Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
.:OII:OIOIII.
flow
BRITISH M U S E U M
ADD. MSS..
78.861
C I R C A . 1600 A.C
VOLUME XXXIII.
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
LODGE PROCEEDINGS
...
Friday. 2nd J a n u a r . . 1020
...
...
...
...
Friday 5 t h JIarch. 1920
...
...
...
...
...
Friday. 7th May. L920
...
...
Thursda).. 24th J c n e . 1020> S t . Jolnl's Day ill H a r ~ e s t ...
...
Snmmer O n t i i ~ g . Bristol and ?IIalinesbury. July. 1920 ...
...
...
Friday. 1st October. 1920
...
...
Monday. 22nd No\.ember. 1920; Festival of the Quatuor Coro~lati ...
Le frhre An14ricai:i
...
...
...
Co~~stitutions
...
...
...
...
Frecmasoary in Fiction
...
The Crown in Parrlier's Lalle
...
...
The Four Old Ilodges
...
...
True Friendship l.odge S o. 160. Ruc.hford. Esspn
...
...
" Frecn~ason"
...
...
...
T l ~ cTower of l.oildoll
Frcci~lnsoi~s
a t C.?nterbur. ill 1734
...
ltecords of Opc-rativc ?Il;isol~s in cot~nection \\.it11 Tri
Dublin. during t h e S e r e ~ ~ i c e l l t Century
h
OBITUARY.
Austen. Artliur Elrey
...
...
B.~con..l lc~sanderS.
Iiass. William H e n r ...
Bearman. Harris Eninuel
Bodenham. John
...
Buckmaster. Fredrricli H .
Buglass. T h o n ~ a sDixon
...
Butler. J . Dixon
Coombe. William John Broolie'
Dave.. Ari~oldE .
...
Davis. Alfred
...
Gove. 1 ) r . Royal i\rneilzo
Hanliin. Herbert 111gle
Hare. Sliolto H e n r ...
Iles. T,ielcf.-Col. E a ~ r yTVilson
Jardine. C f r p f. l\'illiam
Kemp. l\7illiam David
Keys. Joha Pattersoil
Knight. Herbert Manning
Jlxc~vatt.Jutlye Daniel F .
Marty. Francis Charles
i\lillnr. James
...
Peek. Rev . ltichard
...
Price. Arthnr
...
Soltau. T i l l ~ a mEclI~arcl . . .
Starkey. John W .
...
S t o ~ v ~L.i,e r ! f ..Cu l. k'ra~lcisJosepli
Old Charges.'
...
By H. G.
...
...
Uegemallii's Clnssificetio~~critizisecl, 3 ;
comparison of the
Iltigl:cc~sa n d D o r r l u ~ i t l JIHS., 6 ; and of the Btrchuncln, 7lleciumnnt,
and .4fcltesorc-H(cz'er1 ZLSS., 8 ; The l~eriocls a t ~vhich the 3LSS.
n-erc written, 9 ; The Hiramic Legend, 12; S i r Ci1ristophe:- Wren
2 s a Jlason and Grand Jlaster, 1 3 ; The S u r r ~ j l l t c ~ ~and
s t Fishcl.1bosetlft/e ?:SS. described. 11; The ( ' o l e and t h e I n i g o ,Jo~ic,s JISS.,
16. Appellclices.
A T7ariorunl Edition of six versions of the
' 0 r e . C'ol~~illellts
by J . E. S. Tuckett, 28; Lionel Vibcrt,
;)L'; I t . 1;. J!aster. 34; \V. J . Soiighurst, 3 3 ; \V. B. Hestall. 37.
ltcply l>>- Dr. 1tosedz.le. 38.
B - Gordon P. G. Hills
...
...
...
...
By Rodk. H. Eaxter
114
; Biblical
Papers deali!~,: n-it11 t h e Teniple, published in d.().Cr.
descriptions, 114 ; Comparison with t h e Tabernacle, 115 ; Suggested
' reco~lstructiol~s
' b - Tillalpandus ; B e r i ~ a r d Lamy ; Jalnes
Fergusson, 116 ; Professor \T.il!ii~ls ; Halielrill ; Caniiia, 117 ;
Thrupp; Collnt do Vogue ; Count de S a u l c - ; 'Tl~enius; .:B C.
Robins; Tinlothr Otis Paine; Perrot and Cl~ipiez, 118; C. N.
J l c l n t - r e S o r t h ; C . S. Aitken; Rev. \V. Shaw Caldecott, 119.
C:~iinnents,by Gordon Hills, 121 ; W. U. Hestall; C. F. S:-lics,
129; \V. J. \Villiams, 130; Henry Lovegrove, 132. Reply by
R. H. Baxter 133.
Summer Outing, July, 1920.
...
...
136
A tentative Inquiry.
1%)-Idionel Vibcrt
. ..
191
The introductioil of Masonry into Belgium from England; abstention from int,erference in religious and political matters; The
opposition of t,hc ltoman Catholic Church, 231; 'Thr gradual withdralval of Rommi Catholics from inenil~ership; Statutes prohibiting
discussioil of religious and political questions abolished i n 185.1 but
partially re-enacted ; Official relatioiis with the Grand Lodge of
England broken, but visiting permitted, 232; Count Goblet present
a t Installation of t h e Prince of \ITal&s i n 1875; His j o u r n e ~ t o
India ; Friendship with TITilliam Simpson ; Revision of t h e Belgia-n
Rituals, 233; Visit to America ; Member of Belgian Parliament ;
Grnnd Master of Grand Orient; Jubilee of University of Brussels,
234; Interual dissentions in Lodge Am.is Philnnt11,vope.s; a split
into two, 235; The Supreme Council of Belgium, and its alliance
with tho Grand Orient, 236; Conferences betn-eel1 Suprenle
Couilcils of various Countries, 237; 3Eembersllip of t h e Belgian
Solate. 238; The War, nnd its eiTect 011 Belgian Masonry, 239;
lte\-i\-;~lof tl~l,Lodges, 2-10; The Masonic Jubilee, %l.
231
REVIEWS.
PAGE.
of
...
Ancient F r ~ e ~ ~ m s o nnnd
r - the Old 1)undee
Lodge, S o . 18, 1722-23 t o 1920. By
Artllur Heiron
...
...
Podk. H. Baxter
...
W. B. Hextall
...
l\'. J. Songhurst
J. E. S. Tuclrett
...
...
J. E. S. Tuckett
...
,,
97
,,
99
19
A simple Account
of Freemasonry.
...
...
165
INDEX.
...
Adoption, Lodges of
...
Ancient and Accepted Rite in
...
...
Belgitulnl ...
...
Audit Heport
..
Belgiiim, Freemasonry i n
Reverston : Summer Onting
Bristol : Sunlnler Outing
Canterbury,
l732
Freemasonq
...
...
at,
Jarobites .m~tlFreenlasonr
Jaeques, Sons of
...
...
...
...
Andrexv's
Africa
(S.C.)!
...
A111i.sP h i l a n t h r o l ~ ~ s
...
Atlantic Phcenix, Bermuda
Bungay
...
Cabot, Bristol
...
Calloilgate Kil~vinning
CanteFbury
...
Chathani
...
Churchill, Oxford
Croxl-n. Parker's Lane
Doneraile
Ilorer Cagtle, h.~;clon
F?.;
res :I~.tistP S
Gocde Hoop
...
Gordon, llognor
Hanniba.1 (I.C:.), Berm
Jerusalem, Bristol
JXelrose
...
Nexl-castle
...
Norn-ich
...
Old Dundee, h i ~ ; l o n
...
Orpheas. London
...
l'tr,rfnite I n t ~ l l i g c n c e
...
Palladian. Hereford
...
...
Peace, Bristol
...
Pentangle, Chatliam
...
...
Reconciliation
...
Robcrt Thorne. Bristol ...
Royal Gloucester,
Southnnlpton
...
Royal Kent. of S n t i q n i t y
Royal Snssex, of
Hospitalit...
S t . Dax-id, Tarbolton
...
St. James. Tar1)olton
...
S t . .John. S. Africa
...
Strong I l a n , London
...
Tongariro, N.Z.
...
True Harmony, T7ienna ...
True Friendship, Rochforcl
Zetlaiid, S. Africa
...
in
...
S.
...
...
Conipagnonnage, The ...
...
Constitutiot~sor Constitution
Constitutions. MS., Classification
...
...
of
...
Constitutions, MS., rcfcrred t o :-
Stcheson-Haven
Beaumont
Buclianan
Cole
...
Cooke
...
Craue Ko. 2
Dodd
...
Dox~land
Fisher-Rosednle
Heade ...
Hugha 11
I i ~ i g oJoncs
Regius
Songhurst
Spencer
Supreme Council
1Va tson
1Voodford
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Degrecl, Origin of Third
Dublin, Opcrativc 3lasons connected with Trinity College.. .
Certificates of L. J. G.
...
Ferrier
...
...
Jen-cl, Mark Degree
,, St. Mark's Lodge,
Glasgow
...
...
Scotch R.A.
hlc&l of Henry Rugge ...
Snuff-Box, papier-mach6 ...
,, ,, Olive wood ...
...
Felicity, Order of
, ...
...
Fiction, Freemasonry nr
France, Trade organizations i n ...
82
79. 185
192
192
197
205
...
...
Lodges referred t o :-
Chapters ( R . A . ) referred to :-
St.
...
13-5
Persons referred to :-
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
,..
2
2
119
6-2
137
14r)
166
13
108
146
4l.
...
PAGE
..
F -
PACE
Pers o n s referred to :-
?'rocope . Francesc.~
...
91
Radcliffe. Charles
...
S2
...
2
Richards . F . G . . . .
Robins. E . C . . . .
...
l17
Robinson. John
...
2
Rosedale. D?.
. H. G. . . .
7
Rone, Dr . G . R .
...
166
...
Rugg, H .
...
62
Rugge, Anaie
...
...
62
Rngge. Hem;\- ...
62
Rylands . TV . H .
ili, 122. 192
Samson. Thomas
...
185
Samuel. Charles
...
234
Satterly. Thomas
...
16.5
Scoon. Isabella
...
67
Simpson J . J .
...
1.57
S i m ~ s o n TYilliam
. ... 121. 233
Smith. Henr!...
...
142
Soltau. \V . E .
241
Songhurst TV . J:"
16s 152. 184
10. 14. 237
Speth. G . JV . . . .
S t . Leger Elizabeth
64
...
...
192
S t . L6on . JIartili
Stancombe Rev . J . IT. D .
144
Starkey. J . 11-.
...
188
Stonecastle Henry
...
l86
Sto~ve.Liv1rt.-Col. F. J . . . .
244
S t u a r t . Prince Charles
Edn-ard
...
...
40
Sutton. C . \V . . . .
...
188
Sn-eet . Catherine
...
69
S~~.indeii.F . G . . . .
...
2
Sykes . C . F . . . .
...
129
Talbot. ..lrclr rl~ncon
...
140
Tate John
...
...
80
Tempels . Pierre . .
...
232
Thackeray. \V. J i .
...
65
Tl~eni~~s
...
...
118
Thomas. C . . . . .
...
141
Thomas. \V . h ...
...
14.5
Thomson . Peter ...
...
166
Thorne. Robert ...
...
144
...
118
Thrupp. Rev . 311..
Tilley, Ilf vs . . . .
...
71
l68
Truro Lord
Tuckett, J . E . S
3."28. 7'4. 81.
154 180. 223, 230
Tullibardine, 3farqlris of ...
41
Tnrner, G . E. . . .
...
188
Twiss H e n r r Fitzpatrirk
2, 69
2 40
r a n Schaick. Col . L . J . . . .
Vennbles. R . G .
...
80
'
.
.
PAGE
Persons referred to :-
Verhaegen. Fie1 re T .
Tibert. Lionel
2. 1%.
Villalpandus
...
I-on Born. Ignaz
T a i t e . A . E.
T1:arren. S i r ~ n a r i e s
l\ nrwick. E'cc1.1 ul
Webbe. Samuel
Weeks. James Eyre
Welchman. Cnnon
IVesley. Samuel
lVhartont D ~ X . P
of
\I.hyman, H . F .
Wilde. Thoilias ...
TVilkins. P r o j e s s o ~
Wilkes. J o h n
...
JVillian~s~
\V . ?J.
TVindle. Rev . 11. . E .
TYonnacott. W . . . .
T o o d . Cnnon E . G .
lJ700dford. R e v . d . E'. A .
Woods? Herbert ...
Wren. S i r Christopher
\\.right. Rev . C . E. L .
Wyche. Canon C . J .
Baintrailles. Jf m r
Yarker. J o h n
:..
Young. Joseph ...
of
Toprrgc
...
...
...
...
...
ILLUSTRATIONS.
PAGE.
...
Ueversto~l Castle
...
Bristol. The Catheldral, The Red
Lodge, The Freemasons' Hall,
The Dutch House, St. Peter's
Hospital, Temple Church, St.
John's Gateway, St. l l a r y
Itedcliff, The Hermitage ...
Clifton :
156
PAGE.
110, 118
148
136
201
F~ontispiece
......
...
148
...
16
16
Sherston Church
...
CONTRIBUTORS.
PAGE.
PAGE.
Armitage, Fred.
Baxter. R . H.
Sradley, Herbert
...
...
..
..
...
108
...
...
79
Glaeser, E.
...
Goblet d'All~-ieila,C o u n t
Gough, Charles
...
...
13
F o x , P. H.
...
...
--
B1
7 8 , 185
Hestall, TV. B.
...
...
...
...
...
...
108
212
132
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
shad\^-ell, Giibert C.
J.
S.ciie.5, C. F.
....
S O I I ~ ~ I U T S ~\
, i
.
...
...
1e6
io
28
%8
I)
108
3.7, io8, 169, 184
...
...
129
BEING THE
TRANSACTIONS
OF THE
1920.
The Report of the Audit Committee, as foliows, was received, adgpted, and
ordered to be entered on the Minutesi-
The Cpmmittee met a t the Offices, No. 27, Great Queen Street, London, on
Monday, 29th December, 1919.
Present :-Bro.
REPORT
FOR
BRETHREN,
With regret we record the'loss, during the year, of three of our members, two
by death and one by resignation:-Bro.
Lieut.-Col. Sisson Cooper Pratt, a Founder of
the Lodge, died on 10th April; Bro. E d w a d Macbean, a member since 1888, died on
23rd August; and Bro. Henry Fitzpatrick Twiss resigned in October. The election to
full membership of Brb. Sir Alfred Robbins, Pres. B.G.P., raises our total to 30.
The St. John's Card dated 27th December, 191-8, shows a total membership in
the Correspondence Circle of 2,978. Of these, 208 have been removed from the list :64 by death, 47 by resignation, and 97 for non-payment of dues. On the other hand,
201 have been added on election, and a t the end of 1919 the total stands a t 2,971, of
whom 95 remain on the ' War List.'
Thanks are again tendered t o all our Local Secretaries for much good w o ~ kperformed by them. The list in India, which had been looked after most carefully by Bro.
L. Vibert for t,wenty years, has, since his return to England, been placed in the hands
oh Bro. F. Chatterton, of Madras; while Bro. Vibert himself has undertaken the supervision of the Province of Somerset. The vacancy a t Kimberley, caused by the lamented
death of Bro. Alfred W. Adams, has been filled by the appointment of Bro. F. G.
Richards. I n West Lancashire we are sorry to 1- the services of Bro. Herbert Woods.
The vacancy caused by his retirement is a t present unfilled. For the Bradford district
of West Yorkshire, Bro. John Robinson has kindly consented to act. I n Warwickshire,
from which Bro. A. W. Adafns retires after twenty-seven years of good work, Bro. F. G
Swinden, Pr.G.Sec., has been good enough to take our interests in hie charge.
Bro. Alfred S. Gedge, the very efficient Auditor of the Lodge accounts for t~ventyfive years, died on 1st April last, to our great regret. The Committee has appointed
hi9 partner, Bro. R. H. McLeod, F.C.A., t o fill his place.
The accounts which are herewith presented for t h e year ending 30th November
last show a further loss in working. Two parts only of the 1918 Volume of Transactions
have so far been issued. The concluding p a r t and the St. John's Card a r e practically
ready for publication, and the amount held in reserve of 734 188. 5d. is estimated.to
leave' a balance of profit. The subscriptions for 1919, amounting to 1,059 13s. 4d.,
appear in the Balance Sheet as a reserve against the issue of the 1919 Volume, and to
that sum will be added such further amounts applicable t o t h a t year as may be collected
during 1920.
The need of further economies has again been carefully considered, and i t has
been suggested that the long lists of names which appear in the annual St. John's Cartls
might be much reduced. Meanwhile we must once more urge all brethren to pay their
subscriptions promptly. Even if we were t o write off all amounts due from Brethren
on the 'War List,' a sum of about g400 would still b e shown outstanding.
For the Committee,
J. E. SHUM TUCKETT,
in t h e Chair.
BALANCE SHEET
Liabilities.
l.
6:
Less Payments
716 4 10
38 17 3
--
77 7 7
1 ,,
1
Assets.
$2 S. d.
By Cash at' Bank
... 241 8 10
Investment, 1,30d 'kbnsols
a t 51 per cent. ...
... 663 0 0
,, Sundry Debtors far Publications
... ... ... 19 1 9
,, Sundry Publications
... 407 18 1
,, Sundry Debtors
for
Subscriptions in arreaF1919 Correspondence Circle ... 356 9 6
... 145 0 3
1918 ditto
1917 d e t o
... 102 7 6
1916 ditto
... 56 17 2
1915 ditto
... 21 11 3
... 17 8 2
Back years
699 13 10
,, RepairsBalance
30th
Nov.,
1918 60 0 0
Less Amount
written off .. 20 , 0 0
40 0 0
,, Furniture :Balance
30th
Nov.,
1918 l 7 13 0
Add~tions during the year 29 10 0
47 3 0
Less Depreciation written,
off ... ' ... 47 3 0
,,
I'1.cri7~~tcctioi~s
of
tlte
Q ~ r t r f t r o r C'oro~rcrti L o d g e .
cl.
0 0
14 7
15 2
17 9
9 9
8 !l
S.
To Salaries
...
...
... 600
>, Rent, Rates and Taszs .:. 146
., . Lighting and Firing
... 23
:. Stationery ...
...
... 87
,: Postages
...
...
.. . 169
,. Office Cleaning
...
... 33
.. R,ene\vals and Repairs ... BD 0
:, Insurance ...
...
...
13 1
:, Telephone, etc. - .. .
.. .
9 l
.. Carriage nud Su11drii.s . . . 16 1.1
., Local Secretaries' E x p e n s s
1 19
,, Library Account ...
.,.. 66 18
. , Furniture written off
... 4 7 3
,: Depreciation on I i i r e ~ t i l ~ e n t117
s
0
0
9
O
1
7
9
0
Cr.
C S. d .
131 Correspondence
Circle J o i n ~ n g
Fees, 1919
.. 102 19 O
,. 1919 Subscript'ns G G 0
,, 1917 ditto
... 49 14 2
., 1916 ditto
. . 24 4 9
., 1915 ditto
. 719 0
.. Back ditto
615 6
,. Back Transact~oas
,,
..
.
,,
,.
..
Lodge Publications
...
V a r ~ o u sP u b l ~ c a t ~ o n s ...
Interest on Consols
...
. 2213 0
Discounts
... 23 4 0
S.
d.
9
25 3
1.5 4
57 14
3
0
42 19 0
Life Memberships Lapsed
31 10 0
Balance carried torward ... 381 12 1
g1232
L' F. d .
To Balance fro111 last Account l539 7 11
.. Balance 1)rought for!vnrd ... & X I l i l
1 2
,
s.d.
13.y Balance carried forward ... 2121 2 0
p
-
12421 2 0
J 11A.r c.s;~~nint~d
thtt ;:bo:-~13al;1ncc Sl1ec.t a n d Profit ancl Loss Account with the
l a t l ~ cLodge. and ccrtify the salnc to bc correct and in accordance
Rooks ant1 I 7 o l ~ c l ~ eof
t l ~ c r cit11.
~\
-.
I3ro. H. C. R o s ~ o . \ r , ~I).T)..
,
. - -- -
Those who know the mania for the view of philology so prevalent
amongst German Professors will not, be astonished to learn that the opportunity
of practising z little of their system upon the Ancient Charges was too tempting
for the German student to resist. The result, however, has not been good for
English Masons who, IargeIy owing to their modesty, have been led to desist from
research i n that part of the historical arena.
respect that every student of Masonry must have for our late
The
Bro. Hughan has made i t more difficu'lt to impugn results which that great
authority seemed to accept. P e t those who study his works with care cannot help
feeling that, though his courtesy and humility led him to refrain from every
attempt to oppose the scheme laid down by Dr. Begemann, he never seems to
have accepted i t fully. Certainly he has done much by his original research to
make the re-consideration of the Charges far easier than would have been the case
had he not devoted himself to the details of each Charge instead of attempting
to classify.
Without pretending for a moment t o have compared all the Charges, I
have carefully tabulated the peculiarities of some fifty, and, as a result, find it
very difficult t o concur in Dr. Begemann's classification which has hitherto so
unquestionably been taken as final.
To the ordinary student who is not obsessed with the desire to impress the
reader with his philological superiority, the similarity of the great bulk of the
MSS. is obvious.
I n fact. in some cases the differences between the MSS. in
Dr. Begemann's different sub-divisions are greater than those between his groups.
I take two MSS. of a small group a t random, so as to eliminate all chance
of special pleading, and by comparing the differences i t will a t once become obvious
that whilst they might be, as doubtless they all are, different versions of the one
form transmitted by word of mouth from one generation t o another, and in
consequence slightly altered, they could not under any circumstances be considered
as copies. Let us take two MSS. belonging to the Dowland Branch of the Gratid
Lodge group, a thoroughly orthodox and well-known category :-
'
H UGHAN MS.
Introduction
The. Might of the Father of Heaven with
wisdom of the glorious son through the
grace ancl goodness of the Holy Ghost
that iq three persons in one Godhead be
with us now in our beginning C% give us
grace so to govern ourselves here in
our life living that we may come to His,
Bliss that never shall have
ending.
Good Brethren & Fellows our purpose is
t o tell how ahd in what manner this
worthy craft of Masonry was begun and
also how it was found by worthy Kings
& Princes
we will declare the charge that belongeth
to every true Mason to keep for in good
faith if they take good heed thereto i t is
worthy to be well kept as being a worthy
DO W L A N D .
I\lissing.
be
(omitted)
this
eternal
(omitted)
founded
charges
you
a well worthy
science & curious craft
and to
discerne
truth from falsehood The 5th is Geometry
that teacheth a man to mett and measure
of earth & all other things The
is
called Musick & teacheth a man ye craft
of song & the tuning of the voice of
as Organ Harp
tongue.
write t m l ~
Dialect
speak truly &
know and
mete
height
ye perfect measure of song
the volces of tongue urith Instruments
---
Charg~s.'
trumpets
' Old
Lest., however, i t may seem t h a t I am taking any exceptional text, the reader
Inay very easily convince himself by taking t h e following table drawn u p by
Dr. Begemann and publishecl by Bro. 1%-illiam W a t ~ o nin his pamphlet on the
Beaunlont MS., all these three MSS., the fi~rchcrnnn, A t c h r s o 7 1 - R r r ~ ~ r and
n
Nrcrtrrno~it JISS., having been written within a few years of each ot'her if not in
t h e same year l :-
I n viewing the Charges generally we have the Regius MS., which forms a
prelude to all the Charges, then follow the Cooke group of MSS. and the TYillinm
Il'ntson JIS., which have the impress of their own age, a primitive simplicity in
which the operative element is more closely associated with religion than is the
case a t any later period.
Then comes the great group comprising most of t h e Documents extant, and.
lastly, a not inconsiderable or unimportant class extending from possibly t h e last
half of the seventeenth century to the first half of t h e eighteenth.
Each of these groups has its own history t o tell, and *hough t h e various
copies show signs of mistakes by copyists and of different ways of expressing the
same facts, they are practically uniform within their own group.
When we realize t h a t our forbears in Masonry were for the most p a r t rude
men, unskilled in reading, though craftsmen of nd mean order, i t wili a t once
become evident t h a t in the vast majority of cases the recitation of t h e traditional
history, as well as of the Charges, as in our own time, must have been from memory.
I entirely agree with Bro. Vibert t h a t the Traditional History, as given in all
the Chargea before 1717, is based on an oral tradition, possibly dating back to the
tenth century, and reduced to writing probably in the reign of Richard II., of which
the shorter form of the CooXe J f S . may be t h e earliest extant record so far brought
t o light. Oral traditions are a p t to become. changed in t h e course of time, and one
has only to remember the amusing mistakes which are made even now by Masters.
to understand how easy it was fo; those attempting to reduce t o writing-the words
spoken by a typical Mason (say of the zixteenth century), t o change their form.
This explains a t once why the differences, omissions and varieties of text are
found. Moreover, those of t h e same locality would be likely 60 translate the words
of the history into their own colloquialisms, which have given ground for t h e very
imaginative theories of our German critics.
Looked a t from a broad standpoint, the Regi~cs:IfS. is that which links
Freemasons on t o the Monastic pasGa story deeply interesting, but too lengthy
to be dealt with here. It is, perhaps, more of a religious work than a Masonio
one; still, i t has some of the common characteristics of. t h e later Charges, such,
for instance, as t h e Story of Euclid i n Egypt, t h e Assembly of Masons, t h e Story
of Athelstan, the Tower of Babylon, t h e Seven Sciences and some of the Charges
to .Craftsmen, including the compulsory 50 miles and other smaller matters.
Probably nearly a century later, there followed the Cooke MS.-a link with
the previous century.
Of this the Slrpreme Coztncil MS. and 'khe Woodford
MS. are copies, whilst the H r n c l ~ ,Crone X o . 2 and t h e William Watson MSS. are
near relations. These mark a more or less complete separation from domination
by the Church, though they till retain such essentials as t h e Biblical quotations,
the Trinitarian Invocation and t h e first Charge to be faithful to God and Holy
Church, and to avoid heresy. They evidelitly attempt t o oo-ordinate the various
Lodges scattered over the land, doubtless as t h e result of the demand by Richard 11.
for a statement from the Gilds as to llow they came t o be formed and what their
ordinances were.
There can be little doubt t h a t the reign of Henry V I I . was one which
augured well for the workers of this realm, and from t h e keen interest which that
Monarch took in the internal affairs of his country, as well as from the facts t h a t
the period around 1500 not only gives us the G o o k ~MS., b u t some also of t h e
missing MSS., and t h a t much of the atmosphere of t h e traditional History is in
sympathy with the fifteenth century tradition, we may surmise t h a t there was a
great movemenk in Masonry about t h a t time: probably t h e high-water mark in
the history of Trade Gilds.
The original tradition whiclz had come through
monastic sources would then be amplified and developed into a form which we
have in the longer Cookr MS. and this was reproduced in the 1.t'nfson and other
MSS.
That t h e Reformation period had a great bearing on the history of Freelnasonry will be evident t o all who know the movements of those times. It meant
that the one educated person associated with the Gild, the Priest or Chaplain,
m-h. no doubt acted as the Clerk, from t h a t time forward ceased to be an essential
10
'
12
T ~ ~ u t ~ s u c t iof
o t ~the
s Quuttror C'orot~ccti Lodge.
Thus through all the ups and downs of Masonry, from very early days to
the end of the dispute between the ' Antients ' and ' Moderns,' the MSS. with
their enshrined oral traditions, remained the great record and treasure of Masonry.
Their widely extended use, and the practical agreement of the MSS. on all
essentials, may account *for the strength with which the ' Antients' maintained
their unequal conflict and thus ultimately compelled the 'Moderns' to revert to
orthodox practices.
On the restoration of Charles 11.. to t h e Throne the members of the
Puritan party, consisting largely of t h e industrial classes, always of
fre- and independent disposition, though for the most part loyal to
Church and State, were compelled t o seek every means of sheltering
themselves from the growing usurpations by the Throne.
I n my opinion,
they adopted Masonry in order to carry on not only their religious
practices but their political and social movements with secrecy. The intimate
history of the twenty years after the death of Cromwdl is most suggestive. That
t h e Parliamentarians were full of zeal for their Puritan cause, and lived in the
belief that some day they would regain their position, is evident. It may be seen,
even from the writings of Illilton, t h a t they did not hesitate to believe this, and
encouraged one another in this belief-(see Milton Tercentenary Lectures R.S.L.)
-though i t was unsafe to assert it too openly. They found it necessary to use
Allegories for the purpose, a n d ' from no source were the allegories more easily
drawn than from t h e Old Testament, with which they were so conversant.
It seems to me t h a t from 1660 till 1690 or later, Masonry for the most
part upheld the Stuart dynasty, and to this section the one great, memory was
the Martyred King; the one theme which stirred them to energy was their hatred
of the Government, their one desire to bring back the old regime. To them the
story of Hiram as elaborated by the Jesuits of France would appeal. They were
largely to be found in the Provincial towns, such as York, Bristol, Canterbury,
Carlisle, etc.
Many, too, who originally belonged to t h e Ravolutionists had
returned to tlle fold, yet could not divest tllemselves of the tendency to make the
text of the Old Testament their guide in all things, and t o them t h e traditional
history would appeal.
That another class of Masons existed, arid this of a different spirit, cannot be
disputed. Loadon was the centre of political, commercial, social, and literary life.
No wonder, then, t h a t amongst the Craft Gilds of t h e Metropolis there were to be
found some who, surrounded as they were with a strong Puritan atmosphere, had
absorbed the allegorical idea, and insinuated i t into their Masonry.
Small wonder, top, t h a t in t h e neighbourhood of London, the stronghold
of those antagonistic to the small S t ~ ~ agroups
rt
who saw in t h e story of Hiram,
drawn from Josephus' History, 1655, etc., re-published again and again during
the second half of the eighteenth century, there should arise a symbolism which
would serve a purpose very different from t h a t intended by those of the other
scliool.
Whether a legend representzd the Protector and the Puritan Commonwealth, or the slain Monarcli of the Jacobites destroyed by t h e disloyal 'Three
Estates,' but interred in the sanctuary of their hearts and cherished with an
undying love, neither party could speak openly, but the semi-biblical character
who represented all t h a t they held dear, they could openly commemorate, and if
' brought to book ' by those who like theniselves were well versed in alleqorical
methods, there still remained the obvious allusion t o the death of the founder
of the Christian religion, for in those days the traditional history was entirely in
accord with Christian symbolism and had not been emascula*ed. To the AntiRomanist party, Cromwell could fitly be remembered as the personification of the
Commonwealth destroyed whilst building the National Temple, and if attacked
they could fall back on t h e same explanation as t h e Jacobites.
Thus, no doubt, sprang u p the Hiramic legend, formulated by men who
were learned in Scriptural allusions as well as in Masonic lore. Who was the real
compiler of the tradition we shall never know; b u t t h a t influential forces were
involved is not difficult to deduce from t h e elaborate attempt to produce the
13
impression that the Hiram legend was of much earlier origin, shown by the
i ~ ~ i qJones
o
U S . , which, whilst professing to date from t h e year 1607, i n reality
cannot be placed earlier than about 1718. Moreover, there are obvious indications
of classical scholarship in this and other MSS. of the same-group, and to the
writer of this paper, strong signs both of Roman andrpuritan influences.
The Jacobite Movement gradually fell into ill favour, and by 1717 the
novement as a serious political danger was dead. I suggest t h a t four London
Lodges which were Puritan,l or a t least strongly Anti-Roman in character, then
saw their opportunity and took it.
Before 1717 in London, the centre of all t h a t counted for anything a t that
time, Masonry-if
not suppressed, a t least unpopular-was
looked upon as
irregular and disloyal, and for this reason, or because of t h e old age or ill-treatment
of ' Grand Master ' Sir Christopher Wren, the Lodges had ceased t o hold meetings.
1 do not ignore the fact t h a t it is freely denied t h a t Sir Christopher Wren was a
Freemason, and still more strongly asserted t h a t he was not a ' Grand Master.'
I do not myself feel justified in making any dogmatic statements on t h e subject;
but from his own diary, from Aubrey's JTtrt: History of TViltshire, and from
Freemasonry Dissected, i t is difficult t o doubt his having been a Mason. From
the statements of Laurence Dermott, Aubrey, and several Masonic Text Books of
the eighteenth century, little doubt seems to have been felt in those early days as
to his high position in the Craft. The chief argument appears to be t h a t t h e
title ' Grand Master' did not exist then. There does not seem any evidence for
this statement, but, after all, this is only a question of words, for t h e &ce or
its equivalent seems to have existed from the earliest times in t h e person of the
President of the Annual or Triennial Assembly.
Referring to t h e second edition of the Pocket Companion and Hi.story of
Preeniasonry dated 1759, reprinted from Anderson's C o n s t i t u t i o ~ ~ we
s , read:I n 1663 Henry Jermyn Earl of St. Albans, Grand Master, Sir John
Denham, Deputy G.M. Sir Christopher Wren and Mr. John Webb
Grand Wardens made t h e following regulations etc
St. Paul's Cathedral t h e footstone of which was levelled in due form
by the King. Grand Master Rivers . . . in t h e year 1673 designed
and conducted by t h e Deputy Grand Master Wren as Master of Work
with his Wardens Edward Strong the elder and younger etc
Upon the death of Grand Master A~dingtonin t h e year 1685 t h e Lodge
met and elected Sir Christopher Wren Grand Master who annually
whilst carrying out St. Paul's met those Brethren who could attend
him t o keep up good old usages till t h e Revolution.
Surely this is strongly in accordanoe with Aubrey's words t h a t there was to be a
l' great convention a t St. Paul's Church of t h e Fraternity of t h e Accepted Masons :
when Sir Christopher Wren is to be adopted a brother," and Laurence Dermott's
clear and definite statement^.^
The History of Masonry further tells us t h a t King William, who had
privately been made a Mason, approved of Sir Christopher Wren as Grand Master.
When Dr. Anderson and his helpers were called upon to re-model the
Masonic world they found t h a t four of t h e London Lodges which, according t o
Laurence Dermott, were doing all they could to get away from t h e ancient
traditions of Masonry, were in the ascendant. This body had, by d i n t of showing
its aversion to Jacobite principles, attracted to itself men of position and
importance. Dr. Anderson naturally would be disposed to throw in his influence
with this newer and anti-Jacobite section, and t o adopt any Traditional History
t h a t would not alienate this body, especially as it coincided with his own training
1 The term ' Puritan ' is not quite satisfactory, pecause it does not connote the
Political aspect. Canon Horsley suggests ' Hanoverian, but this again fails to connote
the religious aspect of the party. The term wanted is one which would express the ideas
of some degree of loyalty to the Crown, and of considerable devotion to the Protestant
religion.
2 Possibly a mistake for ' Grand ' Master!
3 Ahzman Rezon, 2nd Edition, 1764, pp. xxvii. and xxviii.
14
Tra?~snctior~s
of t h e Qtcatzlor C'orot~crtiLodge.
1
2
3
-1
C.
i., 127.
k : g : C . I.,
27.
15
From the entire similarity of the two bindings and their close approximation to other manuscript books of the period (notably the S'ztpreme Council MS'.'
and the Tl'oodforcl dfS.2), I am strongly impressed with t h e suggestion of
our Bro. Songhurst that the little books may have been the usual form of
manuscript books purchasable a t any good stationers in those days, and that
consequently the writing was posterior to the books.
That this is more than
a guess will be evident to those who are acquainted with t h e habits of t h e cultured
classes a t t h a t time, for t h e transcription of books had already become popular in
polite society by t h e middle of the eighteenth century.
Writers on Masonic subjects have in the past not hesitated t o express the
opinion t h a t t h e Doclcl reprint. was a forgery and t h a t there was no original MS.
as stated on the cover of t h a t print. Such a view cap no longer be held, for,
whether or no the original of the Dodd JfS. has come to light or not, both t h e
Songhurst and Fisher-Rosedale rlfSS. are identical with t h e Dodd reprint and
date back a few years prior to 1735, if t h e handwriting may be taken as evidence.
The discovery of these MSS. adds no small interest to t h e group of printed
Charges, which have hitherto had no documentary support, though quite remarkable, and having, so it appears to the writer, a strong historical background.
Those who have gone carefully into the history of our Craft will not be
either shocked or surprised when I say'that, after the formation of t h e Grand Lodge
in 1717, a new traditional history was produced and was publicly approved, for it
appears in the Book of Cfonstitzctio~zsof 1723, doubtless as a set off t o the one
It may be t h a t those Lodges
which had been gaining ground in t h e country.
which did not approve of the new Grand Lodge, clung t o their own form, and
that ' the opposition ' elected t o adopt the new form of t h e Old History (original of
lnigo Jones), which differed only from the Old Charges in being brought u p to date
~o f a r as history was concerned. This new form excluded the French origin of
Xasonry and traced it back to British sources and added t h e Hiramic Letters,
which, after all, have but little bearing on the new Third Degree. Possibly both
the Revised History *and t h e Third Degree may have incorporated ideas and
symbols popular some twenty or thirty years pribr t o 1725, and what has been
previously said points t o such a conclusion; b u t what will be apparent to every
critic will be the distinct association existing between t h e revival of Masonry in
1717 and the new version af t h e Traditional History, which, as pointed out,
appears to be a revised version of a form dating back to t h e period between 1655
and 1670.
Besides the version of 1726, which we know as t h e Spencer version, there is
also the Inigo Jones, which I hold t o be of about the same date, or even later.
We have the Col< and Dodd prints, not less valuable in a day when printing had
largely rep!aced the scribe, and now at last t h e Songhltrst and Fisher-Rosedale
11fSS. appear, both of them authentic MS. versions approximately 200 years old.
The writer of t h e original of all these versions doubtless had in mind t h e
necessity of getting rid of anachronisms i n t h e earlier works, such, for instance,
as St. Alban being posterior to Charles Martell, who lived more than four centuries
later, or Nay'mus Grecus having been a t the building of King Solomon's Temple,
etc. (Just so in the 1723 edition of the Con.~tit7ction.sthe officials of t h e new Grand
l In the possession of the Supreme Council 33O, London. A very perfect copy of
the Conke MS. Inside the cover is a note in pencil as follo~s:-l' This MS. was advertized
in ve Catalogue as a Treatise on Geometry. It is a Treatise on Freemasonrv." T h ~ n
follows a pencilled quotation from Hale. On p. 1, in ink, is " T. Bailey, 1825," and in
pencil Lord Coleraine MS. A Lord Coleraine mentioned in vC Times of October 1st
1825 as living in 1745."
2 In possession of Quatuor Coronati Lodge.
Has book-plate of William Conper,
Clerk of the Parliaments, and ?t one time Secretary to Grand Lodge. An inscription in
his handwriting rends: "This 13 a %cry Ancient Record of Masonry U-ch was copyed for
me by W m Reid Secretary to the Grand Lodge 1728. Ld. Colernine, Gd. Blaster. Al.
Choclie, D e ~ y . N. Blackerby, J. High.m?re, Gd. Wardens." In size it is slightly larger,
but the Binding and Colour are very s~milart o the Fzsher-Bosednle and Songhursf IIfSS.,
though the paper has a different nater-mark. The text varies slightly from the Supreme
Counezl MR., owing to omissions and errors, but shews remarkahle similarity to the three
and Songhurst
MSS. mentioned above, narnelr, the Rupremr! Counczl, Fzsh~r-Ros~dale,
MSS.
16
-- - --
--
'
17
APPENDIX A
Suggested Classification of ' Old Charges ' according to their Periods..-Church Period-Before
1400
Regius
onward
Fisher-Rosedale
Songhurst
Spencer
Inigo Jones
Cole 1728
Dodd 1739
APPE'AATDIS B.
Comparison between t h e 'Standard' form of
New form of History.
Old form of History.
Heading
1 Heading
Trinitarian Invocation
, Trinitarian Invocation
Account of Seven Sciences
Account of the Seven Sciences
The four children of Naamali
The four children of Naamali
Two pillars
The two pillars
Discovered by Hermes
Discovered by Hermes
Nimrod & his " Charges"
Nimrod & t h e " Charge "
Euclid in Egypt
Hermes in Egypt
His " Charges "
His " Charges "
David cherished Masons
Solomon & letter to Riram
Hyram's letter t~ Solomon
Solomon builds first temple
Eolomon builds first temple
" Curious Craftsmen " & Chas : Martell
" Curious Craftsmen " & Chas : Martell
2nd Temple built
Temple of Onias
Herod builds Tower of Etraton, etc:
3rd Temple
Auriagus' league with Claudius &
masons build Glastonbury
Expansions of Masonry, especially
under Trajan
St. Alban-his wages-his " Charges "
S t . Alban-his wages-his " Charges "
Wars in Britsin-Masonry depressed
Wars in Britain-Masonry
depressed
Ethelbert & Gregory-Augustine
Churches of Canterbury-~RochesterLondon, Westminster & Cambridge
Athelstan & Edwin-his brother
Athelstan & Edwin his son
Assembly held a t York
Assembly a t York
Book made from MS.
Book made from MS.
Method of Administering the Oath
Charges 1, 2, 3
Charges 1 & 2
Admonition
Admonition
Peroration
Peroration
P
-
P
-
p
-
A
VARIORUM
EDITION
O F THE
S I X LATEST VERSIONS O F T H E
' OLD CHARGES '
KNOWN
1
2
3
4
5
AS
T H E DODD FAMILY.
Fisher-Rosedale MS.
circa. 1725 .................
Songhurst MS.
circa. 1725 .................
Inigo-Jones MS.
circa. 1726 .................
Original MS. pro5ably circa. 1657
Spencer Print
pub. 1726 ................
