Assassination of Gustavus III, King of Sweden & Poisoning of Leopold, King of Austria

Illuminati of Bavaria 1

Politics Of 1792

1 Assassination of Gustavus

III, King of Sweden & Poisoning

of Leopold, King of Austria

Politics Of 1792

In 1792, Brissot, a member of a lodges influenced by

the Illuminati at Paris, was the chairman of the French

Assembly's foreign affairs committee. He issued unilateral

ultimatums to Austria for it to express an intent to never

attack France or to reclaim lands taken by France from Aus-

trian protection (e.g., the Comte region seized in 1790). He

imposed a March 1, 1792 deadline on Austria to comply or

face war with France. In response to this boisterous behaviour

by Brissot, Sweden agreed to ally with Austria against France

if a war erupted.

This will provide the context to understand why the

kings of Sweden and Austria were both assassinated in March

1792.

The Illuminati Of Sweden

The Illuminati of Sweden were no different in ideol-

ogy than the Illuminati of Germany. T. Thorild, member of

Illuminati of Sweden, under the Pernetty branch, wrote in

approximately 1790 in his newspaper:

The construction of the Universal Republic that ought to be founded has as its aim the Happiness of Humanity ... They that excel by intelligence ought to rule the world; those

Assassination of Gustavus III, King of Sweden & Poisoning of Leopold, King


that have virtuous energy ought to take in hand the executive power. If some imposter is in power and does not obey, behold the sentence: feriendus. [A blow]. It will give fire to cities and destroy them since they are schools of tyranny, of corruption, of misery ... With a spontaneous return to nature, they will form a free society on the model of the [Golden Rule] ... with a uniform support of a universal reli-

gious tolerance.1

Did this group end up assassinating Gustavus III on

March 16, 1792?

Who was the leader of the Illuminati in Sweden? Brit-

ish diplomats who spoke of the “Illuminati” of Sweden hap-

pened to mention that the next in line, the brother of

Gustavus, “was a fervent disciple of this mystic sect....” of the

“Illuminati.”2 This particular diplomat drew no connection to

Weishaupt’s Order. It is simply the name of the Order to

which this Regent of Sweden was well-known to be associ-

ated with. This Regent by further machinations afterwards

became Charles XIII — the King of Sweden.

Yet, if the Illuminati of Sweden had Gustavus killed,

why in March 1792?

Gustavus III: His Reign Was Marked As

Liberal

Gustavus III, King of Sweden, was a devoted follower

of the French philosophers. When he was made King of Swe-

den in 1766, he often met with Rousseau, D’Alembert, and

Marmontel. He corresponded regularly with Voltaire. He

1. Felice, supra, at 63 n. 54.

2. Horace Rumbold, Recollections of a Diplomatist (London: Edward Arnold, 1903) Vol. 1 at 22. (Available books.google.com.)


Gustavus III: His Reign Was Marked As Liberal

proved his devotion to the reforming spirit soon after taking

the throne. When he came to power, the Caps party who

allegedly were in the pay of Russia had won a majority of

estates in the Riksdag. Gustavus borrowed money from

Dutch bankers so as to secure the nomination of the Marshal

of the Riksdag. Gustavus, with the support of the Army,

thereafter acted to rid the government of the current Riksdag

because it allegedly had become a corrupt oligarchy of nobles

and businessmen.

By 1772, he won military support to surround the

Riksdag. Gustavus ordered the delegates to accept a limited

monarchy, but widened his own powers—giving him control

of the army, navy, and foreign relations. Only he could

appoint ministers. The Riksdag would only assemble at his

will. The Riksdag would have, however, the power to tax.

The Riksdag accepted. The reformists of France were

delighted by this enlightened use of state-power.3

The people hailed Gustavus as the liberator from for-

eign influence, particularly that of Russia. Gustavus insti-

tuted reforms that the French physiocrats like Turgot

advocated: free trade, less regulation over industry and less

control over labor guilds. Free ports were created on the Bal-

tic. Plans of public education were studied. He abolished

torture and softened penalties and lowered taxes.4

3. However, the reformist group should have critized Gustavus for improper pressure over the legislators.

4. Will & Ariel Durant, Rousseau and Revolution — The Story of Civili-zation: Part X (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1967) at 656-57.



Plot on Gustavus Was In Waiting Since

1786, But Thwarted Through 1789

Nevertheless, according to the testimony of two

French Freemasons, at a meeting of Masons in 1786 in Frank-

furt-am-main , it was planned to kill Gustavus III of Sweden

and Louis XVI.5 Why attack Gustavus, the most progressive

of Monarchs?

In 1786, seeds of disaffection were being sown regu-

larly in the press against Gustavus. The king, always previ-

ously revered as a liberal, was now subject of pamphleteers

who cast suspicion on the motives of the government’s

monopoly on liquor and the expenditures on the army. On

May 6, 1786, Gustavus convened the Riksdag for a vote of

confidence, but few supported his proposals.6

Despite the efforts of those who were trying to under-

mine Gustavus, he emerged alive from this dark period. This

was because in January of 1789, Denmark invaded Sweden

and the people were "overwhelmingly for the King."7

The people supported Gustavus’ politics as well. He

had adopted many liberal reforms. He also went further by

personally ending many priveleges of the nobility. He also

opened political offices to almost anyone. As evidence of the

widespread support for his reforms, even the House of Nobles

voted two years supplies for the war with Denmark. The

other three legislative houses put no limit.

5. Charles d’Hericault, La Révolution at 104, discussed in Nesta Webster, The French Revolution, supra, at 21

6. Will & Ariel Durant, Rousseau and Revolution -- The Story of Civili-zation: Part X (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1967) at 662.

