'Men are not to be essentially distinguished…': cosmopolitan foundations of freemasonry

Cosmopolitan Craft - Crafting the Cosmopolis

This paper is an attempt to identify ideas on world citizenship in a series of fundamental texts related to freemasonry[1]. It is a sketch rather than a final product- one typical characteristic of a working paper it is a rough stone as compared to a perfect ashlar; an invitation to colleagues and friends to contribute their thoughts, comments and reactions.
The term "cosmopolis" refers to a combination of two Greek words, Κόσμος meaning "the world" or "the universe" and Πόλις meaning "city". Thus, "cosmopolis" is the idea of a city that embodies the world while "cosmopolitan" is an inhabitant of the world city, a world citizen. "Universality" (what in its Latin origin literally means "all turned into one") and "citizenship" (from Latin, "cives" and "civitas", member of a state) are two key concepts for further investigation. Universal means to transgress borders and to embrace space, to turn the world into an integrated whole. Citizenship is to belong to a civilised urban space created artificially by humans (as opposed to Nature - is it possible to be a citizen of Nature? On the other hand - as would have been argued around 1700 in the early Enlightenment: Nature has given humans certain inviolable rights). Secondly, this quality implies certain privileges: to belong to a human community sharing and using the space defined - which in the case of the world citizen has to be understood as the planet as a whole. "Police" as a term developed from its Greek origin originally related to good urban governance. In the discourse of the German so-called "low Enlightenment", "Polizeywissenschaften" were the sciences of how to create a well-ordered urban community, with sanitary rules, fire brigades, streetlights, regulations for trade and commerce. "Police" in our contemporary society is the expression for the resource used when inhabitants of our joint space (attempt to) break against approved rules as codified in law; it is also the body that offers assistance to the executive branches of our juridical bodies.
The term "cosmopolis" was first used in Greek philosophy: When the philosopher Diogenes (reportedly living in a barrel) was asked of his origin, he replied "I am a citizen of the world". One of the most significant features of early Greek culture was independent city-states such as Athens or Sparta. And when imagining space larger than these delimited entities it only seems logical to assume that universal human order in the ideal case should be structured as a city, at least on the metaphorical level. Even to this day the pope salutes his believers with the phrase "Urbi et Orbi" - to the city (Rome) and the world. The utopian city adds another dimension to the idea of world citizenship. Perhaps most influential in a Western context is the idea of Jerusalem as the centre of the world (Ptolemaios's famous world map vividly mirrors this conception) and the different claims made to represent its successor. Rome, Constantinople, Moscow all built their religious legacy on their presumed inheritance of Jerusalem. In the spiritual sense previsions of "The New Jerusalem" are promises of a heavenly city governed by God and open to all mankind. For the development of utopian ideas, the metaphor of the city is a key element of imagination. Campanella's "The City of the Sun", Andrae's Rosicrucian "Christianopolis" and Bacon's "New Atlantis": all are representations of an ideal human order with spiritual dimensions. When we look at the development of freemasonry, the connection to urban space becomes evident. The cathedral/church of European style representing an ideal construction is at the core of a city, the centre of human settlement. Craftsmen created edifices in a similar style across European space at a time when religious teachings were more or less homogeneous. If modern freemasonry even after the Reformation inherited these values, it is only another step in the same direction that its expansion during the 18th century is by and large a European urban development and with its ideology showing elements of universal values - transformed into an Enlightenment context.

Difference and similarity

The political discourse of the 17th century was dominated by an aggressive dichotomy between the two branches of West European Christian belief, Catholicism and Protestantism. During the negotiations that led to the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, however, theories of natural law had an important impact upon the concepts of European space that were predominant at least until the Vienna Congress in 1815. One basic element of political theory was the European territorial state, with its assumed right of self-determination and independence. Supporting these ideas, it was necessary to explain intellectually how and why European states could differ from each other. Self-determination becomes explanatory only when it is based upon difference, and difference (to make any distinction between the qualities of the One and the significant Other) is a key element of identity and identification. Against such concepts and ideas, counter-concepts evolved during the age of Enlightenment, all containing the basic ingredient of similarity, or rather egalité. Their general idea was that human beings without difference were receptive to a single all- embracing moral message. Related to this idea is the notion that many branches of religions and philosophies originate from the same, single and uncorrupted source of knowledge of the true divine, prisca teologia. In 1717, four lodges in London announced the establishment of a Grand Lodge. The organisational and ideological roots of modern organised freemasonry in Europe prior to that event have to be researched further, the predominant and outdated assumption of a distinct cut between "operative" and "speculative" freemasonry has to be abandoned once and for all[2].
In 1723, the Presbyterian minister James Anderson (1679- 1739) published a book of constitutions, a mythical history of freemasonry that included various "Charges" detailing its rules and regulations. The Constitutions can be regarded as a construction of a mythical and heroic past, as a narrative that construes a consistent history back to the infancy of man, since it stresses that this knowledge was passed on through all traditions and times, codified within the symbolic language of freemasonry. One of the last paragraphs reads:

"In short, it would require many large Volumes to contain the many splendid Instances of the mighty Influence of Masonry from the Creation, in every Age, and in every Nation, as could be collected from Historians and Travellers [...]"[3]

Perhaps even more prominent is the first paragraph in Anderson's Charges defining freemasonry "as a Center of Union, and the Means of conciliating true Friendship among Persons that must else have remain'd at a perpetual Distance".[4]

"The whole world is no other than a great republic" - Ramsay's 1736/37 "Oration"

If the early concepts of autonomous territorial states are based upon mutually exclusive qualities, the concept of freemasonry implies a mutual integration of mankind under a joint ideological roof. This cosmopolitan approach becomes perfectly clear in an oration allegedly delivered at a lodge meeting in Paris in 1736 by the Scottish nobleman André Michel de Ramsay (1686-1743)[5]. Like Anderson, in his Discours he dates the origin of freemasonry back to pre-historical and biblical times. However, Ramsay links the narration about the Temple of Solomon from the Book of Kings in the Old Testament with the Chivalric Orders of the Crusades. Scotland was the cradle of modern freemasonry, Ramsay claimed, and its true secrets were kept there. Nonetheless, it seems rather paradox that cosmopolitan ideas were formulated in the context of a society that is regarded as one of the most secretive, mysterious and even esoteric during the Enlightenment. Where is the connection between cosmopolitanism and secrecy? Did secrecy pave the way for the later popularity of cosmopolitanism among European elites? First of all, Ramsay rejects the capability of political rulers to establish enduring institutions for the benefit of mankind as a whole:

"It may be observed that Solon, Lycurgus, Numa and all the other political legislators, have not been able to render their establishment durable; and that however sagacious might have been their laws, they had at no time the power to expand themselves over all countries, and to all ages. Having little more in view than victories and conquests, military violence, and the elevation of one set of people over another, they were never universal, nor consonant to the taste, or genius, or interest of all nations. Philanthropy was not their basis. The love of country, badly understood, and pushed into limits on which they should not verge, destroys often, in warlike republics, the love of genral humanity."[6]

