From the Wikipedia page of Baphomet
In 1818, the name Baphomet appeared in the essay by the Viennese Orientalist Joseph Freiherr von Hammer-Purgstall, Mysterium Baphometis revelatum, seu Fratres Militiæ Templi, qua Gnostici et quidem Ophiani, Apostasiæ, Idoloduliæ et Impuritatis convicti, per ipsa eorum Monumenta ("Discovery of the Mystery of Baphomet, by which the Knights Templars, like the Gnostics and Ophites, are convicted of Apostasy, of Idolatry and of moral Impurity, by their own Monuments"), which presented an elaborate pseudohistory constructed to discredit Templarist Masonry and, by extension, Freemasonry itself. Following Nicolai, he argued, using as archaeological evidence "Baphomets" faked by earlier scholars[citation needed] and literary evidence such as the Grail romances, that the Templars were Gnostics and the "Templars' head" was a Gnostic idol called Baphomet.
His chief subject is the images which are called Baphomet ... found in several museums and collections of antiquities, as in Weimar ... and in the imperial cabinet in Vienna. These little images are of stone, partly hermaphrodites, having, generally, two heads or two faces, with a beard, but, in other respects, female figures, most of them accompanied by serpents, the sun and moon, and other strange emblems, and bearing many inscriptions, mostly in Arabic ... The inscriptions he reduces almost all to Mete[, which] ... is, according to him, not the Μητις of the Greeks, but the Sophia, Achamot Prunikos of the Ophites, which was represented half man, half woman, as the symbol of wisdom, unnatural voluptuousness and the principle of sensuality ... He asserts that those small figures are such as the Templars, according to the statement of a witness, carried with them in their coffers. Baphomet signifies Βαφη Μητεος, baptism of Metis, baptism of fire, or the Gnostic baptism, an enlightening of the mind, which, however, was interpreted by the Ophites, in an obscene sense, as fleshly union ... the fundamental assertion, that those idols and cups came from the Templars, has been considered as unfounded, especially as the images known to have existed among the Templars seem rather to be images of saints.
Hammer's essay did not pass unchallenged, and F.J.M. Raynouard published an "Etude sur 'Mysterium Baphometi revelatum'" in Journal des savants the following year. Charles William King criticized Hammer saying he had been deceived by "the paraphernalia of ... Rosicrucian or alchemical quacks," and Peter Partner agreed that the images "may have been forgeries from the occultist workshops." At the very least, there was little evidence to tie them to the Knights Templar—in the 19th century some European museums acquired such pseudo-Egyptian objects,[citation needed] which were catalogued as "Baphomets" and credulously thought to have been idols of the Templars.
MsSVig
In 1818, the name Baphomet appeared in the essay by the Viennese Orientalist Joseph Freiherr von Hammer-Purgstall, Mysterium Baphometis revelatum, seu Fratres Militiæ Templi, qua Gnostici et quidem Ophiani, Apostasiæ, Idoloduliæ et Impuritatis convicti, per ipsa eorum Monumenta ("Discovery of the Mystery of Baphomet, by which the Knights Templars, like the Gnostics and Ophites, are convicted of Apostasy, of Idolatry and of moral Impurity, by their own Monuments"), which presented an elaborate pseudohistory constructed to discredit Templarist Masonry and, by extension, Freemasonry itself. Following Nicolai, he argued, using as archaeological evidence "Baphomets" faked by earlier scholars[citation needed] and literary evidence such as the Grail romances, that the Templars were Gnostics and the "Templars' head" was a Gnostic idol called Baphomet.
His chief subject is the images which are called Baphomet ... found in several museums and collections of antiquities, as in Weimar ... and in the imperial cabinet in Vienna. These little images are of stone, partly hermaphrodites, having, generally, two heads or two faces, with a beard, but, in other respects, female figures, most of them accompanied by serpents, the sun and moon, and other strange emblems, and bearing many insc
Hammer's essay did not pass unchallenged, and F.J.M. Raynouard published an "Etude sur 'Mysterium Baphometi revelatum'" in Journal des savants the following year. Charles William King criticized Hammer saying he had been deceived by "the paraphernalia of ... Rosicrucian or alchemical quacks," and Peter Partner agreed that the images "may have been forgeries from the occultist workshops." At the very least, there was little evidence to tie them to the Knights Templar—in the 19th century some European museums acquired such pseudo-Egyptian ob