Cole Print
pub. 1728 .................
pub. 1739 ..................
Dodd Print
S
F R.
S.
J-
SP.
C.
D.
THE BEGINNING
and
F I R S T FOUNDATION
of 'the most worthy
C R A F T O F MASONRY
with .
The Charges thereunto b e l ~ n g i n g . ~
THE FIRST
FOUNDATION
of t h e
Craft of M a ~ o n r y . ~ "
The Might of the Father of Heaven, and t h e Wisdom of t h e glorious Son, through
t h e Grace and Goodness of t h e Holy Ghost, t h e y being three Persons in one
God, be with us a t our B e g i n n i r ~ g ,and
~ give us Grace so t o govern us here in our
Living, t h a t we may come t o his Bliss t h a t never shall have a n
Amen.
Good Brethren and Fellows, our Purpose is t o tell you, how, and in what
Manner this worthy Craft of Masonry was begun, and afterwards how it was kept
s
fiinces, and by many other worsh&u p and encourag&l by worthy ~ i n g and
ful
Men.
And ilso t o those t h a t be here, we will charge by t h e Charges t h a t be7ong 9a
t o every Free-Mason t o keep; for in good Faith, Free-Masonry ,is w o r t h y to be
kept well, i t l 0 is a worthy Craft, and a czirious 'l Science.12
and
l3
"
truly."
T h e second is
l8
l9
in soft terrqs.
T h e third is
IL?LOW
T h e f o u r t h i s 23 A R I T H M E T I C K , which teacheth
2 6 count 26a all Manner of N u r n b e r ~ . ~ ~
24
to discern or
a Man for
25
to
reckon or
F R . , S., Sp.
C.
The
A BOOK
A BOOK
01" THE
OF THE
Ancient
ANTIENT
ANCIENT
Constitution
CONSTITUTIONS
. CONSTITUTIONS
Of the Free
of the
of the
And Accepted
FREE & BCCEPTED
MASONS
FREE & ACCEPTED
1607
MASONS
MASONS.
D is the text used here for comparison.
za Dodd only.
2 J . omits.
3 J . omits.
4 J., S. and.
5 J
omits.
6 FR., S., Bliss.
7 J . Ending. 8 J . omits. 9 F R . , S., Sp. Worshipfull.
J . Worthy.
J . belongeth.
1 0 J. if they take Good heed to it, i t is worthy to he well.kept for Masonry.
13 J . omits.
1 2 J. adds : and one of the Llberal Sc~ences.
11 S. Cour~ous.
l 7 F R., S., Sp., truely.
1 6 FR., S., Sp., C. Grammer.
l 5 J omits.
1".
are,
l9 J . adds : and.
2 0 J . omits.
S., Sp., C. omit is.
1s J. omits.
23 J . omits.
2 %S. omits.
22 J . omits.
2 1 J . omits.
2 G a C. account.
2 7 C . adds: &c.
2 6 J. and.
25 J ., Sp. omit.
1J.
20
2".
3l
21
in the Year of the World 2076, .;n the Reign of Ninus; and some think him to
be Grandson to Cush, which was Grandson t o Noah. H e was t h e first t h a t began
Astrology. t o admire t h e other Works 8 i of Nature. He prov'd there
to leave
was but one God, Creator of all Things. He divided the Day into twelve Hours.
H e is also thought to be the first who divided t h e Zodiack, into twelve Signs.82
H.@was Cot~nsellor t o Osyris King of Egypt, and is said t o have invented
ordinary Writing, and Hieroglyphi~ks,~"
t h e first Laws of the Egyptians, and
and taught them unto other Men.87
other 8"ciences,
diverse
And a t the Building of B a b y l ~ n ,Anno
~~
1810,90 Masonry was much
made of, and the Icing of L l a b y l ~ n ,the
~ ~ mighty Nimrod,g1 was a Mason himself,
as is 9 2 reported by antient 9 3 Histories; and when t h e City of J i n e ~ e h and
,~~
other Cities of the East, were to be built, Nimrod the King of B a b y l ~ n ,sent
~~
, ~ ~Cousin; and when
thither Masons a t the &quest of the King of W ~ n e v e h his
he had 948 sent them forth, he gave them a Charge in this Manner.
That they should be true t o one another, and love truly 95 together, and
that they should serve the Lord truly 95 for their Pay, so that their Master might
have Honour, and all t h a t belong unto him; and several 96 other Charges he gave
them; and this was the first time t h a t ever any Mason had any Charge of his
Craft.
Moreover, when Abraham and Sarah his Wife went into Egypt and there
taught the seven Sciences to the Egyptians he had a worthy Scholar96awhose Name
was H e r r n e ~ ,(Anno
~~
ilfunrli 2084 98) and he learned right well, and became a
great Master of the seven Sciences. And in his Days it befe1,99 t h a t t h e Lords
and l o o Estates of the Realm, had so many Sons, and they had no competent
Livelyhaod to find their Children.
Wherefore they took G o u ~ ~ c1'
i l together with the King of the Land, how
they might find their Children honestly, as Gentlemen, but could find no Manner
of good Way, and then' did they proclairn l o 2through all the Land, t h a t if there
were any Man that could inform them, t h a t he should l o 3 be well 103a rewarded
for his Travrl,lo4 and I o 5 that he should hold him l o 6 well pleased.
After this Cry 106a was made, then came this l o 7worthy Clerk Hermes l o 8
and said to the King, and to l o g the Lords.
If ye 11 will give me your Children to govern, I will teach them one of
the seven Sciences, whereby they may live honestly as Gentlemen should, under
Condition that ye l l 1 will grant them, and t h a t I may have Power t o rule them,
after the Manner that Science ought to be ruled.
grunted 114 anon,l15 and sealed 116
And then 112 the King and the Council
his Commission. And then this worthy Clerk Hermes
took t o him these Lords
Sons, and taught them t h e Science of Geometry in Practice,l18 for to work in
Stone, all Manner of worthy Work, t h a t belongeth to Building of Churches,
Temples, Towers, Castles, and all other Manner of Buildings, and he gave them
a Charge in this Manner.
First, That they should be true to the King, and t o t h e Lord t h a t they
serve, and to the Fellowship whereto 119 they are admitted, and t h a t they should
FR., S., Sp., C. add : off.
81 J ., FR., S., Sp., C. Wonders.
8 3 J . omits.
S., C. Councellor.
J ., FR., S:, C. Signes.
J . Hierogliphiks.
FR., S., C. Hyrogliphicks.
85 J ., C. Divers.
8 6 J . omits.
8 7 Sp. adds : Anno hlundi 1810 here instead of later.
J. inserts
In margin.
88 J., FR., S., C. Babilon.
89FR.adds:Mun:
S.,C.add:Mundi.
9 0 J., Sp. omit date (see 87).
9 1 C. in very great Esteem Insomuch that. the Mighty Nimrod King of Rahilon.
92 J. its.
93 FR., S., C. anc~ent.
94 J . Nineve.
FR., S. Ninivie.
C. Ninevie.
94aS., C. omit.
95 J., FR., S., Sp., C. truely.
95a Sp. unto.
9 6 J. severall.
9 1 3 J . Scholler .
9 7 J. Euclyde.
98 J . inserts in margin.
S. omits.
C. inserts date after Egyptians.
99 J., FR., S., C. befell.
' " 9 I . adds: the.
1' J . Councell.
Sp. Councill.
I o 2 J . Proclaime.
1 0 3 FR., S., C. add: come unto them and.
C. adds: that he should.
103a S. 80.
104 J., FR. Travell.
105 S. omits.
16 S., C. himself.
1 G a S. Cray.
1 0 7 J. the.
1 0 8 J. Euclyde.
l 0 9 J . omits.
110 J . Yea.
FR., C. You.
111 J . Yea.
S., C. You.
1 1 2 J . that.
113 J . Coun.cell.
Sp. Councill.
114 J . Grant.
115 C. omits
116 J , Seale.
1 1 7 J . Eucllde.
l l s J., FR., S., Sp. Practick.
119 J. Whereof.
80
82
84
' .
'I1ransttctio,~sof the Qltut ztor Coronuti Lodge.
love and be true to one another. And t h a t they should call each other his Fellow,
or else Brother, and not his Servant, or Knave, nor no other foul Name. And
t h a t they should trztly l Z 0 deserve their P a y of 121 the Lord, or t h e Master of
the Work that they serve.
Master of the Work,
That they should ordain the wisest of them to be
and neither for Love nor Lineage,lZ3 Riches nor Favour, t o set 12&another that
hath but little Cunning to be Master of t h e Lord's Work, whereby t h e Lord
should be evil served, and they ashamed. And also t h a t they should call the
of the Work Master, in the Time that they work with kim.
G'overnor
And many other Charges he gave them, t h a t are too long to tell, and to
all these Charges he made them swear a great Oath, f h a t Men used at'that Time.
And 110 ordained for them a reasonable Pay whereby they might l Z 6 live
honestly. And also t h a t they should come and assemble together every Year
once, to consult how they might work best t o serve t11e Lord for his Profit, and
to their own Credit, and to correct within themselves, him t h a t hath trespassed
again l Z 7the Craft.
And thus was tlle Craft grounded there, and t h a t worthy Clerk Hermes
gave i t the Name of Geometry, and now its called through all the Land Masonry.
Anno 211u~di2474, 2 Samuel 5, 6.lZ9
Sitllence long Time after when the Children of Israel were come into the
Land of t h e Jebusites, which is now called Jerusalem, King David began' the
i , ' ~ US,
~ the Temple of Jerusalem,
Temple t h a t is called Tetr~ylzcmD o ~ t ~ i t ~with
the Temple of tlm Lord.
The same King David loved Masons, and cherished them, and gave them
good P a y ; and he gave them t h e Charges in manner as they were given in
Egypt by Hertne,r.,lm and other Charges more as you sliall hear afterwards.133
After the Decease of King David, 1 Kings 7 . 13.134
Solonlon sent to Hirani, King of Tyre, for one who was a cunning Worknlan (called Hiram Abif) the Son of a Woman of the Line of ~Vnphtcili,'~'arid of
Urias the Israelite, etc. 136
Solomon t o H i r a m the K i n g .
Know thou, that m y F a t h e r having a Will to build a Temple to God, hat11 been
withdrawn from the Performance thereof by the continual Ii'ars 1 3 ~ "and Troubles
lie hat11 had, for he never took Rest before he either defeated his Enemies, or
made theln Tributaries unto him. For mine own P a r t , I thank God for the Peace 137
I possess, and for t h a t by t h e means thereof, I have Opportunity (according
to mine own Desire) to build a Temple unto God. For he i t is t h a t foretold my
Father, that his House should be builded during my Reign.138 For which Cause
I pray you send
sonleone of your s F i l f ~ t R e ~Men
t l ~ ~with my Servants to the Wood
Lebanon,ldl to hew down Trees in t h a t I'lace, for the Mctcedonians
are more
skilflrl l A 3in hewing and preparing Timber, than our People are, and 1 will pay
t h e Cleavers of Wood according t o your Direction.
H i r a m to
K i n g Solomon.
Thou hast Cause t o thank God, in that he has 145 delivered thy Father's
To thee, I say, who ,art a Man, wise, and full of
Kingdon1 into thy Hands.
Virtue. For which Cause since no News can come unto me more gracious, nor
Office of Love more esteemed than this, I will accomplish all t h a t thou requestest;
for after I have caused a great Quantity of Cechr 146 and Cyprus Wood to be cut
1 2 2 J . adds : the.
1 2 1 F R . , S. off.
J., F R . , S. truely.
12" J ., Sp. sett.
125 J
F R . , S., Sp. Governour.
J Lycage.
1 2 7 J., F R . , S., Sp., C. against.
J . may.
12s J. Euclede.
S. Euiclide.
C. Euclid.
1 2 9 J. inserts in margin.
Sp. Anno Mnndi 2474 2 Samuel 4th 6th.
1 3 0 J . brackets these words.
1 3 l J . ahas.
1 3 2 S., C. omit.
J . by Euclyde
1 3 4 J . , F R . , S., Sp., C. 7 chap. 13 verse.
133 J . ornamental tail-piece.
l:%j
F R . , S. Naphtil~.
1 3 6 F R . , S., C. omit.
13ba J
Warrs.
13s J Reigne.
1 3 7 J . , FR.,, S., Sp., C. add: which.
139 J., Sp. add: me.
1
F R . sk~llfullest.
S., C. sliillfulest.
1'1 J., F R . , S., Sp., C. Libanus.
1 4 3 J . sliilfull.
1 1 2 F R . , S., C. Rlacidolliails.
FR., S., Sp., skillful.
11' J unto.
145 J . had.
l" J . Ceadar.
FR. Cyder. S., C. Ceder.
120
123
126
.,
23
J . MMM.
165
J . divers.
J . adds : And.
J. Savior.
,-;+E.
"....U.,.
V""..Y'VJ.
l Y 0"
o~nizs.
Transactions of the
24
Qztatlcor
Coromti Lodge.
.,
25
26
discreet in Everything.
2"
292
293
>
.
illso ""that
no Fellow go into the ' l 7 Town in t h e Night-time, except he
kaue U I*'ellow
with hiin t h a t
rnay bear hitn 4 2 0 witness that he was in honest
c o r t ~ ~ ) u ? l y ., ~ ~ ~
Also 4 2 2 that every Master and Fellow shall come t o the Assembly if he 4 2 3
be within fifty Miles about,421if he have any Warning; and if he has 4 2 5 trespassed
against the Craft then t o 4 2 6 abide the Award of t h e Masters and Fellows.
Also t h a t every illaster crlzd If'ellow, t h a t has 4 2 6 a trespassed against t h e C r a f t ,
shall stand t o t h e A w a r d of the illasters add Fellows t o make t h e m accorded, if
t h e y ccin; a n d i f t h e y m a y not nccord thenr, t h e t ~to go t o the C o ~ n n r o n - L a w . ~ ~ ~
Also 4 2 8 t h a t no Master or Fellow make u ~ z y4 2 9 Mould, or 4 3 0 Square, or 4 3 1
Rule to a n y 4 3 2 Leyer n o r set a "" Leyer within t h e Lodge, or 4 3 3 withotit, t o hew
Or J .:3 ,t:oztld Stones.434
Also 4 3 5 t h a t every Mason ' 3 G receive and cherish strange Fellows when they
come over the Countries,437 and set them to ' l s work, if they will, as the manner
is; T h a t i s t o say,439 if t h e y have 4 4 0 mould Stones in the 4 4 1 Place, or else he shall
refresh him with Money zinto 4 4 2 the next Lodge.
Also 443 t h a t every Mason shall t r u l y 444 serve the Lord for his Pay, and
every Master 444a t r u l y 444 t o 445 make an End of his Work, be i t Task or Journey,
if he have his Demand, and all t h a t he ought to have. '
These Charges t h a t we have now rehears'd unto you, and all other
t h a t belong t o Masons, ye 41%hall keep; so help you God and
your aGa
H u l l i d ~ r n . ~d ~n ~ t e 7 ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Bro. J. E . S.
TUCKETT
said :-
416
J . Fourteenth.
Discussion.
29
30
(5) @'he date 1607 which appears upon i t is t h a t a t which Inigo Jones is
said to have ' constituted several Lodges ' and to have assisted King
James I . a t the levelling of the ' Footstone ' of the New Banquet
Hall a t Whitehall.
B u t 1607 is also t h e year of the renewal of
Jesuit activity in Britain, when the Guy Fawkes Trouble, culminating
in the execution of Father Garnett, was beginning to blow over.3
1 See Les J i s u a t e s chassts d e la JIcc(.onne~ze, e t leur Poccjnctl~l 6 , z s ~ b pctr les
lUnCons. And in particular J I 6 m e f b d e s Q u n f ~ T'oeux
e
tlr
('ornprrrln~etle ,S'. Iynctre,
Orzent d~ L ~ n t 1 1 c . s 1785
.
The
e t tles y u c c t ~ e Gracles tie In JI11tr~onne1~e
t d ~S . J e t l n .
latter part consists of a reprint of Samuel Pricharcl's M n s o n i y Dlssectetl (21st ed.).
2 The 1788 uork
does not ment~on Laud.
The quotatlons are fro111 Colller,
and may be found in other Protestant Histories.
3 The reference given is Jublleurn S . Speculr~rn b e s u ~ t z c u m ,1643, p. 120, which I
(6)
The 7ni!/o .7oi1es MS. is the oniy one which gives special prominence to
Hiranl Abiff and makes any full quotation from the Bible concerning
him. According to the Jesuit-Theory the ' Master slain,' the 'Lost
Word,' and the ' Sons of the Widow ' are references t o King Charles
I . , King Charles I I . , and Henrietta-Maria, the Queen-Mother.
32
Bro. LIONELVIBERT writes as follows:Some of my remarks in Lodge had reference to certain mistakes and misprints in this paper which have since been corrected, and there is now h o object
in reproducing them. I have accordingly recast what I then said.
When Gould was writing his IIistory, a classification of the versions of the
' Old Charges' based on textual analysis had been recognized as possible, though
i t was still t o be achieved. B u t within a very few years t h e work had been done,
and as early as 1886, in A.Q.C. i., Begernann and Hughan were already in a
position to refer t o t h e classification into ' Families ' as an accomplished fact. I t
was further perfected between that date and the appearance of the second edition
of Hughan's OJd Chnrqea, in 1895. The general lines of that classification are
familiar t o all. There was a regular historical development of the text, and the
versions being all treated as transcripts, i t was possible by a patient analysis of the
At p. 27.
S . 0 . C . . vol. i., p. 159. There is no justification whatever for Dr Begemann's
denunciation of the I n 7 ~ j nl o n ~ sJfS. as a ' fraud ' 01; ' fabrication.'
3 I t i s true that Dr. Plot devotes 5 87 of p. 317 :n his S f n f f o r t l s l ~ i r(1686)
~
to a
discussion of this point, Son or Brother. But the change made by Dr. Anderson is lilll~h
more naturally explained by a perusal of the Inigo .Tones MS., than by reference
to Dr. Plot.
4 The view expressed here exonfrntes Dr. Anderson from the charge of levying
upon his ' imagination ' for his 'pacts.
5 See (in the edition of 1792) pp. 16i-9.
1
Discussion.
33
errors and variant readings of each one, t o arrange them in branches within the
' Families,' and to state the geseral lines of descent. The branches bring together
texts so closely related as prokably all to derive from one version, a t not more than
one or two removes.
Three main forms of the narrative were recognised; an early text, the
Cooke, which gives us t h e Plot Family; a middle text, which may not inaptly be
called the Standard text, though no single version presents it with complete
accuracy, and this has come down to us in three Families; and a late text, t h a t of
the Spencer Family.
I n 1895 the true position of the Tew IMS. and t h e three
others associated with i t had not yet been recognised. It was fairly certain t h a t
the original Standard text had been constructed with the Cooke as its basis a t
some date about 1520, but a iong series of intermediate tran'scripts was required
to arrive a t the text as we have it in either of t h e three Familiw, the Grand Lodge,
Sloane, or Roberts. B u t subsequent t o the publication of Hughan's second edition,
Begemann, as t h e result of further research, made a re-arrangement by which the
Tew group took a new position, as representing a nearer approximation to t h e
original revised text, and this modification was accepted by Hughan and Gould,
and is exhibited in the latter's Concise History (1903), a t pp. 215 et seq. When
Begemann published his History in 1909, he had found i t necessary to make
certain small re-arrangements of branches, b u t otherwise he repeated in all
essentials the arrangement he gives in the Concise H i s t o v ; b u t naturally in his
own History, and in the Zirkel-Correspondenz, the whole classification is described
It is unfortunate t h a t Bro. Rosedale has not merely
in much greater detail.
wholly misunderstood Begemann's system, b u t has also in this paper exhibited
how slender is his acquaintance with the literature of the subject. The existence
of a special Tew Group yas absolutely unknown to him when he read t h e paper
originally, and he now writes with regard to it :-
34
Bro. Rosedale also writes of Gould's practical ideas being ignored, forsootl~,
for Begemann's useless and false system. B u t is i t really the case t h a t he has not
read the Concise H i s t o r y ? Is he unaware that Gould invited Begemann to contribute to t h a t work the section on the classification, t h a t the useless and false,
systenl is there a t length, and t h a t Gould writes about it, on p. 225 :The diligence and acumen of Dr. Begemann are not, indeed, likely to
be seriously impeached, and the highly important results attained by
his critical and scientific methods have been welcomed and appreciated
by all students in the same branch of research.
It is as true to-day as i t was when that was written in 1903 t h a t Begemann's,
work has yet t o be seriously impeached.
And wbat is i t we ;re asked to substitute for the work of our two great
students? A division into three classes, tlie first comprising the R e g i ~ t s , and
Cooke, and the Plot Family; the next t h e great central group; and the last the
Spencer Fan~ily. Instead, then, of a new classificat.ion'we merely have Begemann
over again with the details rubbed out ! B u t I must do Bro. Rosedale the justice
to say that I feel sure lie is under the impression that he really is offering us
son1.ething new, and is quite unaware t h a t Begemann and Hughan had got as far
as this thirt.y-five years ago.
With the rest of Bro. Rosedale's paper I can leave others to deal; b u t I
would like to point out t h a t when writers put quotations in inverted commas it
is a general understanding t h a t the quotations shall appear lifrrrrtittt in all
respects. Bro. Rosedale does not seem to think that this rule applies to his work,
as will be seen by a comparison of his quotations from spetl;,- and Begemann,
with the originals. Indeed, in the latter he replaces ' fabricated ' by ' produced.'
Originally, he also misquoted Aubrey. H e has now quoted him correctly, b u t as
the passage so corrected is somewhat disastrous to his theory, he hazards a suggestion in a note t h a t when Aubrey wrote ' Brother' he meant ' Grand Master.'
A t page 92 of Bro. Rosedale's work of reference, A . Q . G . i., he will find the
entire passage, and will see t h a t his rash suggestion would give the Craft not one
Grand Master but some half-a-dozen. It is not thus t h a t theories are proved.
The exact vosition of the So?7c/hrtrxf and Roredalp AIISS.in the Familv has
yet to be determiied; but, however they may be found to stand in relation CO the
other four texts, they contain nothing to cause us to modify the views, as t o the
descent of the Family as a whale, that were p u t forward in 1886, and confirmed,
iimmediately after, by the discovery of the C'ntnn text.
It is remarkable that
Bro. Rosedale has managed to write a t considerable length on the Spencer Family
without one single reference t o this MS., on which, or on a text all b u t identical
with which, the original of the whole Family was based.
It will, perhaps, be convenient if I take hhis opportunity of putting a t the
disposal of the Lodge for reproduction in 8 .Q.C. my table of the Versions,
showing the classification as given by Begei~ann in his Histor?/. As already
explained, the only important difference between this table and that in Hughan
is the new position of tlie Tew Group.
Bro. RODK.H. BAXTERwrites:Bro. Dr. Rosedale is t o be congratulated heartily on his interesting paper,
I t is just the kind to
" Some Fresh Material for Classifying the Old Charges.''
gladden the hearts of all students of these ancient documents-and
what real
student of craft lore can possibly neglect them ?
We have n o g before us a t least four different m~vthodsof classifyinq our
Old Charges. Firstly, Gonld's, which arranged the MSS. from the viewpoint of
evidence in a legal inquiry; secondly, Begemann's, which attempted to range the
documents in a line of descent through a series of copyings; thirdly, the arrangement according t o t h e inclusion or omission of certain legends, mentioned in
Vibert's Fr~rnzrcronry befor? the E T ~ ' C ~ PoTf IGrand
C P LorTg~x; and, fourthly, Dr.
Rosedale's historical arrangement.
I n my opinion, all these methods are quite good in their way, and there is
no need to discard one in favour of another. Indeed, I would be inclined to
suggest still further tabulations of the I t s S . to show the whole of t h e variations
of such things as proper names and other outstanding features.
This would,
perhaps, resolve itself more into a question of indexing than of actual classifying,
but, all the same, it would be of much use for reference.
Many thoughts rise in one's mind as to the origin of the Third Degree from
the suggestions in the present paper, but as these are, for the mast part, esoteric,
they cannot very well be communicated in writing. The recent correspondence
in the Freemason on tlle old Mason-wcrd (dating back to a t least 1638), which
brought forth the assurance from no less an authority than the Grand Scribe E.
of Scotland that the word was by no means lost, has strengthened my belief that
the essentials of the Third Degree date considerably further back than the
execution of King Charles, and tliat'it was emasculated by the cutting off of the
I am, therefore, not able to
portion we now communicate in the Royal Arch.
accept Dr. Rosedale's theory of Jacobite influence in the creation of the legend.
By the way, was the Jacobite movement really dead in 1717 as alleged by our
lecturer? The rising of 1745, which illet with a very considerable amount of
support, is surely sufficient to brush aside such an assertion.
From correspondence I have had from Bro. Hextall, but wliicll it would
not be fair for me to quote, I hope lie Inay have something t o say now on the
question of the origin of the Third Degree.
I can remember Bro. Songhurst pointing out to me some years ago that
the style of the MS. bearing his name strongly favoured the theory t h a t the
document was an a t t e p p t to copy, not merely verbally, but in actual get-up, the
engraved plates of the Cole version.
However these things may be, I can only express my pleasure a t the value
of the present paper and my regret t h a t I cannot be present in Lodge to hear i t
read and t o listen to the comments i t is sure t o evoke.
Bro. W. J. SONGHURST
said :--
36
the Spencer Family where Dr. Begeinann had placed it.I Then, too, I am not
sure t h a t Dr. Rosedale's method of classification differs very much from t h a t of
Dr. Begemann. It will be remembered t h a t because of certain peculiarities found
,
Begemann satisfied himself t h a t it was written in a
in the Regizis L ~ I S . Dr.
particular part of Gloucestershire; while Dr. Rowdale, noting the scliolarship
evinced in some docunients which he says made their appearance between 1723
and 1735, has come t o t h e conclusion t h a t they probably "emanated from some
branch of London Masonry."
It would be remarkable if such similar methods
of reasoning did not produce the same result.
Without accepting Bro. Rosedale's challenge t o " ruminate " upon the
possibility that the fnigo Jopees, Cole, Fisher-Rosedale, and Sor~ghzirstAfSS. were
all by the saine hand, I should say it is practically certain that one scribe was
responsible for the last two.2 It is quite possible t h a t Cole or his engraver had
before him either one of these or more probably a third example in the same liandwriting3; but I see nothing in the Inigo Jones 1118. which a t all suggests the
caligraphy of these 'pocket editions.'
I am, however, willing to concede the
point if Bro. Rosedale considers it is really important.
A t present I cannot
see that it carries us anv further.
I have been much puzzled by a number of statements made by Bro.
Rosedale, some of which he has amended since the first proof of t h e paper was
printed. Others still remain, and seem to call for explanation. I will only
refer to two of them.
Bro. Rosedale says :When Dr. Anderson and his helpers were called upon to re-model the
Masonic world they found t h a t four of the London- Lodges which,
according t o Laurerice Dermott, were doing all they could to get away
from the traditions of Masonry, were in the ascendant.
1 would like Bro. Rosedale to tell us on what these statements are l based..
Derlnott was bsrn in Ireland in 1720, and was initiated there in 1740; and he
came to London in about 1750. H e therefore had no personal knowledge of the
circumstances attending the proceedings in Lortdon in 1717, for he was not then
born; and he was not even a Masonic contemporary of Anderson, who died in
1739. Again, when and by whom were " Anderson and his helpers called upon
to re-model the Masonic world " ? Who were his " helpers " ? What is meant
by the "Masonic world" ? If in any way i t is intended to,refer to the formation of Grand Lodge in 1717, what evidence is there that Anderson v"as even a
Mason a t t h a t time? If i t is intended t o refer to the digest of t h e old Gothic
Constitutions, what evidence is there (other than his own statement in 1738) that
Anderson was called zcpon to perform this t a s k ?
The other matter to which I wish to draw attention is in connexion with
Sir Christoplier Wren, who Bro. Rosedale has convinced himself, was a speculative
as well as an operative Mason. With this conclusion I have no fault t o find. I
should be sorry to say .that it is incorrect; b n t Bro. Rosedale mentions the
evidence on which his opinion is based, and i t becomes necessary t h a t this evidence
should be examined carefully. First, he gives some extracts from The Pocket
Compn~zionof 1759, and all we can say of tlisse is t h a t tliey have been lifted
bodily from Anderson's Constitzitions of 1738, than which tliey have, of course,
no greater value. Next we are told of " Laulence-Dermott's clear and definite
statement," which, although not quoted, must be assumed t o have come from the
same source. Thirdly, we have a bald reference t o Wren's " Diary" without
even a suggestion as to what it contains.
And, lastly, we are given a mis1 The arrangement shen-11 by Uro. Rosedale ill his ' Appendix A " confirms this
surmise.
2 Facsimiles of some pnqes of each are reproduced by nap of illustration to this
paper. Comparison map also be made .with the handwriting of Grand Lodge Minutes of
about this date. See Quat. Cor. A n l ~ y . ,v01 X. Henjamin Cole officially engraved the
Annual Lists of Lodges from l745 onnxrds.
3 Bro. Baxter has recollectio~l of a conversation in which I suggested that the
writer of the ,Yonghurst JI7.1R. copied froin the .Cole engraved text. I am now inclined
t o think that the process was in the reverse direction.
t
quotation"rom
Aubrey. Surely this is not sufficient tc enable anyone to form,
It is no use whatever
definite opinion on t h i s very- interesting question.
quoting from mere copyists; we must get back to original. sources, and of these
(outside a somewhat vague newspaper report in 1723) we have only Anderson's
work, published in 1738, and Aubrey's tittle-tattle,5 written in 1691 b u t first
printed in 1844; and, unfortunately, these two are mutually destructive, for
while Anderson makes Wren a member holding high office in 1663, when h e
was about thirty years old, Aubrey says,he was " t o be adopted a brother" in
1691, when he was nearly sixty years old. The two statements cannot both be
true, if they refer to the same fraternity. There is this to b0 said in favour of
Aubrey, t h a t he jotted down his memorandum during Wren's lifetime, while
Anderson waited. until he had been dead for fifteen years before claiming him
as a member and high oacial of the Craft. It is quite possible t h a t some further
facts may yet be revealed which will settle the point once for all. A t present
we can scarcely say t h a t i t has been decided. Bro. Gould made a very exhaustive
study of all the available evidence, and published t h e result in his History of
Freemasonry, vol. ii., pp. 6 et sey. I recommend a perusal of these pages t o all
Brethren who take an interest in this subject.
writes:Bro. W. B. HEXTALL
The main features in the paper of h - n i g h t have received such effective
notice that I can make no addition to comments t h a t have been offered: b u t I
should like to offer a word of welcome to an essay that, however hard it may be
to agree to some of its suggestions, does good work in again drawing attention
to (1) The general subject-matter and evolution of t h e Old Charges, and (2) The
topic of Stuart Masonry and cognate influences which bore upon the framing and
practice of Masonic ritual in early speculative days of t h e Craft. I could, however, wish that more specific references had b-en given throughout the paper.
On a collateral matter I would also say a word. Surely t h e Masonic Craft
in the British Islands has amply proved its right to be recognized as a factor in
national research; and I am bold enough to think t h e time has come when some
competent Brother should be included amongst t h e members of The Royal
Commission on English Historical Manuscripts; and t h a t someone in a high place
under whose auspices Freemasons of to-day are privileged to serve might be
advantageously approached with t h a t view.
Much work of permanent historic
and literary value has been done by the Royal Commission named; and whento quote one instance-nearly
forty years ago, in the forgotten purlieus of a ducal
mansion, were found " a deed of the time of Henry 11. among some farming stock
accounts, and gossiping letters from the Court of Elizabeth among bundles of
quite modern vouchers,"-it
should not be too much t o hope t h a t Masonic
' finds ' of great value might be the reward of vigilance.
I n this connexion,- the name of one of our Past Masters, whose gift for
systematic investigation, as well as his association with many who could assist,
eminently fit him for such a nomination' as I suggest, can hardly fail to occur to
mind.
4 This has since been corrected; but Bro. Rosedale sars in a footnote that Aubrey's
statement was " Probablv a mistake for Grand Master." Even if that were so, Aubrey
and Anderson would still contradict each other. Bro. Rosedale adds as a further piece
of evidence, F r e e m s o n r y Dis.scefed, ( ? J i t r s o n r ~ ld i s s e c f e d ) . but he does not give a
particular reference to page or even t o date. I challenge Bro. Rosedale to produce an
edition of Pricharq, earlier than the date of Anderson's second Book of Constitutzons,
wh~chcontains a mention of Wren as a Freemason.
5 Leigh Hunt ( T h e Town, chap. iii.) says of Aubrey : " He is to be read like a
proper gossip, whose accounts we may pretty safely reject or believe as i t suits other
testimony."
38
Discztssion.
39
assertion that Wren was a Grand Ma'ster, and, consequently, I am not a t all
troubled to find that, in his opinion, th.e statements emanating from D r
Anderson are not to be relied upon. I am far too much indebted to him for
help and information to desire to do anything but hear and profit by what he
may say.
One thing, however, I trust he will admit, viz., that, whether
Anderson were a Mason in 1717 or not, or even if he wrote a t a few jears after
the actual events themselves, he was as likely as most people to know t h e general
bearing of Masonic History, and if his statements had been so very outrageous
there would have been (presuming t h a t Masons i n those days were not unlike
those whom we know to-day) many readv t o attack him and prove his incapacity
as an historian. I note that in " Two Letters t o a Friend," published in days
when Anderson must have had less knowledge and experience, no such suggestion
is put forth. Still, Bro. Songhurst may be right.
Many have been disposed to criticize my contention t h a t in 1717 the Jacobite
rebellion had received such a blow as t o make i t no longer a source of anxiety t o
tbe Government. This has been held by Bro. Yarker (see his paper) and others;
but as it is a question of history I need not press it. I would, however, point out
that, though later on in 1745 there was another Jacobite rising, t h e 'Cause'
must have been badly hit in 1716 for so long a period to have elapsed before any
effort was made to recover lost prestige.
Unfortunately for myself, I have b u t scant time t o devote to any form of
literary work, and this must be a t least one excuse for any shortcomings in the
paper you have done me the llonour to listen to and t o criticize.
40
41
As to this statement, the " Edinburgh Advertiser " for December lst,
1843, and Mempirs of Sir Robert Strange, K.T. [sic], t h e eminent
Engraver, and his brother-in-law, Mr. Andrew Lumisden, Private
Secretary to t h e Stuart Princes a t Rome, Vol. I., should be consulted.
Dr. G-eorge Emil W . Begemann, of Charlottenburg, has most
thoroughly t e s b d the Templar incident, and has failed t o find any
evidence in its favour. H e has written me on t h e subject as follows :-
l'?
lr~~suclions
of the Quat i ~ o rCoronati Lodge.
43
p. 56.
1906. p. 56 et seq.
p. 57.
I myself and friends interested in books have for a long time been
seeking the ' repeated publications earlier than 1843 '-but
so far in
vain.
I n the ' Memoirs ' mentioned, the Editor notices t h e few social evenings
a t the Palace of Holyrood which were enlivened by gaiety, and then he
says :'
A word as to the shadowy Court which once again brightened
t h e long-neglected saloons of the Abbey. On the 30th September, the Duke of Perth wrote to Lord Ogilvie. (Vol. i., p. 81 .)
A n official a t t h e British Museum is inclined to consider the Letter as
a complete invention, b u t t h e shorter version without further examination does not convey t h e impression of spuriousness, whilst the additional
portions of the longer version assuredly present a very suspicious appearance.
B
Tt, is truly a proud thing t o see our
Prince Charles Edward Sttiart in the
Palace of his Fathers, with all the best
blood of Scotland around him; he is
much beloved of all sorts, and we cannot fail to make t h a t pestilent England
smoke for it.
Upon Monday last,
there was a great ball a t the Palace,
and on Tuesday 24th September by
appointment, there was a solemn
Chapter of the ancient chivalry of t h e
Temple of Jerusalem held in the
audience room; not more than ten
Knights were present, for since m y
Lord of Mar demitted the ofice of G .
&aster, ho general meeting has been
called, s'ave in your own north convent :
Our noble Prince looked most gallantly
in the white robe of t h e Order, took
his profession like a worthy Knight,
and after receiving congratulations of
all present, did vow that he would
restore t h e Temple higher than i t was
ill the days of William the Lion:
Then m y Lord of Athole did demit as
Begent, and his Royal Highness was
elected G . Master. Z write you this,
knowing how you Zove the Order.
45
p. 60.
The Templar G.M."jp of Charles Edward Stuart is, from the facts
cited, naturally also finally set aside.
The final portion of the Letter B has consequently betrayed its spurious
origin, and t h e middle portion, according t o which t h e Earl of Mar is
said to have been the successor t o Lord Dundee and the predecessor of
the Duke of Athol, seems also to be untenable.
47
the Order of the Temple of 1843 for he drew special attention to them
in a Note (p. 81, Note l ) and cited whole passages therefrom,
The pretended ball on the 23rd September arouses doubt and suspicion.
p. 62.
48
but according
Apart from the fact that not a single one of them is in any way
known t o have been a K.T., i t is not easy t o see how so few men
would (could) have held a Chapter, especially, that is to say, as the
said Lord Murray and the Prince himself were during the first few
days after the battle particularly occupied with anxieties of every
possible kind.
p. 63.
49
Charles Edward Stuart was not only never Grand Master but he was
never even a K.T., for in 1745 t h a t Order had long since ceased to
exist in Scotland.
(End of Dr. Begemann's Arguments.)
The authorities quoted by Dr. Begemann are:Home, John. Hist. of the Rebellion in the year 1745. Lond. 1802.
Johnstone, Chev. de. Nemoirs of the Rebellion in 1745 and 1746. Lond. 1820.
Chambers, Robert. Jacobite L?fenzoirs of the Rebellion of 1745. Edin. & Lond.
1834.
Chambers, Robert. Hist. of the Rebellion in Scotland in 1745, 1746. Edin.
5th ed. 1840.
Maxwell of Kirkconnell. Narrative of Charles Prince of Wales . . . 1745.
Edin. 1841.
Jesse, J. H. Memoirs of the Pretenders &c. Lond. 1845.
Thomson, Mrs. K. Memoirs of the Jacobites of 1715 and 1745. Lond. 1845-6.
Ewald, A. C. Life and Times of Prince Charles Stuart. Lond. 1875.
Hassell, W. von. Der d u f s t a n d . . . Carl Edzcard Stzcart &c. Leipzig. 1876.
Bell, R . F. Memorials of J o h n ilfurray of Brozcghton. Edin. 1898.
Lang, Andrew. Prince Charles Edwurd. Edin. 1900.
To these I shall add::
1745. Macpherson, James. Hist. of the present Rebellion in Scotland &c.
Lond. 1745.
,, Walpole, Horace. Letters. Ed. Cunningham. Lond. 1857-9.
,, The Tl'oodho~tseleeM S . First published in 1907.
Autograph Letter from John Erskine of Preston to Rev. Chas. Wesley,
,,
dated 30 Sept., 1745.
1746. Forbes, Bishop Robert. T h e Lyon i n .Tfoz~rning. E d . Paton. Edin.
1895-6.
The .7acobitr Corresp. of the A tlioll If'crrtrily rlriring the Rehrllion. Edin.
,,
1840.
,, Hughes, Michael. Plain IT-urratiue or Jo?tr?znl of the late Rebelliolz.
Lond. 1746.
1747. TIbe Wanderer: or, Surprizing Escnpe. Lond. 1747.
,, The Female Rebels . . . The Titztlnr Duke and Dutchess of Perth, the
L o r d a n d Lady Ogiluie . . . Edin. 1747.
l
of the late Rebellion in 1745. Reading.
1748. -Boyse, Samuel. ~ m p n r t i a-His;.
1748.
,, Henderson, Andrew. Hist: of the Rebellion, 1745 apd 27.16. Lond.
1753. Edin. 1748.
1749. Jozirnal of the . . . Escape of the Y o u n g Chevalier. Lond. 1749.
1750. Ray, James. Compleat History of the Rebellion. Bristol. 1750. Lond.
1760.
1816. Charles, George. Hist. of the Trans. in ~ c o t l & z d . . . 1715-16 and
1745%. Stirling. 1816-7.
1836. Mahon, Lord. Hist. of England. Lond. 1836-54.
1837. Burnes, James. Hist. of the Knight. Templars. Edin. 1837; also 1840.
1838. Browne, James. Hist. o f th,e Highlands a n d Highland Clans. Glasgow.
1838.
Grant, John.' illemoir of James Burnes. Calcatta. 1840.
Klose, Carl L. Memoirs of prince Charles Stztart. Lond. 1845.
Mahon, Lord. T h e Forty-Five. Lond. 1851.
The Chronicles of the Families of Atholl and Tullibardine. Edin. 1896.
Norie, W. Drummond. Life and Adventures of Prince Charles Edward
Stuart. London. N.D.
Sanford Terry, C . T h e Rising of 1745. Lond. 1903.
D.N.B.
Hadden, J. Cuthbert. Prince Charles Edurard. L ~ n d o n . 1913.
50
William Murray (1689-1746) was the second son of John, Second Marquis
and first Duke of Atholl (or Athole), born on the 14th April, 1689. H e
was at first known as Lord William v u r r a y , and as such served in the Navy
during 1708 and part of 1709. But his elder brother, John, being killed a t the
Battle of Malplaquet on 31st August, 1709, he succeeded to the title Marquis of
Tullibardine.