This paragraph is quoted from one of the first English translations of Ramsay's Discours, published in the Scientific Magazine, and Freemason's repository in 1797 under the heading "The Influence of Freemasonry on Society. Philosophically inquired to". The Freemason's Magazine was published 1793-1796 in London and was the first entirely masonic periodical in the United Kingdom. A continuation with an altered title as above appeared during 1797/98. As early as in volume III 1794 (p. 385-87) we find an article with the heading "Social Influence of Freemasonry" containing translated paragraphs from Ramsay's Discours. In 2001, George Lamoines published a translation from the French original of Ramsay's oration in AQC, but I am not sure if the selected parts of an English version in the Freemason's Magazine were known to him or anyone else[7]. Perhaps even earlier versions exist, hidden beneath headings that would not suggest that the main text treats Ramsay's oration. It is worthwhile to consider the headings in the Freemason's Magazine. In 1794 Ramsay's most cosmopolitan paragraphs seem to suggest that they explain the "social influence of freemasonry" which three years later was slightly altered to "the influence of freemasonry on society". I find those claims most remarkable. They imply that this influence is mainly about inducing cosmopolitan values into society, meaning that they differ substantially from other treaties on the topic concerning the relationship between freemasonry and society. In numerous articles, songs and masonic orations (in fact up to our times) across the continent, freemasonry is tripped of potential influence upon society (and that the "profane" world by definition will never comprehend freemasonry) other than that it produces virtuous men and that a larger number of virtuous men in a society will influence it in the direction of a general improvement.[8] An extension of this idea is that masonic charity has a positive impact upon society. Such a position is represented (for example) by an article with an almost identical heading as above in a masonic periodical published in 1784-1786 in Vienna, the Journal für Freymaurer 1784:I (p. 135): "Einfluss der Maurerei auf die bürgerliche Gesellschaft", "The Influence of Freemasonry on Civic Society". In contrast, an article entitled "Über den Kosmopolitismus des Freimaurers", "On a Freemason's Cosmopolitanism" in the same journal 1785:VII (p. 114) calls for the adoption of cosmopolitan values as a moral duty for every freemason.
But let us return to Ramsay. Using a modern term, "good governance" in Ramsay's view comprises long-lasting institutions, wise laws, and order that are extended to all countries and handed over from generation to generation. The focus of good governance is on a global scale, involving universalism and an attempt to adopt/adjust to the genius and interest of all nations. To establish good governance requires moral qualities, philanthropy and a general love of mankind. A "failed state" is based on military aggression, the violent expansion of its territory, a striving for hegemony and an ill- understood patriotism. In Ramsay's view, each nation has its own genius and its own interests. However, in the subsequent part of the text it becomes perfectly clear that these variations do not constitute a definite dividing line:

"Men are not to be essentially distinguished by the difference of tongues which they speak, of clothes which they wear, of countries which they inhabit, nor of dignities with which they are ornamented: the whole world is no other than one great republic, of which each nation is a family, and each individual a child."[9]

The idea of a global republic is combined with the metaphor of the particular nation as a human subject - or rather, in this case, a collective subject, a family. "Personification of the state", write the authors of Organising European Space (2003), "is a basic metaphor, which guides our thinking about international relations".[10] Each individual is regarded as a child of the national family. Thus, there seem only to be three levels when moving from the local to the global: the individual, the collective, and the universal collective. Ramsay goes on to say that it "was to revive and re-animate such maxims" (continuing with "borrowed from nature" in the version Lamoines translated in AQC) that freemasonry was established. The goal is to unite men of an enlightened mind so that

"the interest of the Fraternity might become that of the whole human race; where all nations might increase all knowledge; and where every subject of every country might exert himself without jealousy, live without discord, end embrace mutually, without forgetting, or too scrupulously remembering the spot he was born."[11]

According to Ramsay the maxims of philanthropic cosmopolitanism are based upon "nature" (a typical figure in the context of the debate on natural law and human rights of the period), but they have declined or even disappeared. We can also assume that he refers to an organic metaphor: humankind is to be conceived as a tree with a joint and diversified root system and a shared stem, divided into larger and smaller branches. Ramsay does not specify further in what ancient period these maxims were alive, but he might be referring to ideas of a golden age, when mankind still was pure, perhaps before the Fall of Man. The potential return of the Golden Age is a distinctive feature of Utopian thought - thus Ramsay sees freemasonry as a vehicle in order to realise a latent Utopian potential among his contemporaries. Once this is realised, all nations will be enabled to mutually increase knowledge, a very interesting statement that will be developed further below. Although cooperation between the different people is the ultimate goal, this does not imply renouncing the "spot where [they were] born", the homeland. Parallel to Anderson, Ramsay subsequently constructs a historical basis for his cosmopolitan approach to freemasonry, calling the Crusaders of the Middle Ages its "ancestors":

"Our ancestors, the Crusaders, gathered from all parts of Christendom in the Holy Land, wanted to unite thus in an only Fraternity the subjects of all nations [...] with the aim to "form in the course of time a spiritual nation where, without departing from the various duties which the difference between the States demands, a new people will be created who, getting from several nations, will cement them in a way by the bonds of Virtue and Science."[12]

This claim is an extraordinary interpretation of the ambitions of the Crusades. Ramsay formulates their ultimate goal: to unite subjects of all nations into one fraternity, to create a new people within a spiritual, universal nation. Most certainly, the vision is not a world republic in the political sense but rather an "imagined community" on a global scale. The aim is not to depart from the duties that each separate state demands of its subjects; however, it would be rather improbable to imagine that such subjects united in a spiritual global fraternity organise warfare against each other. Rather, the opposite should be the case: a common morality and science will unite the "new people". Ramsay terms this morality "the Theology of the heart", a concept whose origin may be located in the context of Lutheran mysticism or Protestant pietism (Zinzendorf), although Ramsay was a dedicated Catholic. However - in parallel with Anderson's Constitutions - he also construes a line back to the "feasts of Ceres in Eleusis [...] of Isis in Egypt, of Minerva in Athens, of Urania with the Phoenicians, and Diana in Scythia" that "are all related to our solemnities". A common source of the celebration of mysteries is described, and there is a similarity between all traditions "where several remnants of the ancient religions of Noah and the Patriarchs can be found". But just a few paragraphs later, the universality of the esoteric mysterious is transformed into a universality of exoteric knowledge in an encyclopaedic and enlightened spirit. Ramsay writes:

"All Grand Masters in Germany, England, Italy and throughout Europe, exhort all scholars in the Fraternity to unite together in order to supply the material towards a universal dictionary of all liberal arts and all useful sciences [...] there will be explained, not only technical words and their etymologies, but moreover the history of particular sciences and arts, their great principle and manner of working. The lights of all nations will thus be united in a single work that will serve as a general store and universal Library of what is beautiful and great in the natural sciences and all the noble arts. This work will increase in each century along with the increase of the Enlightenment: a noble emulation will be spread together with a taste for belles-lettres and fine arts throughout the whole of Europe."[13]

