NATIONALISM TAKES ON THE CHURCH

Questioning the Christian Dogma

The Enlightenment, the intellectual movement that shook Europe, stretches from the 1630s to the eve of the French revolution in the late eighteenth century. In those few years, Rene Descartes, Thomas Hobbes, Baruch Spinoza, John Locke, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, David Hume, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Voltaire, Edward Gibbon, Denis Diderot, and Pierre Bayle, the best-known modern philosophers, made their mark. Most of them were amateurs: none had much to do with universities. They explored the implications of the new science and of religious upheaval, which led them to reject many traditional teachings and attitudes, and it left a spiritual vacuum in the realms of Christianity in Europe, questioning its dogma.

The seeds were sown in the seventeenth century when some people came to think that history was the wrong way around. Francis Bacon (1561-1626) was the first to crystallise this thought. Among the many that echoed Bacon, the French scientist Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) put it best in his writings about the vacuum.

Pascal's vacuum was not the spiritual one-In 1646, Pascal learned that an Italian, Evangelista Torricelli, had inverted a long glass tube filled with mercury into a bowl also filled with mercury, and the result was some mercury left standing in the tube with a vacuum above it. Torricelli thought that the mercury in the tube was kept up by the weight of the atmosphere pressing down on the bowl. Both claims were highly contested--at this time, the air was believed to be natural light, and Nature was supposed to abhor a vacuum.

Pascal sided with Torricelli, and he reasoned that if the atmosphere had weight, then less atmosphere should have less weight, and the level of mercury in the barometer should be lower. Accordingly, on 19 September 1648, Pascal engaged his brother-in-law Perier to climb the Puy de Dôme, the tallest mountain in central France, carrying a Torricellian tube with its bowl of mercury all the way up. Sure enough, as Perier climbed higher, the level of the mercury fell. This experiment, which convincingly demonstrated that air has weight, is one of the most famous experiments performed during the period of the Scientific Revolution.

 

John Locke

Bacon was an effective propagandist for the new idea that all old ideas in Europe are suspect. To Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), who was briefly Bacon's assistant, the medieval European philosophy was part of "the Kingdom of Darkness". Superstition and intolerance were at work in this kingdom. (1)

John Locke was a late starter: It was not until he was 57 that he published his main works. the Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Two Treatises of Government and the Letter Concerning Toleration, all of which came out in 1689. He was born in the same year as Spinoza and his first 45 years were far from idle. The Second Treatise of Government has been called an inspiration not only for the French revolution but for the American constitution, as well. His essay was heralded particularly in France, as the philosophical counterpart of Newton's Principia, which had been published in 1687. They were the twin prophets of Enlightenment. 

In questions of religion, Locke's idea was that theological doctrines must be answerable to the court of reason: "Reason must be our last Judge and Guide in every Thing." He said that some truths, such as the resurrection of the dead, are "Above Reason". (2) In a tract entitled The Reasonableness of Christianity, published in 1695, Locke argued that nothing in the scriptures was contrary to reason and that God had generously expressed himself in terms that can be understood even by "the poor of this World, and the bulk of Mankind." (3) 

Locke's rationalistic approach to religion did not go as far as that of his contemporary, 25-year-old John Toland, whose Christianity Not Mysterious was published the next year. Toland was condemned in parliament and threatened with arrest in Ireland for asserting that doctrines which were "above reason" were as suspicious as those which were contrary to reason and that Christianity is better off without them. (4) Locke was regularly accused by conservative churchmen of indirectly encouraging atheism in various ways, and of not having enough to say about the Trinity. On the question of religious tolerance, Locke argued for the same sort of freedom of belief that Spinoza had defended: "men cannot be forced to be saved", he wrote in his Letter Concerning Toleration, "they must be left to their own consciences." (5)

The Enlightenment dominated Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries with global effects, including India. While it included a range of ideas centred on the value of human happiness, and the pursuit of knowledge obtained using reason and evidence, in politics, it stood for the separation of Church and State. (6)

