Review

Mund, Rudolf J. ​Jörg Lanz von Liebenfels und der Neue

Templer Orden: die Esoterik des Christentums. ​Stuttgart:
Rudolf Arnold Spieth Verlag, 1976.
Edred Thorsson
(From ​Rúna, ​Vol. I, No. 2, Yule, 1982)

Source: ​Green Rûna - The Runemaster's Notebook: Shorter Works of Edred Thorsson, Volume I
(1978-1985),​ pp. 76-77.

The Rune-Gild has a highly ambiguous interest in the subject of Lanz von Liebenfels (LvL). we
are compelled to make a study of his work, 1) because it historically came in the period of the
early 20th century GERMANIC Renaissance and was therefore deeply affected by it (and in turn
it influenced the Renaissance itself(?), and 2) because it has often been identified with this
Germanic Rebirth by later investigators. Our task is to determine the true nature of this work and
its possible relationship to the Germanic Renaissance (ca. 1880-1938)—this book by R.J. Mund
proves to be a great aid in this undertaking.

Mund, who was a member of the Waffen SS and who is without doubt a writer sympathetic to
the views of Lanz, presents a counter-study to that published in the 1950s by Dr. W. Daim, ​Der
Mann, der Hitler die Ideen gab ​(“The Man who gave Hitler his Ideas”). Mund’s scholarship in
no way compares to Daim’s, and sometimes the newer study strays off the track, for example
into the history of the Templars (the supposed model for Lanz’ Ordo Novi Templi—ONT).
However, much of what Mund has to say is invaluable to a more balanced—and hence more
correct—view of Lanz and his work.

The author supports his claim that Lanz never left the Cistercian ​Heiligenkreuz Orden ​(Order of
the Holy Cross), nor the Christian Faith in spirit, and that he was not, as Daim maintains, ejected
by the Order—by reporting (with impressive but inconclusive photographic evidence) that Lanz
was in fact buried by the Holy Cross Brothers. Throughout, Mund emphasizes the fact that Lanz
understood his work as being essentially Christian and that his racial doctrine was of a different
type than understood by Daim, and even by later “admirers” of Lanz’ work. Mund argues that
the racial ideology of LvL was a “positive” one—one of self-development. Pan-Aryanism
(which included Slavs), and tolerance for the rights of non-Aryans—all motivated by an
essentially Christian viewpoint—and that his thoughts were usurped by the Nazis to their own
political ends.
Lanz is considered by most to have been a rabid anti-Semite (and he probably was by today’s
strict standards)—yet Mund points out that Lanz worked with Jews all his life (e.g. the
collaboration with his long-time partner Rabbi Moriz Altschüller—who was also an official
member of the board of directors of the Guido-von-List-Gesellschaft—on the ​Monumenta
Judaica)​ .

These, and other facts must give pause to those who would either damn Lanz as a “proto-Nazi”,
or use Lanz as an ideologue for their own brand of racist doctrine.

Mund goes too far in his assessment that because Lanz was not a Neo-Pagan, neither was Guido
von List. while it is true that both were members of each other’s organizations, any reading of
the work of GvL must place him firmly in the (Neo-)Pagan camp, since his sacred models are the
ancient Germanic culture, the Eddas, etc., while Lanz rarely used anything but the
Judeo-Christian writings as models. This curious juxtaposition of Lanz and GvL is another
aspect which needs further investigation.

Despite its scholarly shortcomings, the book is a must for those interested in the ONT and its
founder.