7. Will & Ariel Durant, Rousseau and Revolution -- The Story of Civili-zation: Part X (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1967) at 663.


Now Enters The Duke of Sudermanie — Templar Chief — & Illuminati Assassi-

Now Enters The Duke of Sudermanie —

Templar Chief — & Illuminati

Assassination of King of Sweden in 1792

The Swedish political figure known as the Duke of

Sudermanie now enters the scene. He was the brother of King

Gustavus III. Cadet-Gassicourt indicated the Duke of Suder-

manie was the chief of the Templars of Europe during the

French Revolution of 1792, as discussed below. His biogra-

phy is most revealing on the causes for Gustavus’ death.

First, let’s review the Duke’s Freemason career.

According to a masonic history pubication, the “Duke of Sud-

ermanie,” the “brother of King Gustavus III” was “initiated in

1770” into the Strict Observance Templar Freemason system

along with Gustavus III. Since 1780, the Duke of Sudermanie

was Grand Master of the “Knights Templar” of the “Strict

Observance” system of Sweden.8

Gassicourt identifies that the Duke of Sudermainie

held international control over Templar Freemasonry during

the French Revolution period:

The principle initiates, who have played a role in the French revolution, are Mirabeau, Fox, the Duke d’Orleans, Robespierre, Clootz, Danton, Dumouriez, [Lepeletier de] St. Fargeau. The Grand Master actually is the Duke of Suder-manie, Regent of Sweden. It is by the taking of the Bastille that the revolution began, and these initiates chose it for the attack of the peo-ple because it had been the prison of Jacobus Molai [Jacques du Molay, Grand Master in 1301 of the Knights Templars]. Avignon was the the-ater of the greatest atrocities because it had

belonged to the Pope . . . . 9

8. Emmanuel Rebold, Joseph Fletcher Brennan, A General History of Free-masonry in Europe (American Masonic Publishing, 1869) at 111.



Gustavus III Finds Out About The Secret

Plans of The Strict Observance (Templars)

However, the same masonic historians admit that

when King Gustavus III “discovered the secret plans which

lay hidden under the Strict Observance, he mistrusted its

tendency.”10

In 1792, Gustavus III then turned to support King

Louis XVI to maintain a constitutional monarchy against

internal agitators. In early 1792, Austria stationed troops near

France should anything befall their nation’s daughter —

Marie Antoinette — still the reigning Queen of France. It

was Gustavus who was put in charge of these troops who

belonged to a coalition force. All were in a wait-and-see

mode on the next move inside France. Gustavus III of Swe-

den was the military commander agreed upon by Prussia &

Austria to lead the coalition forces to protect the King of

France should any harm come.11

In March 1792, Gustavus went to Aix-le-Chapelle to

lead these allied forces into France if there was war. How-

ever, as a result of disturbances back home, he was forced to

return to Stockholm to see what was afoot.12

Thereupon King Gustavus III was assassinated on

March 16, 1792. His young 13 year old son, Gustavus IV,

succeeded him.13 As a result, also the Duke of Brunswick

replaced Gustavus IV as head of allied forces on the borders

of France. As Louis Philippe notes: “But as this Prince

9. Charles Louis Cadet-Gassicourt, Le Tombeau de Jacques Molay ou le secret des conspirateurs, à ceux qui veulent tout savoir. Oevure Post-hume (Paris: Les Marchands de Nouveaute, 1796) at 18.

10.Emmanuel Rebold, Joseph Fletcher Brennan, A General History of Free-masonry in Europe (American Masonic Publishing, 1869) at 111.

11.Louis Philippe, Memoires, supra, at 451.

12. Will & Ariel Durant, Rousseau and Revolution — The Story of Civili-zation: Part X (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1967) at 664.

13.Rebold & Brennan, id., at 112.


The Assassination of Gustavus Itself

[Gustavus] was assassinated in March 1792, the Powers

[Prussia and Austria] made a new choice which fell on the

Duke of Brunswick."14

It later turned out that the Duke of Brunswick, despite

the seizure of Louix XVI and Marie Antoinette in August

1792, never would move forces on France. This astonished

all of Europe, particularly the allies. We will later explore

why the Duke of Brunswick did nothing.

The Assassination of Gustavus Itself

Thus, who assassinated Gustavus III? The assassina-

tion took place at a masquerade ball at the opera house of

Stockholm on the night of March 16, 1792. Death was caused

by two pistol shots from Mr. Ankarstrom. He was a Swede

formerly in the royal guard.15

Police determined this killing was part of a much

larger conspiracy than just Ankarstrom.16 It was indeed not

the lower classes conspiring, but members from the upper

classes. As Mirabeau-Tonneau, the brother of the revolution-

ary, commented at the time, they “arrested thirty-four per-

sons, as well as the killer,” noting “it is dreadful to imagine

that it is the order of the nobility that formed the infamous

conspiracy.”17

14.Louis Philippe, Memoires, supra, at 451.

15.Antoine Etienne Nicolas Fantin des Oduards, Histoire Philosophique De La Revolution de France (Paris: 1801) Vol. II at 90-91.

16.Antoine Etienne Nicolas Fantin des Oduards, Histoire Philosophique De La Revolution de France (Paris: 1801) Vol. II at 89.

17.Eugene Berger, Le Vicomte de Mirabeau (Mirabeau-Tonneau)(1754-1792) (Paris: Hachette, 1904) at 368.



The conspirators’ papers showed this killing was

intended to start a revolution, including to put in place a new

constitution. The first step was to seize command of the

national guard of Stockholm.18

What Organization Was Found

Responsible?

A complete police investigation was made, and the

results published by a French “historian and diplomat” named

Alexis-François Artaud de Montor (1772-1849).19 He

claimed the Swedish police proved some "Illuminati society"

was behind the assassination.20 This account became well-

known, as one magazine in England recorded in 1840: “it has

been proved that the assassination of Gustavus III in Sweden

was the work of a conspiracy of Illumines: Ankarstrom and

Horn did not attempt to conceal this fact.”21

Was Montor credible? Montor in his life-time wrote

over a dozen serious histories that were well-regarded. Many

of his works are still cited today. Montor also was a translator

into French of Dante’s Divine Comedy. Montor added to these

achievements a career as a diplomat. Under Napoleon,

18.Antoine Etienne Nicolas Fantin des Oduards, Histoire Philosophique De La Revolution de France (Paris: 1801) Vol. II at 91.

19.This book was discussed in a 1798 issue of Allgemeine Literaturzei-tung (Jahrgang 1798) Band 2 \ Numero 194, and its online reference identifies the author as “Artaud de Montor, Alexis-François (1772-1849. Historiker, Diplomat.” A second edition appeared in 1802.

20. [Artaud de Montor] Histoire de l'assassinat de Gustave III, roi de Suede, par un officier polinaise temoin oculaire. (Paris 1797), as cited and discussed in "Un Prince Allemand Du XVIII Siecle D’Apres des Memoires Inedits," Revue des Deux Mondes (Jan. 1, 1866) at 920.

21.“The History and Mystery of Secret Societies and Political Clubs,” Fraser’s Magazine for Town and Country (May 1840) 542, at 548.


Templar Leader, Brother To King, Gains From His Brother’s Assassination

Artaud de Montor was the Secretary of the French legation at

Rome until 1805 when he was made chargé d’affaires at Flo-

rence.22

There is thus no reason to disregard this treatise sim-

ply because it ‘fits’ the Illuminati legend. The question is

whether the facts surrounding this claim fit what Montor

revealed.

Templar Leader, Brother To King, Gains

From His Brother’s Assassination

A clearly corroborating fact is that the person who

directly benefited in the short-run and long-run from the

assassination turned out to be the Duke of Sudermanie.

Cadet-Gassicourt referred to this same “Duke of Sudermanie,

regent” as the chief of the entire Templar system during the

French Revolution period. In 1792, as a result of Gustavus

III’s assassination, the Duke of Sudermanie became the

“regent of the kingdom [of Sweden] during the minority of

Gustavus IV.”23 — age 13 at the time.

Then in 1809, the Encyclopedia Americana says “a

conspiracy was formed against” Gustavus IV, and he was

deposed and exiled; later he “died in poverty.”24 Then “after

the deposition of Gustavus IV, the Duke of Sudermanie, this

king’s uncle, was called to the throne.”25

22.http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexis-Fran%C3%A7ois_Artaud_de_Montor (accessed 1/1/2009).

23.Alexandre Dumas, The Memoirs of Alexandre Dumas (Père) (London: 1891) Vol. I at 230.

24.“Gustavus IV,” The Encyclopedia Americana (N.Y.: 1919) at 578.

25.Claude-François de Meneval, Memoirs Illustrating the History of Napoleon I from 1802 to 1815 (N.Y.: 1894) Vol. II at 329.



Hence, due to Gustavus III’s death, his brother — the

Duke of Sudermanie, the international head of the Templar

sect — effectively ruled as regent until Gustavus IV became

an adult, and then again later when the king turned age 30.

This time he duke making himself king, making the true king

a pauper.26

Masonic histories record the duke, now king, contin-

ued as Templar Grand Master of Sweden until 1811 when he

turned the post over to Prince C.J. Bernadotte.27

Because of the way this duke took the crown, people

in those days derogatorily called him the “Duke of Orleans of

Sweden (not altogether inaptly),” meaning he was regarded to

be a virtual “regicide” like many viewed the Duc d’Orleans

of France.28

It seems pretty transparent that not only was Cadet-

Gassicourt correct about this Duke of Sudermanie being the

head of European Templars at the time, but also that this duke

used the same means his Templars used in France to engineer

seizures of power. The police investigation finding the “Illu-

minati” assassinated Gustavus III should surprise no one.

This was during the period the young boy-king and true king

was ruling, and the Regent-brother of Gustavus was still on

the sidelines — yet laying in wait for his day to oust the true

successor king and seize the throne for himself.

26.The Duke of Sudermanie called himself King Charles XIII.

27.Rebold & Brennan, supra, at 112.

28.Louis Gabriel Michaud, The Public and Private Life of Louis Philippe of Orleans (London: 1851) at 75.


Other Advantages To Killing Gustavus III

Other Advantages To Killing Gustavus III

Loss of A Zealous Protector Of King Louix XVI

During the events leading up to the French Revolution

of 1792, Gustavus became more obviously a target to destroy.

Sweden with Prussia and Austria in February of 1792 had

agreed to protect King Louis of France if any harm should

befall him. They offered this help despite no request from

King Louis of France.

Gustavus was indeed zealous to defend Louis XVI.