Some date the beginning of the Enlightenment to the publication of French philosopher René Descartes' Discourse on the Method in 1637, featuring his famous dictum, Cogito, ergo sum ("I think, therefore I am"). Others cite the publication of Isaac Newton's Principia Mathematica (1687) as the culmination of the Scientific Revolution and the beginning of the Enlightenment. European historians date its beginning with the death of Louis XIV of France in 1715 and its end with the 1789 outbreak of the French Revolution. Many historians now date the end of the Enlightenment as the start of the 19th century, with the latest proposed year being the death of Immanuel Kant in 1804.

The Scientific Revolution was a series of events that marked the emergence of modern science during the early modern period, when developments in mathematics, physics, astronomy, biology (including human anatomy) and chemistry transformed the views of society about nature. It took place in Europe starting towards the second half of the Renaissance period, with the 1543 Nicolaus Copernicus publication De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres) often cited as its beginning. (7)

The era of the Scientific Renaissance focused on recovering the knowledge of the ancients and is considered to have culminated in the 1687 Isaac Newton publication Principia which formulated the laws of motion and universal gravitation, thereby completing the synthesis of a new cosmology. The subsequent Enlightenment saw the concept of a scientific revolution emerge in the 18th-century work of Jean Sylvain Bailly, who described a two-stage process of sweeping away the old and establishing the new. (8)

Philosophers and scientists of the period widely circulated their ideas through meetings at various places. The Enlightenment undermined the authority of the monarchy and the Catholic Church and paved the way for the political revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries. A variety of 19th-century movements including liberalism, communism, and neoclassicism trace their intellectual heritage to the Enlightenment. (9)

The central doctrines of the Enlightenment were individual liberty and religious tolerance, in opposition to an absolute monarchy and the dogmas of the Church. The Enlightenment was marked with increased questioning of religious orthodoxy—an attitude captured by Kant's essay Answering the Question: What is Enlightenment, where the phrase Sapere aude (Dare to know) can be found. (10)

The "Radical Enlightenment" (11) promoted the concept of separating church and state, (12) an idea credited to John Locke. (13) According to his principle of the social contract, Locke said that the government lacked authority in the realm of individual conscience, as this was something rational people could not cede to the government for it or others to control. For Locke, this created a natural right in the liberty of conscience, which he said must therefore remain protected from any government authority.

These views on religious tolerance and the importance of individual conscience, along with the social contract, became particularly influential in the American colonies and the drafting of the United States Constitution. (14) In a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, Thomas Jefferson called for a "wall of separation between church and state" at the federal level. Jefferson's political ideals were influenced by the writings of Locke, Bacon, and Newton, (15) whom he considered the three greatest men that ever lived. (16)

Nationalism as religion

Hans Ulrich Wehler, a German historian, in his book, nationalismus (2001) has interpreted the collapse of Christianity resulting in a spiritual vacuum along the Enlightenment and secularization process as one of the conditions for the success of nationalism since the end of the Eighteenth Century in Europe. (17)

The criticism of religion during the Enlightenment (Lumières in French), the dissociation between the Church and the State as manifested in the civil constitution of the clergy during the French Revolution, and the loss of religious guidance by large strata of the population, created a “void” in which nationalism could be inserted. Religion as a system of faith and guidance lost its space in Europe. 

According to French historians, The Lumières originated in western Europe and spread throughout the rest of Europe. It was influenced by the scientific revolution in southern Europe arising directly from the Italian renaissance with people like Galileo Galilei. 