H e was one of the most devoted adherents of t h e fallen Royal
House of Stuart and was out in the 1715 a t t h e head of 1,400 of the Atholl-men,
and, after a narrow escape a t Sheriffmuir and a weary period of hiding, he made
good his escape to Franee. King James I I I . , i.e., The Old Pretender, created
him Duke of Rannocl1 for his services, but he was attainted by the English
Government. H e was in chief command on land during the abortive expedition
to the North Western Highlands, and, in spite of a price of &2,000 p u t upon his
head by the Hanoverian Government, he again got away t o France.
On the
death of his father he was naturally a t once recognized by the Stuart King and
the Jacobite Party as the rightful Duke of Atholl, but, in the eyes of the English
Government, he had forfeited both title and estates, and these passed t o his next
younger brother, James. Duke William *as one of t h e seven who accompanied
Prince Charles t o Scotland in 1745; he i t was who unfurled the Prince's Standard
a t Glenfinnan on the 16th August and read aloud King James I I I . ' s Manifesto
proclaiming Prince Charles as Regent. The Jacobite Duke plays a very important
part in Dr. Begemann's argument, but the account there given of him contains
errors and inaccuracies.
Dr. Begemann.
' -In 1745 as Marquis of Tullibardine
'.
Comment.
H e was in attendance as -Duke of
Atholl. Those of the opposite party
of course styled him Marquis of T.
'
1i
51
We now come to an error which cuts a t the root of the w11ol.e of this part of Dr.
Begemann's argument :"
*' of October
7 7
This is quite incorrect, as I sliall presently show. B u t first let us examine t h e two
reasons given :' ' . . . partly because he was old and infirm, partly in order to beat
" up recruits. "
The picture of the Duke here presented is t h a t of an aged decrepit personage too
.feeble to proceed any further. The facts are t h a t although he was past his youth
and that he suffered from ill-health throughout the campaign, yet he was, in spite
of both these disadvantages, one of the most determined and one of t h e most
valuable of the Prince's attendants and followers: H e accompanied the expedition
into and the retreat from England in command of t h e second column, not travelling
in a coach. as did Lord F i t s l i ~ o .but on foot or on horseback. This in t h e devth
of an extremely rigorous winter. A t Derby, when t h e Council decided upon i h e
retreat, the contemporary H a y tells us that Tullibardine ' seemed much for going
forwards' t o London. (Lang, p. 144.) Before Falkirk h e was engaged in the
arduous and thankless task of looking for and forcing out such of the Atholl men
as were inclined to side with the Hanoverian Duke. After Falkirk and Culloden
came a weary and wearing period of hiding amidst every species of danger and
discomfort. A t last, worn out, this brave man surrendered, was basely betrayed,
and conveyed to the Tower of London. There he died, and was buried in the
Church of St. Peter ad Vincula. [Sanford Terry, 78, 81; Chambers, 445; Charles,
319, 341; Ewald, 150; Journal Escape, 1749, 78; Lang, 126, 130, 144, 157, 191;
Erowne, 274; Correspondence of the Atholl Family, 227; Norie ii., 154, 205;
Murrav of Brou~lztonUemoirs. 231.1
The second reason is the real one, and the very nature of the task assigned
to the Duke of Atholl by the Prince makes it evident t h a t he must have been
moving about constantly in the area within which he was t o recruit, organise,
requisition and collet$ stores of all kinds, and so forth. H e was, in fact, to rally
the Highland Clans and their resources to t h e service of the House of Stuart, and
in particular to recall his own AtholL-men to their allegiance. On 22nd September
the Prince named him Commander-in-Chief of the Forces North of t h e Forth.
His Head-Quarters remained a t Blair Castle until 26th September, and then moved
to Dunkeld. The following movements of the Duke are vouched for by contemporary authority :0
31
3
4
12
13
26
17
30
30
Aug.
Sept.
,,
,,
,,
,, to 14 Oct.
Oct.
,,
,,
onwards
A t Blair Castle
,, Dunkeld
,, Penth
,, Crieff
,, Dunkeld
,, Dunkeld
,, Perth
,, Edinburgh
With the Expedition.
The author of The Wanderer, 1747, quotes from a MS. in French 'written by
' one belonging to the nominal duke of Athol,' adding: ' I . . . endeavoured
' to be particularly informed of his (the Prince's) march t o t h a t metropolis
' (Edinburgh): and with some diEculty and a good deal of diligence got notes.'
The following are some references and quotations :That the Duke of Atholl left Blair 3 Sept. : arrived Dunkeld 3 Sept. ;
left Dunkeld arrived Perth 4 Sepk. : a t Crieff 12 and 13 Sept. ; left
Crieff arrived Dunkeld 13 Sept.
The Wanderer, 39 ;. Home, 295.
' with this view Lord George Murray sent an express to his brother the
' Marquis of Tullibardine, on the seventh, requesting him to march with
' suc11 forces as he had collected, on the morning of Tuesday the tent11
'
. . to reach Crieff next day.'
Jacobite Memoirs, 31; Browne, 49.
That the Duke did so is shown by the fact that he was a t Crieff on the
12th.
The Wanderer, 39.
' tlie 7th ditto (October) tlie duke continued a t the castle of Dunkeld
' till tlle 25th, in whicli time he received all the warlike stores, and four
' thousand.louis-d'ors for the p-,
from on board a ship arrived from
' France. The 28th he set out from Dunkeld for Pert11 about 15 miles
'distant; where on the 29th, he received another snpply of warlike
'stores from on board a French ship . . . the duke joined the
'wanderer a t Edinburgh, on t h e 10th November N.S.'
The Wanderer, 61
[Note.-Oct.
,,
,,
NOV.
7 N.S.
25
28
10
=
=
-
Sept. 26 O.S.
Oct. 14
,, 17
,, 30
I
,,
(2)
3,
(3)
,, James Frazer
27
1,
,, 29th ,,
,, 9th Oct.,
,, Edinburgh
,, Edinburgh
' These three letters are addressed to the Jacobite Duke of Athole, then
' a t Blair Cast.le.'
The fact, if i t is a fact, t h a t the Letters were addressed to the Duke a t Blair Castle
is no evidence whatever t h a t the Duke was actually at the Castle, either when the
Letters were written or when they came to his hand. As a matter of fact he was
a t Blair when Letter No. (1) reached him, but, seeing t h a t t h e gist of Dr.
Begemann's argument is t h a t t h e Duke never left Blair, it is a little unfortunate
that no mention is made of t h e important fact t h a t Lord George's Letter is an
urgent request t o the Duke to leave a t once and proceed to Crieff (Jacobite
Memoirs, 31: Browne, 49 :) which he actually did, being a t Crieff on t h e 12th
(The Wanderer). When the other two Letters were written the Duke was a t
Dunkeld. The evidence in support of Dr. Begemann's contention to be derived
from the address on these Letters is n i L t h a t is, supposing t h a t they were so
53
' The certain historical fact then is t h a t neither t h e legitimate nor the
' Jacobite Duke of Athole attended the pretended Templar Chapter in
' Edinburgh on 24 September 17'45 '
Die Tempelkerrn, p. 59.
' The Jacobite Duke who from 1715 to 1745 lived abroad as a refugee
cannot be seriously regarded as G.M.'
If, as Dr. Eegemann supposes, it is a question of a continuation of t h e old original
Order of the Temple in Scotland, then possibly the Duke's absence in foreign parts
~ i g h be
t held to have some bearing. B u t i f i t is a question of a Jacobite Society
calling itself the ' Ancient Chivalry of t h e Temple of Jerusalem ' of recent origin
and created abroad by adherents of the Jacobite claimant to t h e Throne of England,
then the residence of the Duke a t the Court of- his exiled master. his aee.
his rank.
a
and his prominent services and devot.ion t o the Cause--all these things point him
out as an exceedingly likely personage for t h e ' Regency' until such time as the
Prince himself might be ready or willing to take u p the ' Grandmastership.' It
should be noted that Dr. Begemann again misquotes t h e Letter when he refers to
the Duke as Grandmaster. It is a small point, b u t +he use of the word '.Regent '
makes rather in the direction of genuineness. It must be remembered t h a t there
is evidence of some such ' Templar movement' on t h e Continent just before the
time of *he 1745, namdy, t h a t which is associated with t h e names of Von Hund,
Kilmarnock, Clifford and others. That Order which commencing apparently as
Jacobite and non-Masonic became later Masonic (The Strict Observance) and nonJacobite. I do not say t h a t these things are established facts, b u t t h a t +here are
traditions, and some evidence pointing t h a t way.
54
' Profession ' and election to the Grandmastership of such a society as I have
indicated above.
We may pass over the references to Lord Dundee as quite irrelevant, except
that, supposing a Jacobite Templar Society to have been founded, it would
naturally provide itself with a ' traditional history and succession.' The Earl of
Mar may have been one of t h e ' Founders' and a ' G.M.'-his exile is in favour
of such a proposition.
This may possibly explain why he ' demitted the Ofice of G. Master ' (see Version
B) i f he ever enjoyed t h a t honour.
Dr. Regemann proceeds t o repeat twice t h e ' since-they-were-abroad '
argument, and once mpre decid* t h a t :-
' both Grandmasters ' (Mar and Atholl) ' are fancy-creations of the
' author of the Historical Notice of the year 1843.'
This concludes the examination of Version B of the Letter, that in the 1843
Dr.
Ilistorical Notice in the Statutes of the O'rder of the Temple in Scotland.
Begemann next proceeds to discuss t h e Version A, t h a t in Sir Robert Strcinge by
Dennistoun, 1855. H e conjectures that t h e three asterisks in Version A show that
it is derived from Version B by the simple process of leaving something out. It
should, however, be noticed t h a t there are other differences beside t h a t which occurs
a t the place marked by the three asterisks. It is equally likely that Version A
is a nearer approximation to an earlier Version still than is Version B, and that
Version B has been obtained by another simple process, namely, t h a t of putting
something in.
' . . . the original Letter has never been found, nor is any printed
' version earlier than that of 1843 known.'
That is so, and i t is sufficient to make us decide to suspend our judgment and
decline t o accept the Letter and t h e statements made in it as established facts.
I n 1837 there appeared A Sketch of the H k t o r y of the Knight Templars,
b y Jamgs B u ~ n e s ,L L . D . , F.R.S. Knight of t h e Gtrelphs of Hanover. William
Blackwood and Sons. Edinburgh. M D C C C X X X V I I . A special limited edition
in special binding for presentation t o a few immediate' friends of the Author.
The ' first ' edition is dated 1840. I n his ' Introduction,' which is dated ' United
Service Club. Edinburgh. 28 May. 1837,' Burnes says:A considerable portion of t h e following pages consists merely of an
abridgement or reprint of an admirable b u t not sufficiently known
article, written I believe by Mr. Keightly, on the History of the
Templars, down. to the period of the persecution, in the Foreign
Quarterly Review for 1828, followed by some extracts from Laurie's
Free-Masonry, and Mill's History of Chivalry.
For much of t h e information recorded in the Chapter on the Scottish
Templars I am under great obligations t o Adam Paterson and William
Pringle Esquires both of whom furnished me with valuable Manuscripts.
The latter of these gentlemen is the aut,hor of the interesting ' Notitiae
Templariae ' in t h a t valuable periodical, the Free-Masons' Review.
I n conclusion
Laurie Esq.
55
' This caution on the part of Labiie is quite unusual; a t other times
' he exhibits an astonishing credulity . . .'
Still, even this would be accounted for if Laurie knew that nothing more substantial than a rnernory of a Letter (which some claimed to have seen b u t which
was no longer available) survived when The Hist. of F . M . and the G.L. of Scotland
was in preparation.
Bro. Begemann next deals with what h e calls t h e ' pretended ball ' on the
23rd of September, the evening of the day previous to the alleged Templar
Chapter :' Some authorities speak of a ball on t h e 17th September . . . But
'other eye-witnesses . . . have nothing t o tell us concerning
' festivities. '
Earlier in the argument Dr. Begemann says: -
' In.-the " Memoirs " mentioned (Dennistoun), the Editor notices the
' few social evenings a t the Palace of Holyrood which were enlivened
' by gaiety .'
Here, by a partial quotation, he (Dr. Begemann) has (of course quite unintentionally) quite altered t h e sense. The complete. passage runs :-
56
' old palace was lit up by loyal smiles from, lovely eyes, and anxious
Chap. xiii.
p. 144.
' H e . . . gave a few balls to the ladies who favoured his cause.
' . . . A tune t o which he danced with Lady Betty Wemyss on one
' or more of these occasions has been preserved and published. . . .
' A t his balls, which were held in t h e picture gallery, he took care to
' dress very elegantly . . .'
And on p. 145 Chambers quotes the following from Home's History, being an
' Account of the Prince's daily life a t Holyrood House' and actually written by
one of the Prince's officers:-
' I n the evening he returned t o Holyrood House and received the ladies
H e then supped in public, and
'who came to his drawing room.
'generally there was music a t supper and a ball afterwards.'
Chambers, p. 145.
The quotation from Home is correct, the passage occurs a t p. 139 of his History
of the Rebellion. 1802.
Here is a passage from an Autograph Letter written to the Rev. CharIes
Wesley by John Erskine, t h e owner of Preston, where the Battle of Gladsmuir
(Prestonpans) was fought. The Letter-two
pp. folio-is dated 30th September,
1745 :' Tis reported by both ~ i c e st h a t the Chevalier till he came t o Edinburgh
'was dressed in the Highland habit . . . that a t Perth (and
'Edinburgh) he danced with the ladys a t their Balls and Assemblys,
' does all he can t o ingratiate himself with all sorts, . . .'
Here is another from T h e TVooctho~iselee MS., a contemporary Diary of the
Zacobite occupation of Edinburgh, written by a keen Whig and pious Presbyterian.
The MS. was first published in 1907 by its present owner, C. E . S. Chambers,
Esq. :' This is now the fowrth silent Lords Day in Edinburgh . . . How
' do the walls murne for the stage plays dancing assemblies and consorts
' of musick . . . I n the midest of i t ther is no magestracy nor
' rowle in the place.'
T h e Woodhozcselee MS., p. 94.
Other testimonies worth quoting, are :-
' To mark his sense of the respect shown him, and to ingratiate himself.
' still more with his new fri>ends, Charles gave a series of balls and
of
I
. . . .
57
' LevBes and drawing-rooms were held in Holyrood, and t h e crush tha6
' assembled was worthy of St. James's. Concerts, balls, and receptions
'were freely given by t h e Lowland gentry and the presenc6 of the
' Prince seldom withheld. '
Ewald, p. 136.
Hadden, p. 207.
'These balls and receptions, which were heId in th,e great picture' gallery, . . . attracted all the Jacobite rank and fashion of t h e
'capital and surrounding district . . . Charles rarely, if ever,
' danced himself a t these assemblies . . .'
Norie ii., p. 128.
Dr. Begemann quotes from Lang three pieces of evidence, namely :-(l) - t h e
testimony of hhe Rev. Alexander Carlyle of Inveresk, (2) the statement by
Henderson, and (3) the famous anecdote of the Highland sentry.
The first
amounts to nothing a t all, the second refers to a specific occasion, whilst the third
is believed t o have occurred at a ball when t h e Prince was being reproached for
not himself joining in t h e dance. The Henderson story appears in another and1
different form i n The W a d e r e r : -
' It was once hinted to him, that some ladies seemed desirous of a ball ?
' t o which he answered, it was a very improper season to think of
' diversions.'
The TYanderer, p. 62.
Dr. Begemann, in quoting these passages from Lang, omits to .tell us t h a t they
occur in the course of a discussion of this very point, namely, ,whether or no
dances formed part of the entertainments a t Holyrood. Nor does he mention t h a t
Mr. Lang decides that :-
"
' exclude the possibility thati on t h e same day i n the Palace of Holg-
' rood
"
And the fact t h a t the Prince was 'thoughtful and melancholy, etc.,' together
w;th the statement of one 'witness,' Henderson, and t h e story of the bearded
Highlander, leads him to pronounce as follows:-
58
Tra1~~~7ctiotz.s
o j the Qrcatuor Coronati Lodge.
' The Templar Chapter on the 24th Sept. its lask remaining feature
' cannot escape its fate also.'
'
Either a Ball did take place on the 33rd or it did not, but whether i t did or
whether it did not take place does not affect by a shadow or a shade the possibility
of a Templar Chapter on the 24th. The two things had no connection the one
with the other. The argument is unsound throughout. If the Doctor means that
we ought not t o trust the Letter when i t tells us t h a t a Templar Chapter was held
on the 24th, because the same Letter tells us about a Ball on the 23rd in which he
(the Doctor) plaoes no trust, he should say so. But to say t h a t the Ball is an
' historical impossibility ' and that THEREFORE the Templar Chapter is an ' historical
impossibility ' also--is intolerable.
Dr. Begemann.
Comment.
'
.
.
four
59
4th September, and continued with the expedition until the defeat a t Culloden,
where he commanded the left wing. H e escaped from Scotland on t h e French
ship Bellone, but died during the passage, 13th May, 1746, and was buried a t
sea. The enemies of the Stuart Cause generally recognised his merits and goodness, but Horace Walpole, in his Letters, vol. ii., p. 69, refers t o him as ' a silly
race-horsing boy,' while Tweedale, in a communication t o Lord Harrington,
speaks of him as of ' little spirit ' and with ' no great following in t h e Highlands '
(State Papers, Scotland, 9th August, 1745; Ewald, p. 99).
These are but
malicious slanders, the truer picture bsing t h a t by Douglas, ' bold as a lion in t h e
' field of battle, but ever merciful in the hour of victory ' ( D . A y . H .vi., 32; see also
T h e Female Rebels, 1747). Such was the man who is supposed to liave written
t h e ' l e t t e r with which we are concerned. The man to whom he is supposed t o
liave addressed i t was David Ogilvy, Lord Ogilvy, later Earl of Airlie (1725-1803),
eldest son of John, 4th Earl of Airlie. He was born in February of 1725, and
educated a t Aberdeen and Edinburgh, and was an accomplished young man,
proud and high spirited and quick of temper, but brave and devoted to t h e cause
he served. H e first joined the Prince a t Perth on the 3rd September, but left
again to beat up recruits, which he did t o some purpose, for he was able to lead
into Edinburgh, on the 3rd of October, a regiment of 600 men from his father's
lands in Forfar. . H e joined the Prince's Council, and during the 'memorable
e
entrusted wit.h the important command of the Cavalry,
retreat from Derby l ~ was
in which he showed t h a t he ~ossessedcons~icuousskill. After Culloden he was
in hiding for a time, but eventually escaped on board a ship bound for Bergen,
in Norway.' ( J ~ . ~ V . Uxiv.,
.
p. 917; see also T h e Puntctle Rebels, &C., 1747.)
' It is not apparent why on the 30th Sept. the Duke of Perth should
'have despatchad a letter of the kind to Lord Ogilvy who was daily
'expected and who actually reached Edinburgh on the 3rd October.'
Neither Version A nor Version B pretends to be t h e complete Letter.
The
beginning, the middle, the ending are all wanting, and until these portions are
forthcoming it is impossible for Dr. Begemann or anyone else to havenany idea
a t all as to what 'kind ' of Letter i t was. Suppose, for example, t h e Letter was
written for the purpose of urging Lord Ogilvy to make all speed and to get to
Edinburgh at the earliest possible m o m e n t . Suppose this--and what becomes of
Dr. Begemann's argument ?
The Duke of Perth entered Edinburgh with Prince Charles on the 17th of
September and continued with him until the departure of t h e expedition into
England. Therefore, t h e Duke of Perth was i n Edinburgh when h e is supposed
to have written the Letter.
' T h e Duke of Perth . . . bred in France . . . never attained
' perfect knowledge of the English language . . . his over-fondness
' to speak broad-Scotch.'. .
' S o that the Duke of Perth would have been incapable of inditing a
' letter written in faultless English.'
1 The following passage in Hughan's @?gin of t h v English Rite (Ed. 19C9, pp.
157-160) is of interest.
Dr. Kloss (F~eernasonr!~
zn Englund, Ireland, and Scotland, 1847) refers to n
p. 157.
letter written by Bro. J. F. Pollzt, on the 25th April, 1763, t o Bro. J. Peter
Gogel, Prov.G.31. (Frankfort).
1 have taken the requisite means t o receive
and learn the Scotch Degree usual in England. It is the same which rewhat the French call the Royal Arch, and i t was first knon-n in
" France from the raising of the Scottish Regiment Ogilvy in 1746.
The
" Collar of the French Royal Arch is red, the Apron green, with a St. Andrew's
" Cross . . ."
. the clothing mentioned being more suggestive of the Royal Order of
p. 160.
~co'tland.
After a brief detention at Bergen Lord Ogilvy was alloxred to depart for France where '
he raised and commanded the Regiment named after him and composed for. the most
art of destitute Scottish Jacobite Refugees willing to enter the French Sermce. Bro.
Letter of l763 is witness to Masonic activity in the Regiment which must a t
least have been known and approved by the Commanding Officer.
"
" sembles
Ballet's
60
Now, assuming that there was an original Letter, one thing that is absolutely
certain is that neither Version A nor Version B is t h a t original Letter or any
portion of i t tratiscribed word for word and letter for letter. The original Letterif there was one---would almost oertainly have been written in French of the
period, and, in that case, A and B are translations. If not in French, then the
original Letter must have been written in English or Scots-English, BUT I N THE
STYLE OF 1745.
The style of Versions A and B is that of a oentury later-in
fact, of the time when they were written, 1843-1855.
They are, therefore,
modernisations of the original if that original was in Scots-English. It is no
uncommon thing for letters and documents to be cited with orthography and stylemodernised. And i t is, indeed, very true t h a t the Duke of Perth of 1745 would
have been incapablp of inditing a letter written in faztltless English of a century
later. So that this argument breaks down as completely as the rest. It must
not be forgotten, too, that there is the added probability that Versions A and B
are no more than an effort of memory on t h e part of the author of the Historical
Notice of 1843 or of some person whom he consulted. This is a more satisfactory
assumption than that of a shameful forgery for the base purpose suggested as a
motive by Dr. Begemann.
The result t o which a study of Dr. Begemann's argument leads is conveniently expressed in the form adopted by Dr. Chetwode Crawley :That the letter COULD have been written by the personage to whom it
was ascribed. ( I do not say that i t wds.)
That i t
COULD
POSSIBLY
actual facts.
1920.
Letters of apology for absence were' reported from Bros. E. Conder, L.R.; T. J.
Westropp ; S. T. Klein, L.R. ; J. P. Rylnnds ; G. L. Shackles ; J. T. Thorp, P.G.D. :
F. J. TV. Crowe, P.A.G.D.C. ; Sir Alfred Robbins, Pre5.B.G.P. ; Canon Horslep, P.G.Ch. ;
R. H. Baxter; E. H. Wing, P.G.D.; Count Goblet d'dlviella; and Dr. W. IVynn
Westcott, P.G.D.
. .
62
The S E C X E T ~ R
c;tlled
Y
attention to t h e following
EXHIBITS.
By Bro. SETMOUR
BET.L,hTeweastle-upon-Tyne.
SSU'F-BOX; papier mach6, with Hose Croix design on lid, printed from a n
engraved plate.
Probably Continental.
MARK JEWET.; Chisel, Key-stone and Alallet pendent from n grcsen ribbon.
Probablv from fifalta or India.
" H.
'' Z.
Rugge, M.P. for Youghal, Co. Cork, whose daughter, Annie Rugge,
married i n l i i 5 t h e Rev. James P m t t , M.A. (Rector of Athnowen, Co.
Cork from 1767 t o 1827), the great grandfather of the present owner,
Dr. John P r a t t , of Millom.
'11,;
t h e SECRETARY.
R. h. JEWEL
; silver-gilt, Scotch design, manufactured by J. Law.
JLT;LI, (Organist, R.A.) ; Lyre on ~ r i u n g l eset wikh paste.
I
JI.:\YELS
JEWEL;
Il'~irl~sctctions
o J the Qriatilwr Coronati Lodge.
Berkshire.
AST year, when I was asked to read a paper before the Berkshire
Masters' Lodge, I collected material on t h e subject of W o m e n
and k ' r e e m u ~ o n r y for tliat purpose, which I have also had the
pleasure of bringing before t h e .Mid-Kent Masters' Lodge a t a
recent date. Thc gleanings for those occasions form the found&tion of t h e present paper, in which I present khe results rather
differently arranged and together with pome additional matter,
in a form which I hope may be acceptable to our Brethren, and
serve as a useful article on the subject for the encyclopadic pages of S r s Qurltlcor
Coronatorum.
As the footnotes to my paper will demonstrate, I am indebted to many
sources for references and material, but particularly I should like to acknowledge
the wonted kind and ready help of Bro. Tuckett and Bro. Songhurst in both
respects, which has been of great assistance.
Our distinguished Brot,l~er, the Earl of Wanviclr, mentions, in his recently
published Memoirs,' an incident bearing upon our subject, which occurred whil>t
Provincial Grand Lodge had been
lie was Provincial Grand Master of Essex.
iiivited t o meet in t h e Library a t his seat, Easton Lodge, and he tells us that
some of the ladies of his house party hoped to t u r n the occasion t o account as an
opportunity to unravel some of the mysteries of the Craft. The usual precaution.,
however, effectually precluded them from gratifying their curiosity; but, after the
meeting, certain facetious arid wholly unfounded stories became current, to the effect
that for geveral days following the gardeners came across stray members of the
fraternity lost, and in a somewhat somnolent condition, in various parts of the
grounds. Lord Warwick more than hints t h a t such scandalcus tales originated
from those who were disappointed in their endeavours to fathom our secrets !
A little consideration of our subject will, I think, c o n v i ~ o eus tliat there is
no novelty in t h e attitude.this story reveals nor in the explanation afforded.
Lord Warwick comments on his story that " Women will never respect
Masonry wl-:le they are excluded from all participation in i t "; but I do not
think we can accept such a statement. Many women most certainly do imnlensely
respect Freemasonry. It is remarkable how milch interest they take in the Craft,
its history, its doings and its charities, and, what is more, the support they
accord to the last, when one realizes how entirely external to re71 Freemasonry
they have been, and always must be, with t h e exception of such abnormal cases
as we are now about to consider. A lady,2 writing on the point of view of 11sr sex on
matters in general, has concisely stated the position:-for
men, " in their great
social league of brotherhood, Freemasonry,-silence to men outsiders and to all
women is profound and inviolate. "
~ o n ? eof my hearers may recollect the name of Mrs. Murray-Aynsley, who
was a contributor t o T h e Freemason and also to our T r a n s n c t i o n s . V h e wife of
a clergyman who had resided in I n d i a and travelled much in remote parts, she
took a keen and intelligent interest in Freemasonry, so far as it is possible for a
woman to do so, although, as Bro. Gould remarked a t the time of her death in
1898, her sex " debarred her from acquiring t h a t intimate knowledge of our
Fraternity which is so essential to the formation of correct theories."
Nemozrs o f Sixty Years, b y t h e Earl of Warwick. Cassell & CO. 1917.
Thrvugh n TVomnn's Eyes, b y (Mrs.) Beatrice Heron-Moxwell. hIelrose. 1917.
3 Papers b r Mrs. H. G. M. hlurray-dmslep, in A.Q.C.: - T h e Tau or Cross,
v., 8 1 ; Some Hammer Legends, vi., 5 1 ; Further Light o n Scotch Initiation, vii., 15> 77.
1
2
64
'
"
Dame," 146.
W o m e n a n d Freemasonry.
65
case, as it hss been fully dealt with in our T~nnsuctions.~Bro. Conder, after a
careful investigation, was able t o piece together, what we may take as, t h e nearest
approach to the facts t h a t can be achieved, and further light was thrown on the
I will merely remind you t h a t the
subject by Bro. Dr. .Chetwode Crawley.
occurrence took place between 1710 and 1713 a t t h e latest, before the organisation of the Irish Grand Lodge in 1729-30, i n a private Lodge held by t h e
lady's father, Viscount Doneraile, his sons and intimate friends, a t Doneraile
Court, County Cork. The young lagy had accidentally fallen asleep in a small
library adjoining t h e roam, on the ground floor, in which t h e Lodge was held,
and awoke to hear, and even to see, through t h e partition wall-which was incomplete owing to repairs being in progress-the
ceremonies of t h e Order. When
she realiked t h e solemnity of t h e proceedings she wished to beat a retreat, but
found herself opposed by the butler in his capacity as Tyler; the members of the
Lodge were summoned, and, after long consultation, detwlioined that t h e fair
The lady
culprit should herself pass through the ord'eals she had' witnessed.
during her long life, which only ended a&t h e age of eighty in 1773, proved herself
an exemplary member of the Craft, highly valuing her position of special privilege.
Indeed, it has been recorded of her t h a t " she had such a veneration for Masonry
that she could never suffer i t ' t o be spoken lightly of i n her hearing; nor would
she touch upon the subject, but with t h e greatest caution, in company with even
her most intimate friends, whom she did not know t o be Masons, and when she
did., it was under evident embarrassment, and a trembling apprehension lest she
might, in a moment of inadvertence, commit a breach of Masonic duty."
Bro. Conder mentions a n apron and two jewels supposed to have been worn
by our distinguished Sister, which are preserved as relics of her Craft career.
Bro. Cecil Powell informs me of another jewel presented t o the Provincial Grand
Lodge a t Bristol by Bro. Sir William Osb. Hamilton in 1817. The letter which
accompanied the gift and a memornndum about it are still preserved, hanging
up in a gilt frame, a t Freemasons' Hall, Bristol, b u t unfortunately the jewel
itself has disappeared. It was a little silver trowel, such as actually appears as
being worn by the lady in one of her portraits. It had come into t h e 'donor's
possession owing t o h i s being a connection of t h e familv.
The story of the, famous Lady Freemason has been teld with many variations. Some versions picture the heroine as having deliberately hidden herself in
a clock-case, or behind the tapestry, in order t o spy upon the Lodge proceedings.
One would rather balieve, as; in fact, Bro. Conder seems t o have satisfactorily
demonstrated, t h a t it was an element of accident and no dishonourable intention
which placed the young lady in her desperate dilemma.
The expedient of the clock-case crops up in various quarters. I n a letter
written in 1879 to Bro. Montague G ~ e s t ,the
~ following passage relating to a
norsetshire Lodge occurs :-" There was a Lodge about a hundred years ago,
held in a house facing khe Up-Lyme turnpike . . . It was in t h a t Lodge
that it was said the woman hid herself in a clock and was in consequence made a
Mason. "
There seems t o be an echo of t h e clock-case tradition in Thackeray's
burlesque story of " M Y grandfather's time," which occurs in one of his.papers
on Snobs about
my grand aunt (whose portrait we still have in t h e family) who got
into t h e clock-case a t the Royal Rosicrucian Lodge a t Bungay, Suffolk,
t o spy t h e proceedings of t h e Society, of which her husband was a
member, and being frightened by t h e sudden whirring and striking
eleven of t h e cldck (just as-the Deputy Grand Master was bringing in
the mystic gridiron for the reception of a ne'ophyte), rushed out into
1
p. 16, and p. 53, Notes on Zrzsh Freemasonry, l . Supplemenfary Note on the L a d y Free-
Club Snobs.
i
!
8
I
W o m e n and E'reernason~y.
67
1
2
3
4
69
had been originally designed for a church, and a pulpit and other
church furniture had been installed; but later this plan was abandoned,
and the Masonic Lodge secured t h e place for their meetings. Under
the unused pulpit, the girl, Catherine Sweet, one day discovered an
excellent hiding place when playing hide-and-seek. Later she utilized
i t during the sessions of the lodge, and gained many secrets of Masonry.
. . . For more than a year she had been an unobserved attendant
a t all the meetings of the lodge. She had on several occasions, run
some narrow escapes, but a day came when she failed in her calculations.
The members of the Lodge always carried their rifles when they
attended the meetings. On this fatal day one of her uncles left his
rifle in the ante-room, and had gone some distance before he thought
of it. H e retraced his steps, and as he approached t h e building he
saw K a t e crawling out of her place of concealment. She discovered
him a t about the same time, and she knew t h a t a reckoning was at
hand. Wheg she reached the ground her uncle told her to return
home and go to her room and stay till he came for her. Upon her
uncle's return, he called his brothers and they went into their office.
After relating what he had seen, they decided t o call Kate in, and find
out, if possible, what she had learned about Masonry: She was summoned to appear for what she thought would be her death sentence,
as she had been lad to believe t h a t no one was allowed to live who
stole the sxrets of Masonry.
I t was a t this time t h a t she showed her courage in a way that
probably saved her a vast amount of trouble. She entered the presence
of her uncles, all of whom she knew loved her better than they did
their own lives, with a firm step and head erect. As soon as she was
seated, t h e eldest brother became spokesman, and the following conversation took place :
Uncle: Kate, tell us where you have been this evening.
K a t e : Under the pulpit in t h e lodge.
W h a t were you doing there?
Watching and listening.
Was this your first visit?
No, Sir.
How long have you been doing t h i s ?
For a year and a half, or ever since John Williams was
initiated.
Have you been able to learn any of the secrets of the lodge?
Yes, Sir; all of them.
Well, tell us all you know.
I will answer all questions you may ask me, for I am a Mason,
and am willing t o answer questions when properly put to me; but I
cannot give you my knowledge of Masonry in any other' way.
Where shall I commence, and what kind of questions shall I
ask you ?
Begin a t the beginning and ask such questions as you would ask
a stranger if you wanted him t o prove t o you that he was a Mason.
Seeing t h a t she would not impart her Masonic information in
any other way or manner, the brothers decided t h a t it would be best
to p u t her through the regular catechism, which they proceeded to do.
The Masonic reader can understand the looks and feelings of the five
brothers as the examination proceeded and they discovered that their
seventeen-year-old niece was better versed in t h e secrets of Freemasonry
than either of them. The trial came t o an end on their reaching the
point when she revealed t o them t h a t she had even caught the words
t h a t are spoken by the master of t h e lodge when the candidate is
finally raised to the degree of a master Mason.
71
After all was over and K a t e had told the brothers t h a t no one,
except themselves, knew what she had done, she was confined to her
room and closely watched, pending the decision of the lodge as to the
proper steps to be taken in hei- case. The master of the lodge was a t
once told of what had taken place. Each member was notified of a
call communication to be held the next day.
When the lodge
assembled, i t went into a committee of t h e whole, and after hours of
deliberation adjourned t o meet the next day. Messengers were sent
out, and the oldest and wisest members of the lodge were called in to
consult and advise. Long and earnestly did they discuss the matter.
Many different suggestions were made but none seeme'd practicable.
The laws of Masonry, which had been in force ever since the
days of King Solomon, said plainly t h a t no woman could be made a
Mason. Yet here was a young girl who had all the secrets of Masonry
that could be obtained in the Blue Lodge. The question arose, ' Wllst
was to 'be done? '
Almost a month 'as
consun~edby the lodge in
discussing the matter and consulting the most learned Masons of t h e ,
State. A t last it was decided t h a t inasmuch as K a t e Sweek had
obtained all the secrets of Freemasonrv, the onlv thine
" t h a t could be
done was t o obligate her, in the regular way, and risk the consequencieu.
Accordingly, a mitahle uniform was made of red flannel, and she was
taken to the lodge, where she was obligated as a regular Mason, but
not admitted to membership.
The day she took the obligations
was the first and last time she
was ever inside a Masonic lodge (where she could be seen) while i t was
a t work. She knew Masonry, and kept herself posted up-until a short
time before her death, but never attempted t o visit a lodge.
Many instances are related in the pamphlet in which she found her knowledge
of Masonry of h:lp when she needed assistance. The story would appear t o
refer to the earlier half of the last century, perhaps about 1840.'
Mrs. T. P. O'Connor, in her recently-published l volume of impressions
about Ireland, mentions Doneraile and its legends. Herself hailing from the
Southern States, U.S.A., she writes that she formerly knew a South.ern lady
,' who was a Freemason."
The young and beautiful wife of a distinguished
Confederate officer, her plantation lay directly on the routg of Sherman's march
to the sea,-"
All the houses were to be burned; she was &lone, the fate of the
women was uncertain; to give her protection her husband asked t h a t she should
receive the first degree of the order of Freemasons." Mrs. O'Connor comments:
"This is probably the only instance of a woman Freemason in America."
In
reply to my inquiry for further particulars, Mrs. O'Connor has kindly written
saying that she sees no objection to the lady's name being published, and t h a t
Major-Charles
Lilley, of Gainsvi!le,
she was the wife of Captain-afterwards
Georgia.
I n France there were several Societies dating back t o t h e earlier part of
the eighteenth century which, emulating t h e secrecy of Freemasonry and working
some kind of ceremony, offered membership to women and enjoyed a temporary
prbsperity. The ladies of that nation seem t o have been 'much more anxious to
participate in some sort of pseudo-Masonic activity than was the case on this side
of t h e Channel, and this tendency led in 1774 to an attempt, by the French
Masonic authorities to regulate some of these bodies by the recognition of Lodges or
Adoption. These were societies attached to regular Lodges to which women were
admitted and in which ceremonies were performed for their special edification. It
was not Masonry, but a substitute, and t h e ceremonies, more otr less frivolous,
usually ended with a ball. The subject of Rites of Adoption and other substitutes
for Freemasonry in t h e case of women is outside the bounds of my present paper,
but I mention i t because some curious advertisements in t h e London papers about
this date seem to be a faint reflection of some of these Continental uses.
by Mrs. T. P. O'Connor, author of I mysew, My Beloved
etc. (Hutchinson, 1917). ,
1 Hemelf-Ireland,
South,
72
! Hzstor!~ of Szgnboards
Piccad~llg,1867), p. 417-8.
2
infants in arms with them. Our Fnglish Brethren were informed t h a t a number
of ladies on the Island were Freemasons, and the Order there appeared to be conducted as a benefit society more on the lines of Oddfellowship than of the Craft.
W e know that, unhappily, abroad some of the Continental Masonic bodies
have so departed fi-om t h e ancient landmarks in various essential points t h a t they
have ceased to be recognised by Qur Craft.
The principle which this paper
illustrates-' t h a t women are not eligible to become Freemasons '-despite
the
story last cited, is not one from which there is a general departure from established
customs: yet i t may be noted t h a t certain bodies operating in this country which
are not recognised as Masonic, and which admit women t o membership,
against
which rand Lodge recently reiterated the warnings of nearly ten years ago,
derive their first origin from Continental sources.
In Mexico l for some years past Freemasonry as there practised has been
thrown open t o women, who openly participate in Lodge proceedings. This state
of things is' curiously illustrated by a correspondence which passed between Bro.
Alber,t Pike, the great American Mason, f o r ~ ~ e r layt the head of t h e Supreme
Council 33', houthern Jurisdiction, U.S.A., and Dr. Pombo, the Grand Commander of the A. & A.R. in Mexico. I n 1889 the latter wrote for advice on this point:
" May a Lodge of Perfection admit into its bosom, and confer t h e 4th t o the 14th
Degrees on the, first lady Doctor of Medicine, who received the blue degrees in a
symbolic Lodge? " The answer came " t h a t a woman cannot lawfully receive the
Blue Degrees, anywhere; and if a Lodge so far forgets itself as to give them to a
woma6, she cannot be recognised as a Mason by a Lodge of Perfection."
One sees t h a t there was a plea p u t forward, t h a t t h e case was exceptional,
as the lady had qualified as a medical m a n ; in f a d , a t t h a t date, she was tlis
only female physician who had graduated from a Mexican University; b u t our
American Brother stood firm for this fundamental principle of the Craft-that
IVomen .are n o t eligible to beconze Freemasons.
A cordial vote of thanks was unanimously passed t o Bro. Hills, and comments on the paper were offered by Bros. J. E. S. Tuckett, Herbert Bradley,
L. Vibert, J. S. M. Ward, R. H. Baxter, E . Glaeser, and Cecil Powell.
.Bra. J. S . M. WARDpointed out t h a t Bro. Hills had not given any reason
why women should not be admitted into Masonry. Perhaps this showed how wise
he was, for it was certainly a difficult and delicate question; nevertheless, the
speaker thought they should be prepared to face it, and he suggested t h a t the
explanation might be found in the view t h a t Freemasonry was a survival of the
primitive initiatory rites of the savages.
The speaker in his travels had come across what seemed to him abundant
evidence that our signs and symbols were known the world over t o people who
were not in our sense Freemasons and who yet app-ared to use these signs with
the same meaning as we did. His observations were confirmed by further instances
which had been given him by Brother Masons who had been in different parts
of the world.
To make his exact meaning plain h e mentioned some of his experiences in
different parts of the world, and added that the Dervishes gave as an explanation
of certain ceremonies practised by them that Richard I. of England having during
a truce initiated Saladin into the order of chivalry, the latter, not t o be outdone
in knightly courtesy, initiated Richard into their .lower degrees, and he, in his
turn, initiated some of his own knights, among whom were certain Templars, and
the latter gave it t o the men who built their cliurches.
1
76
The speaker added t h a t he did not consjder t h a t this was the true origin
of western Freemasonry, which he thought came to Europe much earlier and by
a different route, but he believed it was quite possible t h a t a fresh infusion of
ideas was obtained from t h a t source; anyway, the tradition was worth investigation.
T h e speaker concluded with t h e suggestion .that if our system could be
traced back b t h e initiatarp rites of t h e primitive savages it woulcl naturally
follow that women would be excluded from them. for it was death for a woman
to approach a man's lodge, and a similar fate awaited any man who approached
a woman's lodge when its members were initiating a girl into womanhood. The
women's system would perish when t h e tribe passed from t h e totemistic into the
Patriarchal stage and t h e women entered the Harem, b u t with men no such
social cause intervened. If this theory were correct, then we had an explanation
of why no woman could be admitted into our Lodges, and the fair sex might t u r n
their attenkion to t h e surviving systems of female initiation and see whether
they- could not evolve something from them rather than try to imitate masculine
Freemasonry.
