very well be read as a reworking of the practices and hierarchies of the Masonic societies – however, with the important exception that the mechanisms of secrecy has been replaced by mechanisms representation and communication: Every province sends a deputation, eine Provinzialdeputation, to the academy. The members are selected by the prince after suggestion by the academy without regard to their position or rank. The activity of the members consists in writing yearly rapports about everything of interest in their province. Furthermore, these rapports and everything else produced by the members of the academy shall be made available to the public in journals and books. Thus, in an almost astounding or at least highly original way, the function of secrecy has become, has been transformed into a function of publicity.
One obvious element of continuity between the secret societies and the idea of a German Academy can be found in the description of the relationship between the society and the state. There being no secret, no practices of secrecy to protect the Academy from control and intervention by the state, the meetings should be held at places, as Herder puts it,“ dass […] unter den Einflussen keines Hofes stehe”. 17 In this attempt to protect the society from the claws of power, we may recognize the last and almost invisible trace of the political, utopian and almost revolutionary function of secrecy, effective in Masonic lodges prior to the French revolution.
Indeed – and this is my conclusion – there is hardly any better way of learning about the functions of secrecy in the Age of Enlightenment than to consider the fate of Herder’ s plan for a German academy. To begin with, Herder, a former Freemason and member of the Illuminate, reworks the model of the secret society in order to develop a plan for a patriotic institution for the cultivation and communication of German culture. However, upon reading Herder’ s plan, the princes and ministers remain skeptical, even the likes of Carl August of Weimar and Karl Friedrich of Baden. Why? Because, as Carl August writes in his letter to Herder, they are disturbed by the radically public character of the society, functioning according to principles of representation and communication, not, as they are used to from the government of small German principalities, according to principles of secrecy. They are, in short, not used to treating public matters publicly. In the end, the result of this initiative couldn’ t have been more paradoxical. After long and heated discussions of Herder’ s plan, it is the task of certain minister von Edelsheim to come up with a solution that is in accordance with the original idea of his ruler, Karl Friedrich von Baden. What does he do? As proposed by Karl Friedrich, Edelsheim suggests the founding of a learned society for the cultivation of a common German spirit and culture, not, however, according to Herder’ s plan, but – and this is where the real historical irony occur – in the form of a secret society and under the protection of a prince. Furthermore, this society shall not only be a secret to the public, but also – interestingly – to the members themselves. To avoid choosing the wrong people for the society, it would be best, argues Edelsheim in a letter sent to Herder, if the members didn’ t know what they were taking part in, thus, that the purpose of the meetings was in itself a secret. The plan was that eight to ten men – Edelsheim had already made a list – should receive a secret invitation – that Edelsheim wanted Herder to write – to a meeting. Their traveling costs should be paid by the prince, but they were not allowed
17
16, s. 613
59