The replacement of religion with the nation became possible in Europe because religion and nationalism were going to share some common traits and functions: They would provide myths of origin, saints and martyrs, holy objects, places and ceremonies, a sense of the sacrifice and functions of legitimization and mobilization. The Jacobinical period in France and the anti-Napoleonic wars were the first manifestations of what the French historian Mona Ozouf (1976) has named as “transference of sacrality” from the strict religious domain to the nation. (18) That is how the sans-culottes (lower classes) used to talk about their “Sainte pique”, celebrated the Revolution before the “altars of the fatherland” and left to fight in holy wars. (19) 

Bacon

Elias Canetti (1992), originally from the national and ethnical “melting pot” of the Balkans, insists that the nations can be regarded as religions, and it is mainly during the wars that the national and religious feelings get mixed. Norbert Elias (1989), the historian of European civilization, points out that nation and nationalism are important systems of belief, and eventually regards nationalism as the most important faith of the Twentieth Century. (20) Georg Mosse (1976) emphasized in his book on the nationalization of masses, that nationalism is not only a political and social movement but also utilizes a religious language and religious symbols. In his view, nationalism-socialism is the expression of that osmosis between nation and religion within the political culture. (21) 

However, as early as the origin of the scientific investigation on nationalism, Carlton J. Hayes (1926) found out that nationalism is a religion since it possesses rituals and martyrs and develops a particular national mythology. (22) American historian Eugen Weber (1986) observed that a historian can be regarded as the priest of the nation, for helping to provide nationalism with a historical legitimation.

The works that focus on the nation’s symbolism inquire to what extent this symbolism was borrowed from the existing religions and creeds, or was developed in a confrontation with them. (23) The actors of this process also play a primordial role. The priests and their influence, the intellectuals and their audience, and the political men and their strategies are the factors intervening at the moments of contact between religion and nation. 

Thus, German Emperor Wilhelm II could invoke the divine right as the source of his dynasty and his government, in face of the German defeats: however, during World War I, its legitimacy, inexorably disintegrated.  (24) 

The national States did not act only as factors of communication but tried also to impose themselves as organizing principles of the societies, as sources of legitimacy and as references to civic morality. In this mission, the national States had to face oppositions, among which the strongest were those by the Catholic Church. It opposed the State’s intervention in the systems of education and in the internal operation of the Churches, as well as in the public organization of the consolidating ceremonies, the mythical heroes, and the integrating ideologies. The debates regarding the place of the Churches in national societies were always accompanied by a conflict on who was going to retain the monopoly of interpretation of the past and the present. 

Those fights in Europe were between the State and the Catholic Church, from Portugal to Italy, and from France to the Czech portion of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire. There were conflicts between the newly created national States and the Catholic Church, as well as the place of a national movement in face of the Catholic Church in Europe, especially in France, Italy, the Czech portion, and Germany, during the decades that preceded World War I.

Martin Luther

In France, Italy and Czechoslovakia, the State or a laic stream stood, in the course of the Nineteenth Century, against the Catholic Church. (25) This opposition was older in France - during the French Revolution, the revolutionary State forced the clergy to make a civic oath, causing a schism within the Church between the priests that made the oath and those that refused to make it. The opposition between the two loyalties was the origin of the civil war unleashed in Vendee. (26) If under Napoleon, such opposition was attenuated particularly due to an agreement with the Holy See, it exploded again when, under the Restoration, the Monarchy leaned on the Church. But it was under the Third Republic that the conflict between the Church and the State found its most important expression.

The acts of supporting the Republic and standing for political and social progress were equivalent to anticlericalism; the acts of defending the Monarchy and opposing the Republican and, a fortiori, socialist movement were the same as defending the Christian faith and the Catholic Church. Following one of the third French Republic's founders, Leon Gambetta’s word of command: “The clericalism, here’s the enemy!”, the victorious Republicans passed laws to restrict the Institutional power of the Catholic Church (27). With the establishment of the laic, free and mandatory school using educational legislation, the privileged field of activity of the Catholic Church was reduced. In 1880, the hospitals, previously managed by the Church, were nationalized; in 1884, divorce was legalized, and, in 1889, a law decreed that priests should obligatorily render military service, like any other citizen. The practical application of the law of 1905 on the separation between Church and State caused a sometimes violent confrontation between the churchgoers and the police force. (28) The confrontation between the “two Frances” reached its summit.  