Bro. RODK.H . BAXTERunites :-
I have read with much pleasure t h e rough proof of Bro. Gordon Hills'
paper, Wonten and Preemasonry. The author has covered his ground so fully
that there is scarcely any room left for suggestion or criticism.
The impression left -on my mind is that there is not an authentic case on
record of a woman ever having been made a Mason in a regular Lodge. Even
require
the story of the Hon. Miss St. Leger (afterwards Mrs. Aldworth) seems
further investigation.
Bros. Conder and Chetwode Crawley dealt with t h e
subject in A.Q.C. viii., 16 and 53, b u t I could never quite understand why, after
having established so many improbabilities, they both seemed to cling to the
belief t h a t t h e initiation really had taken place.
Bro. H . R . Wood recently kindly copied for me the inscription on a tablet
in the N.E. corner of St. Finbarre Cathedral, Cork, recording the lady's place of
burial and the circumstances of her admission to Freemasonry. I reproduced
this in Miscellanea Latomorum iv., 97, and asked a question relative thereto,
but so far no further part of the publication has appeared, and so I have not
had an answer. It is certain t h a t the initiation did not take place in the Lodge
alleged.
I am inclined t o place the whole story in the category of Masonic fictions.
The case of the Chevalier or Chevaliere D'Eon, so delicately dealt with
by Bro. Chetwode Crawley in -4 .&.C. xyi., 229, might possibly have been referred
tp in this paper as a sort of sidelight on t h e subject.
Bro. GORDON
HILLSwrites :-
the Earl of Bandon and wife of Col. R. W . Aldworth, tried to attach the old
story to her name. The tablet in the modern Cathedral a t Cork, of which the
foundation stone waj laid in 1865, is a case in point; the dates of Mrs. Aldworth7s
birth and death are both incorrect, and i t was certainly not Lodge No. 44 that
met a t Doneraile when the initiation took place.
My paper is written t o illustrate the fact t h a t 'Women are not eligible
to become Freemasons,' and t h a t stories about Women Freemasons bear witness
to this rule, so that if the stories are all myths, so much the better for my contention; but I think that, a t any rate, we can say with certainty t h a t the
Countess Barkoczy was initiated in a regular Lodge, which, however, promptly
paid the penalty of its irregular proceedings.
The case of the Chevalier D'Eon was in my mind when I wrote this paper
as a confirmation of my views, but as i t is a side issue, and has already-been
fully treated in our Transactions, I did not mention i t upon this occasion.
Ero. Ward's comments raise several points, the discussion of which would
carry us far beyond the bounds of my paper, so t h a t I cannot attenspt. t o deal
adequately with them. Further, I am now rather concernel with facts than with
theories, but to answer his main question briefly and in a manner suitable to the
audience to which my remarks are addressed, surely I need say no more than that
WOMEN A R E NOT ELIGIBLE T O BECOME FREEMASONS BECAUSE
OUR CRAFT I S A MEN'S SOCIETY. To a Freemason this must be perfectly
obvious from every point of view.
It has been7siggested t h a t I should a little amplify my reference t o certain
bodies operating in this country which are not recognised as Masonic, and against
whose efforts to induce Masons to attend their meetings our Brethren have been
solemnly warned.
This movement for admitting women t o membership in Lodges arose, as I
have mentioned, on the continent, where Masonry has -adopted hractices with
regard to religion and politics widely different from our fundamental principles.
About 1879 several Lodges seceded from one of t h e French Masonic jurisdictions
and established a new governing body. One of these Lodges, Les Libres Penseurs,
took the step of initiating Mile. Maria Desraimes, a lady actively interested in
humanitarian and feminist questions. This occurred on January 14th, 1882, and
resulted in the suspension of t h e Lodge by its governing body.
This irregular
Lodge, however, pursued its course of action, and, being reinforced in 1893 by
the admission of seventeen lady candidates, constituted a governing body for the
pnopagation of its principles denominated " Universal Joint Freemasonv," and
since called ' CO-Masonry.'
I n 1900 this organisation enlarged its sphere of
action by constituting itself a Supreme Council 33O, and undertook to confer the
degrees of the A. & A.S.R. I derive these particulars from an official pamphlet
published in 1903, in which the following occurs :A kord may be said regarding the Primciples attached to the authorised
English Constitution. I n France a t the present day the tendency in
, our Fraternity is t o dispense with the religious element, and t h e large
majority of Brethren, including those of our own Order, prefer a
somewhat materialistic attitude. Our Supreme Council, however, in
p a n t i n g an English Constitution, recognised t h a t different methods
are required in different countries, and have consequently sanctioned
our upholding for ourselves a belief in a creative principle under the
title of " Grand Architect of the Universe." l
I understand that, owing to disagreements there have been secessions from the
original body in England, so t h a t this androgynous system is now conducted under
three governing bodies in this country.
Amongst other points which will appear incongruous to Freemasons we may
specially note t h a t this movement owes its origin t o the delibetate betrayal by
certain Brethren of their most solemn undertakings, and t h a t some of its votaries
endeavour to induce others similarly to violate their obligations.
1 Transactions of the Dharma Lodge of r the supreme Council of Universal Joint
Freemasonry. No 1 (Benares, 1903), p. 18.
Transnctio~~s
of the Qttatlror Coronati Lodge.
The last Transactions to hand contains the paper on the " Peculiarities of
the Book of Constitutions," and tlie discussion on tlie title leads me t o venturs
this letter to you.
To me, i t seems impossible for Freemasonry to liave a Constitution, b u t is
it not most likely t h a t the learned brethren responsible for our Regulations used
the word and phrasing which would be familiar? C ' o n s f i t i l t i o is the ordinary
Latin for a law and edict ( c f . Gni 192~fifcrti0~1~9).
The Church of England has
its " Constitutions and Canons." Even in 1603 this title is used and the Latin
is Con.stitritiones sive [not e t ] Canonrs. Conftitutions, therefore, is simply Rules
or Regulations having no reference a t all to Constitution. &!fay I, as a student of
~ r e e r r k i s o n r ~ask
, if this is an erroneous interpretation ?
(Canon) CPRILL J. TVYCRE.
Freemasonry in Fiction.-I
have recentlp read the number of t h e A . Q . C .
containing tlie paper and debate on " Freemasonly in Fiction," and I was struck
by the fact that, while several of the worl~smentioned were little known, or of a
somewllat epl~emeralnature, a classic like Tolstoy's TT-crr nnc7 Pence was overlooked ;
perhaps Tolstoy's works hardly come under the head of fiction?
The portions dealing with Masonry made some impression on my mind
because I was not yet a Mason when I read the book, and from it I derived most
of my ideas of an Initiation; ideas which turiled out to be largely wrong, but
from Tolstoy's character for realisin there can be little doubt (whether lie himself
was a Mason or not) t h a t lie was giving a fairly correct account of a Russian
Initiation ceremony in 1806.
I n any case no Mason can read the following chapters of tlie book without
much interest :P a r t V., chaps. ii. and iii. relate tlie introduction of one of the leading
characters, Count Pierre Bezuliov, to M a ~ o n r y and liis Initiation.
P a r t V I . , chaps. vii., viii., and X. contain references to his further career
as well as to Masonry outside Russia a t that period, and to tlie characters and
motives of several Russian Masons.
Count Pierre's mentor j; a remarkably drawn and somewllat mysterious
figure, and seems to be a portrait of some well-known personality.
A reference is made to " Freemasons and Martinists " : I am quite ignorant
of the latter sect.
P. H. Fox.
OBITUARY.
MAY,
Four Lodges and fifty-eight Brethren were admitted to the membership of the
Correspondence Circle.
L'ORDRE
lIP /In0
DE LA FELICITE.
84
Xeither Freeniasonry nor t h e later Mac. . . d ' A d o y t i o n have aught in common with
the Order of Felicity except that the latter did copy its organisation and externals
from the Craft. Herein lies a sufficient reason for examining in some detail its
ceremonial and observances, for by so doing we may learn something concerning
the management of our own Society a t a very important b u t obscure period of its
development.
The Order of Felicity conferred a t first four Degrees, namely :1 Mot,sse
= Cabin-Boy
11 P a t r o n
= Shipmaster or Captain
111' C'hef d'h'scanlre
= Commodore
I V O V i c e - An ~ i r a l
= Vice-Admiral
The
As wit11 Freemasons a person not a Member of the Order was Z'rofcrtle.
equivalent to a Lodge was an Escndre or Squadron. The locality or town where a
' Squadron ' assembled was termed a Rade, i.e., Roadstead. The Grand Ma-,ter was
styled Amiral, i.e., Admiral, and under him were Officers styled Trice-Anlirccl, i.e.,
Vice-Admiral, who correspond to Provincial Grand Masters. Thus we see that
the 111 and I V O were definitely associatecl with Ofice in the Order, and we have
a t once the idea of Chair-1)egree.s. The a d m i r a l issued Pntrntes or C'otttatissiotls
giving power to confer Degrees and Offices, and these seem to have been written
documents corresponding to our Warrants. Later the Degrees were altered by
the addition of a new grade above Patron or Captain and called I'otrotl-Sal&, i.e.,
Salted-Captain.
The Grand Officers of the Order were:Saint Nicholas, Grand Patron of the Order
Amiral
=Admiral
C'orr. to G.M.
Vice-Anlira1
=Tics-Admiral
,,
Pr0v.G.M.
The Officers of a Squadron (Lodge) were:Chef dlEscadre
=Commodore
= M . of Ceremonies
Maitre des C6rgmonies
Commissaire de Marine
-Marine Superintendent
Grand Sondeur
= Grand Leadsman
l~lspecteur
=Inspector 'of Coasts)
Rameur au Chef d'Escadre =Commodore's Oarsman
or ( l ) Boatswain
Cherubin
=Cherub or Cherubin
Paquebots
= Packet-Boats.
,,
c i)
I.G.
Deacons ( ? )
All members of tlie Order (except ' Pzcket-Boats ') wore an Anchor of
Gold as a Badge or Jewel of menthership. There mere J ~ w e l sof office, but all
Degrees and all offices were further distinguished by the ' Cables,' i e., Corcc'o~zr
or Cords of Silk by
t h e Anchor was umnrrC (moored) to the Heart. The
Anchor was therefore worn as a Breast Jewel. The number of Cords and their
colour differed for every Degree and every office, as will be seeE later. Tile
' Accolade '-a
feature of all Degrees and in the investment of all officers-was
given with the Sword for Degrees and the higher offices, but with the Office-Jewel
' Paquebot,' zccording to tlie Diction7crtire cle I'Ordre,
f o r the lower offices.
=Cotnn~issio)z~rire
chnrgt des clPp2cltcs or 1)espatch bearer. They wore an Anchor
o: Silver with a single green ' Cable ' and wers given the ' Accolade ' cirifh n stick
or ~ c - h i p . They were apparently an inferior kind of Deacon. There were also
' Serving Knights ' w l ~ oreceived the ' Accolade ' by a s t r ~ k eof the hnncl upon
their shoulders, and nothing is said as to the ' Cables ' assigned to them. There
is no indication t h a t the Lady-members were eligible to hold oficr in the Order.
Every Office as well as every Degree possessed its secret ' W o r d or Words,'
but those for the Offices cre not disclo~ed. The Degree Words were never to be
littered except in open Squadron. There were also ' Sacred Words ' ( p o r o l r ~
co~zsncr&es). All the Degrees except that of T'icr-.4 mirrrl had special ' Signs ' but
no ' Grip or Token,' while tlie Degree of 17ice-Arnirccl which had no ' Sign,' alone
possessed a ' Grip or Token.' The Sign of Assent and Salutation was called C o ? ~ p d e - R a m e (=Oar-Stroke). I n the ' Language of the Order ' R a m e (Oar) = B r a s et
Jambes (Arms and Legs). The Sign was made thus :Place the right hand on the breast, then hold i t out and trace with i t
a half-circle, a t the same time advancing the leg.
This Sign was made on entering or leaving the Squadron, when addressing a
Superior, and on other similar occasions. There were Single-Arm and DoubleArm Oar-Strokes and t h e n u m b e r of such Strolres was carefully prescribed according to the occasion. There was another form of Salute called ' S a l u t de, C h a p e a ~ ~ , '
which was as follows :Carry the hat to t h e breast, move i t up and down perpendicularly
twice, then replace it on the head.
The Conzr~zandenzent (Word of C o m m n d ) or method of Honouring a Toast a t a
Banquet ran thus :Hold out the Glass CS if to clink glasses with another, the index finger
being kept pointing upwards; then lower the glass and make as if t o
pour wine into i t ; then recover i t upon the breast; move i t u p and
down perpendicularly twice; and then empty it (by drinking the wine).
A Glass was called U n e Jarre and a Bottle Dame-Jeanne.
The Members of the Order are divided into those who are ' within the
Tabernacle ' and those who are not, the meaning of wllich expression is obscure
but seeins to point to something corresponding to Grand or Prov. Grand R a n &
(not o f i c r ) . Ladies were eligible to be 'within the Tabernacle.'
Five or more could hold a Squadron, b u t no one below the rank of Commodore could initiate.
The Commodore or, the ' Throne ' was styled ' The
President.' Those present were ranged in two ' Columns' on the R. and L. of the
Throne. All must be ' clothed,' i.e., provided with their Anchors and proper
Cables. The members wore their Swords and Chapeaux or Head-dresses in open
The
Squadron, and, in fact, these articles were essential to the ceremonial.
candidmate was without Sword and bare-headed b u t not apparently hood-winked,
and was supported by a 2)arrain or Sponsor who testified to his virtues and
eligibility. H e had to profess ' zeal ' and repudiate mere ' curiosity ' and give
proofs of his proficiency in the ' Science of Navigation,' of which more anon. A
Ballot-Box with White and Black Balls was used.
The Ballot was taken three
times (if necessary) a t three separate meetings, and should a Black Ball or Balls
appear at all three the Candidate was for ever rejected. The term Re'ception
applied to all Degrees equally. The Cherubin or I . G . (Ragon calls ilinl 7~ szcrurilInnt, but he cannot mean in t h e sense of Warden), who was always t h e junior
membsr of the 1, stood sword in hand within t h e entrance to t h e Squadron. I n
t,he First Degree the room in which the Squadron was held apparently represented
a Ship or Boat with a double bank of oars. and t h e ceremony includes a rather
striking representation of the membsrs present rowing t h e Boat with the Candidate
as passenger to the Harbour cf Felicity on the Zsle Dvsire'e or Zsle d p Fe'licite' or
Isle d e C ~ t h ? r e ,where the Obligation-which
contains mzny
of familiar
- phrases
~ound-is taken and the Secrets communicated.
It is rather surprising to find t h a t after the First Degree t h e nautical business
seems to recede into the baikground, for the Second and Third Degrees have t o do
with a Garden-the Garden of Eden-while the Degree of Commodore is concerned
with an assembly of heathen Gods and Goddesses not usually associated with the
abode of primitive innocence. All ' Working ' in open Squadron was styled La
Mrtnceuure, and it is evident that it was carried out in t h e ' Language of the Order.'
that is t o say, in French, in which all t h e principal words and phrases had a
meaning other than the ordinary one. This lVorX.ing in a special ' Language of
the Order ' is an unusual feature, but a t the B a n q ~ ~ e both
t s of Masonic and Adoption Lodges something of the kind was customary, and i t is difficult to say ,whether
the Order set the fashion or followed it. The Dicfionnaire d e Z'Ordre is an
interesting compilation in two parts : - Felicity--French, and French-Felicity .
86
Hro. Woodford has hinted t h a t ilie practices of the Order may uot have been
altogether above reproach, and it must be confessed that there is much which might
Le supposed to convey an impression of unpleasant double-entendre, especially in
the Degree of Patron-Sal& or Salted-Captain, and it is difficult to see how occasion
could arise for some of t h e expressions contained in the Dictior~nn~re
without overstepping the bounds of decorum. On the other hand, i t must be remembered that
a t this period certaln subjects were openly discussed in the highest and politest
circles, and with a freedom such as would be quite impossible to-day, and, on the
whole, i t is safer to account for the peculiarities noticed by the licence characteristic
of the times and as common ir our own as in other countries. The ' Science of
Navigation ' meant tIlo ' A r t of L o ~ e , '' i T n ~ 6 a r q u e m ~ n't sis the Felicity for ' Love
Intrigues,' ' Prises faites ' are ' captures '-in
an amorous sense, a novice in the
a r t of ' Navigation ' was called ' H d l c Boltline,' i e., ' Haul-Bowline,' an enemy
of the Order was a ' Pirczte."
Vais.seau stands for ' Man,' Fregatte for ' young
Lady,' while Port (a port or harbour) means ~inlplyccz~tr,that is ' heart.'
That the Order was quite innocent of all offence a t the outset need not be
doubted, and i t seems clear t h a t the nlenlbers were recruited from the best ranks
in Society. Nor was it confined to the Capital, for ' Squadrons ' were formed in
many ' Roadsteads ' in various part? of the country. B u t rapid increase in
numbers lowered the social prestige of the Order and aroused suspicion, as had
happened also in the case of Freemasonry. To our Brother, the G.Sec. of the
G.L. of Massacllusetts, I am deeply indebted for his kindness and courtesy in
supplying me with a photographic reproduction of a page of t h e : Bosto~lEvening Post. J a n . 9. 174$. No. 440.
containing the following interesting reference to the Order of Felicity :London, Sept. 16.
Extract of a Lclter frorr~ Rome, clutrd August 27. N.S.
' We hear froin Avignon, that a Society colnposed of Persons of
' both Sexes, has been lately formed there, under the Name of V n i g l ~ t s
' and Knigktesses of t h e Order of Felicity; and as this Society has
' made a great Noise, by Reason of the Ceremonies performed a t the
' Admission of Members into it, M. Joseph de Guyon de Crochans,
' Archbishop of t h a t City, has published a Nandate against it, wherein
' he expresses himself to the following Purpose :
" That he cannot conceal t h e extreme Uneasiness he is under a t
" the repeated and circumstantial Informations t h a t have been given
" him concerning this Society, t h e Design of which can neither be the
" Service of God, nor a new Engagement tending to greater Perfection :
" That he leaves i t t o the Civil Magistrates to inquire, whether such
" Associations are not destructive of the reaI Good and Repose of Civil
" Society;
and that. h3 exhorts tho Faithful in his Diocese, to be upon
" their Guard against a Society so suspicious on Account of the frivolous
" and indecent Ceremonies, t o say no worse of them, that are observed
" a t the Reception of its Members."
' W e are likewise told, that the said Society started up a t Avignon,
' soon after t h e Free-Masons were suppressed there.'
I n 1751 the same Archbishop issued another furious tirade or ' Mandemeiit '
against Masonry, b u t it is well to remember t h a t the accusations of Roman
Ecclesiastics against Societies which they wished to discourage or stamp out are not
always fully justified by actual facts. Still there is reason to fear t h a t with the
too rapid growth of the Order of Felicity not sufficient care was taken in the selection of candidates, and it is quite likely t h a t this led to disorder ' t h e mob having
seized t h e helm.' ' Soon,' says a contemporary critic, a liveried lackey might be
'seen with t h e supreme grade of a Commodore and a ym'sette perched within the
' Tabernacle.' The proceedings of a certain Prince (who is described as ' G.M. de
1'0. mayonnique' and whose identity can easily be guessed) a t a Squadron at
Vincennes gave great offence.
L'Ordre d e la Fe'licitb.
Two elegant little 12' volumes are in my collection. They are certainly
very rare and, although i t is scarcely likely t h a t they are the only copies known, i t
can a t least be said t h a t they are the only copies which I have been able to trace
0 0 far.
The first of these Z'ormzrlaire, &C., 1745, is a n official production issued
under the auspices of the Order itself, and therefore entitled to every credit, being,
in fact, the work of friends of the Order. The other one, Les Moyens, &C., undated, is of a different stamp, being the work of enemies of the Order and intended
to bring discredit upon it, and, indeed, the doubts cast upon its good fame are
largely traceable to this anonymous and bitter attack.
It must have followed
close upon the heefs of the Porrnulnire. Ragon and Thory assign i t to 1745, and
no doubt they are right, for in the following year appeared an official Apoloyie d e
la PCIiciti, Paris, 1746, in which the odious aspersions cast upon t h e Order are
indignantly repudiated. The year 1746 also saw the issue of LIAntropophile, &C.,
while two years later, 1748, came L'Ordre Hermaphrodite, &c. For the full titles
of these five works, all of which were produced in Paris, readers are referred to
the Bibliography of Contemporary Works a t the end of this Paper. The articles
by the French Masonic writer; of more modern times on t h e subject of the Order
of Felicity are mainly inspired by t h e first two, b u t some additional information
is to be found in Ragon's MCLW~LPZ
complrt d e l a M a f o n n ~ r i e' d ' A d o p t i o n o ~ r
U n ~ o ~ t n r r irlcs
e Dnmrs. Paris. n.d , and in Thory's d n n a l e s originis Jfngni
Gtrllinrtrtt~. 0.'.or1 ZIisfoirr tle IQ Fonclcrtion dtr Grnnd Oripnf cle E'rcrncr. Paris.
1812, and this has been used a t various points throughout the Paper.
How long the Order of Felicity lasted is a matter of uncertainty. I n 1747
the better class of i B members, disgusted with the bad tone shown by t h e ' mob '
or commoner sort, resolved to separate from t h e Socizty and form a new one which
should maintain all the Old Landmarks of the Original except some trifling
alterations in the regalia and modes of recognition. Thus came into existence
I'Ordre rlrs Chevnlirrs ~t ChevnliPres d e l'ilnchre, which was practically nothing
b u t I'Ordre d r In Fklicitt purged from its undesirable members. The Anchor and
Cables were replaced by an elegant Medal engraved with the Emblems and
Attribut.es of the Order. There is reason to suppose t h a t this reformed body
flourished for a time, and that i t spread to other countries. When i t finally disappeared is unknown, but i t seems likely t h a t i t gave way under the superior
attraction and prestige of the A4fnqonn~ried ' A d o p t i o n . The new Order published
Les Motifs de In Criotion, &C.,a t Paris (probably in 1748), an 8' tract of 8 pages.
It is not a little remarkable t h a t in 1745 an Order of The T7essrl sprang u p
in the United Statgs of America, t o all intents and purposes a reproduction of
the Ordre d r In FClicitC. What success attended i t and how long i t lasted I cannot say.
A translation of the Pormzrlaire and Les Moyrns is now presented to English
readers for the first time, but it should be explained t h a t whenever t h e word Footnote occurs i t means a Footnote in the printed book. A ' Note ' enclosed within
[ ] is an interpolation of my own :l l. blank not counted in pagination.
T.P.
1
rev.
2
3 4
blank.
p. 5
1 1. blank.
P. 6
P 7
P. 8
tour,
Qu' aux Charges les plus importantes
De rang en rang je monte un
jour ;
Que contre moi le fier BorBe,
Ne souleve jamais les Mers;
E t que de l'isle d6sirt5e
Je trouve tous les Ports
ouverts
A i n s i soit-il.
Supplication
to Monsieur St. Nicholas
0 ! thou who amidst the terrors of
shipwreck,
A r t the support of Sailors' hearts,
Thou who with a single word canst
calm the storm
And silence the thunder of the inaves;
St. Nicholas be gracious
T o the zeal which calls me to thee;
Let thy formidable ballot
Admit me to live under thy rule
(law) ;
t h a t aboard thy illustrious Squadrons
I may serve and in my turn command,
t h a t to the most important offices
from rank to rank some day I may
rise
that against me proud Boreas
may never stir up the Seas;
and t h a t of the Longed-for-Isle
I may find all the Harbours open
S o mote i t h e .
P. g
p. 10
[Note.-St.
Nicolas (or Nicolaus), Bishop of Myra in Lycia a t
the time of the Diocletian persecution, patron of children,
and the favourite patron of sailors. H0 was accustomed to
predict bad beather, calm storms a t a word, protect sailors
from wreck, and healed them. when sick or disabled.
Is
generally represented as taking a foremost part in the Council
at Nice. When heathen Temples of Poseidon were transformed into Christian Churches they were nearly always dedicated to this Saint. The well known ceremony of the ' Boy
Bishop ' was a feature in the celebration of his festival.]
During this ceremony the Squadron must be up-standing with
head bare and hands crossed over the breast, the Ballot (Box) is the^
opened before the Candidate. H e approaches it, shuts it, and retains
possession of the key, so that he may be assured t h a t no trickery may
be perpetrated; sufficient balls, white and black, are placed near the
Ballot' (Box) so that each Brother may make such use of them as he ,
deems to be right; everybody leaves the room and the junior Cabinboy, who is always the one to perform the office of Cherubin, takes his
sword in his hand and (posts himself) outside the door which he opens
and closes as each of the Brethren enters singly., i.e., one a t a time.
The Candidate stands opposite to the Cherubin in order t o solicit by
an Oar-Stroke the support of each Brother as he goes in t o record his
vote; the Ballot being ended, the Commodore takes the Candidate by
H e solemnly lays his
the hand and leads him to the Ballot (Box).
hands upon i t uttering the Sacred Words . . . and gives it t o him
(the Candidate) t o open. If a single black ball is found therein he is
put back for another Ballot.
Two Ballots for t h e same person may
never be taken on the same day; and should black balls occur a t three
Ballots the Candidate is for every rejected.
When the Ballot is favourable all the Squadron clap hands and
embrace him 'who is thus admitted.
[,Tote.-L.'Ordre
Hermaphroditt, &C., 1748, says that the Ballot
was taken during the recitation of the Prayer to St. Nicolas
.
which does not agree with the above. Ragon, p. 133, and
and Thory, p.351.1
Ceremonies for the Reception of a Cabin-boy.
All the Knights and Ladies who are present a t the Roadstead should group themselves about the Commodore in two columns
on the Right and Left according to Rank, Dignity, and Seniority. All
are seated and with head covered. The Cherubin posts himself sword
in hand within the door.
The Commodore sword in hand is seated
on his Throne.
While waiting for the Master of Ceremonies to intraduce the
Candidate each*member should report to the Commodore the Embarcations and Captures effected since the last Squadron, the Superintendent
ailnounces complaints if there are any, t h e Grand Leadsman renders an
account of the discoveries he has made along the coast, and the Inspector
sees t h a t everything is in order and t h a t each member has his Anchor
and Cable.
When the Master of Ceremonies has knocked for the admittance
of the Candidate, the Cherubin enquires his name and what he wants
and the reply is that he demands admission into the Garden of Eden;
the Cherubin goes to make his report. H e returns to demand who acts
as his Sponsor which information he carries back to the Commodore.
The Sponsor rises' and says that he will furnish an account of the talents
of the person presented by him whenever i t shall be required.
The Commodore then demands if all consent to the admission of
the Candidate and all the Squadron replies by a silent Oar-$troke,
6. 13
The Cherubin opens the door, the Master of Ceremonies makes the
Candidate enter, disarmed and minus his head-dress; proclaims his
name and titles, and then leaves i t to the Sponsor to make a fuller
report on his behalf. The Commodore then asks what he seeks. H e
replies that he wishes to embark for the Island of Felicity and that he
demands the Order of Chivalry. H e is questioned as to the embarkation which he has made in order to judge of his experience in Navigation. The Commodore demands of the Knights if they are satisfied
and they reply by an Oar-Stroke. The Master of Ceremonies leads the
Candidate up to the Throne and makes him there make three low bows
and then places him on his knees at the feet of the Commodore. Then
all the Squadron commence a movement as if rowing 'in order to conduct
the new Brother to the Harbour of Felicity. The Candidate places his
left hand upon the knees of the Commodore, and raises his right hadd
which he interlocks with +he left hand of the one who receives him
( ? Commodore). I n this situation the Commodore demands if he consents to bind himself to the Order by an Obligation which will not commit him to anything contrary b Religion or Honour or the State.
When he has agreed to do so he repeats these words after the Commodore :I swear and promise upon my Honour never to reveal, under any
c re text whatever. or in anv manner whatsoever,
anv of the Secret
, ,
which may be entrusted to me, or any of the things which may happen
within the Sauadron. And I consent. should I fail to k e e ~mv word,
t o be regardLd by my Brethren as a man dishonoured. Footnote.-In
place of the words ' And I consent, &C.,' if i t is a Lady who is being
admitted, she says:-' Under the penalty of being abandoned to tbe
' fury of the most terrible Sailors, should I fail to keep my word.'
[Note.-In
the Dictionnaire the word Matelots (Sailors) is trans
lated Gens sans pitiC (merciless men).]
d
p. 15
"
Footnote.-Serving
Knights receive the Accolade with a stroke of the
hand on the shoulders, instead of with the Sword.
When a Lady is received she is seated on the Commodore.'s
Throne who himself kneels., She places her left hand on the Commodore's shoulder while he places his upon her shoulder.
[Note.-et
la droite szcr Za sienne. Thmemeaning is ambiguous.
It is, however, made clear by Thory :-tandis pu'il posait la
sienna. sur l'tpaule de la nbophyte.],
p. 16
p. 18
Within the Squadrons the Cherubin and the other Knights never
approach or address the President without saluting him with the OarStrokes which are his due.
For a Cabin-Boy-l
Oar-Stroke, for a
Captain-2, for a Commodore--3, for the Grand Master-4
Double
Oar-Strokes. For Ladies the number is not limited.
If a Commodore has a Special Commission from the Grand
Master to confer this same Degree (that of Commodore), he kill carry
out the Reception in the same manner as he himself was Received,
having first tested whether the Captain he is about t o admit is
sufficiently acquainted with the Flowers which make up the FlowerBeds of the Garden, and having required from him the new Obligation.
Footnote.-As a Special Commission from the Grand Master is necessary to confer the Degree of Commodore we have not here given any
more detailed description of this Ceremony. I f it should happen t h a t
anyone to whom such a Commission is entrusted is ignorant of the
details of the Ritual he will be instructed concerning i t by some (other)
Commodore who is acquainted with them.
p. 19
N untber of Cables
That each should wear corresponding
to his Degree.
Cabin-Boy
..
...
..
1
Captain
...
..
..
..
2
Marine Superintendent ...
..
..
4
Commodore
...
..
...
...
4
Vice-Admiral
..
..
...
5
Grand-Master
...
..
6
All Knights not within the Tabernacle wear an Anchor of Gold
attached by a Cable of Green only
'
Those who are within the Tabernacle wear it with a Cable of
Green and Gold.
The Vice-Admiral with a Cable of Silver only.
The Grand-Master with a Cable of Gold only.
The Orfficers of t h e Order wear an Anchor of Gold (or as they
please) with a Cable of Green and Silver.
The Packet-Boats wear an Anchor of Silver with a Cable of
Green only.
[Pages 37 t o 69. Dictionnaire de I'Ordre. The Felicity-French
part occupies pp. 39-52. The French-Felicity part pp. 55-69.]
End of Book.
Many of the words and phrases peculiar to t h e Langciagr of the Order occur
and are explained in t h e course of the Paper and many others will be found in the
Addendum dealing with the Songs of t h e Order.
The second of the two books t o be described will be found to supply most
of the information which is lacking in the first:-
p. 1 Title
P. 2
P 3.
Avertissement.
I make here no dention of the Ceremonies to be observed a t the
Reception of Knights of Felicity, nor of their Jargon, seeing that these
are no mystery tc the Public, and that moreover the whole is set forth
in detail in t h e little Brochure entitled Pormulnire du, Ceremonial
e n zcsage duns l'ordre d~ l a Ptlicitt. I unfold only those essential Secrets
L'Ordre d e l a P i l i c i t i .
P- 4
of the Order which have not hitherto been penetrated and which serve
to distinguish the initiated from amongst those who are not. So t h a t
anyone who profits by my instruct~onscan if he chooses boldly assume
the title of Knight of Felicity, wear the Jewels thereof whether as
Cabin-Boy, Captain, Seasoned-Captain or Commodore, without any
Knight being ,able t o refuse t o recognize him as a Brother. But i t is
necessary to guard against letting out to them that the Instruction has
been gained from this .or any other writing. It is necessary t o persuade
them that you have been received with all due form, by which means
they will be the dupes, although they know perfectly well t h a t their
Secret has met with the same fate as t h a t of the Freemasons. Any who
make trial of this simple test will be convinced that I have not imposed
upon the Public in the sams way as have certain Authors in presenting
i t with Le Parfait M q o n , L a Frawc-Magonne and other similar flights
of fancy, as the true Secret of Freemasonry, believing that thereby the
Public would either be deceived or else p u t into the quandary of not
knowing whom to trust. I,n spite of this fraud the Public has known
how to sort out the Truth from amongst the Lies, and has recognized
the work by Monsieur l'Abb6 Perault entitled Le Secret des FrancsM a ~ o n sd e d i i a u trds-vintrable F r i r e Procope &C., and t h a t by Leonard
Gabanon which has for title C'attchisme des F r a n c s - M a ~ o n sd e d i i a u
beau Sexe &C.,to be the only ones which contain the Veritable Mysteries
of Freemasonry. I hope, then, t h a t t h e Public will accord the same
justice t o this present work, notwithstanding the pains which zealous
Knights of Felicity will take tcl disparage it.
L'Ordre de la Ftlicitt.
95
P 6
P. 8
L'Ordre de la Fklicitt.
97
If you should find o11t all'about it first I shall look t o you for information. I f not, I shall be on the look-out for you. May thus le commer
des curieux,
[Note.--le commer des curieux.
Commer is an obsolete X V l t h
century verb meaning 'to make comparisons.'
I n older
French the P r a . Infin. with the Def. Art. was frequently used
as a Noun, thus :-1e dire d'experts= ' the opinion of experts '
or ' what experts say.'
The meaging here is evidently the
' comparison of experiences by those interested.']
the sharing of lights, shorten human studies, help on the acquisition of
knowledge, quicken the progress of %heArts, and uplift the glory of our
century.
The Means l whereby to rise to the highest Rank lin the Navy without
getting wet. I Or. 1. The Secrets l of the Knights l of the Order of
Felicity. I
There are four Degrees in this Order, namely, Cabin-Boy, Captain, Salted-Captain, and Commodore. To distinguish between them
each has Attributes, Signs, and special Words. But outside the Squadron i t is not permitted t o utter the Words of any Degree for the purpose of making oneself known. .
The Cabin-Boy has for Attribute a Vessel (Man) and a Frigate
(Young Lady), the Captain has a Garden, the Salted-Captain has a
Flower-Bed, and the Comniodore has certain Gods and Goddesses. The
w o r d of a Cabin-Boy is found in the names of the different kinds of
Timber of which his Vessel and Frigate are built; up. The Word of a
Captain is found in the names of the different Plants which are in his
Garden. The Word of a Salted-Captain is found ;F the different
Flowers which &re in his Flower-Bed. And t h a t of a Commodore in
the Names of his Gods and Goddesses.
[Note.-This
is the only authority which mentions the Degree of
Salted-Captain. Ragon gives the S e c ~ t sof this Degree to
that of Commodore, and those of Commodore lie passes on to
Vice-Amiral. Thory omits them and shares the Secrets of a
Commodore between the Commodore and the Vice-Amiral.
It seems possible t h a t Thory's version is that of the reformed
Chev. et Chev. de blAltchre brought about by suppressing the
objectionable Patron-Sal6.1
The Mystery of the (Degree of) Cabin-Boy. 1'.
I n Question and Answer.
Q . How many Planks have you in your Vessel?
A. Six.
Q. Of what Wood is the first? A. Q sdre
=Cedar
W 6tre
= Beech
second
9,
third
+mandier
=Almond
fourth
Vaurier
=Laurel
,,
fifth
Oranger
=Orange
7,
sixth
g urier
=Mulberry
[Note.-Thory
gives Orme (Elm) or Olivier (Olive) in place of
Oranger, also Charme (Yoke-Elm), Acajou (Mahogany), and
Maronnier (Chestnut) as alternatives for the others.]
Q . Of how many Planks is your Frigate built u p ?
A. Four.
Q. Of what Wood is the first? A. Piege
=Cork
77
,
second
Mrable
=Maple
,,
third
flermbs
=Green or Scarlet Oak
fourth
bricotier =Apricot
[h-ot~.-Ragon gives a fifth, namely, Houblon (Hop).]
j 9
p )
9 ,
p,
p. 14
p. 15
I t
i
7
[Note.-Damazone
instead of Damasine (Ragon). Probably an
obsolete form of modern French Damas, cf English ' Damson '
would seem t.o have been originally ' Damascene.' cf also
Italian ' Damaschins. " D a n ~ a smeans :-(l) Damson-plum.
(2) Silken material with flowers woven in. Of course the Silk
originally came from Damascus b u t so did t h e Plum, and is
it not probable that t h e Silk of t h e place was usually patterned
with t h e predominant flow-er of the place, i.e., the wild-plumtree-flower? The Prunus Pissardi i n full bloom gives some
idea of t h e appearance.]
The Flowers of this Garden make u p t h e Word of a Salted-Captain,
except the fourth Flower, which ought to b.. Thin. As its odour is not
to the taste of everyone I thought I might c u t it out and p u t another
in its place. Those who do no6 fear too powerful odours can replace it
and then they will see the Garden and the Word in all their regularity.
[Note.-Ragon
gives FOVDRE
as the Word of a Commodore, adding
' This Word pronounced in nautical fashion needs no inter' pretation.'
The word hinted a t has an intensive (but not
n,ecessarily objectionable) meaning. It is, however, not an
elaga.nt word. ]
The Salted-Captain has b u t one.Sign, which is to half-open the
mouth advancing the tongue just t o the t i p of t h e lips and wagging i t
about for a moment looking fixedly a t the Knight or Lady to whom ile
wishes t o make himself known.
[Note.-According to Ragon this Sign is t h e Answer to the following Sign :-' P u t the hands beneath the skirts of one's~coat,'
both Signs belonging to t h e Commodore.]
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
4.
Q.
A.
100
Chanson.
Avis SiwcLrcs.
See Addendum..
. -.
1 1. blank.
,,
E n d of Book.
l
~itle.
[Note.-Table
showing Degrees and Secrets according to the four
authorities. quoted.]
. .
L- ~ o y e n s&C.
1" CHAT,OM
~LEKA
1"
Mousse
R Ear
R Arm
..
..
Rapon
Tliory
R Haud
R Ear
R Thigh
R Arrn
1" CHALOM
LEKA
. . R Hand
. . R Thigh
L
I,
2' F~LTCITAS
2"
Patron
3'
R Eyettrow
. . R Index
R Eyebrow ; R Index
R Index
. . Nose
R Index
. . Nose
FOVDRE
--
Patron-Sal8
2" FELICITAS
2" FELICITAS
Lips - Tongue
3"
Commodore
4" MASELEROUACH
3"
FOVDKE
Hands
Lips
4"
3" MASEL
. . Skirts
. . Tongue
4" MASEL
EROUACH
Vice-Amiral
Grip as above
'
4 EROUACH
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
Pormulaire du CCr6monial en usage dans I'Ordre de la FQlicit6.
Observe dans chaque Grade, lors de la ~ ~ c e ~ t des
i o nChevaliers et
Chevalihres du dit Ordre. Avec u n Dictionnaire de3 Termes de Marine
a joint
' usit6b dans les Escadres, & leur signification en Franqois. On
un petit Recueil des (Thansons qui ont Q6
faites jus qu'8 present B ce
sujet. MDCCXLV. [Paris.]
8O. pp. 8.
ADDENDUM.
The Pormulaire &c. contains three Songs which are here reproduced, with
spelling and accents as printed :-
F. 20
Chanson de la FBlicitB.
Notes.
L'Isle de la FBlicit6 ,
N'est pas un chimere;
C'est oti regne la Volupt6
E t de l'Amour la mere;
Frhres courons, parcourons
Tous les flots de CithBre,
E t nous la trouverons.
Pour nous faire un heureux destin
B d l o n s d'un feu sincere,
Egayons 1'Amour par le vin
E t ne songeons qu' B plaire;
Embarquemenb = Intrigue
L'embarquement est charmant
d'amour (Love intrigue)
S u r les flots de CythBre,
Mousse= I0 (Cabin-Boy) .
Pour u n Mousse constant.
/
.l02
p. 21
,
p. 22
p. 23
L'Ordre de la PClicite'.
p. 24
LE CHEF-D'ESCADRE
103
B o ? t . ~ ~ o(Mariner's
ll~
compass)=
Les Pews (the Eyes)
S'embarquer (to embark, go on
p. 25
LE C H ~ U R .
I1 a bien r6pondu.
I1 a de la vertu;
Prions Saint Nicolas
Qu'il ne l'abandonne pas.
L a Fregatte souvent
Resiste & se d6fend;
Pour la bien remorguer
Comment faut-il s'intriguer ?
LE CHCEUR.
I1 a bien r6pondu &c.
,
p 27
LE CHEF D'ESCADRE.
d v e c le vent cargu6,
Lorq qu'on s'est embarque
Mon fils, comment peut-on
Avoir toujours le vent bon?
LE FRERE.
Un bon Garde-Marine,
Doit, pour bien naviguer,
Aller B la bouline,
E t ne jamhis carguer;
C'est en bien louvoyant
Qu'on leste un bgtiment.
LE CHEUR.
I1 a bien r6pondu &c.
LE CHEF D'ESCADRE.
Est-ce assez, mon Enfant,
Que d'dtre triomphant ?
Comment s'y maintenir
A p r 6 qu'on vient de Surgir?
I1 a
LE CH(EUR.
bien r6pondu &c.
Aimant, as before.
Ralot ( 1 Ballot, bale of merchandise) = Lettre (Letter epistle).
LE FRERE.
