existed, says Lombard de Langres, that “most secret convention [‘convention secretissime’] which directed everything after May 31, an occult and terrible power of which the other Convention became the slave and which was composed of the prime initiates of Illuminism. This power was above Robespierre and the committees of the government,… it was this occult power which appropriated to itself the treasures of the nation and distributed them to the brothers and friends who had helped on the great work.”
What was the aim of this occult power? Was it merely the plan of destruction that had originated in the brain of a Bavarian professor twenty years earlier, or was it something far older, a live and terrible force that had lain dormant through the centuries, that Weishaupt and his allies had not created but only loosed upon the world? The Reign of Terror, like the outbreak of Satanism in the Middle Ages, can be explained by no material causes—the orgy of hatred, lust, and cruelty directed not only against the rich but still more against the poor and defenceless, the destruction of science, art, and beauty, the desecration of the churches, the organized campaign against all that was noble, all that was sacred, all that humanity holds dear, what was this but Satanism?
In desecrating the churches and stamping on the crucifixes the Jacobins had in fact followed the precise formula of black magic: “For the purpose of infernal evocation… it is requisite… to profane the ceremonies of the religion to which one belongs and to trample its holiest symbols under foot.” It was this that formed the prelude to the “Great Terror”, when, to those who lived through it, it seemed that France lay under the sway of the powers of darkness.
So in the “great shipwreck of civilization”, as a contemporary has described it, the projects of the Cabalists, the Gnostics, and the secret societies which for nearly eighteen centuries had sapped the foundations of Christianity found their fulfilment. Do we not detect an echo of the Toledot Yeshu in the blasphemies of the Marquis de Sade concerning “the Jewish slave” and “the adulterous woman, the courtesan of Galilee”? And in the imprecations of Marat’s worshippers, “Christ was a false prophet!” a repetition of the secret doctrine attributed to the Templars: “Jesus is not the true God; He is a false prophet; He was not crucified for the salvation of humanity, but for His own misdeeds”? Are these resemblances accidental, or are they the outcome of a continuous plot against the Christian faith?
We shall now see that not only the Illuminati but Weishaupt himself still continued to intrigue long after the French Revolution had ended.
Directly the Reign of Terror was over, the masonic lodges, which during the Revolution had been replaced by the clubs, began to reopen, and by the beginning of the nineteenth century were in a more flourishing condition than ever before. “It was the most brilliant epoch of Masonry,” wrote the Freemason Bazot in his
It is in the midst of this period that we find Weishaupt once more at work behind the scenes of Freemasonry. Thus in the remarkable Masonic correspondence published by M. Benjamin Fabre in his “Eques a Capite Galeato”— of which, as has already been pointed out, the authenticity is admitted by eminent British Freemasons—a letter is reproduced from Pyron, representative in Paris of the Grand Orient of Italy, to the Marquis de Chefdebien, dated September 9, 1808, in which it is stated that “a member of the sect of Bav.” has asked for information on a certain point of ritual.
On December 29, 1808, Pyron writes again: “By the words ‘sect of B… .’ I meant W… .”; and on December 3, 1809, puts the matter quite plainly: “The other word remaining at the end of my pen refers enigmatically to Weis-pt.” So, as M. Fabre points out:
There is no longer any doubt that it is a question here of Weishaupt, and yet one observes that his name is not yet written in all its letters. It must be admitted here that Pyron took great precautions when it was a matter of Weishaupt! And one is led to ask what could be the extraordinary importance of the role played at this moment in the Freemasonry of the First Empire by this Weishaupt, who was supposed to have been outside the Masonic movement since Illuminism was brought to trial in 1786!
