Sparked today by a documentary about the history of the encyclopédistes, I learned in my opinion that the greatest breakthrough by them was the application of reason to any subject of science and of philosophy.
It was therefore normal perhaps that after a promising start under the egides (protection?) of the king they came rapidly forbidden while they questioned the reigning of the king by the grace of God, the human soul, the religion, by an approach guided by reason. As such they had immediately the nobility and the church against them. It were only a Frederich II and a Catherine the Great, who remained among their supporters.
Catherine even offered to let the Encyclopedy be completed in exile in Russia.
https://www.arte.tv/fr/videos/080944-008-A/points-de-reperes/
https://longreads.com/2019/01/30/how-diderots-encyclopedia-challenged-the-king/

https://www.greatrussiangifts.com/catherine-ii-catherine-the-great/

Tomorrow more about it and of course I expect some comments from Temperance and nordmann...

Kind regards from Paul.

Not about the enclyclopediastes per se but when I was looking into conspiracy theorists I looked up the historical Illuminati founded by Adam Weishaupt in Bavaria in the 18th century.  I won't go into detail about them (though I'll link the Wikipedia article) but it seems that the original Illuminati were too forward thinking for some elements of the population (and not just Catholics) and it seems that an edict of 1785 forbidding secret societies brought about the demise of the group.  That hasn't stopped wild speculation from people with a predisposition to believe conspiracy theories contending that the illuminati still exist in secret.  Like Topsy (is it still alright to mention a character from Uncle Tom's Cabin) the theories have "just growed".

"Growed" is not grammatically correct English but it is an expression used by the character.

Lady,

thank you very much for this reply. I think the research that I did somewhere on this board about the Illuminati was sparked in the time by your mentioning of them. No time for the mometn to seek it back.
Somewhere you spoke about crowned heads being Freemason. I want there to reply about our Leopold I seemingly a Freemason too
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276903735_A_Lodge_of_Sorrow_for_King_Leopold_I_of_Belgium_1866_Masonic_Patriotism_and_Spirituality_on_Trial
And about Freemasonery in Belgium also realted to the international one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Freemasonry_in_Belgium
My brain hurts when I read it all...and I who thought that Mytriatism, Zoroasterism and related myths were complicated...

But back to the Encyclopédie

https://longreads.com/2019/01/30/how-diderots-encyclopedia-challenged-the-king/
From the entry that I mentioned yesterday:
Seemingly the first tomes were edited from Prussia or London?
"Edited by Mr. Diderot, of the Royal Academy of Sciences and Belles-Lettres of Prussia; and, regarding the mathematical parts, by Mr. D’Alembert, of the Royal Academy of Prussia and the Royal Society of London."

And already in the "Discourse  by d'Alemenbert
"In the first section of the “Discourse,” d’Alembert explains how he and Diderot planned to categorize the tens of thousands of articles that the dictionary would ultimately contain. Implicitly rejecting any a priori categories or authorities, d’Alembert proposes what we might now call a mind-based organization of human knowledge. Beginning with the basic Lockean notion that our ideas arise solely through sensory contact with the exterior world, the mathematician then associates three forms of human cognition with their corresponding branches of learning. Borrowing this idea directly from the English philosopher, statesman, and scientist Francis Bacon and his 1605 Advancement of Learning, d’Alembert asserts that our Memory gives rise to the discipline of History; our Imagination corresponds to the category of Poetry (or artistic creativity); and our ability to Reason relates to the discipline of Philosophy. In addition to creating the three major rubrics under which all the book’s articles would supposedly be organized, this tripartite breakdown established an entirely secular foundation for the web of knowledge presented in the dictionary."

"an entirely secular foundation for the web of knowledge presented in the dictionary"

And they had the new organisation fo the encyclopédie with "renvois", the modern method of related subjects. And they made thankfully use of relating subjects together, even sometimes up to six, to try without hurting too much the authorities, to show the contradictions between two related subjects and obliged the reader to think...
"Some of these satirical renvois functioned quite bluntly. The article on “Freedom of Thought,” for example, pointed to Diderot’s biting entry on ecclesiastical “Intolerance,” inviting its reader to cultivate a critical viewpoint."

Kind regards from Paul.