Pour rendre un stile aimable,
Pour Bcrire avec art,
J e ne voudrois pour table
Qu'un joli gaillard;
Ovide n'6crivoit
Que lors qu'il en trouvoit.
p. 29
L E CHEF D'ESCADRSseul.
I1 a -bien rBpondu ;
I1 a de la vertu,
Pour le recompenser,
Mes Sceurs, il faut l'embrasser.
p. 30
Nouveaux Couplets
Pour I'Ordre de la F6licit.6.
Rival de la Mayonnerie,
Notre Ordre est d'autant respecte,
I1 a de plus la nouveautk;
E t des Dames la compagnie,
Vive, que par tout soit chant6
L'Ordre de la FBlicit6.
Chez nous il faut que le vrai z&le
Soit conduit par lrt libertB;
L a vaine curiosi6
Nacelle (wherry, boat) = (young
N'est point admise en la Nacelle
man, youth).
Vive, &c.
'
'
p. 31
136
p. 32
p. 34
Du Sanctuaire impBnBtrable,
0 ! Pirates, Bloignez-vous,
I1 n'est permis qu' a peu de nous,
D'entrer dans cs lieu respectable;
Vive, &c.
p. 35
Gods.
&C.,
:S
* * * Chevalikre de
I'Ordre de la FBliciG.
Sur I'Air, d e l a Bepuille d u Pere Barnabas.
& Mdlle de
[Note.-' Le P'ere Barnabas ' in France and ' Old Barnaby or Barnabee ' in
England was a celebrated and stock character of low class and of immense
\antiquity. H e was a type of senile but jovial depravity and drunkenness and revelling. Richard Braithwaite (1588-1673) the poet and
dramatist of Burneside in Kendal in Westmoreland refers to this
ancient reprobate in his most famous work B a r w b a e Itinerarium, or
Barnabee's Journal1 . . . t o the old T u n e of Barnabee commonly
chazcnted This first appeared in 1638 under the pseudoqym ' Corymbaeus ' and is a more or less witty record of wanderings about England
put into verse (Latin and English). It met with no success during its
author's lifetime but it reappeared in 1716 as:-Drunken Barnaby's
Pour Jozcrneys t o the Llrorth of England, in L a t i n and English verse:
t o which is ndded Bessy ~ e l t . T h e Second edition. 2.2'. w i t h two
illustrations. I n its new form it became very popular and Barnaby's
name and fame achieved great notoriety. I n 1820 in a 9th edition
there appeared a very elaborate memoir and bibliography of Richard
Braithwaite contributed by the Antiquary Joseph Haslewood (17691833). I n this Braithwaite's authorship of Barnabee's Jozirnall is
clearly established and an attempt made t o discover the origin of the
Barnaby Myth but without success. Hazlitt fared no better. The ' old
' catch of Whoop Barnaby ' or , ' Old Tune of Barnabee commonly
' chaunted ' may-b-in
fact probably is-the
' A i r referred t o in tht?
Chnnsons d e Pulicitt. The French equivalent of Barnaby or Barnabee
is always ' Le P'ere Barnabas ' and associated with his name are a number of more or less coarse and low class catch-~ennv~roductionssome
of them as late as the nineteenth century. ' L a Bequille ' may in Lome
roundabout wav be derived from ' L a Beeueule'
which is a ' terme
m
' injuricux qui se dit d'une femme prude avec hauteur ou dedaignouse
' avec impertinence qui affecte ridiculement la modestie e t la vertu,' a
species of bogus Mrs. Grundy a prominent member of the entourage of
Le Pirre Barnabas or Drunken Barnaby. ,
The coarse allusions in this Chanson ' Avis Sinc'eres ' constitute an
outrageous libel upon the Ordre de l a Ftlicite' and probably goaded the
better class of its members t o attempt t h e vindication of their good
name in the dpologie d e La F t l i c i t t of 1746 and Les M o t i f s d e l a
C r t a t i o n d e 170rdre . . . de 1'Anchre of 1748.
I n the Masonic work L 7 0 r c l r e , trahi, &C., of 1745 there is a
Chanson P o les
~ Francs-llfaqons. Decembre. 1743. S u r l'air d e l a
Bequilb.
This is pos~ibly by t h e same author (his name does not .
appear), but if so, then his Muse has not improved during t h e paL;sn~s
from Freemasonry into Felicity, for whereas only one of six stanzas in
t h e Masonic Poem offends against good taste, t h e whole of t h e Fdicity
Poem is packed with odious suggestion.
To Mr. Falcon,er Madan, late Bodley's Librarian, I am greatly
indebted for my information concerning Bhrnabee and Barnabas.]
108
A hearty vote of thanks was passed to Bro. Tuckett for his very interesting paper,
and comments were cjflered by Bros. Herhert Bradley, Gordon P. G. Hills, Zionel,Vibert,
W. B. Hextall, F. Armitage, John Lawrance and the Secretary.
I feel t h a t the greatest praise is due t o Bro. Tuckett for his z~dmirable
paper, firstly for the choice of subject and secondly for the completeness of the
exposition. of t h e work.
I see t h a t this so-called Order is referred to by t h e late Dr. George Oliver,
D.D., in his H$storical Land~narlisand o'ther e,vidences of Freemasonry, whem
he speaks of i t as the Order of Happiness, and gives a list of t h e degrees which
is a slight variation from t h a t set forth by Bro: Tuckett. H e says in the note :The
" This Order has symbols and a vocabulary which were exclusively nautical.
candidate was said to make a voyage to the island of Felicity, under t h e pilotage
of the Brethren. It had four degrees, called :-l, The Cabin Boy; 2, t h e Master
of the Vessel; 3, the Chief of the Squadron; 4, the Vice Admiral. The Grand
Master was termod t h e Admiral. . The oaths both for males and females are
curious. A schism in t h e Order produced another Lodge, the members styling
themselves ' Knights and Ladies of the Anchor.' "
Again I see reference'made2 to the Order as t h e " Order of Felicity " in
conjunction wit? that of the Green Apple, the Lovers of Pleasure and t h e Knights
Vol. ii., h t . xxv., Pt. I., p. 8, and note 93, p. 41.
F.Q.B , 1837, p. 442, and B.L. and 0 . E . of F?.eemnsonry, by Geo. Oliver, D.D.,
vol. ii., Lect. xxv., pt. III., p.1 16, and note 10, p. 58.
1
Discussion.
109
110
The subject being of no great importance i t is all the more pleasing to know
t h a t the Paper met with the approval of the Brethren who were present when it
was read, and the Discusion which followed certainly brought out many points of
considerable interest. Bro. Gordon Hills assisted to vindicate t h e good name of
the original Order of Felicity and of its successor the Order of the Anchor. His
remarks upon the ' Language of the Order' were v e v welcome, but it must be
remembered that this in the case of the Order of Felicity was very much more
than t h e incorporation of a few technical terms, and it would be difficult to find
anything really comparable to so elaborate a System used in the working of Degrees
i n Open h d g e . The Banquet customs which obtained in Freemasonry are not
by any means a parallel usage although i t is possible t h a t the Order of Felicity
may have adopted and developed t h e idea borrowed from those customs, or, as is
1 See P. Foncart in les M6moires tle 1'Acadtmie des inscriptions et BeUes Lettres,
vol. x x ~ v . ,Pt. II., 1895, entitled " Recherches sur I'origine e t la nature des mysthres
d'Eleusls "; also Elizabeth Lee's Translation of G . C . C . Maspero's New Light on
Ancient Egypt ( T . Fisher Unwin, 1908j, p. 61, et ante as to shipwreck, etc.
2 See Andrew Lang in M y t h , Ritual and Religion, vol. ii., 289.
3 See Dr. A. Churchward, Signs and Symbols o f Prinordzal Man, pp. 294-5 (1st ed.).
'
'
Discussion.
equally likely, Freemasons when enjoying the relaxation which accompanies Refreshment after their Labours in Lodge were content to lighten t h e proceedings by a
partial imitation of the customs of the would-be rival Society. The impression
that the Order .of Felicity was no more than a mere frivolous pastime was
strengthened by Bro. Vibert's instructive explanation of the true significations of
some of the French terms employed, e . g . , 'Mousse' and 'Patron.' A n English
parallel (not tra7zslntion) to the term 'Mousse' is the familiar b u t now obsolete
' Powder-Monkey.'
' Skipper ' is a much better translation for ' Patron ' than
' Shipnlaster ' or ' Captain.' The use of ' Mousse ' and ' Patron ' certainly implies
that the Degrees associated with them were of a more or less mirth-provoking
type. It was far from my intention to suggest that there is any real similarity
between Freemasonry, with the serious and noble idea underlying it, and the host
of ephemeral Orders and S0ciet.i~which pretended to be its rivals. The latter
achieved no more than a passing success in the effort t o fritter away time agreeably,
and t!~ey have long since passed away while our Order is full of life and vigour.
This was well expressed by Bro. Lawrance. But so far as they were acquainted
with them tllose who created these ' rivals ' did imitate or copy t h e usages and
custolns and more particularly the organisation and externals of t h e Masonic
Order. Hro Hextall has noticed a general similarity between the Signs of the
Order of Felicity and those which are described in the early so-called ' Exposures '
of ~reemasonr; published in England, and he made the interesting suggestion
that France in those primitive times looked across t h e Channel for her Fictions
as well as her Facts. I hope t h a t Bro. Hextall m-ill follow u p the idea and t h a t
he will take an early opportunity of communicating t o us the result of his
enquiries.
Rro. Shadwell's communication draws attention to the f a d t h a t I
failed to mention that the J f n q o n n w i r r?'.4c?option officially recognised by the
governing bpdy of the French Craft in 1774 did make use of Orr7re de 7n FilicitC
as a second title, and hence the confusion in t h e minds of many Masonic students
who have written concerning i l f n ~ . ' .cl'dcloption. Bro. Shadwell's references to
the Ancient Mysteries are full of interest, but a possible explanation is that
those who in or about 1740 ' founded ' the Orclrr de In Pblicitb, being persons of
education and well aware of the great. advantage of conferring upon their new
institution a flavour of antiquity, were careful to see t h a t t h e resemblances traced
by our Brother should appear ;n the Ritual they then framed. The suggestion
that a comparison of the Felicit?/ Degrees with certain of our own ' additional '
Degrees ir?ight lead to important results is worthy of consideration.
'
Letters of apology for absence were reported from Bros. E. Conder, P.M. ; F. J. W.
Crowe, P.A.G.D:C., P.M. ; William Watson, P.A.G.D.C. ; S. T. Klein, P.M. ; F. H .
Goldney, P.G.D., P.M. ; John T. Thorp, P.G.D., P.M. ; and J. E. S. Tuckett, W.M.
Three Lodges and thirty-seven Brethren were admitted t o the membership of the
Correspondence Circle.
The 8 ~ c l t r t ~ ~ 2called
nl
a t t e n t i o ~to
~ t h c follon-ing Exhibits by Bro. CH.\RI.ES Gouc-rr,
to whom a, vote of tkanlis was uuanimously passed:Series of J~asoliic CI:~TIFICATES
issued in farour of Lonis Jolin George Fcrrier,
Liel~tenantRoyal Engineers, who n-as b o r ~in~Singapore in 1810. The docli~ncnts
disclose
1865.
1st Nov.
1866.
7th Feby.
1867.
16th Angt.
18G9.
5th July
Grnhamstolvn.
1PG9. 23rd J111y.
1871.
1871.
4th July.
Constitution, in Lol1do11.
187 I-.
21qt Jnly.
1875.
Feby.
5th 3farcli.
1875.
1375.
April.
1375.
(Rose Croix), i n
114
BRO.
RODhT. H .
U A X T E R , P.Pr.C.IV.,
Bnst
Lancs
*A
l b . xii., 150.
7 h . i i . . 122.
1 1 l b . xvii.. 177
7
Zb. xxi., 6.
Zb. viii., 160.
115
the nethermost were 5 cubits broad, the middle 6, and the uppern:o:t 7 ; that is to
say the chambers were in three tiers or storeys with the walls reduced in thicki1e.i~
to form off-sets for tlie support of the floor and roof timbers. The door for the
middle chamber (whatever t h a t may mean) was on the right ( ' G South) side of the
house approached by winding stairs.
The stone for the house was made ready before being taken t o the site and
was covered over internally with beams and boards of cedar, which in t u r n were
carved with figures of cherubim and palm trees, and knops and open flowers, and
overlaid with pure gold. The floor of the house was of planks of fir.
Of the dimensions first given tlie 60 cubits in length seems to have included
the oracle, which we afterwards find stated to have been a cube of 20 cubits, so t h a t
the ceiling could not have been level through if the previous height of 30 cubits for
the house be correct. The " Oracle " was separated from the house by a partition
of gold chains. For entering the oracle there were doors of olive tree of which the
lintels and the side posts ware a fifth part of tlie wall. The door of the temple had
posts of olive tree a fourth part of the wall. Next we find t h a t the two doors of
the house were of fir tree, although only one had been previously mentioned, and
i t is now quite clear tliat there really were two doors, as the description goes on to
say " the two leaves of the one door were folding and t h e two leaves of t h e other
door were folding." The inner court is stated to have been built of three rows of
hewed stone and a row of cedar beams, a form of construction it is very difficult
to understand.
Two famous brass pillars, each 18 cubits high, were placed in t h e porch and
a line of 12 cubits did compass either of them about, which I take it is equivalent
to saying (assuming the translation to be correct) they were 12 cubits in circumference. They had chapiters (or capitals) 5 cubits high with nets of checker work
and nets of chainwork, seven for each. The description of t h e enrichment of t h e
capitals is obscure, but in addition to the network there are stated to have been
lily-work on the belly and two hundred pomegranates.
Supplementing this description we find from t h e SECOND
BOOKOF CHRONICLES
that the porch was 120 cubits high. The height of the oracle, which both accounts
give as being 20 cubits square, is not here stated. There is a big discrepancy in
the height of the pillars, 35 cubits being now given. Not only so, b u t t h e pillars
are now plainly stated to have been before the temple.
I cannot help thinking t h a t some of the dimensions given in CHRONICLES
are;
exaggerated.
The porch was hardly likely to have been 120 cubits high, and
although the 35 cubits of height for the pillars would have been a more fitting
proportion for a cast column, i t does not fit in so well with the other measurements.
Much controversy has taken place as t o the position of tlie pillars; some
authorities, standing by the KINGS,I . version t h a t they were in t h e porch, claim
them to have been supports for an entablature, or superstructure of some kind;
whilst others relying 011 CIIRONICLES,
11. assume them to have been quite detached
and therefore serving no structural purpose. F o r my own part I see no reason
for any disagreement on the point. The pillars could quite well have been in the
porch as well as before the temple.
Leaving all such questions aside for the time being, I should like t o point
out the impossibility of reconstructing the building from the Biblical narrative.
For instance, where were the doors to the oracle? Were they in t h e partition of
chain-work? If so, the lower part of i t must have been of stone, for t h e posts are
stated to have been one-fifth of the thickness of the wall. Again, we are told tliat
the building had windows of narrow lights. Where were they placed ? As the
building was surrounded by chaiiibers in three tiers, on three sides (so I understand
the reading) there could have been 110 height for a clerestory to t h e oracle, which
was only 20 cubits high. I n connection with these chambers an idea occurred to
me when looking a t some geometrical drawings of the Tabernacle in wliich the guy
ropes were naturally marked on t.he plan. Their positions formed around the sides
of the tent a series of squares which struck me as having been the prototypes of
116
'
Elevation
Grm~tidPhn:
%kLV
Elevntion:
.-
d Pe,-Fe~xll,;r:
Gt-oc~r~l
P~III:
TAChhits
Elermtiun
Skkh d Llurnn
FbGlbite.
pnb'~&~-~~-&"
Grctund Hat I .
-*-3d
Fcri)usson's R&
&bits
L)t.si&n :
fi.lm t l ~ r
Ternj3l~soP the ~ e w s ;
"~tirrci~les
of Dec~uty in ~ r t f
til.
llle
Plan:
rR."
lke
'kistoty of ~rchfteckrer'
Plc 11 I
f)icftnmn e+mtq
cf Sawn
UP .T&n
= a t w e d by the Fond nod in f i a d d W m k ?Bnple:
Temples of the Jevss, 1878. I n all cases, however,. lie has restricted himself to
plans and sections, relying on argumentative description for t h e settling of other
points.
It is instructive to follow tlle development of these three plans. I n t h e
first case we have a plan on t h e simplest of lines, a continuous oblong divided
into three parts, the Holy of Holies, the Sanctuary, and t h e Porch with t h e pillars
inside it, surrounded again by another oblong with a continuous passage, instead
of cbambers properly so-called, round three sides, t h e corners a t the East end being
filled in with square spaces ( I towers) having interior circular chambers, one of
wllicll contains a spiral stair similar t o t h a t so mucli i n use in gothic churclia.
I am afraid there is no likelihood of such a feature dating from 1000 B.C. The
second plan follows the lines of the first except t h a t here t h e passages have been
split u p into a multiplicity of very small rooins (possibly following tlie lines of
Josepllus, who was riot very reliable, being prone to exaggeration), two of which
have spiral staircases introduc:d, and tlle addition of two rows of pillars internally,
introduced apparently without any authority, except t h e supposed difficulty of
not by any means a n impossible task.
carrying a roof of 20 cubits span-surely
The two great pillars again appear in t h e Porch. Tlie third plan is rather a
break away froni its predecessors, llaving t h e cllanlbers elongated, only thirteen
being placed on each level instead of twenty-three in the previous example, and
the stairs introduced only in two Eastern towers, running round square newels,
without winders, b u t nllich, 1 think, nevertheless, way be quite properly described
as winding. The pillars of t h e Porch disappear entirely, and tlie author introduces
an elaborats argunieiit in favour of a structure similar to what is known i n Indian
architecture as a toran, of which more anon. The author states t h a t the only
analogy to t h e chambzrs of t h e Temple is t h e arrangement a t tlle Birs-Nimroud.
The table of t h e dinlensions of t h e various temples of the Jews is so useful
t h a t I v e l ~ t u r et o reproduce i t as a n appendix.
I n llis essay on The Temple nt Jer?tsnlem, flre type of Grecinn Arclzitect~~re,
Profeseor Wilkiiis has produced a design in t h e form of a Greek temple with a
projecting portico l ~ a v i n gtwo supporting pillars and a curious arrangement of
hanging chainwork suspended from t h e cornice.
Although I do not for one
minute believe i t give.: us anything like the appearance of the building i t is supposed to represent, i t is, nevertlieless, not very f a r removed from t h e possibilities
of the case.
MR. HAKEWILL.
The design of this autlior was published in 1851, and whilst also representing
a Greek Doric temple, i t has tlie addition of a peristyle, going mucli beyond t h e
ideas of Professor Wilkins. Surely such a feature is a n impossibility, b u t t h e
ingenuity wit11 which tlle author argues 113's theories and twists his translations can
only leave us gasping in astonishment. So far as my reading of history enables
me to judge, such a temple could onIy have been poscible some five hundred years
after Solomon's time, unless indeed tile Greeks had based their models on t h e
Temple a t Jerusalem instead of z1ic.e-13eroa.
118
There is just one point t h a t I would raise concerning all the sections of
the building, so far illustrated, and t h a t relates t o the thickness of the walls.
Why, in all cases, are the outside walls of the chambers carried up s6raight
through the whole three storeys? I s i t not likely that they would be reduced a t
each floor level in the same way as the wall of the temple itself? An offset a t
each level of eighteen inches (assuming that to be t h e length of the cubit) on
one side only mould be more than tile necessities required, whilst nine inches on
each side would be reasonable.
This reverei~dgentleman did not altogether appreciate Canina's restoration,
and in 1855 published a book containing some singular speculations, illustrated
by a plan of his own. His conception was that Solomon's Temple closely resembled an Egyptian fane.
COUXTDE V O G U ~ .
My knowledge of this author's design is limited to what I have been able
to gather from other writers.
Robins gives a fairly good description of it.
According to him the main facade consisted of a large Egyptian pylon with an
opening 20 cubits square in the centre containing the pillars Jachin and Boaz.
The Sanctuary being only 17 cubits high, with an upper chamber over, is, like
the oracle, quite dark. A detail of one of the pillar capitals of this design is
illustrated in the book of MM. Perrot and 'Chipiez, hereafter mentioned.
COUNTDE SAGLCY.
This French archaeologist, I believe, was also the author of a reproduction
of the Temple on paper, b u t I am sorry to say I have not been able to see it.
All I know is t h a t i t was also based on a study of Egyptian art.
is the name of an author, given by Perrot and Chipiez, stated t o have produced a
restoration of the Temple during the " Egyptian mania " on a Theban model,
but beyond this I have no further information.
E . C. ROBINS.
A strong supporter of t h e Asiatic theory, this author has produced a design
based on an Assyrian model. Although a keen admirer of Fergusson, he has not
been led away altogether by t h a t author's very definitely expressed views. He
retains his pillars as supports for a portico, but, unfortunately, in my opinion,
has filled the interior of t h e oracle with pillars which are quite unjustified. This
author's conclusions and design, although very remarkable and ingenious, hav?
somehow failed to impress me as being in accordance with the possibilities of the
case.
TIWOTHYOTIS PAINE.
Solomon's Temple and Capitol, &C., an illustrated work by this author,
appeared in 1866, but this is all the information I have been able to glean.
I n a wonderful work, Ristory of Art in Sardinia, Judma, Syria, and Asin
Minor (English edition, 1890), these two distinguished Frenchmen, t h e former
an archaeologist, the latter an architect, have produced the most elaborately
illustrated design of the temple it has been my lot to inspect. True, it is based
on Ezekiel's vision, but that is supposed properly t o describe the first temple.
This is the first serious attempt, so far as I am aware, to reproduce a typically
Phenician structure. The method by which the so-called trellis plan has been
compiled reminds one of the Oriental tracing board described in Sir Caspar Purdon
Clarke's Paper.' Jachin and Boaz are shown as detached obelisks, surmounted
by capitals of elaborate design, terminated by what I think may be fairly
technically styled finials. Clever though the details of these pillars be I cannot
119
help feeling that, although supposed to be of Phcenician design, they really partake more of a French character. I was much interested to notice t h a t in the
tracing boards recently presented to t h e Lodge of Research, Leicester, and
Illustrated and described in the last volume of Trunsnctioq~s of that Lodge, the
two pillars in tlie second degree board were copied, t o a certain extent, from the
design of M. Chipiez. The authors naturally base their conclueions for t h e
detached positions of their pillars on certain evidence which they adduce, but I
am not a t all satisfied that the examples qfioted from the Carthagenian stela and
the bottom of the ancient glass bowl are representations of pillars a t all. They
might equally well be candlesticks or alinost any other similar objects we cared
to imagine.
I n describing some exploration work in Jerusalem, in connection with the
Temple, the authors state t h a t the corner-stone a t the S . E . angle of t h e Sanctuary,
although not the longest, was cert.ainly the heaviest seen in t h e Sanctuary wall,
weighing over one hundred tons!
TVisdom, Strength ancl Bealrty is a folio work by Bro. C. N. McIntyre
North, which contains a re-constructed design of the Temple and so far as I am
aware is the only example compiled principally for the benefit of Freemasons.
A strong Saracenic influence pervades the design, mingled with a touch of modern
Renaissance. The two pillars stand detached outside the porch, but inside the
large front entrance, which is surmounted by a pointed arch, stands a screen or
toran copied apparently from Fergusson. It gives one a fair idea of that author's
theory, and although I do not think it a t all likely t h a t such a feature ever
existed, in connection with the Temple. we cannot altogether ignore t h e suggestion.
It will be noticed that this design explains the difficulty about i h e
two entrance doors. These did not stand side by side, but one in front of the
other in the thickness of the wall, so t h a t there was only one doorway with two
pairs of folding doors to it.
GEO. SHAWAITKEN.
I n the Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects for 26th April,
1913, this Edinburgh architect gives, along with an essay on the subject, a plan
and isometric view of the Temple of Ezekid wllicli reminds one somewhat of a
modern workhouse infirmary. The pillars are again outside the porch, but following the example of Canina he makes them supports for an entablature to a portico.
The pillar on the left hand facing the entrance is called Boaz and t h a t on the right
hand Jachin.
Bro. Thorp long since pointed out t h a t these names should be
reversed. Two staircases are shown in the central side chambers. There are no
winders, though the stairs necessarily wind round a newel in a series of flights.
It is singular that only one of the staircases has an opening to tlie House, and
that the one on the South side. How t h e other is approached is not a t all clear.
9.0.G'. xxi., 6.
120
Trcr?zaactions
of
t h e Q~tntztorCoro7ulti Loclgr.
MODELS.
I have already referred to tlie models of Schott and Rabbi Jacob Jehuda
Leon. Another which I saw publicly exhibited in Manchester a few years ago I
am able t o show a post-card view of. Carelessly a t the time I neglected to make
any notes, and so am now unable t o give the author's name or any particulars
concerning him. Perhaps some Brother will be able t o make good the deficiency.
It may be permissible to include under this heading t h e Palace of the Escurial
a t Madrid, which H e r r a r a built for Philip 11. of Spain. According to Fergusson,
i t is supposed t o be a reproduction of t h e Temple, although, as he says, the most
unsatisfactory of all. I quite concur, for I must confess I should never have
suspected any such idea unless my attention had been called t o i t .
The conclusion which I think we must all reach is t h a t in the light of our
present knowledge it is quite impossible t o arrive a t a correct solution of the
problem, although we must express our indebtedness t o t h e various authorities
who have spent so much skill and labour in elaborating their own theories.
APPENDIX.
1)IMENSIONS OF THE TEMPLES OF THE ,JF,\ITS.
B
E, 42 - C . ~ . E %
$"2
$ t B e sLO;z
g 4 - & p ; P I :l-
< g$.?
Parts of Temple.
,B
,jS
"
U * U %
-9
Holy of Holies
Holy I'litce
...
Length
{width
Height,
10
10
10
-- ---
Height
--
Porch
. . . . . . . .
20
10
15
. . . . . .
40
20
30
5
10
30
10
20
10
20
_
1XTidtli
. . . . . . . . .
Width
5(?)
..
Jvitlth
...
ellambers
. . . .
--
Total of Temple
Length
Width
{Heigl~t
(Length
[Breadth
Iuner Courts . . . . . .
20
20
20
40
20
30
40
20
60
40
20
40
p
20
50
10
20
-.
--
125
20
20
20
25
90
90
GO
90
l00
60
l00
l00
60
60
200
100
200
150
40
20
15
45
60
100
50
200
100
60
--200
100
(Length
Ontcr Courts . . . . . . . . .
~
~
--
100
100
~
d 100~
100
--
Sanctuary
. . . . . .
{ Length
Breadth
--
11
-
-P-.--
-.-p
20
20
20
-- --
--
Verandah
20
20
20
--
40
20
-~ --
...
20
20
20
20
20
20
333
h
100
---
3000
3000
187
135
-
400
400
500
500
--
.-
-,
.p
--
70
l00
--
--
--
.-
A rordial voto of thanks for the paper was unanilllously passed, colnlnents being
offered by Bros. Cord011 Hills, Herbert Bradley, W. B. Heatall, C. F. Sylres, Lioilel
Vibert, and \V. J. \Villiams. The Secretar- exhibited, fro111 the Lodge Library, the
books of Villalpandus,l Timothy Otiq, Paine, and C. N. Rlclntyre Nortll, which were
referred to in the paper.
Bro. GORDONHILLSsaid : I n offering a n apology for tlie fragmentary and incomplete character of
his paper, Bro. Baxter seems to admit a disappointment a t t h e result of his
S t y l e o f K L I LS ~o l o t ~ ~ o n 'Ts e n ~ p l e ,which I must
enquiries into t h e ilrcl~atect~c~rrl
confess I share. There is a very considerable amount of material available for
the student who has the time and opportunity t o deal with it, and yet i t is very
difficult t o get beyond theories t o facts, b u t I think o u r Brother is a t any rate
to be congratulated on his candour and courage in admitting t h e baffling nature
of the evidence, so f a r as he has considered it, and on his caution in not attempting
to propound a correct solution without further knowledge.
Bro. Baxter refers t o papers and notes relating t o the Temple which have
appeared in our Trcozvcccfzon~; amongst these should be a definite mention of
Bro. W. Simpson's notes on " T h e -II(cconic lItrl1," Jrrltcnlenz, and JInuons' ilfarks
o n tllp ,S'olrt?~Ecot Cot I I P of
~
the IIOIYIIIIIlr/tll (ii , 122, 124), accompanied by illustrations, and of Bro. 1)r C. J . Ball's description of T h e t11~oJZr[r~enI'illnrs in his
paper on l'he I ' r o p ~ r -\I, vies o f J ~ U \ ~ I ~T1.~1(12
Z C tzotl (V., 139). O u r Brother then
promises t o lay before 41s " soille of the ideas of educated architects and others"
. . " of the general appearance and architectural style of the famous building."
This is followed by a n outliiie of the Blblical account, and we are told t h a t " a n
exhaustive study of architectural moiiuments contemporary with the temple is
necessary t o arrive a t any idea of its appearance" . . . " hence v7e have t o
consider t h e contemporary architecture of Egypt, Greece, Assyria and Phcenicia,
which last is probably the most likely of all t o have been adopted, but of which,
only a few fragments remain." Then follows a very incoi~ipletelist of
writers and authorities on the subject, in which soine items are not described a t
all, and in other cases the particulars are but meagre, so t h a t we are left with
very little matter for criticism or discussion.
I feel t h a t Bro. Baxter has not done justice to the sources of information
and has allowed his efforts to be s ~ ~ a m p eby
d the magnitude of t h e task h e
undertook. F o r indeed lie lLis touched t h e fringe of a very big subject, sufficient
to t a x the powers of one who has made i t a life-long study. Recognising these
circumstances, whilst my owl1 special knowledge of t h e subject bids me emulate
our Brother's example of caution and modesty, I will yet venture to make a few
suggestions on soine points, on which I think lle might have carried tlie matter a
little further, on the lines he has indicated.
The idea of arriving a t a correct representation of t h e Temple, or indeed
of any ancient building, is really a comparatively modern conception, and until
recent developments of -arcllzeolo$cal ~ciencein exEloration and research was quite
beyond possibility. M e d i ~ v a l ideas and representations of Jerusalem or King
Solomon's Temple were pictured according t o the architectural style of t h e day,
just as t h e characters of Holy W r i t appeared in t h e costume of t h e period, and
we recollect t h a t i t is not so long since Shakespeare's characters played their parts
in strangely incongruous attire.
The descriptioiis in the Sacred Books, in
J o s eI ~ h u sand a t much later dates. were not designed to enable their readers t o
plot out plans and elevations, or draw full-size details of t h e ornaments, b u t t o
convey in a manner suitable t o t h e comprel~ension of those times a n idea of t h e
unequalled magnificence and dignity of the Temple of t h e Most High. W e are,
as Bro. Baxter justly observes, faced with " t h e impossibility of re-constructing
the building from t h e Biblical narrative."
WO find tlle building described on Roman, Greek, and Egyptian lines, as
tlie study of arch~eology progressed, b u t i t was not until t h e beginning of t h e
last century t h a t "travel in Palestine changed its form from t h e enthusiasm of
1 The front F,!evation of the Temple, as published by John Senes in 1723, appears
in -4.Q.P. xii.. 150. It was evidently adapted from Villnlpandus.
0
'
124
T~LLILXUC
of ~ t~h O
e ~(Jtrattcor
LI
Corotz(rt~ Lodge.
such emphasis is laid upor1 them, and clearly their symbolism is much accentuated
if they were onst structural as well as ornamental adjuncts. A great deal has been
written in this co~lnectionabout tile ~nonolithsof frequent occurrence in t h e Holy
fro111 tlie deewiptions of which i t
L a n d and elsewllere known there as ~t~trzzehtrlzs,
seems t o me t h a t ~ l l o ~ l u i ~ ~ of
e n tseveral
s
distinct purposes are often confused or
included under tlle same name. W e also have coll~parisons suggested with socalled pillars in connection with Temples of Astarte or Venus, which appear to
me t o be erections, as Bro Eaxter says, very like a gigantic candlestick, including
cl~
to this day in
a bason t o receive libations and adapted to rites ~ ~ h i survive
India. One cannot claim n17 these clrff'errtit sources as the original of Jacllin and
Boaz.
Herodotus tells us t h a t there were tcc30 pillars it, the Temple of tlie
Phce~licianHercules a t Tyre, one was of refined gal> and the other of smaragdus,
which Bro. D r . Ball explains as " a higllly polislled green marble." These surely
any
are inore likely t,o have suggested the idea of the pillars of Jerusalem-if
suggestion was necessary-than
tile uses of tlle other cult. The personification of
s t r e t ~ g t h ,t h e main characteristic of the deified hero, could naturally and without
offence be transferred to t h e Establislier of all tli;?lgs. Tlle Phmnician sailors
making their way Westward from tlle M e d i t e r r a n t , : ~ ~called
,
Gibraltar and its
twin peak of t h e African shore Calpe and a b y l a , t h e Pillars of Hercules, these two
being suppozsd t o have originally formed one inoulltain wllich he wrenched in
twain. T h e pillars a t Tyre seem t o have been in t h e Temple, and, from the old
legend, t o have had the associat,ion of door-posts or adjuncts to a porch-way, as
a t the entrance to the Mediterraneza. The coi~temnorarvTolnb or Treasurv of
Atreus a t Alycenx llad a pillar on either side of the door-way covered with scrolls
and frets of ornament like metal work. Tlle first step to render a doorway of
importance a t almost ally stage of a r t is t o add columns, whicl~are really ornate
d ~ o r - ~ o stoo
t s elaborate to be-of use t o liarlg t h e doors to, or in a position where
no door is reouired. so t h a t I do not tlliiik the introduction of t h e two ~ i l l a r s
needs any far-fetched precedent t o explait1 them, and t h a t a syn~bolisnl should
be attached t o them was inevitable under the circumstances of the building.
Mr. Aitken gives a very intelligible description of the capitals of the
pillars : The capitals were bowl-like in form (I. Kings vii., 41), apparently
resembling Fome of tlle later Byzantine capitals, and these bowls were
covered with net or lattice work; and as t h e net work, being 4 cubits
high or so, would present a n~onotonous surfice, i t was relieved by
seven rows of wreathed chain work. The summits of t h e capitals had
<'
poinm~ls," or what we Illay u ~ ~ d e r s t a nas
d some kind of volute, provided to carry t h e plan outline of the capital ball from the circle to
-each of these pornnlels were suspended, after the
the square. - ~ r o m
manner of a festoon, two rows of pon~egrailates,one hundred in each
row, or, according to the description in Jeremiah lii., 23, ninety-six
towards t h e four winds-in
other words, t h a t number on each face.
leaving four over on each festoon for suspension from tlle pommels.
This combination of details is reasonable, and would form a capital
in harmony with t h e sturdiness of t h e shafts and possibly full of
symbolism.
The photograph of a " Basket-work Capital " a t t h e Church of the Holy Sepulchre
with which Bro. Rev. Canon Horsley illustrated llis pap& on this subject solne
years ago (A . Q . C 7 . xxi., 8) gives ail excellent idea of such a capital in the Byzantine
style. The capitals a t Solo~aon'sTemple, 011 these lines, would seen1 to be prototypes of t h e Corintllia~lOrder.
Mr. Aitken has his own theories about the arrangement of a series of
friezes in metal, wood and stone above the coluinns and attached t o the porch.
The Chinese looking erection of colulnns and superstructure which was one of
M r . Fergusson's solutions of this feature, whilst it seems a t first view to carry
ns very f a r afield in its origin, may remind us t h a t t h e Suinerians, who were the
first civilized inhabitants of Babylollia and Assyria, appear to have been a Tartan
race. O u r Bro. D r . C. J . Ball is autlior of a learned treatise on the resemblance
between t h e ancient Sumerian writings and those of the Chinese.
I quite agree with Bro. Baxter that tlie Biblical account lends no sanctioll
to any colunlns besides Jachin and Boaz in connection with the Temple itself.
Where such were employed in the palace buildings they are definitely described.
There are discrepancies betwekn the accounts in the Books of Kings and
Chronicles as regards the dimensions, and in some cases the figures are lessened,
i:i others increased. This is a point in which errors are certain t.o occur ir?
transcriptions, wliicli are apt to be further coniplicated by emendations made by
the scribes in perfect good faith. Thus srur11 n e t s for eacli chapiter of t h e
columns in the earlier account may really have only been a n e t as i t appears in
the Greek version.
The discrepancy between the length of the columns in the two accounts is
explained by tlie later historian having given the height of the two shafts as a
' running ' measurement in one dimension. The idea of the writer was to express
size by length and superficies, and iiot to give exact figures.
Mr. Robins points out that in the later account we have the statement that
the wings of tlie cherubim adorning the walls of tlie Oracle were twenty cubits long,
and it then appears that this dimension is arrived a t by adding together the four
wings of the two figures, each wing being five cubits in extent. The porch is
described thus :And the porch that was in front of t h e Izouse the length of i t was
according to the breadth of the house, twenty cubits, and t h e height
~ ~ 1 an
. s hundred and twenty: and lie overlaid i t within with pure gold.
Applying the same explanation to tlie statement, that eacli side of the porch,
30 cubits high, was overlaid with pure gold, we obtain a height of 120 cubits
ill, ctl1,-intended
to give an approximate idea of tlie amount of gold-just as by
2dding together the four wings or tlie two heights of the columns the other
di~nensions,an increase of those mentioned in the Book of Kings, are arrived a t .
Thus the accounts are iiot contradictory although a t first sight i t so appears.
T11e difference in the height between the three storied aisles and the main
building explains the position of the windows as in a clerestory, whilst the
Oracle was expre-sly purposed to be in " thick darkness" (11. Chronicles vi., 1).
as was also the case in the Tabernacle. The descriptions of the window openings
may be noted ; they are described as " broad " within and " narrow " without,
or " skewed " and " closed " as in the margin of the Authorised Version, and
the rendering in the Revised Version describes them as " of fixed lattice work,"
z . r . , not to be opened or shut.
With. regard 'to Bro. Baxter's reference to the ropes which stayed the
Tabernacle being the originals of the divisions of t h e chambers adjoining t h e
Sanctuary, we may observe that in the earliest description (I. Kings vi., 5) the
word translated " chambers " implies in the first case aisle or side-h~cildiog,but
when the word is repeated a marginal note explains that i t means, in the original,
ribs,
he built aisles round about . . . and he'made ribs round about.
The repetition in the text is by way of explanation.
I t may be usefully noted that when Joshua entered Canaan he set up the
Tabernacle a t Shitob, where residences for priests were adjoined, and i t assumed
so permanent a character that i t was called " the temple" (I. Samuel iii., 3).
Thus David and Solomon had the actual prototype of t h e Temple before them
on which, according to the inspired designs, t o found the general disposition of
the new Sanctuary and its adjuncts.
And now allow me to endeavour, briefly and very inadequately though it be,
to sketch the architectural environment a t this period.
When the Israelites of the Exodus entered the Pronlised Land about the end
of the thirteenth century B.C., they were a tent dwelling people preparing to enter
into their heritage in the sphere of the Semitic races. They found t h e country
;~l!~abited
by ~ e o p l e swho had arrived at a considerable advance on their own state
some of Hamitic origin, others near kinsfolk of their own race.
of
The Tell el-Amarna tablets, giving the correspondence of the Pharaohs of those
,l;lys
their tributaries, enumerate the spoils taken from the Princes of Canaan,-
126
elaborate furniture, jewelry, gold, silver and precious stones, rich embroidery
and other evidences of a n advanced and highly developed culture applied rather
to t h e luxuries than t h e necessities of life. The invaders found themselves faced
with well fortified towns, whose remains " i r e a t and walled up to heaven" have
bee11 unearthed in recent times, as, e.g., a t Taanach, Megiddo, and Gezeli. The
inhabitants of these cities dwelt in houses of brick or mud aiid timber, sometimes
i n caves, or rather rock dwellings. The influence which Egypt had exercised on
t h e earlier civilizatioii of Syria had waned, t h e enterprise of the Pl~cenicianshad
achieved their independence, and i t was the a r t and culture of the Mediterranean
as well as what afterwards developed into Assyrian aiid its sister arts which was to
b s obtained through those pionezrs of t h a t day. The Phcenicians were middlemen
in t h e distribution of t h e luxuries of the times, and a r t so f a r was applied rather to
these t h a n to the refinements of building, which had not progressed in Palestine
much beyond the demands of necessity. Slrill i11 timber construction was the
natural outcoine of their maritime pursuits, and good masonry to construct their
citadels, sea walls and quays was also a necessity for their existence.
The
history of t h e occupation of t h e country by the Israelities shows their difficulties
i n cohesion accentuated by their tribal nature, and the broken territorial
character of t h e country, and explains how by force of "circumstances
t h e nation did not achieve such a n establishment as would enable i t to
cultivate architectwe as distinguished froni t h e maintenance of necessary fortifications and engineering works in connection with water supply and tlie like.
Yet we need not doubt t h e probability tliat a latent arcliitectural power
did exist, waiting t h e opportunity t o develop, such as tlie remains of their
I d u m s a n kindred exhibit in later times a t Petra. Thus i t was tliat when peace
a t last seemed within their grasp, resort was had to Hiram of Tyre for artificers
to raise t h e work of t h e sanctuary from t h e level of engineering to architecture,
b u t possibly t h e skill with which the dlficulties of t h e site of the Temple enclosure
were surmounted a r e more impressive to the m d e r n mind than would be t h e
gorgeousness of t h e embellishments of t h e metal workers.
