The establishment scholars say that the Illuminati was
founded in Bavaria, Germany, by Adam Weishaupt in 1776.
Establishment histories ignore what is often said in the
conspiratorial histories: that the group had predecessors.
Nesta Webster, for example, claimed that Weishaupt had
received instruction in Ancient Egyptian occultism from
a mysterious man named Kohlmer in 1771. The implication
is that an unbroken line of conspiratorial adepts going back
to ancient Egypt created the Illuminati. But, of course, this
avoids the obvious: where did Kohlmer get his information?
Could it be he had simply read about it in books? Or again, the Abbe Augustin de Barruel claimed that the
Illuminati was part of a conspiracy dating back to the Knights Templar of 1314. But did Barruel have any
evidence that an unbroken line of members extend from 1776 until 1314, four hundred and sixty two years
into the past? Or did Barruel simply read about the Kniqhts Templar in a book and assume this without
evidence?
The establishment scholars repeat, over and over again, that the Order of the Illuminati was disbanded in 1776. But the two major conspiracy books of the time, John Robisons' Proofs of a Conspiracy and Abbe Barruel Memoirs of Jacobinism, were actually concerned with the French Revolution of 1789-1794. The Elector of Bavaria, which ordered the closing of the German Illuminati lodges in 1785/1786, did not leave any authority in France, so obviously, if there were Illuminati lodges in France they were not in a position of getting rid of them.
Elector of Bavaria Jean Joseph Mounier, who wrote On the Influence Attributed... in 1801 to refute Barruel and Robison, argued that there was no correspondence between French lodges and the Bavarian headquarters in existence, and suggested that this meant there were no Illuminati lodges in France. Fair enough, but a September 1996 issue of the John Birch Society magazine The New American claimed that many important members of the French Revolution were recruited into the Illuminati through a convention of Freemasons attended by Honore Gabriel Riquetti Mirabeau, a leader in the States-General between 1789- 1791. If Mirabeau was recruited into the Illuminati, it would have had great influence through Mirabeau, and not needed a lodge in France. Of course, this comes from the John Birch Society. The New American's attitude towards other conspiracy theories is so stupid and dishonest that I wonder if Mirabeau had even met a member of the Illuminati, much less joined it.
The New American's an article about the French Revolution completely ignores the French Monarchy, which was the major source of attention throughout the time. The JBS also ignored that a restored French Monarchy under Louis XVIII was set up by the victors after the defeat of Napoleon in 1815. Considering that the execution of Louis XVI led to 22 years of war between France and England, you'd think it would have been important enough for the JBS to mention.
Which leads to another point: when John Robisons' Proofs of a Conspiracy was published in 1797, Great Britain was living in dread terror of a French invasion, and was recruiting a huge military to fight abroad, and at home if there had actually been an invasion. In such an atmosphere, is it surprising that a book explaining the French Revolution as the result of an evil conspiracy of hostile secret societies would sell so well? (I read in guide to used books that original editions of Robison's Proofs of A Conspiracy sell for $150. They must be pretty common to sell that cheaply.)
But establishment accounts of the Illuminati conspiracy theory ignore this fact. It doesn't seem to occur
to establishment scholars that Robison and Barruel had an army of sales representatives in the form of the French
Army pushing up book sales. They behave as though the idea of an Illuminati conspiracy to conquer the world were
the results of political extremists in the United States during the 1790s. It was a reaction to the French wars for
control of Europe that created an audience for Robison's and Barruel conspiracy theories.
In the Reverend Marion 'Pat' Robertson's 1991 book New World Order, he suggests that members of the Rothschild banking family may have been recruited into the Illuminati because they lived in Frankfurt, Germany, and the Illuminati had a lodge there. By suggesting the Rothschild banking family joined the Illuminati, Roberston completely avoids the question of how, and even if, the Illuminati survived the order to disband. Hand the ball to the Rothschilds and every single thing the family ever did suddenly becomes an attempt to turn the world over to the Illuminati. It would make just as much sense to suggest that since Patricia Hearst joined the Symbionese Liberation Army in 1974, all Hearst newspapers are secretly manipulating the society towards a radical leftist revolution. Perhaps Robertson believes this, but his logic here leaps even farther, to the point of suggesting that all the movies director John Waters makes for the rest of his life will be covert Symbionese Liberation Army propaganda because Hearst played a part in his movie Serial Mom.
And, of course, Robertson does not claim to know this, just suspect it. That's because he never bothered to go to Germany and spend a few days in some archives to see if there any evidence exists that the Rothschilds and Illuminati actually met.