In Italy, differently from France, an agreement between the Holy See and the national movement seemed to be possible within the period that preceded the revolution of 1848. However, because the Pope stood on the counter-revolutionary forces’ side, the Church took quarters in its hostility toward the national unity, and the priests who participated in the national unification had to face problems with the ecclesiastic hierarchy. (29) This hostility was expressed on both sides after the national unity. The State responded to the questioning of the government by confiscating the Church’s properties, imposing military service on the seminarians and priests, and refusing to acknowledge the religious marriage ceremony unless accompanied by a civil marriage. The State exercised its right to inspect and consent to the ordination of the archbishops- in 1864, half of the dioceses possessed no archbishops. The Pope’s position hardened when, in 1864, he condemned in his “Syllabus” the “eighty mistakes”, and, in 1870, the Pope’s infallibility was affirmed when he speaks ex-cathedra. 

The issue of the pontifical State’s survival was the major obstacle between the two actors. The representatives of the Risorgimento proclaimed the march over Rome and elevated Rome to a symbol of the recovered national unity. After the Rome of the Caesars and the Rome of the Popes, the Rome of the people should be constructed against the Pope. With those discourses, they provoked and intensified the suspicion of the Pope, who feared that this expansionist rhetoric would lead to the abolition of the pontifical State. That occurred on 20 September 1870. (30) The subsequent decades regarded the papacy, pathetically as a “prisoner inside the Vatican.”  

In the Czech portions of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire, only in the second half of the Nineteenth Century, a conflict between the Catholic Church and the national movement occurred. The Catholic Church was divided into a Bohemian and a Moravian Church, which was dedicated to the cult of their regional saints: Saint Wenceslas in Bohemia, Saint Cyril and Saint Methodius in Moravia (31). But it was with the revolution of 1848 that the Czech started to refer, more and more, to Jan Hus, the heretic who was burned during the Council of Konstanz. Hus was regarded as an important character within a European general movement towards progress and an individual religion that was based on ethics. Hus was interpreted as a factor of sacralization of the nation that, with its sacrifice, had permitted the rebirth of the Czech nation. The more the Catholic Church attacked Hus’ doctrines, the more his image gained popularity. Within a period in which the Catholic Church was losing importance, a national interpretation of Jan Hus became relevant. (32) This cult was supported by 250 important intellectuals who, in 1868, left in a peregrination to Constance, where Hus had been burned at the stake as a heretic. 

Jan Hus

The German situation was fundamentally different, for the German empire had been the stage not of an opposition between the national State and Catholicism, but of a struggle between Protestantism and Catholicism; the Hebrew community did not have the same numeric weight. The identification of the German nation with the history of Protestantism, which had already begun before 1871, was reinforced with the victory of Prussia against Austria in 1866, and with the outcome of the Franco-German war. Protestantism could claim to be the Emperor’s faith, which had been defined as Protestant. He stood against the Catholic faith, whose loyalty to the Pope was construed as antinational, and whose connivance with the enemies – often Catholic – of Protestant Prussia was suspected. During the period of the Kulturkampf – the cultural struggle- after 1871, the difference between the Protestant Empire and the Catholic Church exploded. (33)

In December, the clergy was forbidden to criticize the Empire and its constitution ex-cathedra. One year later, Prussia decided to exclude from the School inspection all the Catholics. In the same year, the Jesuits’ houses were closed and their foreign members were expelled from Germany. From that time on, the Catholic priests had to be German citizens and should have studied in the State schools of Theology. The State reserved the right to appoint the archbishops and threatened with financial penalties those who preferred to leave their positions vacant. In this confrontation, the Catholics were perceived as the internal enemies, and it was even affirmed that there was a new confession of faith in the public and private life: struggles occurred between students of different creeds, the inter-creed marriages became more difficult, and consumers chose stores that were managed by merchants of their own creed. (34)  