King David had
given long and earnest consideration to the inspired schemes for the building of
the Temple, and had gathered together skilled workers, accumulated treasure and
materials, and prepared wrought timber and masonry for its construction, before
Solomon took u p the charge laid upon him. It has been suggested t h a t all along
building operations had been distasteful to t h e I~raelites, from their association
with Egyptian bondage, and t h a t i t was upon t h e subject races in tlie IIoly La1.d
t h a t t h e labour of such operations devolved.
The account of King Solomon's
c,rgenizatiori of the work seems somewhat to bear this out. There is a differei~ct
drawn between those bondsmen who worked as bearers of burdens and hewers 111
the quarries, who were survivors of those nations Israel was not able utterly to
destroy, and the levies of jreemerz of t h e nation. I t is particularly to be noted
t!il*t of t h e Children of Israel were t h e chief officers t h a t Soloinon .;~ppointrd.
The position wac like t h a t of a mediaeval ecclesiastical building 7rhere the nile
c!: the order, and necessities of t h e ritual determined the plan, .and it \v;ts the
task of t h e builders t o translate i t into the arcliitectural expression of tlie period.
When we arrive a t this stage, about t h e year 1000 B.C., we find that to the East
Assyrian architecture had not yet rezclled its highest expression, and further
West t h a t t h e kindred Mediterranean style reaching back t o 3500 B.C. which has
left such extensive ruins in Crete had become decadent. The foundations upon
which Greek a r t was t o be superimposed were being,laid. by a kindred school of
culture, t h e -rvell known remains of which a t Tirryris and Mycenae are t o be seen
i n fortifications, buildings of megalithic masonry, and tornb-like erections depending, as i n the Treasury
~ r t e u s ,for their enrichment on ornamentation of brass
or bronze plating and rude carving. The description of tlie nails for t h e work
of the Temple recalls those whicil still re~liaiii a t Myceiiz.
Mr. Ferguson thus described t h e era of King Solomon's Temple: W e must recollect this was tlie bronze age of architecture. Homer
tells us of tlie brazen liouse of Alcinous. Tlie treasuries a t Mycenze
were covered internally with brazen plates, and in Etruscan tombs of
of
this age, metal was far more essentually the material of decoration
than carving in stone, or any other of the modes so frequently adopted.
The altar of the Temple was of brass, and the molten sea supported
by twelve brazen oxen. The bases, the lavers, and all the objects and
implements in metal work were in reality what made the Temple so
celebrated, and comparatively little was done to t h e mere masonry by
which we should judge of a Christian church or any modern building.
What, however, distinguished the workmanship of King Solomon's Temple
above the other metal coloured buildings of its time was the profuse use of gold,
the most precious of all.
The volute or spiral ornament which distinguishes the Ionic capital was,
as I have mentioned, a characteristic of Assyrian and kindred a r t ; we get
suggestions of its use at Jerusalem a t the doorway of the Oracle, and a t the caps
of the two pillars. Professor Flinders Petrie in his recent excavations a t Lackish
brought to light a number of low relief slabs originally part of the doorways of a
consid6rable building enriched wit11 a volute ornament.
This decoration is,
however, applied as if it were an exotic novely hardly understood. These remains
have a special significance as being perhaps the only authentic detail of the
Solomonic period yet recovered. The decorations of the Temple a t Jerusalem
Pave their more ~ r ~ o d a rcounterparts-in
n
the decorations of the palaces-of
the
dates annexed or later-at
Nimroud (900 B.C.), Khorsabad (722 B.C.), and.
Koyuiljik (702 B.C.), a t Pasargadae (560 B.C.), and Persepolis (521 B.C. and
later) examples of which may be studied in the courts of the British Museum.
A passage in Mr. Fergusson's IIandbook of Architecture (1859), p. 188, describes
a platform of masonry a t Pasargadae :Whatever i t supported, the building has disappeared, and the structure
is only remarkable for the beauty of its masonry and the largeness of
the stones with which i t is built. These are bevelled not only a t their
joints but often on their faces with the same flat sinking as is found
in all the Jewish works a t Jersualem, and sometimes in Greek buildings of the best age.
Dr. Thomson, in T h e Land and the Book (1881), gives an illustration of similarly
bevelled stones, of large size, a t Tyre:One nearly seventeen feet long and six and a half feet thick [which]
rests just where the Tyrian architects placed i t thousands of years ago.
Other similar stones auarried from the ruins of the earlier town on t h e shore
have been used in the construction of t h e mole which connected the later city
with the main land.
,
These particulars may be compared with a description of the masonry
investigated by Sir Charles Warren a t Jerusalem. O'f the actual Temple itself we
have not a stone that can be recognised, the description is of the enclosing wall
of the Temple area known as the " Haram eslz Shereef" or "Noble Sanctuary,"
but these particulars give some idea of the masonry which David and Solomon
made use of :The masonry of this wall presents several marked and very important
differences of work. These as we shall shortly see may be divided
into five. The stones are thus prepared :-In
the first instance they
are dressed square on the upper and under surface and a t t h e two
ends: the dressing is in many cases so true that a knife cannot be
inserted between the two stones. They are placed one above the other,
each stone being set half an incl1 to an inch farther back, so t h a t the
wall is not perpendicular, but stands a t a slight angle--the great
advantage being that buttresses and other supports are not needed.
No mortar or cement has been used. The faces are dressed with what
is known as a " marginal draft " i . e . , the oentral portion of the stone
project3 from a marginal cutting of 2in. to 4in., or even more, broad.
The projecting base is left rough in what appear t o be the oldest
portions, and is smoother in others. This marginal drafted masonry
...
3
..
4
5
...
3.6 i n c h ~ q ,
Equivalent in
English inches
10.8
14.4
18-0
This point is arrived a t as the result of the translation of the Se~lkerellmathematical tablet found a t L a r ~ ain 1850 by Mr. Loftus.
The second point wllicli Mr. Caldecott brings out is that tlle Temple itself
stood upon a pl.~tform of stones. The plan of building temples upon raisad
platforms arose in Babylonia as a necessity owing to the natural condition of
tl10 soil near great rivers. This plan was copied by the Assyrians and adopted
when building the Templa a t Jerusalem.
I n a prefac'r: to Mr. Caldecott's book l i i n g Solomon's Te,nplr, the idea of
the building rising from a platform is accepted by Dr. Sayce, professor of
Assyriology a t Oxford, himself an authority on Eastern monuments and
archaeology.
These two points, relating to the measures used in the Temple building
and a platform bpon which the Tenlple was raised, are so well considered by
Mr. Caldecott that when brought to tlie test of application to the Temple building
according to the specifications as set out in I. Kings and 11. Chronicles some
harmony can be evolved out of what otherwise is confusion.
If the appendix t o Mr. Caldecott's book was not reproduced in A.Q.C.
when Canon Horsley read his paper, I venture to think i t would be an acceptable
addendum to the account of to-night's proceedings when issued.
Bro. Baxter thinks t h a t the porch could hardly have been 120 cubits high.
Certainly in Caldecott's reconstruction where this height is allowed i t does not
appear to be out of proportion to the rest of the building, and, in fact, upon
comparison bears about the same relation to t h e height of the main building as
does the Beffroi a.t Bruges to the Halle of which i t is a part.
Bro. Baxter points out that the Jews were never great builders, and that
the monuments of other Eastern peoples must be relied upon in the endeavour to
elucidate the problem of the architectural style of the Temple. To his list of
contemporary architecture I would suggest the addition of t h a t of Babylonia.
It was from there t h a t the original ancestors of the Jewish race sprang.
Josephus says t h a t the Egyptians and Phcenicians bore ill-will towards the Jewish
race, but adds i t was otherwise with the Chaldeans.
I n his concluding remarks Bro. Baxter speaks of an exhibition of models
which he saw a few years ago a t Manchester, but is unable t o give the author's
name.
If this was the same exhibition as that which took placa in London
some time ago I have postcard views of the models and the pamphlet which was
published in explanation of them.
(Arcadian Lodge 2696) said :Ero. W . J. WILTJAMS
When I received the Summons and noted that the subject was "The
Architectural Style of King Solomon's Temple" I looked to see what books I
had bearing on the topic, and among them found a book by the celebrated Dr.
Thomas Fuller, entitled A Pisgah-Sight of Palestine.
The first edition of this book (which is a folio with numerous engraved
maps and plans) was published in 1650. Although i t is not mentioned in the
paper of Bro. Rodk. H. Baxter, i t includes an important section and two
engraved plates descriptive of Solomon's Temple and its appurtenances, and deals
with the subject in the commonsense, painstaking, and witty method which all
who know anything of Thomas Fuller's writings have had occasion to admire.
I n the course of his remarks he appears to have made good use of quite a
number of the then known authorities, for while basing his conclusions chiefly
upon the Bible, he refers also to Josephus, to the Rabbins, to Ribera, to St.
Jerome (who for a long time dwelt in Palestine), to Eupolemus, Tremellius,
Villalpandus and the Venerable Bede.
Several items which appear to have.presented difficulties to Bro. Baxter are
investigated by our author with some degree of minuteness.
For instance, referring to the golden nails mentioned in our Brother's
paper, he says :-
The weight of the nails used in this room was 50 shekels of gold
(11. Chron. iii., 9) which Ribera understands not collectively of them
all (the most seeming sense of the text) b u t t h a t each of them severally
weighed so much. I dare not say t h a t Solomon particularly reflected
on them in that his expression " the words of the wise are as goads and
as nails fastened by the Masters of the assemblies" (Eccles. xii., 11).
But here the query will be, how could they be of pure gold, seeing
nails of such refined metal will not drive, b u t flat, because of t h e
extraordinary softness and pliableness thereof ? It is answered, either
they were rivetted into holes fore-prepared of purpose or else they were
stiffened with some mixture of silver or copper, not for cheapness, but
the greater usefulness thereof. Be it here once for all observed that
where utensils of the Temple are termed of pure gold, understand it so
pure as the end for which they were intended would permit. Otherwise some necessary alloy of baser metal made them not only serviceable
for but more durable in that purpose for which they were employed.
Fuller also deals with the question as to the gradual widening of the upper
stories in the porcli or front of the Temple, consequent on the narrowing of the
main walls as thev were carried up higher. Other supposed inconsistencies in the
::tated dimensions of various features in the building receive con~ideration, and
frequently elucidation by our author, and occasionally, when lie meets with a
difficulty he cannot solve, lie frankly confesses it.
There is, however, one thing which occurred to me in the course of perusing
Fuller's book, namely, t h a t i t is not a t all unlikely that the compilers of onr
Ritual had his book before them and used it as part of their materials.
The
volume was highly spoken of, and the writings of the author were well lrnown,
and looked upon as, to some extent, authoritative.
Let me mention a few points which seem to justify this suggestion.
EIe speaks of Hiram as Solomon's architect. Hiram is not so spoken of in
the Bible. H e is re~resented rather as beinga the chief artificer in metals.
Yet in a certain place in one of our ceremonies i t is said of Hiram that a t
the construction of the Temple he was tlie principal architect.
Again, in another passage, Fuller refers to the Sanctum Sanctoruin as
penetrable but once a year for the high priest. I n another place the names, and
the separate and conjoint significations of the names of the two pillars in the
aorchwav are dealt with.
Further, in one of tlie small illustrations inserted on the large plate of the
Temple, there are representations of tlie two pillars surmounted with spherical
balls; and, altho~lghthe engraving is not very clear, i t seems to me t h a t tlie
artist intended to indicate on those spheres maps of the celestial and terrestrial
globes.
One of the spherical balls clearly shows lines similar. t o those used to
indicate longitude.
Fuller seems to have been in some way influenced by the language or
atmosphere of Freemasonry for in another work of his, on the Crusades, entitled
Tite Holy Tl'rrrrc, the first edition of wl~icliwas published in 1639, we find this
phrase: l ' But in sudden alterations it is not to be expected that all things b3
done by tlie ,Vytrrtre mad Cornpasse." Probabk this is one of the earliest instances
in English literature where the Square and Conlpass are brought into such
significant juxtaposition. ( I quote frolii my copy, page 241, which is tlie second
edition, published 1640 .).
Returning to the main subject of the discussion, it would seen1 that many
writers have exercised themselves in guessing a t tlle source which served as a model
for the style of the Teniple. Sonle confidently assert Egyptian origin; others
Assyrian. Bro. Fort Newton asserts the Pliwnician origin, and Josephus (who
in this case seeins unreliable) alleges a Grecian origin, altliough the Parthenon
was not built until about 500 years after the Temple. For my own part, there
seems to be little need for all these guesses. I t is distiilctly stated in the Bible
(see I. Chron. xxviji.. verses 11 and 12) : " Then David "
gave to Soloinon his
son the pattern of the porch and of tlle llouses thereof and of the treasuries thereof
134
There are few papars read in our Lodge whicli Bro. W. B. Hextall cannot
amplify, and his note on the curious manuscript relating to the Temple, and now
u~tfortunately lost, is of considerable value.
Ero. C. F. Sykes has kindly lent me a pamphlet -descriptive of tlie model
exhibited in Manchester and other places a few years ago, from which i t appears
the author of the design was Rabbi Aaron Cohen, of Jerusalem. So far as tlie
contention of Bro. Sykes as to the height of the Porch is concerned, I think i t
has been effectively answered by Bro. Gordon Hills.
Bro,. W. J. Williams refers to the representation of the Temple in I. Pisyak
Sight o f I'ale.ytine, 1650, by the Rev. Dr. Thomas Fuller. I have consulted this
work, but regret t h a t the design can hardly claim to fall within my classification
of attempted solutions by educated architects. The question of t h e origin of the
Masonic Ritual does not fall within the scope of the paper, b u t I am sure we all
appreciate the investigations of Bro. Williains into the connection between the
Rev. Dr. Fuller and our early speculative Brother, Elias Ashmole.
The comments of Bro. Henry Lovegrove hardly need any reply. I do not
think there were any pillars in either the Holy Place or the Holy of Holies, and
the idea of the Pillars of tlie Porch having spherical terminations is due, in my
opinion, t o a mis-translation.
I n conclusion, I must ret.urn thanks for t h e vote of appreciation accorded
to me and for the comments whicl~the Brethren taking part in the discussion
have made, all of wllicli have, undoubtedly, added something t o our knowledge
of a rather obscure subject.
Tron.~rrcfio71~
o f i7tr Q.r~rrf,lorCoronnii JIo/7r~r.
135
1920.
5 JU
~ LY
~.
Trn~tsnctionsof
136
fit^ ( S I I C ~ ~ ICoronciti
IO~
Lo~Ige.
Sword."
14th century.
Probably obtained in 1373, a h c n
Edward 111. conferred a new Charter upon the City. It has two shields
side by side, one with the Royal Armq as borne b~ Fdm-ard H I . , " France
ancient and England qnarterl-." the other n ith thc Cross of St. G ~ o r g ~
on a diapered field,
2.
' l
3.
"
4.
Fourth Sn-ord.
Lent Sword."
Bought in 1722.
17th century.
Water Bailiff's Oar. Purchased in 17-15, The City h:ls Adnliri~lty jnriidiction orcxr
the Avon and the Hohnes.
1,ord Mayor's Chain of Office. Gold.
a cost ot 2236. 16. 6.
1751;.
Four Waits' Collars and Badgeq. 011 thc backs are snatchecl or ( , l ~ g r a r e dnames
and dates of divers Iiold~~rs,
the oldr.;t ' ,ing 1683. Shields ancl rollars are of
Queen Mary's time.
City Trumpetcrs' Instrume~ltsmrd Badges.
,tdded to t h e C o r p o r n t i o ~in
~ l715
dangerous roads for t h e purpose of attending the county courts and on otlier legal
occasions." 1 Bristol was to have ' L the usual officers of a county, Sheriff, Eschaetor,
and Coroner ; t h a t is, the Rfayor was to be its Eschaetor ; the Sheriff was created anew ;
One of
and a Coroner was there already; and t h e two Bailiffs were left as before."
t h e reasons influencing the king to g r a n t t h e charter was that, i n consequence of heavy
losses lately sustained in his wars i n France, he was sorely i n need of money, and was
glad to receive the sum of 600 marks paid by t h e inhabitants of the town. The dignity
arid title of Lord Mayor was conferred upon Bristol's Chief Magistrate on t h e occasion
of Queen Victoria's birthday in 1899, and the office of Sheriff still continues.
It should perhaps be explained t h a t t h e River Avon from some little way above
Bristol t o its mouth was t h e boundary between Gloucestershire and Somerset, and Bristol
Bridge connected the two counties. Formerly the water a t t h e quays rose and fell with
the tide, and the smaller ships used to lie a t low water upon t h e mud, being, of course,
constructed to bear t h e strain. A t one time the Corporation allowed no vessels of more
than 100 tons t o come up further t h a n Hunroad, a mile from t h e Bristol Channel, and
often they were unloaded a t the excellent anchorage a t Kingroad, a t the mouth of the
river. Early in t h e nineteenth century t h e Avon was diverted through what is termed
t h e " New Cut," and its old course has been dockised under t h e name of the " Floating
Harbour," and hence shipping is seen right i n t h e middle of t h e city.
The situation of Bristol in ancient times was a very strong one, for i t lay a t t h e
angle formed by the tributary river Frome when joining t h e Avon. At the base of t h e
triangle a formidable castle was built, which bore no small p a r t in the history of t h e
country. I n 1247 a great improvement was carried out in the port by the excavation
of a new channel for t h e Frome, (which rises near Temkesbury and approaches Bristol
from t h e East), through land purchased from t h e Rlona~teryof St. Abgustine and still
called " Canons' Marsh."
This must have been a remarkable feat of engineering a t
t h a t time, and i t resulted i n inany additional acres being enclosed within t h e defences
of t h e town. N o w a d a ~ st h e principal work of the port is done a t A v ~ n m o u t h ,which,
as its name implies, is situate x t the mouth of the river, about six miles from t h e city.
The Corporation of Bristol have spent upwards of 7,000,000, and possess vcry fine docks
there. It has been a cause of g r m t satisfaction t o the citizens t h a t they possessed a
property which proved of immeuse service to the country during the War. Very large
quantities of stores and equipment of all kinds, including many Tanks, were shipped a t
Avonmouth for France.
Bristol continued to be a Bishopric from 1542 until 1836, when a change was
made i n the arrangement of t h e See, and t h e city became part of t h e diocese of
Gloucester and Bristol. After a n Act of Parliament had been passed for the purpose in
1896, Bristol again became a Bishopric, included within which is the northern portion
of Wiltshire. The Brethren i n going t o Rlalmesbury were thus visiting a detached part
of t h e diocese of Bristol. The first Bishop under t h e new scheme was Dr. George
Forrest Browne, still happily wonderfully vigorous, the author of a most interesting
life of St. Aldhelm of Malmesbury. The present Bishop, Bro. Dr. George Nickson, is
now (in 1921) the Senior Warden of t h e Jerusalem Lodge, No. 686.
T H E CATHEDRAL.
Until its constitution as the Cathedral Church of t h e diocese in 1542, the building
had been t h e Minster of the Monastery of the Black Canons of St. Augustine, which was
founded in 1142 by Robert Fitzharding. Robert was t h e son of Harding, who was said
by some chroniclers to have been t h e son, or, a t least a descendant, of a Danish king,
and held the office of Przepositus of Bristol in the time of Edward t h e Confessor and
afterwards under t h e Normans. The Saxoii lord of the Honour of Gloucester, of which
Bristol formed a part, was Brictric, and Harding probably governed t h a t portion of his
possessions as his representative. The story goes t h a t when Brictric, who was a, nobleman
of great wealth and consequence, was sent on a n embassy by King Edm-ard to Raldwyn,
Earl of Flanders, unfortunately for him, t h e Earl's daughter, Matilda, fell in lore
with him, and he did not return her affection. Afterwards she married Willia~n of
Normandy, and, when t h e opportunity came, and she found herself Queen of England,
she induced her husband t o give Brictric and all his possessions into her hand. H e was
accordingly seized, and died a prisoner a t Winchester, while she had his lands. I n later
years Bristol \\-us in the dower of the Queens of England.
The representation of the
head of one of them, Philippn, wife of Edward III., who was ~velland descrvcdl~loved
1
inerchantsme~i ~ h traded
o
n71th their owl1 vessels, chiefly (in the eighteenth and part
of the niileteetli centuries) to t h e West Coast of Africa-has disappeared from t h e port.
At one time t h e sea called those who, besides loving adveature, were prepared to fight
a t any time for t h e honour of their country a11d the defence of their religion, and many
a captain came back t o Bristol with rich spoils from t h e Spanish Main. Later on " the
tri:tngulnr ~ o r : ~ g e ,as
" i t n-as termed, which usually occupied about a year, was popular.
011 this, goods were carried for barter to Africa, slaves from thence t o the West Indies,
and then sugar and other tropical productions brought home. This, i n course of time,
changed t o a less reprehensible form of commerce. One other notable achievement was
accoin~,lished in the port, when, in 1842, t h e Great TVesfern was sent t o New York, being
the firbt steanlsllip t o cross from England t o America. T ~ d i t i o nsays t h a t Defoe learnt
the story \vhich he told so well as " Robinson Crusoe " froin Alexander Selkirk, (who
had bee11 rescued froin J u a n Fernandez in 1709 by \Toodes Rogers, a fanlous privateering
captain of Bristol), a t the " Cock and Bottle " Tavern i n Castle Green.
T H E VISIT TO T H E CATHEDRAL.
Tlle B r e t h r e n h a d t h e a d v a n t a g e of t h e g u i d a n c e of C a n o n J. G . Alford,
C . B . E . , a n d t h e V e n . Dr. T a l b o t , Archdeacon of Swindon, w h o showed them
r o u n d t h e C a t h e d r a l a n d i t s precincts a n d pointed o u t the various features
of interest. A t the conclusion of the visit, t h e W.M., in a s h o r t speech, proposed
a h e a r t y vote of tllanks t o Canoil A l f o r d a n d D r . T a l b o t f o r t h e i r g r e a t kindness.
COLLEGE GREEN.
Collcge Greet?, on tlie Sort11 of thc Cathedral, is still nluch t h e same as i t was
tvhel~ i t helony?d t o t h e Black Canons. I11 tliose days, however, i t must have been a
quiet plare. far froiii t l ~ chaulit?; of nielt, with green hills behind i t . The Manor of
Billes1~-icli,-tlfnt is. Bella Tics,-in which i t stood, must then have becl1 a beautiful
neighbourhood.
There is a story of one of thc Abbotu. ~x-llodelighted to rest his aiiiple form beneath
a certain trcc on t11~Green. t h a t , ~v11cn11r (lied, his bretllren buried him i n his favourite
spot, aiid thereafter t h a t trcc. seeniing to relien- its strength, bccan~efiller and taller
than any of its fellows.
I n 1586 t h e College Green was t h e scene of a stately ceremonial, which is thus
described b ~ Lclnncl
:-li
King Henry 1-11.was reccired a-it11 due procession 111. the Abbot
and his c o n r c ~ l t\\-~tliinthe walls of St. Augustine's Church, and on t h e morrow, when
the liing had dined, he rode on pilgriniagc to St. A ~ ~ a e 'ill
s t h e Wood.
And on
'rl~ursdayn e s t follo~ving, n-hi cl^ n-as Corpus Christi Day, the killg n-cut in procession
about the Great Green, the11 called 'the Sanctuary, whither came all the processions of
t h e town also; a ~ i dtlie Bishop of Worcester l)rcached in the pulpit iii the middle of the
aforesaid green, in :I great audience of tlic mayor and tlic substance of all the burgesses
of thc ton-n and their wives, with niuch other people of the country. After evening the
lritig st>tlt for t h e :?layor and sherift', and p a r t of the best burgesses of tlic ton.11~ancl
dcnla~idedof them t h e cause of their pox-erty, and they shelr-ed his grace t h a t i t was
by rc:lsoa of thc great loss of ships and goods, 1rhic.11 they had suffered within five years.
The liiilg comforted them t h a t they should set on and lllalre net\- ships, aud exercise their
iiierchandise as they mere wont to do, aiid his grace 15-ould so help them b~ dirers means,
like as he shewed nnto them, so t h a t t!ie inayor of thc to~v11told rile they had not heard
these hundred years from any liing so good a colnfort, therefore they thanked Allnighty
God t h a t had sent so good and so gracious a sovereign lord. And oil the moril the king
dcpartcd t o Lolldoll ward."
[This occurred only a few months after IIcnry had won his crown on Bosworth
Field, and when his thronc in:ly li:~vc:\pprnrcd none too safe.]
The King paid another visit to 13ristol four years later, but \lras then in another
franio of mind; for he exacted a benevolence from t h e town and made " every mall
who was worth 200 pay 20s. because ~neii'swives went so sumptuously appareled."
T H E CIVIC CROSS.
The cro5s in tlio initltllt~of College Grecn is a replica of the " High Cross " which
formerly stood a t tho spot. (still the c.entrc>of the modern city), where the four principal
thorougl~f:~res,
(uno:ely, Broad, Hi&, N'incb and Corn Streets), nicct. It is said t o have
A. C. Powell.
A. C. Powell.
A. C. Powell.
Bristol Cathedral.
J. F. H. Gilbard.
The Cloisters.
Bristol Catlledral,
A. C. Powell.
A. C. Powell.
A. C. Powell.
T~.cl?~xuctio/l.~
of the (d~cccf/torC1oro,~aliLodge.
142
1 They
' l
I t ninst have been difIicnlt to seat so many in the room, which only measured
33tft. by 26fft., alth0u~11poss11,l.v the performers n-ere placed in tho organ-gallery.
Besides Hnydn's ' l Creation," Bro. Pcrcirnll's l' JIasonic Ode " was performed, and t h e
latter was repeated a t the consecration n e s t day.
An organ with twelve stops (whlch had cost 300 when built by Brice Seede for
George Daubeny, M.P., in 1763) was purchased for t h e Hall in Bridge Strect for forty
gi~ineas, and the sum of C30 was spent in putting i t into proper order.
FREEJIASONS' HALL I N P A R K STREET.
The house in Bridge Street was the Masonic home of the Bristol Lodges for more
than half a century; but a t length i t was found to bo too small for the requiremellts
For several years the Brethren had been considering how best t o
of the Province.
procure improved accominodat.ion, and eventually bought a piece of ground t o build on.
Just afterwards the preinises of the L ' Bristol Institution for t h e advancement of Science
and Art " came into the mnrliet, on-ing to removal, and were purchased by the D.P.G.hl.,
Bro. W. A. F. Ponell. His action nns entirely approved by t h e Prorince, and the new
" Freemasons' Hall," as i t then became. mns dedicated by Lord Limerick, t h e Provincial
Grand Master, on February 2nd, 1872, " about 400 Brethren " being said t o have been
present.
The building had been erected by public-spirited Bristolians for t h e purposes of a
museum, exhibitions of Art, and lectures upon science and other intellectual subjects,
and was opened in 1823. There was a Library, aiid the greater portion of the space non*
Many of t h e
floored over and occupied as the dining-room, was the lecture theatre.
leading scientific mcn of their day have addressed audiences there, and some important
discoveries have been colnnlunicated to t h e world from this place. The upper storey,
including t h e present Lodge-room, was used for exhibitions of fossils, objects of interest
in g e o l o g ~and natural history, ancl sonletiines of pictures. Orer the entrance, beneath the
portico, is a n allegorical frieze,l representing thc Arts and Sciences and Literature bcing
introduced to the City of Bristol 117 Apollo and 3iiaerva. This was the \3~0rliof Bro. E. H .
Baily, R..4., F.R.S., the eminent sculptor, 1%-howas born in Bristol in 1788, and was presented by him. His beautiful statue, " Eve a t t l ~ eFountain," now in the Art Gallery, was
formerly placed in the building.
Brethren will recollect his statue of t h e Duke of
Sussex a t t h e Freeninsons' Hall in London. H e was also t h e sculptor of the figure of
Nelson in Trafalgar Square.
The decorations on the ceiling above tile stair-ease, depicting four Cardinal Virtues,
were brought from Bridge Street. They were designed by Bro. Edward Bird, R.A., a
member of t h e Royal Sussex Lodge of Hospitality, and painted upon floor-cloth. The
circular centre-piece, representing the " Copernican Solar System," was too much injured
by smoke to be rer~iored.
The premises in Park Street have proved highly convenient, but, owing t o t h e
expansion of t h e Order, they are scarcely capable of fulfilling all t h e demands of to-day.
Fortunately it was found possible in 1919 to acquire t h e adjoining house, and i t is
intended to make another Lodge-room, with a complete set of subsidiary rooms there,
as soon as building operations are again allowd. It will still be practically possible for
the chief characteristic of Bristol Masonry to be preserved, and for t h e whole Provinco
t o continue t o meet under one roof.
The organ, n-hich was formerly in Bridge Street, was enlarged and improved in
1915. At the " opening " by Bro. H u n t , occasion was taken to make a presentation t o
Bro. R. G. Parminter, P.M., 1388, P.Pr0v.G. Organist, who had then held t h e position
of organist 0 the Gcvernors of the Freemasons' Hall for thirty-three years, and is
still happily continuing.
At present there arc fifteen Craft Lodges in the Province, living harmoniously
under the genial rule of R.W. Bro. George ,4. Gibbs, M.P., who has been Provincial
Grand Maste: since 1909, and his esteemed Deputy, Bro. Dr. E. H. Cook, P.G.D. There
are also in Bristol fire Royll Arch Chapters, three Mark and one Royal Ark Mariner
Camp
Lodges, and n Royal Arch aiid a N a r k Province. Bristol is the home of t h e
of Baldwyn," which includes the Knight Templar Preceptory, and t h e Rose Croix
Chapter of t h a t name. The Preceptory, together with the Coteswold Preceptory of S t .
Augusti~ie,a t C1ieltenh:inl. forms the Prorinei:tl Priory of Bristol and Gloucestershire, while
the Rose Croix Chapter constitute!, by the terms of the " Treaty " of 1881, a '1 District H
under the Supreme Council, 33O.
1
144
THURSDAY EVENING.
I n t h e evening a Special Emergency Meeting of the Robert Thorne Lodge,
No. 3663, was held a t t h e Freemasons' Hall in P a r k Street, in honour of the
Quatuor Coronati Lodge.
Ro\,ert rhorlle (son of Robert Thorne who is said to have fitted out the good
ship Mattheto in which Cabot sailed from Bristol and discovered North America) was
born in 1492 and served the office of Mayor in 1515. He was elected M.P. for the City
In 1523. He founded the Bristol Grammar School, under Letters Patent from King
Heury 1-111. under l,he Great Seal of England dated 17th day of March, 1532, bequeathing
for that purpose the dissolved Priory of Saint Bartholomew. Here the School was
carried on until about the year 1769, when an Act was passed ' l to enable the Corporation of the City of Bristol to exchange the building of the Hospital, called Queen
Ehzal)eth's Hospital, for the building cal!ed St. Bartholomew's in the sald City &C."
Under this Act the two Schools, the Grammar School and the Queen Elizabeth's
Hospital, exchanged homes, and the former entered into possession of the more commodious buildings erected in 1702 behind the Church known as St. Mark's of the
Gaunts (the Lord Mayor's Chapel) in College Green. The Grammar School was again
moved in 1879 to the magnificent new buildings in Tyndall's Park. The present Headmaster is Bro. J. E. Bsrton, M.A., of the Robert Thorne Lodge. Among the alumni of
the School may be mentioned William Henry Goldwyer, who entered it on 29th June,
1771. He was borr in 1763 and died in 1820. He was a distinguished physician and
surgeon and particularly successful as an oculist. He was the Founder and first
Honorary Surgeon of the famous Bristol Eye Hospital (1812), and in gratitude for his
services he was presented with the Freedom of the City.
He was one of the most
prominent Freemasons in the West of England, and ruled the Province of Bristol from
1808, and the Camp of Baldm~nfrom 1810, until his death.
The Robert Thorne Lodge, No. 3663, was founded by eighteen Old Boys of the
Bristol Grammar Szhool by warrant dated 16th April, 1913, and the Consecration took
place on 14th Juno following. There are now 64 members, all Old Boys, Masters, or
Governors of the School.
By kind permission of t h e W.M. of t h e Lodge the visitors were seated
before t h e c o m m e ~ c e m e n tof t h e prowedings and so they were enabled t o witness
t h e Opening Ceremony according t o Bristol Working. There were 41 members
of the Lodge present, and 159 visitors, including our party, so thzt, after t h e
entry of Provincial Grand Lodge t h e magnificent Lodge Room, one of the finest
But. there was no overcrowding, and the
in t h e kingdom, was exactly filled.
perfection of t h e arrangements throughout was t h e subject of universal admlration.
The Lodge was opened i n d u e form a t 7.50 p.m. with the following
Officers :W.M.
Bro. G . S. Pakenian, P.Prov.G.Purst.
T.P.RI.
,, R. J. Culverwell, P.Pr0v.G.A.D.C.
8.W.
,, C. W. Stear, P.Prov.G.Org.
J.W .
,, J. S. Edbrooke
Treac.
., H. W. S. Neville, P.Pr0v.J.G.W.
Secy.
,, G. Langford, P.Prov.G.Reg.
D.C.
,, T. Goulding, P.Prov.G.Sw.B.
S.D.
,, R. H. Price
J.D.
,, F . J. Langford
,, W. Hunter
A.D.C.
Org.
,, R. G. Parminter, P.Prov.G.Org.
I.G.
,, H . E. B. Harris
A f t e r t h e visiting G.L. Officers had been saluted in due form, t h e Wor.
Dep.Prov.G.M., Brisbol, D r . E. H. Cook, P.G.D., E n g . , attended b y t h e Officers
of Prov.G.L., was announced, and entered t h e Lodge with due ceremony.
The Dsp.Prov.G.M., after t h e usual official enquiries had been made and
suitably answered, proceeded t o offer a most hearty welcome t o t h e Visiting
Brethren of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge, and to express t h e hope t h a t they would
have a very pleasant sojourn in t h e ancient City of Bristol. O u r W.M. replied,
and t h e W.M. of t h e Lodge, o n resuming t h e Chair, also welcomed t h e Visitors,
and then announced t h a t t h e business of t h e evening was t o raise Bro. Rev.
J. W. D . Stancombe. It is a n open secret t h a t t h e Lodge authorities had been
A Past Master writes as follows:I had praviously enjoyed the opportunity of attending some Masonic functions a t
Bristol so that I was prepared for a very interesting experience on the occasion of our
reception by the Robert Thorne Lodge, but I gladly acknowledge that my general
impression after the ceremonies was that I had never witnessed any ceremony which
held my attention more closely or stirred me more deeply. The absolute finish of the
whole of the work of the Lodge reduced me to the condition of mind of the Queen of
Sheba when she found that ' the half was not told me.' In the first place I was struck
with the easiness and dignity with which the honours were accorded to the Dep.Pr0v.G.M.
and his attendant Officers. One saw in that respect the advantage which such a Province
as Bristol gains over those spread over widely scattered. areas ; the Bristol Brethren know
one another and are used to performing ceremonies together. Then as to the special
ceremony of the evening, it would not be proper to write more than that the working
was more elaborate and more dramatic in its execution than that generally in use,-in fact,
it is closely akin to that of the American Lodges of which an exemplification has recently
been given in London. The I.P.M. has a prominence in the proceedings which our modern
working has lost. The Bristol Use is clearly a survival of pre-Union working, and I
daresay that proximity to Ireland, and sympathy with Irish usages in the Craft may
have been one element which led Bristol Masons to adhere to time-honoured customs
when uniformity was generally enforced a t the Union of the English Grand Lodges.
At any rate, whilst I should deprecate Lodges elsewhere copying Bristol working, and I
think that what me are used to is the most suitable in every way for modern working,
yet it would be a very great loss if this link with past working were to be abandoned.
The ceremony as we saw i t a t the Robert Thorne Lodge in its Bristol setting, was most
impressive,-a precious heritage to be cherished and preserved,--and I strongly advise
every Brother who has the opportunity to try and see the Bristol working, which we
all found most inspiring and interesting.
FRIDAY, 1
6 JULY.
~ ~
146
Summer 0,lcting.
147
himself in bed and said solemnly, " King Arthelstan hath kept I all lily life; King
Arthelstan shall keep I till I die " (op. czt., p. 217).
The great veneration paid t o King Athelstan by t h e monastery may have a special
interest for t h e Craft. Our earliest narrative, the Book of C h a ~ g e s ,merely attributes
t o Athelstan :he reform of t h e masons' laws, for great default found among them
(Cooke i., 700). The R e y i u s Poem expands this by a reference t o Athelstan's great
building of castles and churches.
The Coolie narrative, after introducing St. Alban
and St. Amphabel, has no more than a passing reference t o t h e worthy King Athelstan,
whose youngest son is now the reformer. This youngest son becomes Edwin i n t h e later
texts. We may suspect t h a t t h e introduction of E d a i n is due t o northern influences, and
we find St. Amphabel in writers like Matthew of Paris, who was himself a St. Alban's
man. B u t t h e R e g ~ u sPoem comes from this p a r t of t h e country, t h e western midlands,
and the special emphasis it lays on King Althelstan's good works suggests t h a t it was
composed i n some locality which had peculiar reasons for venerating his name. Work
was going on a t t h e abbey all through the fourteenth century, and it is accordingly not
inJpossible t h a t our oldest text was p u t together a t Malmesbury itself.
The Danes r a ~ a g e dall this country and would seem t o have destroyed t h e monastic
buildings a t Frome, although Aldhelm's church a t Bradford-on-Avon is standing to-day.
[(ut owing t o t h e prudence of .Dunstan (and t h e sanctity of St. Aldhelm himself),
br:rlnlesbury remained unscathed. For Dunstan removed all the relics, and placed them
within a plain stone sarcophagus, and t h e Danes, when they came t o pillage, found
nothing but the bare shrine. Even this they were prevented from damaging by a miracle.
The first who ventured t o lay a sacrilegious hand on it was struck down senseless, and
t h e Danes fled, and molested Malmesbury no more.
SHERSTON AND ITS CHURCH.
After the decisive victory of Assandun, in 1016, Cnut set himself to repair t h e
laxages caused by t h e Danes, and in particular t o rebuild t h e churches -they had
desecrated. It is probable t h a t t h e church a t Sherston represents one so built. The site
miist have been a n important one from a n early date.
It is, like Malmesbury, of
considerable natural strength, and i t lies across t h e direct line of co~nmuilication from
Malmesbury to the Severn valley, by t h e gap i n the western escarpment a t Old Sodbury.
That t h e church is dedicated t o the Holy Cross is a n additional reason for believing i t
;o be one of Unut's foundations, and in all probability one t h a t replaced a still earlier
Saxon edifice of which, however, there is no record or trace.
There is a tradition of a battle a t Sherston, and it is usually stated t h a t this was
the indecisive action fought between Cnut and Edmund Ironside i n l016 a t " Sceorstan."
B u t one chron~clertells us t h a t from t h a t battle the combatants retired respectively on
Winchester and Old Sarum; and t h e topography of Cnut's campaigns is a subject a s t o
which few would be prepared t o make specific assertions. It is a tempting hypothesis
(vitle Browne's St. Aldhelm, p. 220), t h a t the battle was t h e one in which t h e Inell of
&lalniesbury helped Athelstan, and from which t h e bodies of his cousins were taken to
the abbey church, only six miles distant, for burial. B u t Cnut would hardly select, either
for a restoration or for t h e site of a new church, t h e scene of a Danish defeat; and, on
t h e other hand, Irorside's battle of Sceorstan was hardly a Danish victory. The question
is one to which a t present no satisfactory solution is forthcoming. A t Sherston itself is,
preserved, o n t h e cuter wall of the south porch, a very early stone figure, which is
supposed to represer~tRattlebone, t h e hero of the battle. H e slew couiltless Danes, and
when, after being severely wounded, he showed signs of relaxing his efforts, t h e people
urged him on In t h e following dialogue :People: Fight well, Rattlebone,
Thou shalt have Sherstone,
R.:
What shall I with Sherston do,
Without I have all belongs thereto?
P. :
Thou shalt have Wych and Wellesleg,
Easton towne and Pinkeney.
These are all local names to-dag, but no one appears t o have succeeded in identifying t h e hero with any actual individual, or with a n ancestor of any lord of t h e manor,
and the effigy is in fact t h a t of a priest or bishop, holding a large book t o his breast.
It may be Saxon, hut the drapery rather suggests t h a t t h e artist was copying the
remarkable figures inside t h e south porch a t Malmesbury, which are late Norman in date.
>In the T ~ u n s n c t i o n sof the Wilts. Arch~ologicalS o c i e t ~ ,vol. xxxi., Mr. Pontin'g, in his
148
article on t h e church, points o u t t h a t Rattlebone's corbel was built for him when the
porch was constructed, so t h a t he was already regarded with veneration in circa 1460.
Mr. Ponting describes the figure a s clothed in either a n alb or dalmatic, with a pallium
passed over t h e left shoulder extending i n front nearly to t h e bottom of the robe.
Sherston Church as it stands to-day is a mixture of many styles and periods.
A church is mentioned i n Domesday, b u t it has disappeared. It was replaced by a
Norman building i n 1160-70, and this would appear t o have consisted of a nave of four
bays, with one aisle. and t o have remained incomplete. Possibly t h e Saxon chancel was
Of this Norman church t h e north wall of t h e nave
preserved for t h e t ~ m ebeing.
remains, and one arch of t h e southern wall. The font is Norman, and on t h e outside of
t h e south wall we still have t h e Norman eaves corbel table. It runs through the parvise,
and so much of t h e masonry of t h e south wall will, therefore, be t h e original work.
I n 1230-40, x central tower was added, a s also t h e Chancel and north transept.