As far as we know, at the time Ramsay delivered his speech, with the exception of England, Scotland and France no national grand masters were appointed in the countries listed above. The stated project for the collection of knowledge organised by the order of freemasons therefore seems a mere construction. In reality, it was by this time only Johann Heinrich Zedler (1706-1751) who in 1732 had launched his large encyclopaedia project Grosses vollständiges Universallexikon aller Wissenschaften und Künste (64 + 4 volumes) in Leipzig. This project outsized by far Ephraim Chambers's Cyclopedia, edited in London in 1728 (two volumes with approximately 2500 pages). Chambers is nonetheless of interest for further examination. He included a short entry on "Free, or Accepted Masons" in volume II, p. 506: Freemasonry is "found in every Country in Europe" (mind-provoking to imagine from where this information came in 1728). Its claimed ancestry back to biblical times is mentioned, as well as the statement that its secret is about promoting "Friendship, Society, mutual Assistance, and Good Fellowship". These secrets have been kept by the "brothers of this family" and have been "religiously observed from Age to Age".[14] A second edition of the Cyclopedia was printed in 1738 and one year later it is said that Chambers was asked to produce a French translation that was finally published between 1743 and 1745. A couple of years later it was translated into Italian. It seems perhaps a bit far-fetched to interpret Ramsay's oration as a plea to support these translations. However, the character of the Cyclopedia definitely fits into his vision. The word "encyclopaedia" has its origin in Classical Greek ἐγκύκλιοςπαιδεία, literally, a "[well-]rounded education", meaning "general knowledge" Ramsay delivers an imaginative forecast of the encyclopaedic ambitions of his time, creating this general knowledge: "the lights of all nations will be united in a single work" and this single work will substantially contribute to the augmentation of enlightenment throughout Europe.
In the XIXth volume of Universallexicon, published in 1739, we find an article on freemasonry according to which the fraternity was originally based in England and by then had spread to the Netherlands, France, Germany and Italy. The article also states (clearly referring to Anderson), that "persons belonging to all religions and congregations, if they only accept the rules of morality, may be accepted as members of this society." Furthermore the Zedler article on masons, "Maurer" in the same volume, contains a draft version of Anderson's mythological history of freemasonry. The occurrence of these two entries begs the question of what sources the editors used, as the first German translation of Anderson was published in 1741[15]. Still, there is no evidence of any involvement of organised freemasonry (although there is evidence of the involvement of single freemasons, especially in the French Encyclopédie) in the encyclopaedic projects of the 18th century. The question remains why Ramsay mentioned it.
Ramsay's ideas on world citizenship might be interpreted as the following: in his view, the concord between human beings is rooted in the natural state of man. When political leadership interfered in this state of nature by means of aggressive and coercive expansion, the true unanimity between humans was lost. There is also an idea of an all-embracing morality that can be experienced by everybody. Freemasonry aims at a revival of the true state of nature and works with the same ambitions as its historical ancestors, the Crusaders, to create a new people who embrace a universal solidarity. The roots of this universal solidarity are not only found in a common spiritual/mythical past, but also in the intellectual challenges of the future: to collect, augment and disseminate knowledge for the benefit of mankind as a whole. In the definitions established by Pauline Kleingeld, Ramsay's oration unites several different varieties of cosmopolitanism[16]. Without doubt, we find in it the conviction "that all human beings are members of a single moral community and that they have moral obligations to all other human beings regardless of their nationality, language, religions, customs etc." (moral cosmopolitanism)[17]. When it comes to ideas of a world state, Ramsay does not go so far as to advocate a certain model, although he talks about the whole world as a "vast republic" (not a kingdom - perhaps he had the educated "Republique des Lettres" in mind). However, it is clear that in his view, states using military power to suppress others are "failed states". They do not represent the true natural state of mankind. The universal level of a world state is described as a "spiritual nation" only, with no political obligations. In this sense, Ramsay is perhaps already very close to romantic cosmopolitanism as represented by Novalis. Novalis, Prussian statesman and freemason Friedrich von Hardenberg (1772-1801) gave a talk in 1799 to a Romantic circle of friends in Jena that posthumously received the title "Christianity or Europe", treated extensively below[18]. Here he also stresses philanthropy, moral bonds, a shared faith, and a "general love of mankind". Romantic cosmopolitanism is fulfilled within the fraternity. Even more striking are the parallels between Ramsay and Novalis: both refer back to the European Middle Ages as a golden age. Novalis emphasises, however, the unity between the political ruler and religion within Europe. Ramsay makes a link with the Crusades, where chivalric and religious orders - outside Europe - could experience transnational similarity and unity when encountering the significant "oriental" Other. It is on foreign soil they can truly develop their visions. Although Ramsay does not mention anything about a legal frame, keeping the inhabitants of the world republic together, we can assume that for him, a universal concept of human rights exists, based upon the idea of the true state of nature.
In a sense, Ramsay defends the universal right of each nation to maintain its diversity, and he thus represents "cultural cosmopolitanism". Although languages, geography, clothes and customs do not essentially differentiate people, they still are separate families. They represent different kingdoms, and they have duties that are a result of the demands of those states. The "new people" are thus not created as a totally new design of mankind but instead by a joint imagination, the universal "spiritual nation" serving as the ideological roof of a compartmentalised building where different families can live together in harmony without being forced to relinquish all the differences between them (compare this with last Soviet president Gorbatjov's vision of the "joint European house" in 1987). In his oration, Ramsay does not mention the necessity of free trade between people (Kleingeld brands these interests "Economical cosmopolitanism"). However, he adds a distinct trait to his ideas on universality by emphasising the importance of the free transfer of knowledge. When he states that "all nations might increase all knowledge" or in the original manuscript "all nations may borrow sound knowledge" ("toutes les nations peuvent puiser des connoissances solides"), he apparently refers to his encyclopaedic ideas of a "universal dictionary of all liberal arts and useful science" ("Dictionnaire universel de tous les arts liberaux, et de toutes sciences utiles"). And it is the bond of Science, along with that of Virtue that will cement the "new people". We might here identify a new category of cosmopolitanism, involving the idea that knowledge can be increased mutually, freely transferred and disseminated among mankind for the benefit of all (an idea that we find represented in the contemporary virtual project Wikipedia). Let us call it "encyclopaedic cosmopolitanism", a world citizenship based upon shared knowledge.
How did these cosmopolitan ideas become part of the values of a society that initiates its members in secret ceremonies and that is known for the vast use of secret symbols? How compatible are extroverted ideas of a world community with the introverted secrecy of a restricted group? To address this question, we need perhaps to look at the tradition of Western esotericism. It has often been assumed that irrational mysticism is incompatible with the project of rational modernisation and the Enlightenment, but it may also be the case that these two currents in Western thought are interdependant from each other. Does secrecy manifest itself in the rituals and symbols of freemasonry or does it perhaps mirror an approach to establish a universally comprehensible language? Alexander Roob writes about the puzzle pictures and linguistic riddles in alchemy and mysticism:

"The tendency towards arcane language in 'obscure speeches', in numbers and in enigmatic pictures, is explained by a profound scepticism about the expressive possibilities of literal language, subjected to Babylonian corruption, which holds the Holy Spirit fettered in its grammatical bonds. The prehistoric knowledge, the prisca sapientia that was directly revealed to Adam and Moses by God, and which was handed down in a long, elite chain of tradition, had to be preserved in such a way that it was protected against the abuse if the profane. To this end, Hermes Trismegistus, who like Zoroaster, Pythagoras and Plato, was seen as a major link in this hermetic chain, developed hieroglyphs."[19]

In his Oration, Ramsay puts this idea of a universal language for the initiated in the following words:

"True it is, that this Society hath its secrets; but let not those, who not are initiated, laugh at the confession; for those figurative Signs and sacred Words, which constitute amongst Freemasons a language sometimes mute and sometimes eloquent, are only invented to prevent imposition, and to communicate at the greatest distance, and to know the true Member from the false, of whatever country or tongue he may be."[20]

Regardless of country and origin, freemasonry has established a universal language of its own communicated through secrets. Still, however, the ambition is to contribute to the perfection of mankind as a whole, through the dissemination and transfer of knowledge.

The Order of Cosmopolitans": Christoph Martin Wieland

Are there other ways to combine cosmopolitanism and secrecy? Fifty years after Ramsay's oration, in 1788, on the eve of the French Revolution, the German Enlightenment writer, editor and freemason Christoph Martin Wieland (1733-1813) published his prominent essay Das Geheimnis des Kosmopolitenordens (1788, "The Secret of the Order of Cosmopolitans"). The general message of the text, appearing in his journal Der Teutsche Merkur, is: cosmopolitans/cosmopolitanism need neither secrecy nor an Order. This is in line with Wieland's repeated attack on secret societies and Orders for their concealment. However, it is astonishing that Wieland's and Ramsay's views of world citizenship correspond to a large extent. It is even difficult to imagine that Wieland had not read Ramsay's oration prior to his essay when looking at the following key passage:

"Cosmopolitans carry their name (citizens of the world) in its virtual and most eminent sense. They regard all people of the globe as the same branch of one and the same family, and the universe as a state were they are citizens together with uncountable other reasonable beings, in order to - under general Laws of Nature - promote the perfection of the Whole, each of them according to his particular species and manner industrious for its own prosperity."[21]

In Ramsay's oration, the world is seen as a "Grande République", with nations as families and individuals as children. Wieland expands this vision even further, on a truly universal scale: the cosmos is a state that is inhabited by reasonable beings, fellow-citizens, ruled by the laws of nature. Each of these beings promotes the perfection of the whole while being involved in the augmentation of its own wealth. Ramsay and Wieland are both referring to natural law in their formulations of the cosmopolitan ideal. The mutually integrating approaches between the citizens of the universe are not based upon territory or concepts of territoriality, but instead upon an imagined community, or rather a sense of unity.
Wieland's text on the secret of the Order of Cosmopolitans published in Der Teutsche Merkur is divided into three parts. In the introduction, he recapitulates the content of the novel "Geschichte der Abderiten" ("History of the Abderites"), which was published as a series of articles fourteen years earlier[22]. The second part of the essay deals with the "secrets" themselves, whereas the third part is devoted to the political foundations of the cosmopolitans and their relationship to society. Since the days of the Abderites, the "invisible society" of cosmopolitans has existed for thousands of years, Wieland claims. And true cosmopolitans never would organise themselves in the traditional way. Their "invisibility is a result of the nature of the thing". From the moment a cosmopolitan enters another secret society, he ceases to be a cosmopolitan. Hence, it is not possible to establish a society of cosmopolitans, and Wieland attacks those who had claimed to represent such an organisation and their secrets (which apparently had been the case). Thus, in the name of the Order, Wieland now aims to reveal the secrets of the cosmopolitans so that no one else can claim to represent them.
Wieland invests a lot of effort into explaining the differences between "real" secret organisations and the secrecy of the cosmopolitans. Secret Orders are only secret because they want to be. The only secret of the cosmopolitans is constituted by the ignorance of the masses. There will always be people who - no matter how open the revelation of the cosmopolitan message is - still would not be capable to understand its message. It is this inability of comprehension that creates its only "secret". Unlike secret Orders, it is not possible to be initiated into or instructed about cosmopolitanism: "you are in their society, because you are a cosmopolitan. You are born to be it, and any instruction will not contribute to that more than nutrition and movement contributes to the growth of the animal body [...]".
Wieland criticizes secret societies for their habit of demanding that members take an oath that is unknown to the authorities of the country in question. In doing so, Wieland places his work in a very long tradition of anti-masonic literature. Beginning with the first revealing articles and texts published on freemasonry in the 1720s and 1730s, this argument against freemasonry was mentioned over and over again. How can government authorities be sure that members of secret societies will not conspire against them if their secret obligations remain unknown? On the other hand, to be a cosmopolite requires no oath. There is no need to hide secrets, or to make a secret out of cosmopolitan principles and ambitions. All humans and, in fact, all beings are regarded as parts of the same universal community. However, human beings neither play the most important role nor are subjected to an arbitrary fate. They are not a blind tool of foreign powers, but instead as intellectual beings they are enabled to use their will and mind in order to have an impact upon the surrounding world. From this general anti-deterministic position, Wieland derives a dual principle: to leave aside what human spirit cannot influence and to focus instead on what can be changed by reason and will. The former principle has close connections to Epicurean teaching, where one of the main principles is to remain unimpressed by what we in fact can neither perceive nor affect. I am convinced that a closer examination of Epicureanism and its immense importance for the Enlightenment will reveal significant dimensions for our comprehension of freemasonry and other fraternal organisations during the period.
The latter principle - to focus on what can be changed - reflects the duty of "utmost perfection" explicitly mentioned by Wieland. Each human being has received a gift from nature and it is up to the surrounding conditions to promote the development and refinement of those unique qualities. There is no excuse for not trying to improve upon those gifts. These are the foundations of cosmopolitan virtues, and from here it is possible to make a distinction between "world dwellers" and "world citizens". World dwellers are passive - on the same level as animals. The world citizen, on the other hand, is the one who tries to improve his usefulness in order to contribute to the best of the "grand city of God". Wieland, definitely belonging to the faction of radical Enlightenment, nevertheless uses this term that links him back to the previously mentioned tradition of utopian cities. Cosmopolitans acknowledge no other superiors than necessity and the law of nature. Wieland mentions here "the highest governor of the universe", a terminology closely connected with freemasonry, which often refers to a "Great Architect of the Universe" as the Supreme Being who has created the world. But besides this subordination under the highest governor of the universe, among cosmopolitans only rules supplement equality. Authority and instructions are only taken from nature: there are no other degrees than the different steps of capability and inner moral righteousness. There is no agenda to revive a long-time defunct Order, to unite churches, or to reform the world according to their minds. Cosmopolitans do not constitute a state within a state; they do not require a constitution, or superiors, or secret chancellery, or joint finances. Without the use of any secret signs, a close unity is nevertheless autonomously formed. The entire secret lies in an affiliation that is in force universally: "A certain natural relationship and sympathy, that expresses itself in the whole universe among very similar beings, and in the spiritual bond, with which truth, benevolence and purity of the heart chains together noble human beings". This idea is reminiscent of Goethe's thoughts on elective affinities between humans who attract each other (Wahlverwandschaften, 1809). As the goal of the Order of Cosmopolitans is self-evident, there is no need to call for any synods or convents where this achievement has to be negotiated. Only one formula is needed to summarise the main ambition of cosmopolitans: "to diminish the totality of evil that suppresses mankind as much as possible (without creating any malevolence themselves) and to augment the total of good in the world in accordingly to their best capacity".

Political Principles of Cosmopolitanism

After this formulation of a cosmopolitan code of conduct, Wieland in the second chapter of Das Geheimnis des Kosmopolitenordens discusses the political principles of the cosmopolitans and their relation to the civic society. Good cosmopolitans are quiet citizens. They never use violence to achieve their goals and never take part in any conspiracy, uprising, civil war, revolution or regicide. The only weapon of resistance allowed is reason, which also constitutes the only form of government. In the conflicts between different parties of the state, the cosmopolitan has to remain neutral and impartial. However, there are reasons to choose sides, for instance, when one party is threatened by suppression, or when the other party treats it inhumanely. A cosmopolitan thus never disturbs the public peace, and remains within the legal framework of the state he happens to inhabit.
However, "republican enthusiasm" is also irreconcilable with cosmopolitanism. All types of patrimony are foreign to the cosmopolitan:

"What among the ancient Greeks and the proud citizens of that town that thought to have been founded in order to rule the world [Rome], was called patrimony, is a passion incompatible with the basic concepts of cosmopolitans. No Roman could have been a cosmopolite, no cosmopolite could have been a Roman".

Here again, the parallels with Ramsay's Oration are most intriguing. As we remember, in the very introduction to his speech he rejects the "ill-understood love of one's homeland" which destroyed "the general love of mankind". Even more obvious is the similarity when it comes to the rejection of hegemony. In Wieland's words, it is wrong to "build the prosperity, glory and grandeur of the fatherland upon intentional over-favouring and suppression of other states". Ramsay speaks of the "raising of one people above another".
In a general exposé, Wieland ascribes reason as the main element in the formation of the superiority of European culture. However, the progress of culture and science was not followed by an improvement of governance, "the supreme of all arts, the royal art to put people by means of legislation and governmental administration in the state of higher felicity". The term "royal art" is heavily involved in the sphere of freemasonry. Known as "ars regia", it is not only a synonym for alchemy. Within the masonic context, "royal art" is often used to describe the essence of masonic ideology as a synonym for "masonic science". Wieland's use of the term was not intended to defend any real "royal" rights or powers of monarchy. Subsequently, he ardently proposes that a civic society needs to liberate itself from the last vestiges of the "barbarian constitution", where there are no clear limits between the rights of the "nation" and the rights of the "throne". He then attacks arbitrariness in legislation and jurisdiction, and defends the right of personal property, honour, freedom and life of the citizens. A revolution will come, says Wieland, but not a revolution that sets fire to Europe. It will be a revolution of reason, one which has the power to instruct humans about their true interest, their rights and duties, and the purpose of their existence.
This analysis clarifies that cosmopolitans consider all existing governments as mere "scaffolds for the erection of the eternally existing temple of general felicity". Here again, Wieland employs a terminology widely used within freemasonry, describing with architectural metaphors the purpose of the society. Subsequently, Wieland elaborates in a very long passage on the concept of freedom as an integral part of all human development, which is suppressed by despotism. The establishment of a constitution based on reason will be accelerated by "the utmost spread of basic truths, publicity of facts, observations, discoveries, investigations, suggestions of improvements, warnings of negative consequences". Hence, cosmopolitans regard freedom of the press as the true "Palladium of humanity" and the last part of Wieland's treatise is dedicated to explaining how true journalistic freedom should be organised in a well-civilized state. His ambition is encyclopaedic in essence, and elaborates upon what Ramsay already stated in his Oration: one of the main principles of the masonic fraternity was to enable that "all nations can borrow sound knowledge" from each other. There is a duty of mutual assistance regarding knowledge. Ramsay proposed a "universal dictionary of all liberal arts and all useful sciences" that united "the lights of all nations [...] in a single work". He would perhaps also have argued for the freedom of the press that could fulfil a similar roll, but, at the end of the 1730s, the press in Europe was still not as emancipated as it would be fifty years later.

Why an Order of Cosmopolitans?

These two chapters constitute the content of Wieland's Das Geheimniß des Kosmopolitenordens. A continuation announced at the end of the second part was never published, and was probably never written at all. However, Wieland subsequently, despite the horrors of the French Revolution that he strongly rejected, discussed cosmopolitan topics in his writings. Why did Wieland use a description of a non-existent or at least invisible Order as a framework for his ideas on cosmopolitanism? I suggest the following possible reasons.
Within secret societies (such as freemasonry) during the 18th century ideas on human equality developed together with a principal need for universal solidarity, charity and welfare, dissemination of knowledge, and the introduction of sound principles of government. This general ideological framework comprised the often-cited "augmentation of felicity" or 'pursuit of happiness" for mankind in the sense of the US constitution. Through a joint European sociability, a cosmopolitan community was created, yet open only for the initiated and practised only in privacy. Although many of the ideas and items of modern civic society were exercised in the framework of secret societies such as freemasonry (passports, membership records and payment of fees/taxes, democratic voting, etc., see Margaret C. Jacobs ground- breaking work on these topics), there was never a direct adoption of those principles in society as a whole. Wieland surely saw a need for that (he wanted the royal art to be extended to the field of governance) and thus he needed to attack the internal preoccupation of the Orders with themselves and their "private" matters. As a result, Wieland rejects the secrecy within the act of initiation: he states that cosmopolitan values should be accessible to all (aside from the ignorant Abderites) and should be promoted in public. Another important aspect of the rejection of secrecy within initiatory societies is the habit of taking an oath, the content of which remains unknown to the outside world, especially governments.
Secret societies and Orders were widely discussed in 18th century European press. The 1780s in particular contained many features that Wieland could draw upon. Already the words secret and Order were constantly found in the press. One of the reasons was that a masonic system called the Strict Observance (SO) had spread throughout Europe between 1754 and 1782. The SO claimed that it had inherited the right to re-establish the defunct Order of the Knights Templar, and thus founded provinces and chapters in many European countries. Its Inner Circle of Knights counted 1,600 members, among them many prominent people from high nobility or royal families, well-known writers, academics and so on. The leader of the SO also claimed that he had received his instructions from a group of "secret superiors" - the names of whom he was unable to reveal. Within the framework of the SO some of the most Utopian and most irrational traits of enlightened culture can be found. On the one hand, the knights of the SO worked to realise certain groundbreaking innovations such as an all-European pension fund, financed by the contribution of its members and by investments in industrial production. On the other hand, mysticism and alchemy flourished. For instance in 1767 the supposed "Clerical branch" of the Order revealed its existence and started to practise a very esoteric interpretation of Christianity. The involvement in particular of a substantial part of the German functional elite in the SO was repeatedly discussed. In 1782, a convent was established in Wilhelmsbad that abolished the supposed connection to the Knights Templar. In the aftermath of this event, several books were published such as St. Nicaise (1786) and Anti-St. Nicaise (1786-1788), Versuch über die Beschuldigungen, welche dem Tempelherrenorden gemacht worden, und über dessen Geheimniß (1788), or Noch etwas über Geheime Gesellschaften im protestantischen Deutschland (Berlinische Monatsschrift, 1786). It was also during this time that the famous Order of Illuminati began to be active in Germany, dedicated to a rational reform of society and on the other hand "Count Cagliostro" hypnotising the educated drawing rooms of Europe with his "egyptomanian" metaphysical science. Secrecy, whether involving rationality or irrationality, was always on the agenda. Orders, their history, and their organisations were discussed and questioned. With this context as a background, a semantic field was laid open for use by a mind like Wieland's. References to a general discourse of the time could easily be made and, as we have seen already, there are plenty. In particular when Wieland talks about the qualities of true cosmopolitans, he uses well- established terminology from the discourse of secret societies such as "warrant", "instruction", "degrees", "secret plan", "secret connections", "defunct Order", "unification of churches", "common interest of an Order", "honourable supreme", "secret chancellery", "common treasure", "Shibboleth" and certain "signs".
In the preface to his treatise, Wieland describes how a person who was raising funds believed the Order of Cosmopolitans was real when he addressed his request to them. This already seemed to prove their existence, Wieland writes satirically, and it fuelled misuse by others. "Pseudo-cosmopolitans" now seized the name for their purposes, and awarded themselves the cosmopolitan title. They believed that being a cosmopolitan meant achieving world dominance, the "Imperium orbis". Yet, to be a cosmopolitan is not a label, and requires no organisation: "the invisibility of cosmopolitans follows from the nature of the thing [my Italics]". However, the misuse of the word and of the pretended organisation forces Wieland to both, explain and reveal its real purposes. "Invisibility" is a concept in several contexts, and worth to elaborate upon further. Jesus is known as the "representation of the invisible God" and the "invisible church", and Ecclesia invisibilis refers to the universal Christian community as a whole, united through its shared faith. The article on "Unsichtbare Kirche" in Zedler's aforementioned encyclopaedia states that:

"all humans [that accept the revelation of the Bible] are not only united with Christ, but also mutually with each other, and hence they are parts of the same society. Secondly, because this union in essence is an inner and spiritual, and hence is not perceivable with the eyes, the society is called an invisible church, even if the people who constitute the same are visible and their community with Christ and each other must be perceivable through their actions. Thirdly that the invisible church in the society of all believers or true Christians exists on the whole surface of the world [...]"[23]

This definition of an invisible global community sounds much like Wieland. Invisibility is a prerequisite of cosmopolitanism; any attempts to make the organisation visible will corrupt its essence. The concept of the invisible church as a representation of true and universal Christianity was widespread in Protestant theology. The predecessor of the Royal Society was called the "Invisible College", because as it is stated in Francis Bacon's New Atlantis (1626) a college, the Salomon's house, is devoted to the exploration of new knowledge.

Novalis Romantic Vision of a Cosmopolitan European Space

The era of change in Europe around 1800 triggered visions of a new order. If the old order had to be replaced (which basically everybody agreed upon), why not dream back to a state of a perceived golden age when the Sacred could be experienced? Around 1800 Europe was seen not only as a laboratory for the establishment of French revolutionary and secular principles, but also as a cathedral, founded on a joint order of values, spirituality and emotions. Early political writings of German romantics with authors such as Schlegel, Herder, Schleiermacher and Novalis contributed substantially to the political discourse during the formative period of romantic thought (1797 to 1803). Their ambition was to find a middle path between conservatism and liberalism, between a community ethic and individual freedom. In the writings of the German romantics we find a profound critique of the Enlightenment for disregarding the most essential components of truly human life: love, emotional bonds, beauty, faith and mutual trust. Although they share many of the ideals of the Enlightenment such as individuality, freedom and equality, they accused the philosophers of Enlightenment of perverting and misusing these ideals.
This becomes perfectly clear in the work of Novalis (Friedrich von Hardenberg, 1772-1801). In 1799 he gave a talk to a Romantic circle of friends in Jena that posthumously received the title "Christianity or Europe"[24]. The basic topic of the talk is the religious and spiritual renewal of human being through the revival of "the holy sense", a sense for invisible dimensions like beauty, harmony, peace and truth. Most certainly the idea of the "holy sense" has to do with the emergence of Kantian idealism, although Kant rejects the possibility that the human sense is able to perceive something in the realm of ideas. Rather, the figure used by Novalis dates back to Renaissance concepts of a "visio intellectualis", the intellectual perception of totality. One of Novalis's contemporaries was the exiled Swedish philosopher Thomas Thorild (1761-1808) who developed a perception theory based on the so-called "all-blick" enabling man to see everything on a scale from the most invisible to the most visible. Thorild rejected the Platonian and Kantian concept of a realm of ideas unperceivable by man - it is possible to measure everything and hence Thorild's major work was called Archimetria (1800), popularized in a German version as Die Gelehrtenwelt. Thorild spent some of his time in exile in England where according to a letter written in 1800 addressing the German philosopher Herder he had tried to "arrange humanity as an invisible universal state" ("die Menschheit als einen unsichtbaren Universalstaat einzurichten"). English writings of Thorild are preserved, but have to the best of my knowledge never been analysed in the context of their origin during his time in London. An examination of Thorild's British encounters and the way he attempted to realise the invisible universal state would be most fascinating.
In his talk, Novalis communicates a broad picture of European historical development and also delivers outlines of theoretical approaches towards it that in many senses tangent the emerging trans-national history (or should we rather say post-national historiography?) of our times. From Novalis's point of view it is impossible to separate a part from the whole when it comes to (European) history: "partial histories are impossible - each history has to be universal history and only when related to the whole of history is it possible to treat one single element historically."[25] This leads him (and subsequently also Hegel) to the conclusion that European historical development is a result of a dialectical opposition between the "holy sense" and its counterparts such as reason and utility. However, there are three given phases in historical development: a "golden age", a phase of real, contemporary history, characterised by struggle, resistance and alienation, and a future phase when a new realm of peace, faith and love will come into power. This utopian picture of historical development is projected by Novalis on the European history of state, church, religion and intellect in its development from the strongly idealised middle ages to the strongly criticised contemporary times. The first part of Novalis' talk contains a bright description of a Christian realm of belief, the second part deals with the power of utility and reason, characterised by materialism, irreligiosity and egoism. The third part is devoted to the seeds of change for the better, a realm of freedom and eternal peace to come. Pauline Kleingeld categorises Novalis's thoughts on Europe as "Romantic Cosmopolitanism"[26]. She rejects the notion that he idealises Catholicism. According to Kleingeld, Novalis uses mediaeval Europe only as a symbol in his creative imagination for "a cosmopolitan ideal of a global spiritual community". Christian mediaeval Europe serves merely as a symbol for an ideal humanity united in faith and love. However, an inescapable development of humanity subsequently disrupts the primal unity. Individualism and profit lead to social fragmentation and political fragmentation of the states. Religion after reformation is confined within state borders, in contrary to its cosmopolitan intentions. Europe is in a state of constant warfare instead of eternal peace. A true change can only be achieved through the revival of a new spiritual power that enables one to take a new step forward.