The Catholic Church refused to comply with the laws, organized movements of protest and refused to participate in the holidays of national celebration. In the organization of the “political circles”, as defined by German sociologist Rainer M. Lepsius, the Catholic environment would eventually organize the majority of the Catholic voters, regardless of their social origin (35). Catholicism found itself in a difficult situation, for it should try to find its place in a national culture defined by the Protestants. Considering that, for a long time, Catholicism had defended a Germany that lived under the domination of Catholic Austria, and it found itself in an uneasy position in face of the victory of Protestant Prussia. Moreover, its social professional composition was damaging to it, for Protestantism was supported by the great majority of the members of the "enlightened bourgeoisie", whose importance was smaller within the Catholic sphere. Because the members of the bourgeoisie had a prominent position within the German national movement, the Catholics had limited space to make their voices heard.

Another trend would constitute the nation as a community of believers, by using Christian symbols to ascribe it to a sacred nature, resorting to the religious liturgy to celebrate it, and developing a history of national redemption. (36) The was a re-interpretation of the national figures and the establishment of civil religion, as developed by Rousseau in 1772 in his “Considerations on the government of Poland”; then there was the national application of the biblical figures, of the saints or of the characters of the Churches’ history.

In the history of the nationalization of religion, the cult of Martin Luther in Germany is important. The reformer was celebrated as a national hero, for having defended Germany against the Pope and Catholicism. The Reformation was celebrated as a pre-history of German national unity. During the commemoration of the 400th anniversary of his birth, on 10 November 1883, forty thousand speeches were allegedly made in Germany about the Reformer’s merits; a Luther Foundation was created to sponsor the higher education of the pastors’ and teachers’ children, and a multitude of monuments was built and inaugurated in Luther’s honour. The reference to Luther and to a Protestant national tradition also helped to differentiate, in history and in the present time, those who favoured the uprising of the nation and those who opposed it. The Middle Ages were regarded as gloomy and ineffective, and the Catholic Church was ultramontane and vassal to Rome. The European countries that were regarded as enemies of the new German nation, such as France, in their majority Catholic, were perceived as “rotten” due to the ultramontanism that prevailed there. With many initiatives and resources, Protestantism succeeded, under the Empire, to promote a “religionization” of the nation and a nationalization of the religion.

The German Catholics responded with the same enthusiasm and with similar arguments. Even in 1848, Ignaz von Döllinger contended that the “only true national Church is... the Catholic Church” (37). Against Luther, the Catholics mobilized, especially after 1848, Boniface, the “apostle of the Germans”, to emphasize that the German nation had been associated, by the time of its birth, with the introduction of Christianity. Boniface, whose name derives from the Latin bonum facio, was celebrated as the one who, during the AD Eighth Century, was assigned by Pope Gregory II with the mission of Christianizing the German provinces. In this missionary action, he was murdered – as the legend has it – by pagans from Northern Germany. The missionary and civilizing action and the martyrdom were, in Boniface’s Catholic perspective, good examples of the longevity of the Catholic struggle for the unity of Germany. 

In France, a similar effort to nationalize a character of the ecclesiastic history occurred when the Republicans tried to nationalize the cult of Joan of Arc, which had great importance within the Catholic Church. As demonstrated by Krumeich (1989), Joan of Arc achieved great popularity among Catholic believers and in popular culture (38).  To the “maid of Orleans”, who had saved the king, the Republicans opposed a Joan of Arc that had been betrayed by the king, by the noblemen and by the Catholic Church, and who had to die to save France. The Republicans placed among the adversaries of Joan of Arc all those that they combated during the Third Republic. The Republicans were successful in ascribing a sacred nature to the national heroes by transferring them to the Church of Saint Genevieve. Such a decision, made during the Revolution of 1789, was abolished during the Second Empire, but renewed under the Third Republic. The entombment of the national heroes inside an ancient church raised a strong reaction from the Catholics, who regarded it as a profanation and a sacrilege. However, in 1855, Victor Hugo - the national poet – was transferred to the Pantheon. (39)