Also t h e old Norman north aisle was replaced. The fine arches of t h e transept crossing
The rest of t h e E.E. work
a r e still standing, but t h e tower itself has been rebuilt.
remains, with t h s exception of some windows t h a t have been replaced by Perpendicular
work.
Such E.E. windows as are still in existence a r e fine, particularly t h e east window
of three lights.
At a much later date a n ambulatory passage was opened from the Chancel t o t h e
Similar passages exist i n other churches i n the
Lady Chapel in th2 north transept.
neighbourhood, e.g. a t Avebury, and there is one a t Beverston. They can hardly be
mere hagioswpes. They seem rather intended for the priest carrying t h e elements t o pass
from t h e altar in the transept chapel direct t o t h e chancel, or they may have been used
for processions. The other work of Perpendicular period consists of windows in t h e north
aisle and south wall, and a south aisle, so to call i t ; b u t i t seems rather to have been a
series of three chay.els, opening respectively to t h e nave (by the Norman arch), the
transept (by t h e E.E. arch), and t h e chancel (by a perpendicular arch).
Immediately west of this aisle conies t h e fine south porch, with its parvise, of the
same ~ e r i o d .
The tower is a well proportioned structure, but t h e queerness of t h e details is
sufficiently accounted for by t h e date, which is 1730-33. Still t h e parapet is distinctly
effective. The vicarage adjoins t h e churchyard on t h e west, and built into t h e wall are
five sculptured stones with heraldic carvings and a rebus of a burr growing out of a tun,
for J o h n Burtan, who was king's warrener here i n 1479. I n t h e vicarage garden is all
t h a t remains of t h e old village cross, its base and one step. The east wall of the north
transept has a good early corbel table with grotesque heads.
The Rattlebone figure
already referred t o is on t h e outer east wall of the porch. This porch has interesting
carved bosses in t h e vaulting, and on entering t h e church we have the Norman arcade
i n front of us.
Reference has already been made to t h e arches of t h e transept crossing, which are
particularly fine. 9i t h e corbel heads, five are original. Two a r e claimed to be portraits
of Henry 111. and his consort, Queen Eleanor of Castile. Two others may be portraits
of Richard, Earl of Cornwall, and Siinon de Montfort. Sherston was a royal manor, and
as such would be in t h e latter's care as High Steward.
B y t h e k i n d permission of t h e D u k e of B e a u f o r t , w e h a d approached Sherston
t h r o u g h t h e magnificent p a r k of B a d m i n t o n , whence a good view of B a d m i n t o n
H o u s e was obtained. W e now c a m e t o Malmesbury, crossing the Fosse W a y , i n
t h i s p o r t i o n n o longer a m a i n t a i n e d road, b y t h e s i t e of w h a t was once a R o m a n
settlement, the v e r y n a m e of which i s d o u b t f u l , a n d on the g r o u n d to-day n o
vestige of it remains.
H e r e we w e r e m e t b y B r o . H a r o l d Brakespear, F . S . A . , the architect who
h a s c a r r i e d o u t t h e restorqtion, a n d who, a s M r . H u t t o n says, knows m o r e of t h e
c h u r c h t h a n a n y o t h e r living person. He was good e n o u g h to t a k e u s a l l r o u n d
t h e buildings a n d p u t h i s immense knowledge of t h e m a t o u r disposal.
MALMESBURY.
St. Aldhalm enlarged Maildubh's church and re-dedicated it, and i n addition to
t h e monastery builclings he erected two other churches close by. King Athelstan rebuilt
t h e monastery. and t h e old church of Maildubh was apparently rebuilt i n the days of
Abbot Elfric, 977-992. It is i n connection with this structure t h a t we read of a certain
Oliver, who at somo d a t e before 1030 attempted to fly from one of t h e towers, having
A. C . Powell.
A. C. P o w e l l .
A. C. P o w e l l .
fastened wings to 111shands and feet; but he fell and broke 11is legs. I11 the days of
Henry I., Rogcr,%htj Norman bishop of Saruni, seized t h e abbey and bui'it a castle over
against it, apparently t o t h e east of t h e present church. B u t he died in 1139, and soon
afterwards t h e great Norman church was begun, of which little more remains to-day thmi
the six eastern bays of t h e nave. 1Villiam of Malmesbury, writing i n 1142, speaks of
t h e abbey a s exce1li:lg i n size and beauty any other edifice of the early time in England,
and he makes no allusion a t all t o any contemporary re-building. This seems t o indicate
t h a t as latc as this date t h e older building was still intact, as the Norman work of
which we see p a r t to-day cannot have been finished a t so early a date.
The style
indicates t h e second half of t h e twelfth century. R u t many of t h e buildings on t h e hill
must have been removed to make room for the new abbey, and when King John granted
t o t h e monastery the site of the castle with leave to pull i t down, the opportunity was
taken for a further extension. The church now consisted of a presbytery and aisles of
six bays and apsidal end, N. and S. transepts n-ith a n apsidal chapel t o each, t h e
magnificent south porch, a nave of nine bays with aisles, and a central lantern tower.
I n the fourteenth century a Lady Chapel was added, and the tower was raised and
a spire erected on it, whilb t h e nave and transepts were re-vaulted and t h e present
clerestory built.
1 still later addition was a square tower over t h e two western bays
of the nave. The spire fell in the early p a r t of t h e sixteenth century. At t h e dissolution of t h e monasteries t h e whole structure was purchased by Master Stumpe, a wealthy
clothier, who demolished practically everything except the nave, which he made over to
the townspeople. Their parish church of St. Peter's was now ruinous; so p a r t was
turned into a town hall and t h e rest was demolished, R-ith t h e exception of t h e tower and
spire, which remain to-day. The nave of the abbey now became t h e parish church. B u t
very shortly afternards the western tower collapsed, and th:s and a later fall of
masonry completed t h e ruin of the three western bays of the nave, and the northern half
of t h e west front. What was left was itself in a dangerous condition, and had t h e tower
a t the south-western corner fallen we should i n all probability have lost t h e incomparable
porch. B u t to-day under Bro. Brakespear's careful and skilful hands the whole fabric
of t h e nave and west end has been made sound. The roof has been relaid, t h e flying
buttresses taken down and rebuilt stone by stone, and everything else done t o ensure t h e
stablility of t h e structure.
A t t h e same time t h e utmost care has been taken by
differentiating the mouldings and so on t o prevent any possibility of the modern work
being taken for part of the original fabric (vzde Browne, S t . Aldhelm, p. 232). Fragment
though it be, t h e structure still presents a n impressive appearance externally, which is
chiefly due to t h e unusually high clerestory; b u t t h e fourteenth century builders in
great measure prestrved t h e Norman walls, and many of t h e original ornaments and
mouldings are still visible, and indicate where t h e Norman clerestory windows came.
The South Porch has been fitly described as one of t h e grandest Norman wo-ks
left in England. The entrance is of eight members, all sculptured. The vaulted porch
within this arch has on either side a group of six apostles and a n angel in flight. The
style of this ssulptilre is remarkable, especially t h e drapery, and there is nothing of t h e
same period to compare with i t in this country. Beyond is a n inner door, also richly
sculptured, within t h e tympanum a figure of our Lord between two angels.
Owing t o t h e damage done by the fall of t h e western tower, t h e interior is
unsymmetrical. There are three bays of t h e south aisle which stand alone, and are now
used a s a vestry ancl entrance. ' f i e body of t h e church consists of t h e six remaining
bays of t h e nave, n i t h aisles. There a r e bold Transitional arches, obtusely pointed, and
a grand triforlum, and above this t h e great height of t h e clerestory.
I n the rout11 aisle two large windows were inserted in t h e fourteenth century,
which a t all events give light, but their tracery is remarkable rather t h a n beautiful.
The other windows generally retain their deep Norman splay, b u t have been spoilt by
t h e addition of tracery. We were able to inspect t h e so-called monument of King
Athelstan, on the south of the altar, b u t we were not asked to accept i t as a contemporary work; inducd, n-e \\-ere told it was fitted with a new head after the Great
Rebellion.
Nothing remains of t h e rest of the abbey and monastery .buildings save the northern
arch of the transept crossing, part of one wall of t h e south transept, and elsewhere a few
pavement tiles and fraglnents of sculpture.
T l ~ eollly o t h e r considerable a n t i q u i t y in the t o w n i s the b e a u t i f u l m a r k e t
cross. T h i s is a fine work of d a t e circa 1490, a n d of t h e s a m e type a s those a t
C h e d d a r , Salisbury, a n d Cliicllester a n d it h a s been well, b u t n o t drastically,
150
restored.
Indefatigable brethren with cameras found it would make a good
background to a
photograph.
Perhaps i t was owing to o u r having just walked across a n unusually wide
a n d empty i n a r k e ~place, t h a t t h e hall where lunch was served conveyed t o some
of us a h i n t of congestion. A f t e r lunch, t h e W . M . expressed t h e thanks of the
whole p a r t y to B r a Brakespear for all t h a t lie h a d done t o make the visit a success,
a n d Bro. Brakespear suitably replied.
Many of the p a r t y found time to walk
through some of t h e q u a i n t streets of t h e old town a n d note t h e Green Dragon
and other old-tim? inns.
W e left Malmesbury by t h e main road t o Gloucester, and were able to
appreciate t h e remarkable n a t u r a l strength of t h e position, where, as old Leland
says: " Newton water a n d Avon r u n so nere together i n t h e botom of t h e west
suburbe, t h a t t h e r e within a burbolt shot the toun is peninsulated."
Passing through Tetbury, t h e brethren who were giving t h e course had a
happy thought, and took us some little way along t h e old Acman Street, f a r
enough t o l e t us have a glimpse of t h e typical old f a r m at Doughton. Returning
t o Tetbury, we resumed o u r programme route, a n d came t o Beverston, where a t
t h e entrance to t h e village we noticed i n passing t h e W a r Memorial, a beautiful
wayside Calvary.
H e r e we were received by t h e Rector, the Rev. J. Nowill
Bromehead, who acted as o u r cicerone, a n d to whom we owe t h e following
account :--S
BEVERSTON.
It is po3sible that the family of Godwin had some hereditary connection with
Beverston. Sweyn had lands here, and we know from William of Malnlesburf that in
1051 Godwin made this his headquarters when he assembled an army in the neighbourhood, ostensibly against the Welsh, who had fortified a position in Herefordshire, but he
used it to overawe the liing, then a t Gloucester, and to compel hiin to dismiss his Norman
favourites. For thiv rebellion the family mere exiled, and Sweyn's lands were confiscated.
Beverston accordingly appears in Domesday as Crown property. I t was included in the
grant of lands made by William the Conqueror to Roger de Berkeley, who had a castle
of his own a t Durs!ey, eight miles to the west. The family lost its lands in Stephen's
wars, during which the castle was besieged, and probably suffered considerable damage,
as i t was rebuilt in 1225-7, by Maurice de Weare, to whose family the estate together
with t h a t of Berkcley had been granted by Henry 11. The church was probably built
a t the same time. I n 1356 the then owner, being rendered opulent by the ransom of
prisoners taken a t the battle of Poictiers, re-edified both castle and church, and the
present structures date in great measure from this period.
The castle was held for King Charles during the Parliamentary wars, and withstood
more than one assault. I11 1644 Colonel Massie, commander of the Parliamentary Forces
a t Gloucester, captured Tetbury without much difficulty, but he was only able to make
himself master of Beverston by stratagem. It was not recaptured, nor further attacked.
But in 1691 much of i t was destroyed by fire, and of the remainder, part has been
adapted as a farm.
The fourteenth century castle was in plan a square with a tower a t each angle,
and a barbican, a deep moat encircling the whole. Nothing is now left but one of the
towers, that a t the S.W. angle, which i11 all probability represents the original thirteentll
century building, the gateway and its tower, and the ruins of the western curtain.
The moat remains on the western and southern sides, but i t is only on the latter that
i t now holds water.
The great tower or ' keep ' is of three storeys. The lowest forms a vaulted entry
aild guard-room, lighted by an elegant ogee-headed window in a deep recess. From the
corner of the entry rose the original staircase; the place of which has been taken by a
newel, in an octagonal turret, not morticed into the main tower, but built up against
it in a manner so insecure that the two would long ago have parted company had not
the turret been bound to the tower by strong iron ties and a massive chain. The second
storey contains a gallery and stairs leading to the rooms behind the western curtain,
but is mainly occupied by the greater or garrison chaprl. This latter was a beautiful
structure, with a fine traceried window of three lights on the east, an ogee-headed lancet
on the south, and a large window, which has been altered and filled in with masonry,
a t the west. The stone vaultillg is extreniely fine, and shows richly carved bosses a t the
juncture of its quadripartite sections. The double sedilia and piscina on the south side
Summev Outing.
151
are nearly perfect, and were elaborately, though not very deeply, carved. The piscina,
like that in the parish church, is set across the corner in a manner very rarely seen.
A small portion of the tiled pavement, in tiny black, red, and yellow diamonds, is
preserved; and a curious recess in the wall beside the lancet window suggests that it
may possibly have been cut to afford space for the seat of the commander, from which
he could see a t a glance whether all was right without, the while he assisted a t the
service being held within. Above this chapel a large chamber, whence steps led to the
battlements above, occupies the whole of the third storey. Northward of this, and on a
slightly higher level, is the private, or domestic, chapel, of such small dimensions that
not more than ten or a dozen persons could find space within it, but furnished with
double slits or ' squints ' in the walls on either sidc, so that five or six times that
number could see and hear the service from the large chamber on the south and a
smaller one on the north. This chapel was lighted by a rose, or wheel, window, of which
framing, filled in with masonry and s square opening, alone remains. The roof was of
wood, supported by a massive stone wall-plate and heavy square corbels. Opposite to
what W a s the entrance to this chapel a singularly elegant doorway opens on to a small
spiral staircase, giving access to the embattled roofs of the turrets.
There was a church here as early as 1170, but i t has entirely disappeared. The
present structure dates from about 1225, and i t was re-constructed in 1360. Ever since
1884, a 'succession of rectors, the Revs. Arthur Blomfield, E. W. Evans, and J. N.
Bromehead, have devoted themselves to repairing the ravages not merely of Cromwellian
Puritans and otherj, but of Victorian restorers. Thus a processional passage connecting
the Berkeley chapel in the north transept with t h e chancel that had been walled up
has been opened out again, and the very fine chancel screen, or what is left of it, has
been rescued and restored to its proper place and use. After lying as lumber in the
tower for many years, i t had been turned by a previous rector into an arbour for the
rectory garden, being cut about as the requirements of its new function dictated. I n
1844 frescoes were discovered, and one of the figures seemed to be intended for a portrait
of Pope Gregory the Great, the subject of the paintings being one of his miracles.
The date was an unfortunate one. The walls were summarily re-plastered and the
frescoes have perished.
The registers, which are well preserved, date from 1563. Among the names to be
found in them are those of Shakespeare and Hathaway, presumably kindred of the poet
and his wife. Shakespeare seems t o have had a peculiarly intimate knowledge of the
locality. In 2 Henry IV., v. 1, we read:Davy. I beseech you, Sir, to countenance William Visor, of Woncot,
against Clement Perkes of the Hill.
Woncot is the local pronounciation of Woodmancote, a hamlet of Dursley; there
are Visors, or Vizards a t all events, a t Dursley to-day, while on Stinchcombe Hillgenerally called ' The Hill,' is the site of a house once occupied by the family of
Perkes (vide p. 26 of Mr. Bromehead's Guide to Beverston).
,
I n both t h e church and t h e castle Mr. Bromehead described for us i n a
most delightful manner all t h e features of interest.
Then, passing through t o
t h e Rectory gardens, we were shown a valuable collection of prints relating to
t h e place, and we there took leave of o u r courteous and erudite cicerone.
To
the I.P.M., Bro. Gordon Hills, was assigned t h e pleasant task of thanking him
in t h e name of t h e party, and assuring him how greatly his efforts had been
appreciated.
A r u n of six miles brought us t o t h e Ridge, 800 feet above sea level, with
an extensive view reaching a s f a r as t h e Marlborough Downs, and Roundway
Hill by Devizes, i n one direction, and t h e Malverns and Welsh Mountains in
another, while below us lay t h e Severn valley and Berkeley castle. Then came
the steep descent t o Wotton-under-Edge, where we had tea, b u t there was no
time t o see anything of t h e place itself.
W e reached Bristol not much more
t h a n a n hour behind time, n o bad achievement considering how much we had
contrived t o get into t h e day, and also considering t h e narrow and devious ways
we for iome reason encountered on t h e homeward journey.
Trcc~zsncfio~~s
of t h c Qzlntuor C'oro~~cctiLodge.
F R I D A Y EVENING.
MASONIC MUSIC.
On the Friday evening a programme of Masonic music was given in the
Lodge-room a t tlie Freemasons' Hall under the auspices of t h e Bristol Masonic
Society. This Society was formed in 1917 for the study of matters relating to
the Craft, and has been the means of affording a good deal of interest, as well as
instruction, t o the members who now number over 270. Various papers have
been read, sometimes with lantern illustrations, but so far no publication has
been attempted. I n a preface to the printed programme, which, bwides the
words and notes upon the musical compositions, contained a short account of the
Province, Bro. Cecil Powell, P.G.D., the President of the Bristol Masonic Society,
remarked t h a t he considered it, like other similar organisations, owed its existence
to t h e example set by t h e Quatuor Coronati Lodge. H e also stated t h a t in
March, 1920, Bro H u n t , then Grand Organist of England, gave the members of
the Society a most enjoyable evening of " Mozart's Masonic Music," when he
read a paper and directed t h e performance of ten compositions by t h a t great
master; and t h a t he had suggested to Bro. H u n t t h a t a similar programme might
The idea was extended so as to
be arranged for the " Summer Outing.'
embrace other Masonic music. Five of Mozart's pieces were retained, b u t none
of them were those rendered when Bro. Bradley read his interesting paper before
the Quatuor Coronati Lodge in 1913. With all those concerned in the performance it was truly a labour of love; and, as all present, whether in the
orchestra, chorus, or audience, were members of the Craft, permission was granted
for t h e wearing of Masonic clothing.
Bro. Powell concluded his remarks by
saying : " I may say t h a t this is not the only outcome of a musical lecture here,
because the oldest musical society in this city, the Bristol Madrigal Society, was
founded in 1837 as a result of a series of lectures given in this very building.
Our Worshipful Master, Bro. Tuckett, has, by request, composed the music
I am glad that
for one of Robert Burns' Masonic songs for this occasion.
something from the pen of Bro. Burns is incruded in our programme. He seems
t o me t o hold in a sister A r t much t h e same position as his contemporary, Bro.
Mozart, occupies in the realm of music. The facility of expression, the perfection
and the gaiety of their genius appear t o have much in common, while their lives
present t h e same contrasts, sometimes struggling with poverty, and sometimes
enjoying the enthusiastic applause of all. To each came death long before he
had reached his fortieth year. It is a great satisfaction to us t h a t each of these
great men, so full of kindness to all mankind, found so much solace and fellowship
in our beloved Order."
Bro. E . H. Caok, D.P.G.M., presided, supported by Bro. J. T. Francombe,
the Lord Mayor of Bristol, and Bro. J. E . S. Tuckett, W.M. of 2076.
Bro Powell, in his capacity as President of t h e Bristol Masonic Society,
extended a very hearty welcome to the Brethren of the Quatuor Coronati Ladge,
and hoped they would be interested and pleased with t h e music provided for them.
Bro. Sydney Clifton Bingham, Deputy Grand Master of New Zealand, Secretary
of the Past MastersJ Lodge a t Christchurch, N.Z., and Local Secretary of 2076,
who is a Bristolian and the son of a highly esteemed member of t h e Province,
and Bro. William John Songhurst, P.G.D., Secretary of 2076, were then elected
Honorary Members (the only ones so far) of the Society upon t h e proposition of
the President, seconded by Bro. Tuckett.
Those taking part in t h e performance were the following:CONDUC~OR-Bro.
Hubert W. Hunt.
CHORUS-Alto,Bros C. G. A. Beavis, E. Gay, J. Horsell, G. N. Pike, A. G. Ransom,
C. H. E. Trevett; Tenor, Bros. W. Cunnington, R. F. D. Longford,
E. G. Maby, W. A. McGuffie, Rev. W. T. Phillips, T. Pitcher, C. Powell,
A. Ransom, TV. A. Stear, H. 3. Taylor, J A. Westcott; Bass, Bros. F. H.
Baber, W. H. J. Greenham, H. G . Hill, W. Holloway, A. H. Jupp, J. A.
Nixon, A W Parkman, J. Thomns, E. G. Vevers, L. 0.Vowles.
S7lm nz r r O u t i n g .
153
ORCHESTR.~-FI)S~
T71oF!~~s,
Bros. H . Darbey aiid J. W. Beauchamp; Second Violins,
Broa. A. J. E. Lucas and T. Pcarse Clarke; T7zolo, Bro. F. S. Gardner;
T'toloncello, Bro. B. H u n t e r ; Doztble Bass, Bro. J. Taylor; Oboe, Bro.
P. IJennett; Tympani, Bro. M. W. Loam; Organ, Bro. C. MT.Stear.
PROGR.~XME
(n.ith accompanying notes).
SHORTMasoxrc CSSTATA. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
BTO. iZf02drt
Tho tunes sung by t h e Orpheus 1,odgc to their opening and closing Hymns are
mritten for S.T.T.R., and. ~lnfortuniately.are not :~ppropriatefor Lodges which are not
favoured with tlie 1;ugt. nnmbrr of mpable singers such as is enjoyed by this very
musical Lodge.
5-SCESE from
"
., .
...
...
...
C . cuunod
clntl
Organ.
The sceno is tnlce11 from t h e last Act of the Opcra, the fourth in the original, but
the fifth in t h e English edition.
References to this work in English 3Iasonic publications have generally been based
upon t h e English rersion, and this seems to owe its transformatioll t o the necessity of
avoiding the representation of characters from t h e Bible on the stage; therefore t h e
Solomon becomes t h e Sultan Sulimanscene of action is changed to Stainbonl-King
Balkis is changed t o Ircnc, a Greek Princess and rassal of the Sultnn-Bdoniram
becoiiles l l u r i r l , a mysterious person from the Yar East-and
t!i:, tl1rc.e conspirators,
3lethusae1, Phnnor and Amron. as in fact a11 t h e characters, hare other rianles assigned
t o them.
After the death scene as it appears in tlie E~lglislieilitiou, the original has the
fol!on.ing :J f < f hrtsctel. Someone approaches !
f'hnrrot,. 1,et us fly! the night hides us.
S r l o n l i ~ t m (it1 n choliing v o i c e ) . Balkis! Balkis!
Then comes a scene with a characteristic French-dramatic dying fipeech by
Adoniram and a duet bet\^-eel1 t h e lovers.
The work was produced in 1862 as " La Reine de Saba, Grand Opera en 4 actes
do Rf. RI. Jules Barbier e t Michel CarrC. lnis en musique par Ch. Gounod " ; but the
libretto was actually taken from a work by GGrard de Nerval. De Nerval was, nbout
1848, a Parisian man of letters of ~vhoiii,anlong others. Goethe had a very high opinion.
With 141exandre Dunlas he projected a Grand Opera on t h e subject of Solomon's Temple,
for which Me-erbeer was to IT-rite the music. De xerral had colnposcd a stirring story
setting forth the loves of t h e Queen of Shcba wit11 Hiram, the iiiterfercnce of Solomon
therewith, and the assassination of the unfortunate c ~ . a f t s n ~ a(.l.().(!.
n
siv., 179). The
scheme, however, fell through; poor De Kcr~-ald i d by his own hand in 1855, having
first lost his reason, then his money.
6-Sosc.
"
Bra. J . E. Shum T u r k e t t
Solo T o i c e (Bro. Tlaber). ~c.tth Tvio (Bros. Ueavis, Maby and Hill) ctr~tl P i o n o f o r t e
(Bro. Hubert Hunt).
Robert Burns was initiated in the Lodge of St. David a t Tarbolton on t h e 4th
July, 1781, a t the age of 23 years. I n 1782 lie and some other members quitted this
Lodge and revived tlie old but dormant Lodge of St. James', and in l781 he was chosen
Depute Master to thc TTr.31.: Major General Blontgomerie, of Coilsficld. Burns 1%-asvery
regular i n his attendance, and freqneutlp occupied t h e Chair, and on 2nd March, 1786,
lie passed and raised his brother Gilbert. Tonrards t h e close of 1786 he arranged to
set sail for Jamaica, there t o " pnrsne Fortune's slidd'ry ba'," and this song \ras
written and chanted by the Author to the Brethren in Lodge assembled almost on the
eve of his intended departure. B u t in Koremher, 1786, iiisteqd of being on t h e seas
bound for t h e West Indies, he was in Fdinburgh in the midst of enthusiastic fliends,
and xlrcady famous. The FAinburgh edition of his Poems appeared in February.
1787. The now priceless first, or Kilmarnock, edition is dated 16th April, 1786,
and i t IT-as the Lodge of St. James. Tarl)olton. nhich was rea!ly responsible for
its issue. Thus t h e genius of Masonry discovered and led forth the genius of ono of
the greatest of Scottish poets.
S t o u m e r Outing.
7-Gr.m,
"
155
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.inon. ( c . 1800)
Gticcccotnyar~zetl Choir.
Happy are we met,
Happy have we been,
Happy may we part,
And happy meet again.
FI.OIII:r collt~ctionof Catches and Glces selected and arranged by Robert Broderip,
of Bristol.
" 2 of Broderip's Glce Boolis " ;tppcar in t h c in rent or^ of the Royal Sussex Lodge.
IS.PEI~T.II,
(during whicl~ refreshments were served in t h e dining-room).
~-CASTAT.I, " The >$ason's Rejoicing
"
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Bro. Mozart
...
C. B u c k n a l l
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Bro. Mozart
O r c h e s t ~ nccnd O r g a n .
This 1)enlltiful little piece was coinposed a t TriCnna in July, 1785, on the death
of t n o d:sting~lislledk'rec~nasons,Dulic Georg August of ?.Icclileilburg-Stwlitz :tnd Print e
Franz E.;tcrhazg, n h o a r r noted in AIozart's autograph catalogue as " Brothers hfecklenImrg and Esterhazy." It is grom~ded,after a sho-t introduction, on n Gregorian Psalmtone which nlay possibly h a r e had some spccial sig~lificancet o Freemasons, and it cnds
with a niajor third which ' sounds lilie tho opening of heaven.'
Il1rn,~sc[ctio7~s
of t h e Qr~atrrorCorotlati Lodge.
156
" Mozart," saFs his biographer J a h n , ii has written nothing to surpass this short
Adagio for the beauty of its technical treatineiit, and the perfection of t h e sound, or its
depth of feeling and of ps-cltological t r u t h . It is the musical expressio~lof t h a t manly
calm which gives sorrow its dv.e in presence of death, without exaggeration or unreality."
11-SOSG,
"
Charity
"
...
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Bro. Afozart
' l
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Bro. J . Parry
I~TROEUCTI~X.
1Zecitutire (TENOH).
Conven'd 11-e're nlet :-Chief
O ~ a c l cof Heav'n,
To whom the Sacrcd BIysteri!ls are g i r ' n ;
We're met to bid a sple~ldidfal~ricrise
lVorthy the mighty Hiller of the Sliies.
Xiid lo! where Uricl, Ailgel of the Sun,
Arrives to sec the nliglity busin:ss done.
A ~ i a(TENOR).
Behold he conies upon tho \r-ings of light,
And with his Sunny T*estment cheers tho sight.
Recitative (Bass).
The Lord supreme, Grand Masher of t h e Sliies!
11'110 Imde Creation froni a, chaos rise,
The Rules of Architecture first engrav'd
011Adam's licart.
((>~tccrtetn j ~ t l Choi~tts).
Sound Great Jehorctir's praise!
\Vho bade Iiing Solonlon the Temple raise.
A. C. Powell.
A. C. Powell.
Malmesbury Abbey.
South Porch.
J. F. H. G i i I ~ . ~ t - d .
J. F. H. G i l h n r d .
.-
b ~ ~ r g The
.
3larlret Cross.
J. F. H. Gilbard.
Malmesbury.
J. F. H. Gilbard.
Beverston.
L. A.
The Gateway.
Engel.
Beverston.
The Keep.
The xords of t h e " Ode " are taken from a poenl which appeared i n the (London)
i l h i m a n R e z o n of 1756. It is there described a s " Solomon's Temple, a n Oratorio, zs
i t was penformecl a t t h e Philharmonic-Room, i n Fishamble Street, Dublin, for t h e
benefit of sick end distressed Free-llasons. The words by Mr. James Eyre Weeks.
The ,music conlpozed by Mr. Richard Broadway, Organist of S t . Patrick's Cathedral."
No d a t e is given of t h e performance, but i t w:ts probably later t h a n 1750, since t h e
Broadway was
worlr is not ~centioned i n t h e (Dublin) .4himnn R e z o n of t h a t year.
The poem was reprinted in Masonic
organist of St. Patriclr's froin 1748 t o 1761.
Jfiscellanies of 1797.
The characters in t h e Oratorio include the Queen of Sheba. The words " Convened
we're met . . . Mighty Ruler of t h e skies " are uttered by Solomon, and t h e latter
part of the recitative, " And lo! where Uriel " &C., and t h e aria a r e given t o the High
Priest. Criel sings the bass recitative, and the chorus, " Sound great Jehovah's praise "
&C., is rendered by Priests and Nobles.
Bro. George Percirall was a nlenlber of .the Royal Sussex Lodge of Hospitality,
now No. 187, and played t h e 'cello i n the orchestra a t t h e performance in 1818. It is
strange there is no record of any other musical production of a composer who shows he
possessed considerable ability and charm.
The " Ode " is set for voices, flute, chrinets, bassoons, horns, trumpet, tympani
and strings.
On the present occasion, a s i t was impossible t o find players of windi i ~ s t r u m e i ~among
ts
the Brethren, t h e wind parts are taken by the organ, and the score
has been arranged so as to include t h e oboe.
T h e p r o g r a m m e being concluded, tlle W . D e p . P . G . M . , tlie L o r d M a y o r , a n d
t h e W.M. of tlie Q u a t u o r Coronati Lodge m a d e s h o r t speeches of congratulation
a n d t h a n k s t o all m110 liad t a k e n p a r t .
B r a . H u b e r t H u n t responded w i t h a
deliglltful l i t t l e address which was itself one of tlie m a n y enjoyable iteins i n tlie
proceedings.
It is doubtful whctlier anything on t h e same scale has previously bcen attempted. The
City of Bristol is famed for its music, vocal and instrumental, hut on the present occasion
only Freemasons were permitted t o contribute. Thus t h e Concert stands out not only
as a brilliant fenturc of onr Summer Outing I'ragrainme 'nut as a great Event in
Freemasonry. To Bro. Cecil Powell and t h e Bristol Masonic Society, t o t h c talented
artistes who so graciously gave their services, and especially t o t h e ' Master-Craftsman '
Bro. Hubert H u n t we owe a deep debt of gratitnde for pleasure we can never forget.
-Friday evening may stand as t h e model for all future _nerformances of Masonic Music.
SATURDAY, 1
7 JU
~ L Y~ .
Tra~lstrctiot~s
of t h e Q U C I ~ LCIoOr o~t ~ ~ fLodge.
ti
158
211
Suntnter Outing.
161
when he grew older, and had never seen a rib of beef eight feet in Icngth, then he made
further inquiries and found that all the truth had not been told: the rib is the rib of
a cow whale brought home by Sebastian Cahot.
The Crypt contains the tomb of R.W. Bro. M'. A. F. Powell, P.G.M., Bristol,
and the window with his monogram. Here were confirled for fifteen years some fifty of
Blake's Dutch prisoners of war, previous to their removal to Chepstow Castle.
I n the Crypt, our kindly conductor gave us some remirscences of his own
quaint experiences there as a school boy, and the opportunity was taken by the
W.M. to express our thanks t.o His Lordship llor making our v+it t o t h e Church
so pleasant and instructive.
We thed went on, still under Bro. Francombe's guidance, t o visit t h e Caves
on the Wharf, which run under the Church and from Bristol Castle under The C h t
t o Arno's Vale. These caves were probably cut. to procure dry, red sand for lead
castings. As trade increased, they became storehouses for palm oil and possibly
some slaves, as Bristol was a great market for them. The caves are now used by
Messrs. Lever Bi-others'as stores for, their valuable oils, and, through the courtesy
of their foreman, Mr. Os'Brien, we were allowed to explore them.
After a 11urr:ed inspection of the Shot Tower, still in active use of recent
years, we visited Canynge's' House, where the roof of the fifteenth century hall
in which Canynge
entertained Edward I V . is still preserved; also the staircase
. .
and chapel.
The afkrnoon was spent in visits to various objects of interest in Clifton,
including the famous Suspension Bridge. I'he weather being then (as it was
' throughout t h e whole period of the visit) all t8lla.tcould be deeired, there was an
excellent opportunity of seeing the many beallties of the neighbourhood, which
were much enjoyed, especially as a numerous band of local Brethren had volunteered
to act as guides.
One party paid a second visit to t h e Cathedral, ubder t h e
guidance of Bro. Hubert H u n t , for a more minate examination of its architectural
features.
The Clifton Suspension Bridge, spanning the beautiful Gorge of the Avon, is
admired for its grace and appropriateness to its position. I t stands 245 feet above the
high-water mark of the river below, is 627 feet in length between the nbntments, and
weighs 1,500 tons. I t possesses also an interesting history. In l733 a wine merchant of
the name of Vich left 1,000 as a nucleus for building such a bridge, N-hichhe estimated
would cost 10,000. In 1830 his bequest had accumulated to 8,000, and the scheme was
started under Brunel, who set up the t w o great piers. The undertaking was, however,
abandoned in 1853, when 45,000 had been expended. Eventually a further effort was
made, and the Bridge was opened, with great rejoicings, in 1864.
It is a curious fact that the chains, originally made for Clifton, but sold for the
construction of the Hungerford Bridge, London, became available upon the latter's
demolition, and arc now in the position a t .first intended.
SATURDAY EVENING.
We were a t home t o the local Brethren a t the Grand Xotel, and Wor. Ero. *
h. H. Dring, P.G.D., gave us a Lantern Lecture on tlie Evolution of the Tracing
Board. The paper itself was printed in A . &.C. xxix., where i t is fully illustrated ;
but there is a great difference between reading such a paper for oneself and
listening to it being delivered by the writer with the illustrations as lantern slides.
The Bristol Tracing Boards are of particular importance in t h e history of t h e
subject, and the Lecturer shewed us how originally these Boards were drawn so
as to receive metal models of t h e pillars and jewels, which were not designated on
the Board, as is the present practice. The actual metal jewels thus used a t Bristol
have been preserved and are now in the Provincial Museum. Our best thanks are
due to Wor. Bro. E. T. Dunscombe for his kindness in pctting a t our disposal t h e
lantern, which he also operated most efficiently.
As the slides were being shewn, questions were asked, and at tlie close of
the Lecture a discussion ensued, after which Wor. Bro. E . H. Cook, Dep.Prov.G.M.,
moved a vote of thanks t o the Lecturer, which was carried with enthusiasm.
It is a new departure on these occasions to devote our last evening t o this sort
of thing, and the innovation was fully justified.
,
162
The evening concluded with various speeches in which guests arid hosts alike
expressed their goodwill and gratitude for hospitality, and referred to the great
success of the Outing, a success principally due to the iiiimense trouble tlie local
Brethren had talren 111 preparing for i t and thin!ring i t all out.
General regret was felt a t the absence of Bro. A. C. Powell, caused by an
attack of influenza, and, indeed, this was tlie only thing one would have had
otherwise. The success of the Outing was in a very large measure due to him,
and liis absence 11:ust have been as keen a disappoint.ment to him as it most
certainly was to us
IIappily, he was able t o be present for a short time on
Friday evening, and we were glad to know t h a t liis heroism in venturing out had
been attended with no ill results.
A t the time of our visit the gas workers and allied trades in Bristol were
' resting,' and a t first the Hotel authorities were disposed t o shrink from the task
of providing for our army of invasion. However, Bro. A. Dodge, P.G.Treas.,
Bristol, came to the rescue, and, thanks to his power of persuasion, the Hotel
management consented to ' do the best they could considering the strike,' and all
will agree t h a t tlie result was in every way satisfactory, and t h a t our hearty thanks
are due to Mrs. Raynioild and her efficient staff.
SUNDAY, 1
8 J~
ULY
~
On the Sunday the Brethren attended service i n tlie Cathedral. The kindness of the Cathedral Authorities led thein to extend t o us a special invitation to
assemble in the grand old Norman Chapter House, where we were cordially
received by Bro. tlie Very Rev. tlie Dean, Canoil J . G. Alford, C.B.E., Canon in
residence, Arclideacon Talbot, Bro. the Rev. Precentor Phillips, and other members of tlie Chapter. The local Brethren had also assembled in great force, accompanied once more by the Dep.Prov.G.M., Bro Dr. E . H . Cook.
After a few cordial words of welcome by the Dean, a procession was formed,
being marshalled by the Prov. Directors of Ceremonies, and we proceeded into
the Cathedral and down the South Aisle t o where, on the North side of the
Nave, seats had been reserved for the Craft, while the Dep.Pr0v.G.M. and Oficers
of tlie Q.C. Lodge were assigned Canons' Stalls.
The music appointed for the
service was all selected from conlpositions by Freemasons, and was as follows:Chants.
Venite.-Dr.
Maurice Greene.
Psalin 90.-Dr.
William Hayes.
,, 91.-Rev. Sir F. A. G. Ouseley, Mus.Doc.
,, 92.-Tliomas Attwood.
Wesley.
Te Deuni in F.-Samuel
Benedictus in E flat.-Dr.
C. Harford Lloyd.
Antllem, " 0 1107.~amiable," (Psalm 84, v. 1, 2, 12 and 13)Hubert W . H u n t .
Webbe.
Hymn 273 A . & M. (Tulle ' Melcombe').-Samuel
As a voluntary, Bro. H u n t played a Fugue oil the tulle ' Bedford,' which was
compcsed by the late Bro. F. S t . John Bullen, F . M . of the Royal Sussex Lodge
of Hospitality, Bristol, who died in 1917. Bro. Bullen was an amateur possessing
considerable musical gifts and was a man of charming disposition. The following
biographical notes on the other musicians named will be of interest :DR. GREESE (1695--1755) wrote pieces of high llnsonic tendencr (A.Q.?. iv., 92). He
n-as Organist of St. P;~ul's Cathedral from 1718, and Professor of nlusic a t
Cambridge from 1730.
Dlc. HAYES(1706-liii), composer o f " An Odc Sacred to PIIasonry."
Professor of
Music a t Oxford from 1742.
SIR FREDERICK
OUSELEY
(1H2r5-1889) was Grand Chaplain in 1864 with the Rev. A. F. A.
Woodford ( a founder of No. 2076). and Professor of Mcsic at Oxford from 1855.
'l'
ATT\%-oO~
.
(1768-1838)
SAMUEI,WESLET(1'7661837) was born in Bristol, a son of the Rev. Charles IVesley, the
hymn writer, and therefore a nephew of John Wesley.
H e was t h e first
Grand Organist after t h e Uilion of t h e Ancients and Moderns, which office he
held for five years.
H e was Grand
H . \V. HUXT, Orgallist of Bristol Cathedral from 1901, was Grand Organist i n 1919 a t
t h e Pmce Celebration. The Anthem was written for t h e Coiiseeratioii of the
Cabot Lodge (Bristol) in November, 1918, and repeated a t the Consecration
of the Peace Lodge last September, when t h e solo was sung by Bro. John
Horsell, who also sang i t o n t h e present occasion.
WEBBE(1'740--1816) was a promineat nlusiciall of his time, a i d , like nlost of
SAMUEL
his brother glee writers, a Mason.
B u t n o t only were we privileged t o h e a r tlie music t h u s selected f o r u s
rendered by Bro. H u n t a n d h i s choir, b u t we h a d the f u r t h e r privilege of listening,
f o r t h e second t i m e i n t h history
~
of o u r Outings, t o a sermon specially addressed
t o us, a n d preached b j a m e m b e r of t h e C r a f t , o n tliis occasion B r o . t h e R e v .
C a n o n W. E. R. Morrow, P r . G . C h a p . , S u r r e y , V i c a r of Clifton.
Taking his
t e x t f r o m St. M a r k i x . , 50, t h e p r e a c h e r d e a l t w i t h t h e s u b j e c t of influence a s a
factor i n life, a n d i n his opening words m a d e use of a n apposite q u o t a t i o n f r o m
Jeffrey F a r n o l : " M a n is a pebble t h r o w n i n t o t h e pool of life, a splash, a b u b b l e ,
a n d h e is g o n e !
B u t t h e ripples of influence h e leaves b e h i n d go o n e v e r
widening u n t i l t h e y reach t h e f a r t h e s t b a n k . "
D u r i n g t h e sermon t h e preacher
m a d e a special reference t o t h e inembers of. t h e L o d g e i n tlle following words:" We \\-eleome to-day to our Cathedral man\- distlngulshed and influential brcthren
of the Pllasonic Fraternity, b u t especially the me~llbcrsof the Quatuor Cororiati Lodge
who have been visiting our c ~ t y . The xrhole Masollic Order is under a n ever-increasing
obligation to these learned brethren and students of Afasonic lore.