When Baron Escars, a German of distinction who served sev-

eral French princes in exile, told Gustavus III of “a plot

against the King’s life,” based on “notices from Germany, in

which he was instructed about a widespread talk that the

next murder would be of Gustave,” King Gustavus replied:

If I allowed myself to listen to all the stories of conspiracies, I would soon have to take a drink of water. The Swedes are brave in war, but timid in the political affairs, and as I have no doubt in the success of my expedition in France, I intend to send Stockolhm all the flags that I can. I will by my moral authority inspire confidence and respect that is naturally

accorded conquerors.29

Gustavus III clearly had a zeal and purpose to invade

France if necessary to protect Louix XVI’s life. This is some-

thing that was broken when he was replaced by a new expedi-

tionary forces leader — the Duke of Brunswick — the very

same who chaired Wilhemsbad where the overthrow of

France was planned in 1782.

29.Antoine Etienne Nicolas Fantin des Oduards, Histoire Philosophique De La Revolution de France (Paris: 1801) Vol. II at 87-88.



Sweden Dropped Out of The Alliance Against France

Another consequence of this assassination is that

Sweden dropped out of the alliance. This was due not only to

the disruption such a death causes but also because the new

king besides the Regent (Duke of Sudermanie) appears to

have sympathized with the forces behind the Jacobins.

We already spoke of the Duke of Sudermanie. The

king’s son, King Gustavus IV, at age 14, joined the Freema-

sons at Stockholm on March 10, 1793.30 Also, in the same

month of March 1793, the new young king put all secret soci-

eties under government supervision but his Ordinance said

explicitly "Freemasons . . . are alone excepted from this

inspection."31 Thus no secret society other than Freemasons

could operate in Sweden.

Hence, those who took power from Gustavus III,

whether the boy-king or his uncle, the Duke of Sudermanie,

were obviously protective of the forces that were hiding the

Illuminati in the upper degrees.

Was Leopold Murdered on March 1, 1792?

The assassination of Gustavus also coincided with

events in Austria. Its connection to those other events cannot

be ruled out as one of the reasons why March 16, 1792 was

singled out for the date of Gustavus’ assassination.

30.. "Gustavus IV," Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, supra, at Vol. I, at 312.

31.. Id.



Leopold: Poisoned By Another, Or His Own Concoctions, or A

Natural Death At Age 45 on March 1, 1792?

This part of the account starts with Leopold’s sudden

death in Austria. Leopold was brother to Queen Marie Anto-

inette of France, and thus had very sincere reasons why he

would wish to help his sister in France.

Emperor Leopold died on March 1, 1792, at age 45. In

the year prior — August 25, 1791, Leopold had met the king

of Prussia at Pillnitz, near Dresden, and they drew up a decla-

ration of their readiness to intervene in France if and when

their assistance was called for by the other powers. A formal

alliance by Leopold with Austria was indeed signed on the

7th of February 1792.32 However, on March 1, 1792 Leopold

died “suddenly.”33

In fact, however, the cause of death appears to be poi-

soning by an Illuminatus. At the time, this is precisely what

people believed.

But in March, 1792, Leopold, Emperor of Ger-many, died, — as his friends supposed, of poi-son administered by an agent of the secret order of Illuminati, — and the king of Sweden was assassinated by Anckarstrom. These two catastrophes struck terror into the royal and noble families of Europe, who, after the horri-ble events of the French Revolution, might be pardoned the suspicion that the Jacobins were entering in disguise the service of their ene-mies, to play more conveniently the part of

assassins.34

32.http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Frederick_William_II (accessed 1/2/09).

33.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_II,_Holy_Roman_Emperor

34.“Prince Gallitzin,” The North American Review (Boston: Crosby Nichols, 1859) No. 182, 349 at 354.



Before we discuss that evidence, let’s review some

facts. The king had been vomitting for three days. “Because

of rumors that he was poisoned, the government was obliged

to perform an autopsy.”35 The autopsy revealed a tape worm

several cells in length, and some assume this was the cause of

death.36 However, Lamartine says there were a mixture of

issues, including the likelihood that pills concocted by Gusta-

vus were involved and the face a trace of poison was found

— which indeed may have been in those very same pills:

The most probable opinion is that this prince had made an immoderate use of drugs which he compounded himself, in order to recruit his constitution, shattered by debauchery and excess. Lagusius, his chief physician, who had assisted at the autopsy of the body, declared he

discovered traces of poison.37

As we read on, it is evident that the pills he used con-

tained a poison, but the question was whether another person

was responsible for this or Leopold himself alone. He had

used such pills for a very long time, without bad effects.

However, shortly before his death, someone came with new

recipes. He was Johann Rudolph von Bischoffswerder (1741–

1803), an envoy of the King of Prussia, but no one ever seems

to suspect him. Let’s read Dr. Eduard Vehse’s account

because his naivete about Bischoffswerder is most revealing

about who poisoned the pills, whether Leopold or Bischoff-

swerder.

After advising us that the king was vomitting for three

days, Dr. Vehse explains:

35.Chris Woodstra, Gerald Brennan, Allen Schrott, All Music Guide to Classical Music (2005) at 299.

36.William Coxe, History of the House of Austria. From the Foundation of the Monarchy (2006) at 199 fn.

37.Alphonse de Lamartine, History of the Girondists (N.Y.: Harper, 1848) Vol. I at 365.



There was a rumour of his having been poi-soned, the suspicion even being fixed on Signora Livia, who afterwards lived in great luxury in Italy. Hormayr, however, has com-pletely refuted this gratuitous suspicion. Leopold dabbled in alchemy and chemistry, and hastened his death by the use of stimulat-ing pills, manufactured in his own laboratory, of that sort which were then in Italy called Dia-volini. Frederic William II of Prussia had sent to him, as an ambassador, the famous Rosicru-cian, General Bischofswerder, who was reputed to be particularly skilled in the prepa-

ration of those erotic stimulants;38 and with this adept the Emperor was repeatedly engaged in alchemist and other similar

experiments in his secret laboratory.39

So this doctor does not think anyone but Leopold poi-

soned himself. Yet, the doctor ignores the role potentially

played by the “Rosicrucian” Bischoffswerder in helping for-

mulate new alchemist concoctions. Everyone assumed Bis-

choffswerder was above suspicion.

38.From 1778 to mid-1780, Major Bischosffswerder was stationed as a calvary officer in Bavaria fighting the potato war with Austria. Bis-choffswerder applied a ‘magic elixir’ to cure Prince Frederick William (F.W.) of some disease. He said the Order held the secrets. When F.W. recovered, he was anxious to join. Bischoffswerder accepted him as a candidate as F.W. was already an initiate in the Masonic lodge of the Golden Keys. After a year’s probation, on August 8, 1781, Bischoff-swerder with Wollner initated him into the Rosicrucian order, with the alias Ormesus Magnus. (Christopher McIntosh, The Rosicrucians, supra, at 78.)

39.Dr. Eduard Vehse (trans. Franz Demmler), Memoirs of the Court, Aris-tocracy, and Diplomacy of Austria (London: Longman Brown, 1856) Vol. II at 371.



However, once one understand this “Rosicrucian”

Bischoffswerder was actually part of the Illuminati, as

explained next, then there is no coincidence that Leopold died

by poisoning on March 1st, 1792, to be followed by Gustavus

III on March 16th by two pistol shots.

Bischoffswerder & The Illuminati

Introduction & Synopsis of Conclusions

The evidence below should establish that at Berlin

there were two lodges of significance in our account of Bis-

chofswerder. One was controlled by the Illuminati, but the

other was a Rosicrucian lodge.

First, there was a Freemason lodge Concordia that

later changed over to become a Strict Observance lodge. Just

as Cagliostro was told the Illuminati were the higher superi-

ors within the Strict Observance, this was the lodge run by the

Illuminati linked to Weishaupt. The other lodge at Berlin was

a lodge of Rosicrucians at Berlin. Bischofswerder belonged

to both. So did Wöllner.

The Illuminati Are Linked To Bischoffswerder, not Wöllner

In October 1790, the Comte de Vaudreuil, advisor and

friend to the emigre prince of France, the Comte d’Artois,

wrote him from Venice:

What strikes me most is that the sect of the Illumines is the cause and instigator of all our troubles; that one finds these sectaries every-where, that even the King of Prussia is imbued with this pernicious system; that the man who possesses his chief confidence (Bischoffswer-

der) is one of its chief heads.40



Thus, as of 1790, the French emigre princes were not

fooled into thinking Bischoffswerder was on their side. The

King of Prussia may have sympathized with the emigre

Princes of France, but that did not matter if Bischoffswerder,

and his Illuminati sect, held sway over the king. And note that

Bischofswerder is linked to the Illuminati, not Wöllner.

Henry Fox, Lord Holland’s Links Bischofswerder To The

Berlin Illuminati

Lord Holland provides a most ‘illuminating’ account

of the Illuminati and Bischoffswerder. There is no mention of

Wöllner.

First, we need some background on Lord Holland to

understand his reliability, including the company he kept.

Henry Fox 3d, Lord Holland (1773-1840) 41 was the

“orphaned nephew and ward of Charles James Fox, the cele-

brated Whig politician and the most powerful British sup-

porter of the French Revolution in this period.”42

Through connections of his famous uncle, Henry Fox/

Lord Holland went to Paris in 1791 and was able to meet with

Lafayette and Talleyrand. He again visited France in 1793

during its most extreme phase.43

In 1796, Henry Fox became Lord Holland as he

joined the House of Lords. There he became leader of the

(liberal) Whig party. “Throughout [Lord Holland’s] whole

40.Correspondence du Comte de Vaudreuil et du Comte d’Artois (Paris: 1889) Vol. I at 342, quoted in N. Webster, World Revolution, supra, at 86.

41.Lord Holland, Henry Richard Vassall Fox, 3d (1773–1840), “British politician, nephew of Charles James Fox. He was a member of the Whig opposition party from 1797 and served as lord privy seal in the coalition ministry of 1806–7.” http://www.answers.com/topic/baron-holland

42.Markman Ellis, The History of Gothic Fiction (Edingburgh University Press, 2005) at 98.

43.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Vassall-Fox,_3rd_Baron_Holland



political career he took a pro-French stance.”44 He opposed

absolute monarchies in Europe and any effort to restore the

Bourbons to France.

His home was known as Holland House. It became a

salon comparable to those found in France, where important

figures from around the world visited, and swapped stories.

In 1850, Lord Holland wrote a book of his reminisces

from what he heard in such political circles, including discus-

sions about Bischoffswerder.

Lord Holland specifically reported how Bischoffswer-

der used Illuminati seances to manipulate of the king of Prus-

sia, Frederick William II. Holland. He does not claim they are

all true, but that so many statements to the same effect must

have some truth in them. Yet, because Bischoffswerder often

encouraged the Prussian king to war against the revolution,

Holland could not fathom how this made the Illuminati in

league with the French Revolution.45

Here is Lord Holland’s reminisce of King Frederick

William II of Prussia and the role of the Illuminatus Bischof-

swerder in his cabinet:

However irregular in morals, he was not devoid of superstition. In 1792. he was much under the influence of a sect then famous in Ger-many, and called the Illumines. Of that asso-ciation of visionaries and impostors, his favorite, Mr. Bischoffswerder, was a member ; and he is much belied if he did not resort to conjuration and apparitions, for the purpose of converting the King to his views of policy,

44.http://johntyrrell.blogspot.com/2008/03/lady-holland-dahlias-everlast-ings.html

45.But what Holland overlooked is that if the Prussian king ended up only threatening war from Prussia on France, this could be, and was used, as a pretext to initiate revolution at Paris. This is precisedly what hap-pened on August 10th, 1729. After threats were made by Prussia, no counter-attack from Prussia ever came.



which were very versatile and changeable, and not unfrequently as mysterious and unintelli-gible as his belief in necromacy, magic, and an immaterial world. Some odious and many ludi-crous instances of the delusions practiced to engage the King in the war, and nearly as many of similar artifices to wean him from the prosecution of it, were circulated and credit ed throughout Europe. Many, no doubt, were invented ; and most, in all likelihood, consider-ably heightened by public report; but there could hardly be so much exagger ation without some truth, and the notorious prevalence of such superstitions in all the courts of Germany rendered the stories probable enough, though I neither recollect the details, nor have examined the authorities on which they rested, suffi-ciently to justify my recording them as facts. Some years afterward it became a fashion or an artifice among the servile apologists of tyr-anny, to connect the sect of Illumines, and all their ramifications, first with free-masonry, and afterward with the disorganizing and irreli-gious principles of the revolutionary clubs in France. I believe they were entirely distinct in their origin, their objects, and their progress. It is, at least, whimsical, that the only known practical result of such visionary practices on the events of the political world, was to prevail on many petty, and one important court of Ger-many, to inflict the calamities of war on man-kind, for the purpose of rescuing the institutions of monarchy, popery, and nobility

from destruction.46

46.Henry Richard Lord Holland, Foreign Remisces (N.Y.& London: Harper, 1851) at 52-53. A complete copy is at http://www.archive.org/stream/foreignreminisce00hollrich/foreignreminisce00hollrich_djvu.txt (accessed 1/2/09).



Thus, Henry Fox aka Lord Holland recorded what he

learned from his international crowd. Bischoffswerder

manipulated the king of Prussia using the German Illuminati

at Berlin. Sometimes for war. Sometimes against it. But

always the king was like a puppet due to his credulity for the

mysticism of the lodge. Notice again this is not linking Wöll-

ner to the Illuminati, which will prove important.

Specifics On Lodge Of Bischoffswerder: Templar Origins

The lodge which I believe is where the Illuminati

came to predominate was founded actually in the 1760s at

Berlin. Rene Alleau, in his scholarly work on the occult ori-

gins of Nazism, explains that the lodge’s German name was

Zur Eintracht, or “For Concord.”47

Yet, it was dying out soon thereafter. Freemasonry

was viewed suspiciously in Germany, as it originated in a

Protestant nation (i.e., England.) When Freemasonry was los-

ing energy, then came along “an order known as the Strict

Observance, claiming succession from the Templars, sup-

planted Freemasonry.”48

Alleau says this particular Concord lodge linked up to

the Strict Observance — the Templars. Bischoffswerder “was

initiated into Strict Observance masonry under the ceremo-

nial name of Eques a Grypho.”49 Much later “Members of the

Order [at Berlin] associated with the Illuminati.”50

47.René Alleau, Le origini occulte del nazismo (trans. R. Leveghi, Gian-franco De Turris) (Edizioni Mediterranee, 2006) at 109. The original French title was Hitler et les societes secretes (1969).

48.History of the Ancient and Honorable Fraternity Part 1 of Free and Accepted (Kessinger reprint) at 492.

49.James Van Horn Melton, The Rise of the Public in Enlightenment Europe (2001) at 77.




Part of Bischoffswerder’s transformation toward the

Illuminati might have taken place when in 1778 until the mid-

1780, he was stationed in Bavaria in the “Potator War” with

Austria.51

Yet, it was in that time, at Christmas eve 1779, that

Bischoffswerder (probably at Hamburg) joined a Rosicrucian

Order.52

Going back to the Strict Observance, one of the key

differences from ordinary masonry in this sect, other than

using the Templar myth, was that the Strict Observance had

“unknown superiors.”53

As we saw previously, when Cagliostro was initiated

in 1780 within a Strict Observance lodge, he was told the

superiors of the Order belonged to an inner circle known as

the Illuminati. This is thus where the Illuminati were — in

this Strict Observance lodge. This must have been true as

well for the Berlin branch.

Meanwhile, mention is frequently made that Bischoff-

swerder belonged to this Concord (now Templar) lodge as

well as the Rosicrucians. In the Rosicrucian lodge at Ham-

burg, in 1781, Bischoffswerder and Wöllner had initiated the

future heir to the Prussian throne — Freidrich Wilhem — into

their Rosicrucian lodge.54 Involved in this same lodge was

Ferdinand of Brunswick.55

51.James Van Horn Melton, The Rise of the Public in Enlightenment Europe (2001) at 77 (mid-1780 is based on the one year anniversary stated by Melton being August 1781).

52.Glenn Alexander Magee, Hegel and the Hermetic Tradition (2001) at 250.


54.James Van Horn Melton, The Rise of the Public in Enlightenment Europe (2001) at 266-67.

55.R. Swinburne Clymer, Book of the Rosicruciae (Rosicrucians) (2005) Vol. 3 at 107.



Now between the two men, Wöllner’s biography is

the only one that suggests conservatism. His father was a

Lutheran minister, and Wöllner had been an “ordained” min-

ister. He left being a pastor to become a specialist writer on

agriculture. There was no sign of any esoteric studies.56

Later in 1788, Wöllner issued the “Edict on Religion” signed

by the king “which attempted to impose stricter standards of

orthodoxy on Prussian Protestant clergy.”57 Religious tests

were imposed. In 1786, when the old king died, he was hop-

ing his friend, the Crown Prince now King, would place him

at the head of the religion department “for the purpose of sav-

ing millions of souls from perdition and bringing back the

whole country to the faith of Jesus Christ.”58

By contrast, Bischoffswerder’s background was that

he had initially studied law, but later became a Prussian cal-

vary officer. Thereafter, he was a stablemaster and chamber-

lain to a duke.59 “Bischoffswerder, unlike Wollner, was not

active in matters of the church; he was a soldier.”60 His only

official post in the kingdom after 1786 was that he was Adju-

tant-general on the king’s military staff.61

56.Christopher McIntosh, The Rosicrucians, supra, at 78. Johann Christo-pher von Wöllner was born in 1732. He was “a minister of religion” in his early life. “Prince Henry, brother of Henry, took him into his Coun-cil, and the Hereditary Prince [Freidrich W.] took lessons from him in political economy. This was the origin of the favor he enjoyed with that Prince, after the latter came to the throne.” (Biographie Universelle, quoted in Albert Pike, Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freema-sonry (2003 reprint) at 166-67.

57.James Van Horn Melton, The Rise of the Public in Enlightenment Europe, supra, at 268.

58.“Frederick William II,” The Encyclopædia Britannica (Cambridge, 1910) Vol. XI at 64.

By Hugh Chisholm

59.Christopher McIntosh, The Rosicrucians, supra, at 77.

60.R. Swinburne Clymer, Book of the Rosicruciae (Rosicrucians) (2005) Vol. 3 at 107.

61.Georges Lefebvre, The French Revolution (2001) at 76.



Wöllner’s next action around 1783 corroborates his

conservatism and rejection of the Illuminati was sincere. The

issue of the Bavarian Illuminati came up at a lodge, appar-

ently the Rosicrucian Berlin lodge. As mentioned previously,

in 1783, the exposures started to take place in Bavaria on the

Illuminati.62According to Alleau, relying upon Arnold

Marx’s book, Gold und Rosenkreuz (1929), in 1783, Wöllner

denounced the Illuminati in 1783 in the Rosicrucian context:

Wöllner...became freightened by the persecu-tion that had been exercised against the “Illuminati of Bavaria,” which he presented as a revolutionary sect and “devouring wolves” and “assassins of the spirit.” The taking of the position, in 1783, of the national ‘Mother Lodge’ [i.e., within standard Freemasonry] of the ‘Three Globes’ against the Illuminati is tes-timony to the power of the ‘Rosicrucian party’

of Wöllner in Germany masonry at the end of

the 18th Century.63

Notice this spoke of Wöllner, not Bischoffswerder, as

condemning the Illuminati Order. Wöllner had been an

ordained minister of religion as a young man. There is no

guarantee that Bischoffswerder shared the negative senti-

ments expressed by Wöllner.

In the quote above, Alleau is also referring to a decis-

sion on November 11, 1783 by the regular Mother lodge of

Prussian Freemasonry, The Three Globes. What happened

was that in light of the 1782 decision at Wilhemsbad to essen-

tial “subvert the Strict Observance,” the Three Globes dis-

sented and refused to agree. It would not use a new Templar

rite. It “refused to conform to the rectified Templar system,”

and it instead it would recognize all masons “except the Illu-

62.See “Bavarian Investigation & Suppression Decrees” on page 1 et seq.

63.René Alleau, Le origini occulte del nazismo (trans. R. Leveghi, Gian-franco De Turris) (Edizioni Mediterranee, 2006) at 110.



minati” freely across systems. Despite this disagreement,

Three Globes would still accept Duke Ferdinand as Grand

Master.64 The Three Globes were very serious about this. On

that date, it issued a warning that at Berlin had arisen the Illu-

minati — a “masonic sect which wants to sap the Christian

religion and to make Masonry a political system.”65

Whether Concord refused to use the rectified Templar

rite adopted at Wilhemsbad is not known.

Meanwhile, Wöllner’s conservative leanings are evi-

dent in the fact that “in 1791, he became the Grand Master of

the Mother Lodge Zu den drei Weltkugeln (The Three

Globes).”66 This means he was moving toward supporting

the Freemasons, not the Templar Rite.

Where was King Friedrich William in all this? He

insisted upon twice having two bigamous marriages by 1789

with both wives in his life simultaneously.67 He did allow

himself to be persuaded to conservative decrees on religion

proposed by Wollner.68 But other than his listening to either

of these two lodge brothers, he did not seem to have a mind

of his own.

Conclusion

There is a repetitious identification of Illuminati at

Berlin as being under Bischoffswerder’s influence, and no

othe name is referenced. Neither time is there a reference to

Wöllner.

64.Moses W. Redding, Illustrated History of Freemasonry (1997) at 430.

65.“Illuminés,” Daniel Ligou, Ed. Dictionnaire de la Francmaçonerìe (1987), supra, at 604. Ligou implies that this is directed at the Rosicru-cians of Munich and Vienna where they allegedly were influential.

66.Alleau, Le origini, supra, at 109.




Next Moves In France After Leopold Died On March 1, 1792

First, we quoted Comte de Vaudreuil in 1790 saying

the Illuminati are serving Bischoffswerder. Henry Fox, Lord

Holland, said again the Illuminati were serving Bischoff-

swerd. Each time the Illuminati are connected to Bischoff-

swerder, not Wöllner. Fox clearly said this was the “German

Illuminati,” meaning the order of Weishaupt. The evidence

appears that only Bischoffswerder had previously been in the

Strict Observance system. This system had turned itself over

to the Illuminati at Wilhemsbad. Bischoffswerder in 1780 had

spent over a year stationed in Bavaria on a war assignment

against Austria. There is every reason to believe he was play-

ing along, pretending to tolerate what Wollner was doing, for

the greater advantage of dominating the king via the lodge.

In sum, when we learn that Bischoffswerder was giv-

ing pill recipes proximate to Leopold’s death, and everyone in

the world regarded Bischoffswerder as an Illuminatus, then

we can put two-and-two together. It would appear likely that

Emperor Leopold was killed by poisoning himself using a

recipe from Bischoffswerder that was designed to kill him.

As a result, one of the problem kings to France’s future was

eliminated on March 1, 1792. Two weeks later Gustavus II

would be taken care of by pistol shot.

Next Moves In France After Leopold Died

On March 1, 1792

The French king’s minister, de Lessart, sent letters to

Austria that were conciliatory in tone. The Jacobins under

Brissot’s influence at the time spoke out in the Assembly.

They accused de Lessart of treason and began impeachment

proceedings against him. The king felt compelled to dismiss

de Lessart on March 9, 1792 and all the other ministers on the

10th.

King Louis of France decided to put the Brissotins in

all minister positions as an offer of conciliation to stop these

Jacobin critiques. The ministry now included a Swiss banker



named Clavière, a close friend of Mirabeau and Brissot (Min-

ister of Finance); Roland, an unemployed factory inspector

(Interior Minister), and Dumouriez, a soldier (Minister of

War). These three men were all for war. The king apparently

imagined that the Brissotins would not want war if they were

now in power.69

King Louis miscalculated. The Austrians had put

50,000 troops at the frontier. Then, upon the slightest of pre-

texts Jacobin deputies demanded war with Austria. The pre-

text was that Austria sent letters to General Bender in the

Netherlands (Belgium) that Bender should assist the Elector

of Tiers if the French invaded Tiers. 70

Deputy Mailhe’s speech in April revealed once more

that the Jacobins did not want war merely to satisfy wounded

French pride that someone thought France belligerant enough

to attack Triers. Rather, the true reason for all this Jacobin

rhetoric was that the Brissotin-led Jacobins wanted war to

cause an overthrow of the French king and then conquer its

neighbors in a world crusade. Amazingly, the Jacobins acted

entirely fearless of Prussia, Austria, and Sweden who were

now amassing to attack France despite the king’s protesta-

tions that he was not asking for these foreign nations to help

him. Mailhe called for a declaration of war to liberate all of

Europe. He said:

Humanity will doubtless suffer, when one con-siders that in decreeing war you are also decreeing the death of several thousand men; but consider also that you are perhaps decree-ing the liberty of the entire world . . . . Con-sider also that outside France despotism is in

69. William Doyle, The Oxford History of the French Revolution, supra, at 180.

70. Simon Schama, Citizens--A Chronicle of the French Revolution (N.Y.: Vintage Books, 1989) at 593-95.


Next Moves In France After Leopold Died On March 1, 1792

its death-throes and that a prompt attack will

precipitate its final agony.71

The Assembly of France declared war on April 20,

1792 at this juncture. Clootz alias Anarcharsis at the Jacobins

made a speech on April 21st where he claimed that the pur-

pose of this war was not defensive, but to take over all

Europe. Cloots arrived handing out maps that showed all of

Europe carved up in departments, beginning with Holland,

Belgium and Savoy. He said: "the more extensive the seat of

war the sooner, and more fortunately, will the suit of plebians

against the nobles be decided . . . We require enemies, . . .

Savoy, Tuscany, and quickly, quickly!”72 One deputy, Bec-

quet, warned in dissent that "we shall earn the reputation of

being an aggressive and restless people who disturb the peace

of Europe and disregard treaties and international law."73

Louis XVI was compelled to read the declaration of

war, which he did so in a faultering voice. The Brissotin

Jacobins thereby put the king in a conflicting situation where

he was fighting nations which claimed they were allies of the

true majority of French who wanted the Constitution of Sep-

tember 1791. And yet, King Louis had not asked for their

help this time.74 Talleyrand now became the foreign ambas-

sador on behalf of General Dumouriez to make this war come

about.

71. T.C.W. Blanning, The French Revolution in Germany — Occupation and Resistance in the Rhineland 1792-1802 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986) at 63.

72.Taine, II, at 77 fn.

73. Schama, Citizens, supra, at 597.

74. He has asked their help in June 1791, but consistently begged them not to intervene after the October 1791 elections because it would make matters worse. No evidence at King Louis’ trial in December 1792 ever showed otherwise.



Analysis of the Call to War

After their allies knocked off Gustavus III on March

16, 1792, the Brissotin-led Jacobins knew the war leadership

would fall to the Duke of Brunswick, and thus by the time

they declared war in April 1792 at Paris, there was nothing to

fear from armies under Brunswick’s control approaching

them. The Brissotin-led Jacobins could fearlessly talk of

wiping out their enemies, and sending them fleeing. These

Jacobins knew their opponent would act as their secret allies

and merely pretend to attack so that the Jacobins could bring

about a revolution at home. These plans of war were very successful. In the next

chapter, we shall discuss how the war was manipulated so as

to cause the Revolution in France.

Assassination of Gustavus III, King of Sweden & Poisoning of Leopold, King of Austria

Documents

Transcript of Assassination of Gustavus III, King of Sweden & Poisoning of Leopold, King of Austria