The Extinction of the Holy from Reformation to French Revolution

"Those were beautiful times, those were splendid times, the times of Christian Europe, when one Christianity inhabited this continent shaped in human form, and one vast, shared design united the farthest provinces of this spiritual kingdom. Free from extended worldly possessions, one supreme ruler held together the great political forces."[27] Novalis, 1799

These are the first lines of Novalis's fragment. Here he strongly idealised the mediaeval past as a period of unity of the European continent, united by a joint religion. Everyone acted on the decrees of the church and ordinary people found "protection, respect, and audience" in the church when needed. Churches were full of beauty, music, smells and mystery. Politically, Europe was a unit, and religious and political powers were in harmony with each other. The "holy sense" was defended against scientific claims. Jerusalem, once destroyed by Rome, was now resurrected in the capital of the former destroyers, a "holy residence of a divine government on earth". Those were the beautiful traits of truly Catholic or truly Christian times. "But humanity was not yet mature, not yet educated enough for this splendid realm". Faith and Love were replaced by Knowledge and Possession. Due to the course of the Reformation (and the peace of religion in Augsburg in 1555), religion was limited within the boundaries of states. Thus the foundation of the cosmopolitan interest of religions was undermined, it lost its great political and peacemaking influence. Novalis claims that the inner-religious split between Protestant and Catholic was more profound than the one between Christians and Muslims.
According to him, modern politics was also created during these times "and separate powerful states sought to take into possession the vacant universal chair [of papacy], converted into a throne". Hence, the drive for hegemony is rooted in the Westphalian state concept. The only cosmopolitan impulse left is ascribed by Novalis as the Order of Jesuits, a society that is "a pattern for all societies that sense an organic longing for infinite spread and eternal existence". One of the most unique consequences is the role of the Order as "the mother of the so-called secret societies, a still immature but most surely important historical sow". However, it was impossible to prevent antagonism between religion and science. The holy sense became marginalised by philosophy, "the infinite creative music of the universe was turned into a monotonous clattering of a monstrous mill". Nature, earth, human souls and science were cleansed of poetry. "[E]very trace of the Holy was extinguished" by the new European guild of philanthropists and Enlighteners.

Embellished India versus Dead Spitzbergen: the Second Revolution

According to Novalis a second revolution is about to come during the 19th century, a revolution of religion or rather a return of religion. In the chaos of his time, Novalis sees "true anarchy" as a "generative power of religion. From the extinction of all positive, she lifts her glorious head as a new founder of the world." The traces of this new world are best observed in Germany, he continues, and Germany leads the European league into it. Poetry is now juxtaposed to the old "chamber reason" ("Stubenverstand") like an "ornamented India" compared to a "cold, and dead Spitzbergen". Within politics the new and the old world are fighting each other, the weakness and needs of state orders have become obvious through grotesque examples. Novalis, hoping that the (Napoleonic) war creates a closer and more diverse connection and contact between the European states, cries out: "if a new movement of the until now slumbering Europe would be brought into the game, if Europe wanted to rouse itself, if we would face a state of states, a political state theory!" But in his opinion it is impossible that secular forces create harmony among themselves. A third element, simultaneously secular and unearthly, is required to establish that (eternal) peace:

"Blood will flow across Europe as long as the nations become aware of their horrible insanity that leads them around in circles, [until] hit by holy music, appeased they will step in a colourful blend towards the former altars, commit works of peace and [until] a great repast of love, as a feast of peace [...] will be celebrated with hot tears. Religion only is able to rouse Europe and to secure the people, and with new splendour and visible on earth install Christianity into its old peacemaking office."

Novalis claims finally that other continents await the reconciliation and resurrection of Europe and that the time of eternal peace is near "when the new Jerusalem becomes the capital of the world". At the end of his prophetical essay he conclusively calls in the soul-less representatives of pure and secular reason "into the peace-founding lodge". It is there they will receive "the kiss of brotherhood" in order to reunite them with religion and in a new synthesis of enlightenment paired with holy sense initiate a new and shining future for Europe and humanity.

Conclusion: two Readings of Cosmopolitanism

The cosmopolitan foundations of freemasonry are not to be found in a direct use of the word within freemasonry. It would be easy to assume cosmopolitan foundations if, say, Anderson or Ramsay had claimed: "the brotherhood of freemasonry is cosmopolitan in essence". The article in Journal für Freymaurer from 1785, referred to above, creates - to the best of my knowledge - for the first time a direct link between freemasonry and the concept of cosmopolitanism.
This has to take into account that this masonic periodical was edited by a lodge of intellectuals in one of the epicentres of European enlightenment. During the first half of the century "cosmopolitanism" does not even occur in any titles of printed publications, neither in German nor in English[28]. On the other hand, the term "citizen of the world" or "world citizen" is widespread and most likely known by educated men such as Anderson and Ramsay. The Constitutions claim a united source of human knowledge, to be found in all ages and among all people, transferred through freemasonry. The Charges furthermore open up for the idea that all men who share certain moral values, can through freemasonry experience unity in a potentially global community. This claim is expressed vividly in Ramsay's Oration, in which he creates the image of a world republic made up of different nations, founded upon principles of peace and a mutual exchange of knowledge for the benefit of all (of course he is not the first doing that, but it is remarkable that this is pronounced on the occasion of a masonic meeting). He explicitly defines the establishment of a world republic, a "new people" as one of the main intentions of freemasonry. Like Anderson, Ramsay's concept of knowledge does not only embrace the chosen few in an esoteric circle of initiated. He claims that the grand masters of freemasonry in Europe encourage the collection and spread of knowledge in form of an encyclopaedic project, accessible to all people. As already mentioned, this is notably early. At the time, most European states would not even have educated academies and societies.
The reprint of parts of Ramsay's oration in the flagship of English masonic press sixty years later triggers the question of how confined his ideas actually were in the context of their origin in late 1730s France. Furthermore it shows a tendency of the editors of Freemason's Magazine, who were apparently of the opinion that Ramsay's thoughts mirrored the influence of freemasonry on society. Given that one of the most prominent representatives of German radical Enlightenment, Wieland, in his essay on the Order of Cosmopolitans fifty years after Ramsay's oration (and six years before the first reprint of Ramsay in London) repeats some of its central ideas, it cannot be underestimated. Again it must be emphasised that Ramsay was not original in the sense that he invented the concepts in his oration (although I would like to see the idea of crusaders as the "new people" and the petition for an encyclopaedia to which all people contribute, in print or even manuscript, before 1737), but he surely was one of the earlier representatives, crystallising these ideas. Wieland's essay on the Cosmopolitans is not printed for a masonic audience but reflects the discourse of a time that was disappointed with the turn that the first masonic, truly European, endeavour had taken. The rise and fall of the Strict Observance was one of the most traumatic events for those who had hoped that a new time for a trans- national community - at least among European intellectuals - would arrive. This disappointment explains to a large extent the emergence of the Illuminati - to which Wieland disappointment explains to a large extent the emergence of the Illuminati - to which Wieland most certainly and leading Vienna freemasons most definitely belonged. In the aftermath of the French Revolution and the subsequent Napoleonic Wars there grew a resistance against an entirely rational definition of world citizenship. Napoleon's dominion over Europe was perceived as a threat of a universalising force able to erase some of the continent's core values. Faced with the destruction of a political order that had given sense to the German-speaking states since its foundation by Charles Magne in the 9th century, the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation - finally dissolved by Napoleon in 1806 and thus erasing the Peace of Westphalia of 1648 as the framework of European statehood - Novalis attempted to secure at least the concept of "Holiness" for a new cosmopolitan vision of Europe. Opposing the "sacred" with the "secular" he invented a basic dialectic pattern of world explanation (as later developed in Hegelianism and Marxism) and saw in their synthesis a dream of the future unity of humankind: the secular is reconciled with the sacred in the lodge, receiving there the kiss of brotherhood. Ramsay's oration contains the nucleus for two forms of world citizenship, one based upon rational principles and the other founded upon spiritual values. Both readings of cosmopolitanism, in a rational and an ideal sense, are possible within fundamental texts of freemasonry.