For i t is their
privilege as m-ell as jog to search into the hidden m ~ s t e r i e sof nature and of science,
in order t h a t they may inspire their brethren with kno13-ledge and truth, and with lofty
ideals, so t h a t every Mason shall be ablc t o render himself more serviceable t o his
fellow-men. Bristol will be the richer in experic.nce from tliis brotherly contact. The
visiting Master, Wardens, and Brethren \v111 carry away with them many happy
memories of the charm and unique interest of this Capital City of the West. This is
not exactly the time t o go deeply into t h e principles of the Masonic Order, but,
speaking from a dual position, I am profoundly impressed by t h e influence of Freemasoi~rr
especially during the last five years. If I may quote from t h e oration of t h e Chaplain
a t t h e Consecration of your Lodge, who was also one of your first members, t h e Rev.
Adolphus Woodford, P.G.C., i t will explain in better words than I can command t h e
true ideals of Masonry. ' Freemasonry,' he says, ' is not either intended to promote
and foster alone agreeable coteries and graceful hospitality; i t is not even solely a n
assemblage of brethren of t h e '' mystic tic,'' as we often say, met t o discharge from
time to time the normal duties of t h e Lodge, and display the beautles and accessorics
of a n ornate and cherished ritual. . . . It has higher aims and greater ends within
its purview for, all its c r l ~ t n n i ,and without these, I make bold to say, its mission 111 t h e
world might seem a doubtful blessing t o some minds, and i t nould forfeit, I venture also to
think, much of the fascination i t exerts over those of its members who have known i t
t h e longest and t h e best, and all of its attractions for manliind. . . . English
Freemasonry to-day a s ever asserts in ulinlistakeable tones bellef in God and love of
man, and emphatically seeks t o assert a reverence for religion. Because i t seeks this
eud its Lodges are like a n electric c h a ~ i iof light, nhich seenls t o be encompassing mankind, bringing intellect and culture, peace and civilization, fricndsliip and fraternity, to
t h e distant and t h e near.' I therefore appeal to you, my brethren of the Craft, in t h a
strongest possible manner, in the face of the enormous problems 11-hich await solution
by good men, and by them alone, t o bring in the weight of your immense influence illto
the service of the Churrh, t o aid her in the performance of her great task. May your
lives be such as to send forth a fragrance and a n influence which shall be remembered
164
I10.(1n.~actlorzsof
tfie
(~trtrfttorC'orot~at;Lodge.
by tlio generations which come after you. Such an influence could not be more
toucllingly expressed 01. more b~autifullg described than in a char~niag epigram of
Philip of Thessalonica ( d n t h . PUT. rii., 5 4 4 ) , placed upon a monument raised to n stonemasoilis boy by his own father's hands:"
From a translation of the original I)>- Bro. tthc Very Rev. the Dean of \lT\'ells.
Tra~nsciction.~
of the (&71at~(or
C'orotiati Lodge.
REVIEWS.
-GOLBY"S IliISl'OE17 O F T l i E S T S UZLZTP LODGE OF I N S T R U C T Z O S .
Z E R E has just been issued from the Herald Press, Bath, a work
bearing the title A Centzcry of JIaso,~ic TJTorl;ing being a IIistory
of the Stability Lodge of Znstrztction, of which the author is
Bro. F. W. Golby, P.A.G.D.C.
The volunle is octavo in size, of xix. and 276 pages with
four portrait illustrations.
A first handling of the book does not inspire one with
any feeling of joy, for i t is printed on paper of rather poor
quality and the workmanship of the binding is not of a high stalidard.
Having, however, got rid of the indifferent impression first formed of the
work, i t is grstifying to find that tlle contents are well worthy of careful study,
and that much of value is to be gleaned from its pages. The book is much more
than a mere history ot' a Lodge of Instruction, for i t deals with the fascinating
subject of the transmission of the Ritual from 1816-when i t was settled by the
Lodge of Reconciliation and approved by Grand Lodge-to
the present day.
The author expresses regret a t the inaccessibility of official records which
were apparently freely available for reference in the past, but, fortunately, he
has had sufficient material to hand in the records of the Lodge to enable liim to
deal very satisfactorily with his subject.
From these records i t seems that this Lodge of Instruction came into
existence in 1817 an.1 t h a t amongst its original inembers were Bros. Pliilip
Broadfoot, Thoinas Satterly and James McCann, who had taken an active part
in the work of the Lodge of Reconciliation, whilst seven other niembers of that
famous body subsequently joined t h e Lodge of Instruction and assisted in carrying
on the work.
Before proceeding with his real history of the Lodge the author in a clearly
written and well reasoned preface deals with the various claims that have been
mado from time to time by the Enlulation Lodge of Improvement regarding its
alleged connection with tlle Lodge of Reconciliation and the authenticity of its
Ritual and Lectures, and although these claims are effectively shattered for tlle
time being, i t may be well to w~thholdjudgment, for some reply will surely be
forthcoming. The Enlulation Lodge has by persistent advocacy so well consolidated its position that it can hardly now leave the field without a final effort
t o re-establish its front.
Chapter i. deals with the " Lineal Descent from tlle Lodge of Reconciliation,"
and i t appears tliat members of that fanlous Lodge were amongst the organisers of
the Stability Lodge of Instruction. Bro. Phiiip Broadfoot, the first Preceptor,
was not only a prominent and active member of the Lodge of Reconciliation, but
he was engaged in promulgating tlle system in "parts of England and Ireland."
Bros. James McCann and Thomas Satterly were similarly employed in disseminating the Reconciliation system. It cannot be doubted that when these
three Brethren joined in forming the Stability Lodge of Instruction i t was because
they recognized that a general Lodge of instruction would be beneficial to the
Craft, and they could hardly help teaclling the authorised system of which they
were masters. Further evidence is given that the earliest work of the Lodge was
in ever- way authentic, and the inlpression left on one's mind is that the author
has prdved his case.
Chapter ii. is headed " The Stability Lectures." It deals in an interesting
way with the question of Masonic Lectures generally, but simply leads to the
conclusion t h a t whilst ceremonies have been approved by the Grand Lodge,
Lectures never have been, but, on the contrary, that august body, a t three
successive meetings in 1819, refused to order for adoption any special form of
Masonic ~ e c t u r e s y
166
Chapter iii., which is styled " The Stability Ceremonies," gives copious
extr:.cts from the Minutes, but no quotation appears of an actual ceremony having
been rehearsed until April 24th, 1835, when the Initiation was gone through.
The point may not be very material, for all three ceremonies were oertainly
performed on November 8th, 1850, i n the presence of Bro. Peter ~homs'on,who
was from the beginning associated with Philip Broadfoot.
Chapters iv., v., and vi. are concerned with the " Continuity of Teaching"
under the various Preceptors who have ruled the Lodge, and t h e following table
is a sufficient explanation of the course of t h a t teaching and its transmission in
an unbroken line:Preceptors.
Ruled.
Joined.
(Philip Broadfoot
1817-1835
19 Ilecr. 1817
l ~ e t e rTllomwn
1817-1851
19 Dew. 181'7
Henry Muggeridge
1851-1885
8 Novr. 1839
Eustace Anderson
1885-1900
29 Octr. 1880
F. W. Golby
1900-1917
8 Mar. 1895
-a
Constituted in 1723, the Lodge met in t l ~ cCity of London till 1739, when
removal to Wapping preceded existence there for eighty years-for
nearly sixty
of which i t met upon its own freehold premises-and in 1820 reverted to the City,
where its meetings have since been held. That t h e Lodge was in fact in being
before 1723 is suggested as probable, and; indeed, claimed (page 14) b u t historic
proof dates o ~ l yfrom the year rlamed, and the Grandmastership of the Duke of
Wharton.
Bro. Hieiron can hardly be correct in writing: " It is said t h a t he
[the Duke] became President of the ' Hell Fire Club ' meeting, a t Medmenham
Abbey on the Thames"; as, although the proclamations against these luridlynamed clubs were issued in 1721, the Duke of Wharton died abroad in 1731,
whilst the assemblies a t Medmenham commenced a t the earliest about 1742, when
Sir Francis Dashwood took the Abbey on lease and restored t h e ruins; John
Wilkes becoming a member of rhe Club a t Medmenham in 1762.
The old customs, Masonic, convivial, and hospitable, are fully illustrated,
both by extracts from the Lodge Minutes and pleasant explanatory comments of
the author; and payments so various as for " a Crimson Velvet Pall with Gold
Fringe Lace " in 1745, and for " Red P o r t " in 1779, find place.
As to the
velvet pall, the surmise is t h a t its purpose was not t h a t of a " Mort-cloth," l
provided by some Scottish Lodgas, but was for use in craft ceremonial.
From 1749 to 1825 the annual Country Feast was observed with regularity,
and one almost sighs to read of days when i t was possible to regard Hackney,
Hoxton, Islington, and Camberwell as rural retreats from London noise and
turmoil, where songs such as thove enumerated on page 70 were in vogue, with
(as Bro. Hteiron properly suggests) the addition of " Wapping Old Stairs," which
the present writer once heard rendered by a retired naval officer who, as a ' middy,'
had been a t the bombardment of Algiers in 1816.
Is not this song often
attributed to Charles Dibdin, by the way?
The Dundee Lodge Minutes show that i t was favoured with t h e warning
letter touching Messrs. Cropper and North, sent out to the Craft by the Union
Cross Lodge, Halifax, in February, 1792.2
On its own freehold premiws a t Wapping, between 1763 and 1820, it is
estimated that some two thousand candidates were admitted.
Though the Lodge duly purchased the Constitzctions published in 1756,
1767, 1784, and 1815 (page 182), only t h a t of 1756 'seems to have survived to
the present day. Whether the conservative instincts of successive Masters confiiieti ceremonial use to the oldest copy, and so rendered easier the loss of later
volumes, or how such loss happened, is probably now less known than regretted.
Chapter xi. deals with the membership of Thomas Dunckerley from 1761
to 1768; and makes mention of thab curious person [Sir] Fr;ncis Columbine
Daniel, who, though proposed as .a candidate, proved not to be a persona grata
a t "Dundee."
The course taken by the Lodge, alluded to on page 165, was
identical with that a t a Lodge a t Yeovil. A.Q.C. xxiii., 154".
I n Chapter xiv., headed " W a s Dr. Saml. Johnson a Freemason?" Bro. ,
Heiron traverses new ground in his contention for a probability t h a t t h e Doctor
was admitted to the Craft in the Dundee Lodge on J u n e l l t h , 1767. Certainly
a " Saml. Johiison " occurs in the Mi11ut.e~of t h a t date, and later as occasionally
attending until 1770: but, with every desire to accept an obviously attractive
theory, i t seems diacult to regard the latter as more than a very remote possibility
arising on practically nothing more than a coincidence of name. The origin and
attribution of t.he solitary records3 reference by Dr. Johnson t o Wapping, uttered
less than two years before his death, seem rather to point to t h e years following
1737, when Boswell tells us " not much could be ascertained about this period of
Johnson's life." As one biographer has written4 : "Many of his youthful contemporaries were dead, and he himself, having attained distinction and competence, was u n w i l l i n ~to look hack upon t h e difficulties of his earlier days ";
1
<:
168
T ~ N I I P ( I Cof~ ~the
O ) (;)~rtrt~ror
IY
Corottati Lodge.
and another l : " During some portion of Johnson's married life he had lodgings,
first at Greenwich, afterwards a t Hampstead. But he did not always go home
o'nights, sometimes preferring to roam the streets with t h a t vulgar ruffian Savage,
who was certainly no fit co~npanyfor hiin." This " legendary period," as it has
been termed, of Johnson's life, appears more suggestive of relatively remote
quarters, such as Wapping, than those years wit11 which the historian of Dundee
Lodge is concerned.
The latter obviously relies on Johnson'9 disposition to
melancholia in support of his theory: but it is hardly going too far to,say that
in a life from l709 to 1784 the years circcc 1767 were some of those in which the
tendency least manifested itself. Johnson in 1765 had become acquainted with
the Thrales, and the friendship lasted eightee:l years; only a little earlier he had
founded the celebrateci Literary Club; whilst in February, 1767, occurred his
lengthy and treasured interview with King George 111. in the Qneen's Library.
No; when the probabilities are weighed, and Johnson's complete silenoe as to
the Craft, coupled with the circunlstance t h a t no trace of his association with
persons known to be connected with the Craft is allywhere to be found, one can
hardly do other than conclude the truth to be that he ' shied ' a t reference to his
days and nights in London before fortune smiled upon him; and i t was for t h a t
reason "before his death he burned several manuscripts, amongst others, two
quarto volumes containing an account of his life."
Bro. Heiron puts his
argument quite fairly, and the reader will decide for himself.
It seems not unlikely t h a t inquiry would add t o " Some Interesting
Names " conllected with the Lodge (page 295), one already in the printed "List
of Menlbers in 1810 "; that of Thomas Wilde, Attorney, Castle-Street, Falcon
Square, who may well prove to be the Thomas Wilde, Attorney, practising in
the City 1805-1811, who was a f t e r ~ a r d s ~ s e r j e a nWilde,
t
Chief Justice of the
Common Pleas, 1846, and Lord Chancellor 1850, with the title of Lord Truro.
His second wife was Lady Augusta Enlma d'Este, daughter of the Duke of Sussex,
G.M.
I n the Library of Quatuor Coronati Lodge, No. 2076, is the photographic
copy of " A List of Members belonging to t h e Lodge of Free and Accepted
Masons, held a t the Dtc7ulre-~Zrn,s, near TVapping New-Stairs. A.L,. 5759,"
originally printed as a broadside, and surmounted by an engraving much
resembling that opposite page 209, and inscribed, " I. Cartwright Sculp. Royal
Exchange "-perhaps
the " Copper Plate " for which Bro. Cart vright was paid
by the Lodge in March, 1755 (page 238). This list gives 46 members, and 151
" Members u s ~ n gthe Sea "; amongst the Iast-named being one " Elijah Goff."
I n the printed list of 1810 is, "Elijah Goff, Surveyor, Wellclose Square"; he
being presumably of a younger generation than the member in 1759 (or 1755,
according to A.D. calculation). Here comes in a coincidence consequent on the
rather noticeable appellation, " Elijah Goff," thus twice appearing. Long years
after, in 1872, was given to the world, " Elijer Goff, his Travels [etc.]," a book
of humour stated in Allebone as written by one William Dawes, of Lancashire;
followed by other publicatioils from the same pen and under the hame pseudonym,
and published collectively as, "The Works of Elijer Goff," in JP78 and 1881.
This seeming appropriation of an unusual name may justify a passing word.
As before intimated, Bro. Heiron's labours add to t h e Masonic Library a
volume praiseworthy in design 2nd execution, and to be read with profit and
pleasure; and i t may be ungenerous to complain that such a book-and especially
one planned as is this-is,
relatively speaking, halt and maimed for want of an
adequate index. Unless t h e reader will go thorougl~ly and systematically from
cover to cover, and make his notes on the way (and how many readers will do
this ?), he will inevitably niiss much. A good table of contents does what i t can.
but an equally good index would have assisted in both value and appreciation,
and incidentally have saved the author some amount of repetition. The illustrations are well Gone, and many cf them interesting; and b u t for the sore want
just now indicated, which i t is hoped may be supplied in a future edition, to
criticise Ero. Heiron's book would only be t o praise.
June, 1921.
W. B. HEXTALL.
1
'
9 A1;BIV
E N C T C L O P ~ 3 D I d OE' F R E E l I f d S O N R Y ( A R S JfAG-V-1
L.4 TO.1IORUilf) 4 S D OF C'OG-'VSTE I S S T I T U T E D V F S T K R I B S :
T H E I R R I T E S , L7TEZ?dTC7RB d,TD I I I S T O R Y .
By A r t h u r Edward Waite.
I n t w o Volumes.
1921.
170
But the difficulty of finding out what information is given on any matter
is increased by the inclusion of several smaller alphabetical lists within the main
alphabet. Under L WQ have the names of over 130 " Lesser Masonic Personalities " ;
M gives us about 150 more names of " Minor Masonic Literati ' l ; while about 50
Orders and Rites are brought together under the heading "Minor Rites in
Masonry," another 50 or so appearing under N as " Non-Masonic Rites," with a
third group under C as " Convivial Societies." Again, there are lists of " Major
and Minor Hermetic Grades " and " Minor Master Grades " within these subalphabets, and so far as I have been able to check these hundreds of names and
titles ( I do not pretend t o have checked them all) I have not found one for
which a reference can be gained by means of the Index.
One wonders what was the standard or criterion by which Bro. Waite
decided-no
easy task-whether
some brethren should be classed among the
Greater or the Lesser Masonic Personalities, or among the Major or the Minor
Masonic Literati. George Washington comes as a Lesser Personality in company
with Joseph Cerneau, William Finch, Martin Folkes, The Duke of Wellington,
and William IV. George Smith appears twice-in the main body of the work
(II., 419), as well as among the Minor Literati (II., 136)-with a discrepancy
in the date of publication of his Use and Ablrse of Freemasonry.
The need for providing some means of easy reference t o scattered allusions
to the same subjects may also be gathered from the following which I have taken
from Vol. I . :-" We pass t o the consideration, a t a later stage " (27) ; ' With
which I shall deal later o n " (77); " I have mentioned this adventurer previously" (101); " I have tabulated elsewhere' (103); " I shall return to this
subject at a much later stage" (110); " As we have seen" (185); " The Grades
. . . will come before us in due course .
. We shall have an opportunity
of adjudicating on this question in another section " (213); " We shall see later"
(214); " I have referred to the subject" (218); "About which I have spoken1
elsewhere in these pages " (257) ; " I have indicated " (264) ; " It is explained
in the proper plaoe" (266); " I have given sr.me intimations already on this
subject" (282); " A s we have seen" (284); "Pending their analytical consideration in the place t o which they belong" (284); " Conclusions which will
be reached a t a later stage" (291); " To which I have referred previously "
(294); " W e shall see in the proper place*' (315); " W e shall see shortly"
(333) ; " I have cited . . . previously " (S38) ; " I have explained elsewhere "
(385) ; " With which I have dealt briefly elsewhere " (409).
I n making these extracts I have not exhausted Vol. I . , and I have left
Vol. 11. untouched. I should consider that it contains quite 9s many of these
indefinite references. The Index fails to shew the connexions. I have spoken of
this unsatisfactory list as an Index because Bro. Waite so describa i t in his
Preface.
Its official title is actually " Conspectus of Cross References," but
that does not increase its utility.
Of the following points for correction or modification, some-but I think
not all-may
be attributed to careless proof-reading or editing. Dionysius for
Dionysus (I., ix.); Duke of Sussex, Grand Master in 1782 (xiii.); Tyler elected
by ballot (xiv.); Commanding for Commandery (xv.); The note under " Resignation" is not in accordance with English Masoric practice (xxii.); George for
William Ravenscroft (82); Martin Clare app3inted t o revise the Lectures (112);
" According t o the Cooke MS., three pillars were found a f k r the Flood by
Pythagoras and Hermes" (140); The birth of Crucefix as in 1797 (160);
Dunckerley's Charge published in 1737 (203) ; Caglaistro for Cagliostro (296) ;
Pausanius for Pausanias (302) ; Desaguliers a t Edinburgh in 1781 (334); Dernlott
" seceded from the other jurisdiction " (336) ; Hemn~ingsfor Hemming ( I I . , 12) ;
Dunkerley for Dunckerley, described as " Pro-Grand Master" (33); Plot's for
Aubrey's Nattiral History of TViltsltirr (46) ; John for George Payne (48) ; " The
Duke of Wharton summoned a meeting of Grand Lodge . . . and the Duke
of Wharton . .\ . was proclaimed Grand Master" (49); AbM Peran for
PBrau (58) ; L'Orde for L'Ordre (59) ; Pia:lw \for Pianco (1 26) ; " Thomas
Harper, . . . Deputy Grand Master of the Union Grand Lodge" (128);
Reviews.
171
Lebauld le Nanes for Le Bauld de Nans (131); " Stray Leaves from a Freemason's
Note Book " attributed to Dr. George Oliver (210); Radcliffe for Rancliffe (227);
Ragon "born a t Bruges in 1781 or thereabouts," should be: born a t Bray-surSeine on 25th February, 1781 (313). Kenneth Mackenzie is almost always put
down as MacKenzie. On two occasions I have noticed the name spelt correctly.
Once it appears as MacKenize (II., 188).-"
A mythical person with an evidently
mythical name-Fredericas
du Thom" (I., 306). A portrait of Fredericus de
Thoms and some biographical notes were printed in A.Q.C. ix. (1896), 82." [Stukeley's] Diary, which is in private hands, has not been printed and is not
available for consultation" (I., 332). Surely j l is not necessary t o remind Bro.
Waite of the publications of t h e Surtees Society !-Bro.
Waite seems to be
under the impression t h a t the Royal Masonic Institutions for Girls and for Boys,
and the Royal Masonic Benevolent Institution, are " under the general supervision
of a Board of Benevolence which meets monthly throughout t h e year a t Freemasons' Hall" (II., 93), and he makes no mention of t h e Fund of Benevolence
which is actually administered by t h a t Board.-"Kloss
is t h e German
bibliographer of Freemasonry . . . and Findel is still, I believe, its chief
German historian " (I., 276).
Kloss " the great German bibliographer.
[His
book] 1844, is indispensable rather than valuable " (II., 129). B u t is i t possible
that Bro. Waite has not heard either of Wolfstieg or Begemann ? Their publications have certainly superseded those of Kloss and Findel.-"
I would give
mmething to eonsult A n d e s Chronologiques . . . de l a Maconnerie des
Pays Bns, which seems t o have appeared in parts between 1822 and 1829"
( I I . , 322). It ought not to have been difficult to obtain a sight of this work.
There is certainly one copy in London.-The
name of Lambert d e Lintot
" should be held in fair remembrance for his zeal in t h e foundation of the Girls'
school . . . according to one account was alive in 1788" ( I I . , 2). This man
certainly designed and engraved a plate commemorating the foundation of the
school. It was a commission for which no doubt h e was duly paid. I n these
circumstances i t is not surprising t o read t h a t he was alive in 1788, for in t h a t
year the Girls' School was founded by the Chevalier Ruspini, to whom Bro. Waite
gives no credit.
It might be supposed from an examination of t h e Index t h a t t h e Duke of
Sussex is mentioned only once in these Volumes. As a fact his name appears
frequently, and almost always with a n allusion t o his religious views, and to
their supposed influence upon Masonry and its Ritual. I believe it is generally
admitted that the Duke was in the habit of abtending a Unitarian place of
worship, but the inference which Bro. Waite and others before him have drawn
should not be accepted as a fact without evidence t o support it. It would perhaps
have been well if Bro. Waite had referred direct to t h e Articles of Union instead
of t o the partial quotation therefrom contained in the Book of Constitz~tions;
while note should also be made of t h e admission of Jews t o the Craft early in the
Eighteenth Century, thus indicating t h a t Masonry had assumed an unsectarian
character long before the time of the Duke of Sussex. gome of the reference to
this matter will be found a t I., 177, 278, 279; I I . , 23, 78.
A short article under M (II., 92) headed " Masonic Glass " might perhaps
be considered by the unlearned as intended to give some particulars of the
vitreous ware, engraved and embellished with various emblems, example of which
are to be found in most Masonic collections. Such, however, is not Bro. Waite's
idea. Under this heading he expresses his view " t h a t Masonry is t h e Jfllinutus
.Wt~n,d~s,or Mirror of t h a t great world of initiation which interpenetrates all
history and seems also to lie behind all . . . Masonry is a mirror of this
kind, or a last receptacle," &C.; which may perhaps be true, though Bro. W a i h
lays himslf open to the suggestion that even a Mirror is not necessarily made
of Glass.
Of some earlier Masonic writers Bro. Waitq: appears to hold a very poor
opinion which he does not hesitate t o express:- ' Did I say t h a t he was a liar
from the beginning-which
indeed goes without saying-I
should be specifying
only in a variant form of words that he was z Ma-onic litte'rateur, like others who
172
Trnnsactio?~sof t h e
Q ~ r t c t u o r Coronati
Lodge.
had preceded him in France and like many who came after" (I., 72).
" The
unholy rubbish which is met with from time to time in Masonic periodicals-bhose
of America especially-is
only a degree less stultifying than the Anti-Masonic
gutter-press of the Continent until i t was swamped by t h e War. I do not wish to
be invidious, but the illiterate vapourings and ravir.gs of writers like J. D. Buckwho has the plaudits of the Southern Judsdictio : per saeculas e t aiones-is one
case in point " (I., 37). " Buhle, however, had this advantage over Ragon, that
he was a man of some ability and learning" (I., 77). ( ' W e have had Oliver in
the early days confusing all the issues by frantic hypotheses reflecting from preceding speculation, and we have had American writers in our own who carry no
titles whatever on either side" (I., 85). " Pike was like Ragon unfortunately,
a man of uncritical mind " (I., 354). " I n place of the Pierian spring [Oliverl
had drunk unwisely and too well from those turbid waters of the Deluge which
were conveyed in his day through t h e conduits of Jacob Bryant, Faber, Higgins,
Vallancey and other makers of dreary Noachian m y t h " ( I I . , 210).
"John
Yarker -another collector of materials, but in this case almost illiterate " (I., 162).
" It comes from John Yarker and is the usual mass of confusion" ( I I . , 319).
" Yarker on the highest peak of his particulzr Darien-a sorry spectacle of pose
in tatters of thought" (II., 392). "Reghellini, who incorporated with his own
reveries every fable which he met with" { I I . , 446).
" As might have been
expected Kenneth MacKenzie gives a muddled explanation " ( I . , 12). " Kenneth
MacKenzie, wh-with
characteristic intellectual crookedness . . .'' ( I I . , 4).
l' A
most dubious source - that of Kenneth Mackenzie " ( 1 1 , 197).
" Egyptian Masonry has been vilified by people Iike Woodford, who have neither
cee.l its rituals nor sought information concerning them" ( I . , 93). " Woodford
. . . in his characteristic slovenly fashion " (II., 102). " From the trend of
Woodford's criticism it is tolerably certain t h a t he had not read his author"
(I., 207). ' Observations by worthless makers of paragraphs like Woodford and
Kenneth MacKenzie" (I., 64).
" Woodford, nioreover . . . but quoting
no source as usual . . . Kennet11 MacKenzie. in his charactekistically crass
manner " ( I . , 272). ' People of the Woodford and MacKenzie type " ( I I . , 153).
" The mouthing ruffianism of MacKenzie and Woodford " ( I I . , 368).
I leave these expressions to speak for themselves. B u t it may be askedWhat particular advantages or abilities does Bro. Waite claim to possess which
enable him to take a position superior to t h a t of earlier writers? To what extent
he has been able t o consult books which wera not available to them is not clear
to me. I do nbt see that he mentions many works of an authoritative character
which were written since their time, and of some which have appeared both
before and since he has expressed or implied his ignorance. Throughout the work,
Latin and French words and phrasks and peculiar technicalities such as ' palmary '
and ' implicits ' are scattered with a lavish hand. To those who do not understand
them the effect is far more likely to be repellant than impressive; and those who
do understand them can hardly fail t o be irritated by their constant and needless
display in an Encyclopadia from which readers might expect information and
that alone. Bro. Waite refers to himself as " a Catholic Mystic " (I., 216), " a f
spokesman of the Great Quest" ( I I . , 7), and as ' a historian whose sole concern
is t h e truth whatever the consequences " (II., 218) " I know only t h a t one who
like myself has passed through many schools finds intimations and messages in
the Third Degree of the Craft which are not heard by men of material minds
and persons belonging to low prades of culture" (I., 249). " I have travelled
f a r through the fields of Ritual" ( I I . , 139). " I speak with a wide knowledge
of French Masonic Rituals" (IT., 228). " I plsce on record here, as one who
has followed the quest and has reached its term in symbolism " (IT., 469). " I
have not lived among Rituals through all my literary life without having acquired
certain canons of criticism by which to distinguish among them" (IT., 481). His
words are not always directed to Masons generall3-" I speak a t this ~ o i n theret
fore only t o a small as~embIyof the elect and of those who are capable of election
within the ranks of the ~ r o t l i e r h o o d " (I., 383), ,and " I speak here indeed only
to a snlall assembly of the elect and of such as are capable of election, who know,"
&c. (I., 305).
For myself (and I am inclined to think that serious students of the Craft
will take the same view), I am not a t present prepared to discard in favour of
this work the much reviled Cyclopedias of Woodford and Mackenzie, nor the
Concise Cyclopedia of Hawkins t o which Bro. Waite makes no reference, nor
even the " mammoth compilation which still passes in America under t h e name
of Mackey " (I., 405)
I may add a word concerning the pictorial illustrations of which the book
contains many, some with a description beneath, most with none. For particulars .
of the latter i t becoines necessary to cons111t a tabulation which immediately
follows the Preface in Vol. I . , and from t h a t to judge of their relevancy t o the
text with which they are associated. Of th.: former class I mill refer to two.
The Frontispiece to Vol. 11. is a picture descriked beneath as " The Chevalier
Ramsay," of which the following particulars are given in t h e table:The Chevalier Andrew Michael Ramsay, in t h e robes of a Knight ~f
the Order of St. Lazarus. It is necessary t o say that I have followed
the quest of Ramsay's portrait for something like ten years, and nowby a process of exhaustion, I an1 riven to conclude-in spite of many
rumours-that
there is none extant. This is how he is presented to
the mind of a young Masonic friend and artist . . . and it shall
serve as faithful in the spirit until time or circumstances provide
another, more authentic in the literal sense.
The second portrait to which I direct attentio.1 appears in Vol. I. facing page 26,
and is t i ~ e i emarked " .3;lmes Anderson," of wilicn it is earlier said, " The portrait
is characteristic and well known."
Characteristic-of
whom? Well knowncertainly ! but NOT of the Rev. James Anderson, who issued the Editions of the
Book of Constitritions in 1723 and 1738, and wit11 whom the portrait is associated
by Bro Waite. Can i t be t h a t i t is so set down in ignorance, or is i t to be
understood as yet another deliberate flight into the realms of fantasy?
June, 1921.
W . J. SONGHURST.
After writing the above I found that Bro. Tuckett nlsa had prepared a Revirw
for our pages, and as this contains much information on subjects of which he
is ualified to speak with special authority I have thought it desirable to print
bo& Reviews, although in some respeczs our criticism will be found to overW.J.S.
lap.
C C
. . . for n7y part I will tell you fr~1nX-Iy that Z d o not swrtz'iow
everything I retrd in Encyclopedirc~; eithrr ilfmonic or othertuise."
(Bro. Henry Sadler, -4.Q.G'. xxiii., p. 327.)
174
Transactio~~s
of the Quatzior Coronuti Lodge.
The two handsome volumes are well printed on excellent paper and
axternally leave nothing to be desired. There are numerous illustrations, both
full-page and in the text, but-it
seems unkind to say it-the
whole of them
might with great advantage have been discarded, and the space so saved devoted
to useful matter.
A n unpleasant feature running more or less through the whole work is the
tone which the compiler permits himself to adopt when referring to certain other
Masonic writers. No doubt a word of caution as t o the extent to which the late
Xro. John Yarker may be accepted as a reliable authority was really necessary,
i u t the constantly recurring references in terms of scorn and contempt to one
who has passed hence are-let us say-very much to be regretted. Here are some
of them:-I.,
162, 345-7, 405, 407; I I . , 143-4, 229, 240, 319, 464, and 473.
Attention may also be dra'wn to the following remarks:' . . . one a t least whose verdict upon any Masonic subject is utterly
out of court" (I., 45).
' < . . . on the part of Masonic writers in terms of scurrility which
are witness of uncritical animus, while betraying their own incompetence
otherwise " (I., 64).
c( .
. . worthless makers of paragraphs like Woodford and Kenneth
MacKenzie (sic) " (I., 64).
. . . the mouthing ruffianism of MacKenzie (sic) and Woodford "
( I I . , 368).
" Kenneth
MacKenzie (sic), in his cl~aracteristically crass manner "
(I., 272).
' . . . Kenneth MacKeilzie (sic), who-with characteristic intellectual
crookedness-"
(II., 4).
" Did I say tl-at he was a liar from the beginning
. . . I should be
specifying only in a variant form of words the fact that he was a
Masonic littdrateur, like others who had preceded him in France and
like many who came after " (I., 72).
" Hereunto Claret adds what he describes as an Old Charge, a pretension
which may stand a t its value . . .' ( I . , 179).
"
. . . but his [i.e., R . F. Gould's] dicta on the subject are worthless and are characterised by the viciouh habit of calling non-operative
Masons speculative instead of theoretical or honorary members" ( I . ,
327).
"
. . . a certain association familiar i ~ the
. annals of folly as Societns
Rosicrucia~za in Anglia, not otl~arwise calling for mention in these
pages " (11.. 214).
~ l l e s e , * a n dsimilar passages, strike a note which, fortunately, is seldom heard in
Masonic controversy.
The compiler's style a t times has a distinct resemblance to t h a t adopted by
Robert Samber in the well-known Detliccitiolb of his Long Livvrx of 1722.
Thus :" A Word to the Few . . I speak at this point therefore only to
a small assembly of the elect and of tliose who are capable of election
within the ranks of the Brotherhood . . ." (I., 283).
" I am too well aware t h a t the measure of this catholic affirmation cannot enter into t h e understanding of any rank and file in the
brotherhoods. I speak here indeed o~.lyto a small assembly of the
elect and of such as are capable of election . . ." ( I . , 305).
Or, again, the following" I know only that one who like myself has passed through many schools
finds intinlations and messages in t h e Third DegAe of the Craft which
are not heard by men of material minds and persons belonging to
low grades of culture " (I., 249).
(
'6
" Among all Masonic historians past and present, it is I only who have
seen and hold the, great treasure of Rituals in the X g i m e ~ c o s s a i s
Ancien et Rectifi6 and in that Ordre Interieur which arises out of it "
(I., 435).
(11.) 139).
" I have travelled far through the field:: of Ritual"
Would i b not have bee11 better to avoid such direct claims to profound knowledge
leaving the reader to discern i t for himself?
I n his Preface Bro. Waite says of the Ntw Encyc1opcedia:" It endeavours t o represent the latest knowledge and to be the spokesman of t h e latest research " (I., v.).
No one will doubt the willingness of the spirit even if they remark how very far
short is the performance of so fair a promise. Bro. Waite also describes himself :" A s a historian whose sole concern is the tru.th, whatever t h e consequences . . ." (II., 218).
We are all sure of it, but, as will appear preseutly, there is much within the
covers of the New Encyclopcedia t o justify the spirit of caution shown by Bro.
Henry Sadler in the quotation placed a t the heail of this notice.
To be a success an EncyclopiZia must be as nearly as may be complete and
as e o t r ~ p c tas i t is possible to make it. I t s contents must be arranged upon
some system such that the information available upon any particular point can
be found with a minimum of trouble and delay I n this last respect t h e New
Bnc:~clopadia is conspicuously wanting. It is true t h a t the main Articles are
arrangsd upon what is apparently an Alpllabetical basis, but the qualification
' apparently' is used advisedly, as will be sufficiently clear when the following
peculiarities are noted as specimens of the 'system' adopted :\
77
,)
The Four Hypotheses of Origin (of Speculative Masonry) are described under F for
Four, not Five, which is, however, the numb& of ' hypotheses ' discussed. P p .
38-113 of Vol. 11. are occupied by matter tabled under M for Masonic. Thus :Masonic Apron, Masonic Baptism, Masonic Chronology, and so on, ending with
Masonic Symbols follo\r-ed by Masons' Word. Why is the word Minor selected
for ' Minor Masonic Literati ' and Lesser for ' Lesser Masonic Personalities,' and
'Lesser Masonic
M and L chosen to determine the position of these lists l
Personalities' is a series of brief qotes concerning a number of individuals, e.g. :" Wellington, Duke of :-Was made a. Mason in Lodge No. 494 eircn
December, 1790 " (II., 30).
The date (and a P e ~ r o g e )would probably enable t h e student to identify the
particular Duke referred to, and some furtlzer independent research as to the
nobleman's life and movements might lead to satisfactory knowledge of the
176
When dealing with ' Constitutions and Charges ' (I., 135-149) Bro. Waite
avoids all mention of Dr. Begen~ann, whose name does not appear in the
Conspectus of Cross References ' (I., xxv.-xxxi.), while in ' Printed Texts '
( I . , 148-9) he has nothing to say concerning the work done in connection with
the Quatuor Coronati Lodge.
A t I . , 266, there is a reference to ' t h a t conlparatively old ceremonial . .
which was once worked in England as the Passing of the Veils.'
Bro. Waite
might have added ' and still is ' before ' worked.' A t p. 279, ' Speaking of tbe
Grade of Rose-Croix Findel'quotes an alleged statement of Baron Tschoudy-that
it is " t h e Roman Catholic Religion incorporated into a Degree." ' Did Bro.
Waite look up the reference? I t is quite easy to find, being a t L'Etoile
Fla,nboyantr, Vol. I . , p. 114:<'
. . . le Rose-croix, proprenlent dit, ou A l f ~ q o cl'Hlr&clon,
r~
quoiqu' 2 tout prendre ce ne soit qu'une Maponnerie renouvellt5e, ou le
catholicismc mis en grade . .
A t p. 358 Bro. Waite has:" However this may be, in the memoirs of the life of Elias Ashmole, as
'drawn up by himself in the form of a diary, there is the following now
wall-known entry under date of 0ct.ober 16, 1646"
Again one asks, did Bro. Waite look up the reference? Because the well-known
extract is given not as it appears in the Ashmole MS. 1136, Fol. 19, verso. a t the
Eodleian, but nearly (yet not quite) as i t appears in the published Diary of 1717.
The compiler is very severe as to Jacobite and Jesuitic ' mendacities.' As
regards ' Jesuits & Masonry ' (I., 411), he seems to ascribe the Jesuit ' Theory '
to Ragon, but Ragon's earthly pilgrimage commenced in 1781, and Les Jtsuites
c h ~ s e ' sde la J f n ~ o n n ~ r iand
e illernet6 cles Quatre T'oeux, &C., appeared in 1788.
Lambert de Lintot is the subject of an Article ( I I . , 2-3) and so, presumably,
is ranked as a .lfnjor Masonic Personage which is sufficiently surprising to those
who knoiv .anything of that worthy. H e was initiated in 1745, not in 1743 as
stated by Bro. Waite and also by Bro. John Yarker (Arcane Schools, 466 and 468).
H e joined the St. Geo:ge de I'Observance in 1779 and became its W.M. in 1787.
(Sea S.Q.C. xxvi., 127.) I think he died in late 1795 or early 1796.
The authority for t h e story of t h e Sackville Medal is no longer Thory
( I I . , 7-8). Drs. Begemann and Chetwode Crawley (A.Q.C. xii. and xiii.) have
dealt with the Sackville incident, and the medal is as authentic as King George V.'s
Coronation Medal. Bro. Waite says:-' Whether these stories are true or false
there is no means of knowing.' He should read his A.Q.C., he would a t least
have learned soinetliing about the Sackville Medal.
Who was 'Hemmings, a Grand, Warden of the period' (just after the
Union) ( I I . , 12), who had something to do with Masonic Lectures? Perhaps a
Major Masonic Person 1 Apparently not, as there is no Article about him. But,
me Conspectzrs I., xxvii., there was a " Hemming, Dr. Samuel,' and we are sent
to I I . , 472, to learn t h a t :' l Prior to
Williams we hear also of Dr. Samuel Hemming, who was
appointed to revise t h e Lectures and-as i t is said-to unify the widely
different wodss of Opening and Closing the Lodge in the Three Degrees."
The Conspectus does not, betray t h a t the Rev. Dr. Hemming is t o be found amongst
the Lesser Masonic Personages, but there he is a t I I . , 23, where we are shocked
to find : " We have to thank him for expuaging all references to St. John the
Baptist and St. John the Evangelist, those time immemorial patrons
of English Masonry-a
creditable work for a supposed Doctor of
Divinity a t that unholy period, and no doubt very pleasing to the Duke
of Sussex. "
The expression ' sctpposed Doctor of Divinity a t t h a t unholy period ' is d e p l y
mysterious. Was the legality of Hemming's University Degree called in question
a t that period, and not befor; or since ? And was the period ' unholy ' because i t
doubted the Doctorate, or because the Doctor doubted, or what was i t ?
I ,
178
Reviews.
Encampment of Redemption t h a t he had been invited to assume the
m c 9 of Grand Master by the Knights Templar of Bristol. York
appears t o have favoured the proposal, and he accepted in due course.
The following groups, probably among several others, came under his
charge : (a) The Observance of London; (b) the Redemption of York;
(c) the Eminent of Bristol; (d) the Antiquity of Bath. He formed a
Grand Conclave under the style and title of The Royal Exalted
Religious and Military Order of Heredom, Kadosh, Grand Elected
Knight Templars of St. John of Jerusalem, Palestine, Rhodes, and
Malta " ( I I . , 227).
Thomas Dunckerley's project of ' centralisstion ' followed his election by Baldwyn
to be her own Grand Master and this was in February of 1791. The letter he
wrote to the Encampment of Redemption a t York was not dated July 24th, 1791,
but " Hampton Court Palace. March 2211d 1791 " (see Sadler's Life of Thomas
DuncEerley, p. 262). Dunckerley's acceptmce of the Baldwyn Grand Mastership
could not have been influenced by the ' favour' extended to the 'proposal' by
Redemption for i t was already an accomplished fact. If Bro. Waite means the
' proposal ' to ' centralise,' what was i t that (in Bro. Waite's opinion) Duuckerley
' accepted in due course ' ? The date ' July 24, 1791,' which Bro. Waite gives is
It is the date of the initial ' Grand
one of a real importance nevertheless.
Conclave ' held a t London under Dunckerley. The title of the ' Grand Conclave '
according to the rare statutes' of date July 24th, 1791 (from which I quote)
is not as given by Bro Wait.2, but runs:- ' The Royal, Exalted, