Talk:Illuminati

RfC about the Conflict with Rosicrucians Section

Is the Conflict with Rosicrucians section of this article agree broadly with current consensus on the histories of the Illuminati and the Rosicrucians in terms of POV? And is it in need of secondary sources instead of/in addition to René le Forestier's Les Illuminés de Bavière et la franc-maçonnerie allemande? I have also made an entry at the NPOV noticeboard here. Thank you! AnandaBliss (talk) 12:51, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

They hated each other. Plotted against each other. Yes, it's the consensus because it's true. It's a big part of the Illuminati's history and it was the cause of their downfall. Le Forestier got his PhD on his magnum opus. He consulted all the original writings of the Illuminati and cites archival evidence (correspondences) from the Rosicrucians bragging about the fight they were winning. You're complaining about a point of view because you think somehow that the Rosicrucians are being dissed or something. Check your biases at the door and know something about a subject before you go trashing an article. XDev (talk) 04:09, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm going to provide exact page numbers that you desire clarification on, plus the sources Le Forestier cited for his info. Also I've acquired English translations of Weishaupt's accounts on the Illuminati persecution - I've got a 6 month to a year headstart to them before they finally are published. You'll get it from the horses mouth, so to speak. Also will back that up with modern esoteric/masonic/illuminaten experts like Yves Beaurepaire, Christopher McIntosh, Monika Neugebauer-Wölk and Renko D. Geffarth's important monograph "Der Orden der Gold- und Rosenkreuzer als Geheime Kirche im 18. Jahrhundert" (2007). XDev (talk) 18:32, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Sorry to revive XDev, but please do not assign motives to other people's edits, or accuse people of "trashing" an article. From what I can still see, there aren't sources in the article from modern scholars regarding the scope and scale of any conflict/rivalry that may have occurred. The Rosicrucianism article doesn't mention the Bavarian Illuminati at all, which shows a disconnect between the two (which could go either way). My original point, though, is that the source cited for many of the Rosicrucian (and Jesuit) interactions with the Bavarian Illuminati, is René le Forestier's 1914 book Les Illuminés de Bavière et la franc-maçonnerie allemande. In fact, this book seems to be the basis of the bulk of the article, cited around 40 times. The issue I see is, I'm not sure that that book reflects modern scholarly consensus, which could be shown with corroborating sources. AnandaBliss (talk) 15:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

• Something that may help is to clarify exactly who we are talking about when we use the term “Rosicrucians”. The original Rosicrucian movement had all but died out by the time Weishaupt came along. Blueboar (talk) 19:09, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

  Agreed. XDev (talk) 19:15, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

  Seconded, Blueboar. It seems the Bavarian Illuminati were roughly contemporary to the Orden des Gold- und Rosenkreutz, so perhaps any conflict occurred between those two orders, specifically? Otherwise, I don't see any sources for Rosicrucian interaction with them. AnandaBliss (talk) 15:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Wrong to associate Illuminati and freemasons

the freemasons are not illuminati. Freemasonry is not a secret society. You can find anything you want on line and in the real world. It is perceived to be secret but it is not. It is just discreet. D612m (talk) 01:29, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

There's a clear link between Freemasonry and the historical Illuminati, with its founder being a former Freemason and several lodges being influenced. They also both were secret societies, until these were banned and the Freemasons forced to maintain membership lists etc. in 1785 by the Holy Roman Empire. Calling it "discreet" is (I'm assuming) a modern approach, which doesn't apply to the 18th century versions of both organisations. Call me Matt - Bling Collector 12:41, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

of course there are links. But Freemasonry is not secret. Here it reads as a blanket statement that Freemasonry is a secret society. It should be clarified that: Freemasonry although perceived as secret, especially in the 18th century, is a discreet society. 38.122.241.122 (talk) 12:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

The article is discussing 18th century organisations. At the time, the Freemasons were a secret society. That is not open to dispute. If modern Freemasons have issues with accurate statements regarding historical events that is their problem, not ours. We are not going to misrepresent what our sources say for their convenience. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Meh… a lot depends on what region of the world you are talking about, and what you mean by the term “secret society”.

In the UK and its American colonies, for example, the Freemasons of the 18th century frequently marched public processions dressed in their Masonic regalia. They definitely did not keep membership secret. In European countries (and especially Catholic countries), however, they were far more “secret”… even as to membership.

We also have the problem of defining what sources mean when they call something a “secret society”. Today, that term conjures images of masked men in robes, meeting to plan something nefarious… but as recently as the 1960s the term was used much more broadly - to describe any fraternal group that had “secret” handshakes, passwords and initiation rituals they did not share with non-members - this included college fraternities and eating clubs, the animal fraternities (Elks, Lions, Raccoons and Waterbuffalo), the Knights of Columbus and even the Boy Scouts’ Order of the Arrow. It is estimated that, in the 1920s, one in five American men belonged to at least one “secret society”.

All that said… in the context of the 18th century… there is good reason why the Illuminati was based in Germany. GERMAN Freemasonry in that era was indeed far more “secretive” than its UK or American counterparts. It was also far more “esoteric” in outlook than Anglo Freemasonry. Blueboar (talk) 14:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain 2600:100B:B01A:B22:0:59:901C:5901 (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

There is no curtain. Blueboar (talk) 13:13, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 May 2024

I want to improve the article by adding citation. Deeprahul07 (talk) 14:05, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 14:13, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Illuminati page on vikipedia

Since there are two secret societies with the Illuminati name Illuminati official and Illuminati brotherhood how The information in the page has any relevance? Illuminati official leader (talk) 10:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

This article is only about the Illuminati secret society founded by Adam Weishaupt in 1776, which ceased to function in the 1780s. That is all it is about. Any more recent organisation calling itself 'Illuminati' (of which there have been many) is off topic. None have been given significant coverage in independent published reliable sources, and none, despite their claims to the contrary, have any meaningful connection with Weishaupt's organisation. Most appear to be little more than means to extract money from the gullible. AndyTheGrump (talk) 11:09, 19 May 2024 (UTC)