It is surprising to see how the policies of memories and symbols are similar in the four Christian societies. They were based on characters of the past, both to celebrate the longevity of the national unity that had been created by the Christianization of the country – such as Saint Wenceslas, in Czechoslovakia; Boniface, in Germany; Joan of Arc or Saint Louis, in France – Jan Hus, Martin Luther, Giordano Bruno, and a Republican Joan of Arc could serve as an example. In this opposition, the characters of the ecclesiastic history were nationalized and inserted into a historical construction, into an “invention of tradition.” (40) The nation itself was made sacred with those discourses and lost the character of a contingent and historical construction. The nation was not defined in a pluralist, open way, but as a closed, unique and holistic entity. 

Joan of Arc

During the years preceding World War I, in Italy, the Right-wing had tried to attain a commitment to the Catholic Church and avoid manifestations and publications that could be regarded as anti-clerical. The attitude of the Catholic Church was changing as well. With the encyclical Rerum Novarum, the Pope signalized a relative openness toward the modern world and allowed the national Churches to set out for a policy of commitment with the laic National States (41). This did not produce deep effects in France, where the Catholics had eventually adopted the national symbols such as the tricolour flag and the commemoration of July 14, but where the separation between the Church and the State of 1905 unleashed new conflicts and increased the rupture between the laic Republicans and the Catholic believers. Only World War I allowed the Catholic Church to participate in the defence of national unity and the “sacred” cause of the nation, without eliminating the fundamental differences between the “two Frances”. (42)

Tipu ties up with the French

While Europe was in conflict with the Church, in 1794, surprisingly, the despot Muslim king of Mysore, Tipu Sultan, allegedly founded the (French) Jacobin Club in Seringapatam, had planted a Liberty tree, and asked to be addressed as 'Tipu Citoyen,'" which means Citizen Tipu. (43) Helped by French republican officers, he founded the club for ''framing laws comfortable with the laws of the French Republic."

One of the motivations for French Emperor Napoleon's invasion of Egypt was to establish a junction with India against the British. Bonaparte wished to establish a French presence in the Middle East, with the ultimate dream of linking with Tippoo Sahib. (44) Napoleon assured the French Directory that "as soon as he had conquered Egypt, he will establish relations with the Indian princes and, together with them, attack the English in their possessions." (45) According to a 13 February 1798 report by Napoleon's chief diplomat and cleric Charles Maurice Talleyrand: "Having occupied and fortified Egypt, we shall send a force of 15,000 men from Suez to India, to join the forces of Tipu-Sahib and drive away the English." (46) Napoleon was unsuccessful in this strategy, losing the Siege of Acre in 1799 and at the Battle of Abukir in 1801.

But, In a 2005 paper, historian Jean Boutier argued that the club's existence, and Tipu's involvement in it, were fabricated by the East India Company in order to justify British military intervention against Tipu. (47)

Ignorance in England

The majority of textbooks on British history make little or no mention of the English Enlightenment, although they do include coverage of major intellectuals such as Joseph Addison, Edward Gibbon, John Locke, Isaac Newton, Alexander Pope, Joshua Reynolds, and Jonathan Swift. (48) Freethinking, a term describing those who stood in opposition to the institution of the Church, and the literal belief in the Bible, can be said to have begun in England no later than 1713 when Anthony Collins wrote his "Discourse of Free-thinking", which gained substantial popularity. This essay attacked the clergy of all churches and was a plea for deism.

The reasons for this neglect were the assumptions that the movement was primarily French-inspired, that it was largely a-religious or anti-clerical, and that it stood in outspoken defiance of the established order. (49) After the 1720s, England could claim thinkers to equal Diderot, Voltaire, or Rousseau. However, its leading intellectuals such as Gibbon, (50) Edmund Burke and Samuel Johnson were all quite conservative and supportive of the standing order. The reason given was that Enlightenment had come early to England and had succeeded such that the culture had accepted political liberalism, philosophical empiricism, and religious toleration, positions which intellectuals on the continent had to fight against powerful odds. Furthermore, England rejected the collectivism of the continent and emphasized the improvement of individuals as the main goal of enlightenment. (51)

In England, during the last decade of the Eighteenth century,  the pattern of English thought got altered profoundly. Responding to the dual impulses of the French revolution and the evangelical revival, educated Englishmen changed their attitudes toward both political and religious questions. In politics, a Trory emphasis on traditional institutions superseded the Whig insistence on traditional rights as the framework for debate on public issues. In religion, emotional Evangelicalism began to compete with rational Christianity of the late Eighteenth century for the allegiance of the educated population. These changes in the political and religious views in turn modified the hitherto dominant ideas in other spheres of thought and thus set a cultural pattern which persisted well into the nineteenth century. (52)

In the period of transition in England, the least studied development was the growth of public concern about the relation of science to religion. This most perplexing nineteenth-century problem had caused Englishmen little anxiety in the years before 1790. The orthodox opinion then assumed that science and religion were complementary, not contradictory, and that scientific investigations would confirm the literal truth of the religious writings. English scientists for the most part acknowledged this religious mission and carefully organized their findings to accord with the scriptural account of the origin of the earth and its inhabitants. According to Charles C Gillispie, Eighteenth-century English scientists were influenced by rationalist ideas and began to express the religious applications of their work in "the language of convention rather than of ardent conviction." (53) 

Scientists and theologians were united in that "peculiarly English phenomenon, the holy alliance between science and religion". (54) 

It is in this world of contradictions that the East India Company Writers in India tried to place Indian scriptures.

____________________________

1. Gottlieb, Antony, The Dream of Enlightenment, Allen Lane, 2016, p xi
2. ibid, p 116
3. ibid, p 117
4. ibid
5. ibid
6. Zafirovski, Milan (2010), The Enlightenment and Its Effects on Modern Society, p. 144
7. Juan Valdez, The Snow Cone Diaries: A Philosopher's Guide to the Information Age, p 36
8. Cohen, I. Bernard (1976). The Eighteenth-Century Origins of the Concept of Scientific Revolution. Journal of the History of Ideas. 37 (2): 257–88.
9. Eugen Weber, Movements, Currents, Trends: Aspects of European Thought in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries (1992).
10. Gay, Peter (1996), The Enlightenment: An Interpretation, W.W. Norton & Company
11. Israel, Jonathan I. (2011). Democratic Enlightenment: Philosophy, Revolution, and Human Rights 1750–1790. Oxford University Press. p 10-11
12. ibid, pp. vii-viii
13. Feldman, Noah (2005). Divided by God. Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, p. 29: "It took John Locke to translate the demand for the liberty of conscience into a systematic argument for distinguishing the realm of government from the realm of religion."
14. ibid, p 29
15. Sorkin, David. Hayes-Robinson Lecture: Enlightenment and Faith: Debates among Protestants, Catholics and Jews in Eighteenth-Century Europe, 2008, p. 10
16. Susan Manning, Francis D Cogliano, ed., The Atlantic enlightenment, 2008, Routledge p. 14
17. Heinz-Gernhard Haupt, Religion and Nation in Europe in the 19th Century: Some Comparative Notes, Estudos Avancados, 22 (62), 2008
18. Ozouf, M. The Revolutionary Party: 1789-1799. Paris: Gallimard, 1976, quoted in Heinz-Gernhard Haupt, Religion and Nation in Europe in the 19th Century: Some Comparative Notes, Estudos Avancados, 22 (62), 2008, quoted in Heinz-Gernhard Haup
19. Martin, J. C. Violence and Revolution: Essay on the Birth of National Myth, Paris: Seuil, 1996
20. Elias, N. Studies on the Germans: Power Struggles and Culture Development in 19th and 20th Centuries. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1989. quoted in Heinz-Gernhard Haup

21. Mosse, G. L., The Nationalization of the Masses. Political Symbolism and Mass Movements in Germany from the Napoleonic War to the Third Reich, Frankfurt: Campus, 1976. quoted in Heinz-Gernhard Haup
22. Hayes, C. J. H. Essays on Nationalism. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1926
23. Temps Modernes, v.550, May 1992, quoted in Heinz-Gernhard Haup
24. Haupt H G & Langewiesche, D ed. (2001, 2004), ) Nation und Religion in Deutschland. p.293-332.
25. Burleigh, M. Earthly Powers. The Clash of Religion and Politics in Europe from the French revolution to the Great War. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005 (2005),
26. Martin, 1996, quoted in Heinz-Gernhard Haup
27. McManners, John (1972), Church and State in France-1870-1914, Oxford, p.2327-58
28. Mayeur, Separation of Church and State (1966), quoted in Heinz-Gernhard Haup
29. Papenheim, Margot, 2003, p.202-36, quoted in Heinz-Gernhard Haup
30. Verocci, G, 1997, Places of memory, Characters and dates of United Italy, p.89, quoted in Heinz-Gernhard Haup
31. Hroch, The Europe of Nations, 2005, p.55, quoted in Heinz-Gernhard Haup
32. Schulze-Wessel, 2004, p.135-50, quoted in Heinz-Gernhard Haup
33. Burleigh, M. Earthly Powers. The Clash of Religion and Politics in Europe from the French revolution to the Great War. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005 (2005), p.311 ss
34. Kuhlemann (2004), p.27-63, quoted in Heinz-Gernhard Haup
35. Laube, 2001, p.293-332, quoted in Heinz-Gernhard Haup
36. ibid, p.302ss
37. ibid
38. Winock M, 1997, p.4427-73, quoted in Heinz-Gernhard Haup
39. Ben Amos, 2002, Funerals, Politics, and Memory in Modern France, 1789-1996. Oxford University Press, 2002
40. Burleigh, 2005, p.365
41. Hobsbawm & Ranger, ed, (1992), Invention of Tradition, Cambridge
42. Mollenhauer D, 2004, p.228, quoted in Heinz-Gernhard Haup

43. Conrad, Sebastian (2012). Enlightenment in Global History: A Historiographical Critique. The American Historical Review. 117 (4): 999–1027
44. Watson, William E. (2003). Tricolor and Crescent: France and the Islamic World (2003), Praeger Publishers
45. Amini, Iradj (1999). Napoleon and Persia, Mage Publishers

46. ibid

47. Boutier, Jean (2005). "Les "lettres de créances" du corsaire Ripaud. Un "club jacobin" à Srirangapatnam (Inde), mai-juin 1797". ( The "credentials" of the corsair Ripaud. A "Jacobin club" in Srirangapatnam (India), May-June 1797". The Learned Indies, Les Indes Savantes.

48. Peter Gay, ed. The Enlightenment: A comprehensive anthology (1973) p. 14

49. Roy Porter, "England" in Alan Charles Kors, ed., Encyclopedia of the Enlightenment (2003) 1:409–15
50. Karen O'Brien, English Enlightenment Histories, 1750–c.1815 in José Rabasa, ed. (2012). The Oxford History of Historical Writing: Volume 3: 1400–1800. Oxford, England: OUP. pp. 518–535
51. Roy Porter, The Creation of the Modern World: The Untold Story of the British Enlightenment (2000), pp. 1–12, 482–484.
52. Gillispie, Genesis and Geology, Cambridge, 1951, p 10, quoted in Norton Garfinkle, Science and Religion in England 1790-1800: The Critical Response to the Work of Erasmus Darwin, Journal of the History of Ideas, (June 1955) vol 16, no 13p 376-388
53. Morris Quinlan, Victorian Prelude, New York, 1951, W L Mathieson, England in Transition,1789-1832, London, 1920
54. Basil Willey, The Eighteenth Century Background, (New York, 1941, p 136)

© Ramachandran