[1] This paper is a much supplemented and elaborated version of the authors recently published chapter "Cosmopolitanism and what is 'Secret': Two Sides of Enlightened Ideas concerning World Citizenship" in The Idea of Cosmopolis: History philosophy and politics of world citizenship (Ed. Rebecka Lettevall and My Klockar Linder), Södertörn Academic Studies 37, Södertörn 2008, pp. 65-86.

[2] Andrew Prescott in "A History of British Freemasonry 1425-2000" in CRFF Working Paper Series No.1, Sheffield 2008; www.freemasonry.dept.shef.ac.uk/workingpapers.htm (accessed 22 May 2008) suggests a new periodisation of the development of freemasonry in Great Britain. Here it becomes obvious that the "Gould-paradigm" of a pre- and post-1717- history of freemasonry has to be abandoned. Jan Snoek in "Researching Freemasonry: Where are we?" in CRFF Working Paper Series No. 2, Sheffield 2008; www.freemasonry.dept.shef.ac.uk/workingpapers.htm (accessed 1 June 2008) elaborates further upon the different approaches of research into freemasonry and the devastating effects of the so-called "authentic school" inspired by Gould.

[3] Quotation from the 1734 Benjamin Franklin edition of the Constitutions of the Free- Masons, (accessed 22 May 2008), digitalcommons.unl.edu/libraryscience/25/, p. 41f.

[4] Constitutions of the Free-Masons, (accessed 22 May 2008), digitalcommons.unl.edu/libraryscience/25/, p. 48.

[5] C.N. Batham: "Chevalier Ramsay: A New Appreciation" in Ars Quatuor Coronatum, Vol. 81 (1968), pp. 280-315 was one of the first to re-establish a proper understanding of one of the most influential figures in early French/European freemasonry. For a recent and eminent discussion on Ramsay and the rise of chivalric degrees in freemasonry see Pierre Mollier, La Chevalerie Maçonnique, Paris 2005, pp. 89-105. Here it becomes evident that perhaps alongside his famous oration, Ramsay's hitherto largely unknown Le Voyages de Cyrus (Paris 1727) plays a crucial roll for the imagination of chivalric motifs within freemasonry. Gould treats Ramsay's "unlucky speech" in Gould's History of Freemasonry, Pools 3rd Edition, London 1951, pp.171-189. This edition is far easier to use than the original because of its splendid index.

[6] The Scientific magazine, and Freemason's repository 1797, p. 35.

[7] André Michel de Ramsay, ms 1213 Bibliotheque Municipale de Toulouse, in Georges Lamoine (ed.), Discours prononcé à la réception des Francs-Maçons (Toulouse: Éd SNES, 1999), pp. 38-45. Georges Lamoine, "The Chevalier de Ramsay's Oration 1736-37", Ars Quatuor Coronatum, Vol. 114 (2001), pp. 230-233. Gould writes in the above-quoted account (History, 1951, p.182) that Ramsay's speech "in its entirety is unknown in an English garb", but doesn't mention the partial translations in the Freemason's Magazine. For a free French version of the text, see also:misraim.free.fr/textes/discours_Ramsay.pdf#search=%22%22André%20Michel%2 0de%20Ramsay%22%22 and freemasons-freemasonry.com/bernheimfr.html for a selection of brilliant texts on Ramsay and his oration.

[8] As recently as November 2007, an official of a masonic organisation stated: "In that context, I was rather surprised that some of you had been discussing the role of Freemasonry in a changing Europe and how Freemasonry can influence, for the common good, the social and moral development of the new Europe. The Home Grand Lodges - England, Ireland and Scotland - would respond that Freemasonry has no role outside Freemasonry and that the only influence it should be seeking is over itself and its members." Source: www.freemasons- freemasonry.com/phpnews/show_news.php?uid=84 (accessed 28th May 2008). Is this the "mighty influence" of freemasonry Anderson was writing about in 1723?

[9] The Scientific magazine, and Freemason's repository 1797, p. 35.

[10] Christer Jönsson, Sven Tägil, Gunnar Törnqvist, Organizing European Space (London: Sage, 2003), p. 14.

[11] The Scientific magazine, and Freemason's repository 1797, p. 35.

[12] Georges Lamoine, "The Chevalier de Ramsay's Oration 1736-37", Ars Quatuor Coronatum, Vol. 114 (2001), p. 230.

[13] Ibid., p. 232.

[14] Chambers Cyclopaedia, or, An universal dictionary of arts and sciences [...], London 1728, vol. II, p. 506.

[15] Zedlers Universallexicon [...], vol. 19, Leipzig 1739, column 2207-2209.

[16] Pauline Kleingeld, "Six Varieties of Cosmopolitanism in Late Eighteenth-Century Germany", Journal of the History of Ideas, 1999, pp. 505-524, where she makes the distinction between moral, political and legal reform and cultural, economic and romantic cosmopolitanism

[17] Ibid., p. 507.

[18] For a good account of Novalis and his talk on Europe see Philipp W. Hildmann: "Von Novalis für Europa lernen?" in Stimmen der Zeit 5 (2006), p. 334-343. An extended version is also available at goethezeitportal.de/db/wiss/novalis/christenheit_hildmann.pdf (accessed 2008-04-10).

[19] Alexander Roob, Alchemy & Mysticism: The Hermetic Cabinet (Köln: Taschen, 2005), p. 9.

[20] The Scientific magazine, and Freemason's repository 1797, p. 36.

[21] Christoph Martin Wieland, "Das Geheimniß des Kosmopolitenordens", Der Teutsche Merkur, Weimar, August 1788, pp. 97-115, the quotation is on p. 107.

[22] History of the Abderites, trans. Max Dufner (Bethlehem, PA: Lehigh University Press, 1993). See also the web page lehigh.edu/ library/ lup/ BookPages/ DufnHist.htm?Literature [accessed 4th May 2008].

[23] Zedlers Universallexicon, Vol. 49, pp. 1020-1021

[24] For a good account of Novalis and his talk on Europe see Philipp W. Hildmann: "Von Novalis für Europa lernen?" in Stimmen der Zeit 5 (2006), p. 334-343. An extended version is also available at goethezeitportal.de/db/wiss/novalis/christenheit_hildmann.pdf (accessed 2006-11-10).

[25] Quoted by Carl Paschek in Novalis Fragmente und Studien, Die Christenheit oder Europa, Stuttgart 2006, p. 148.

[25] Pauline Kleingeld: "Six Varieties of Cosmopolitanism in Late Eighteenth-Century Germany" in Journal of the History of Ideas, 1999, p. 521-524.

[26] All quotes from Novalis from the edition of Carl Paschek: Novalis Fragmente und Studien, Die Christenheit oder Europa, Stuttgart 2006, p. 67-89. Translations by the author of this article.

[28] Checked in the bibliographical databases copac.co.uk and www.ubka.uni- karlsruhe.de/kvk.html as well as in books.google.com/intl/en/googlebooks/about.html.

...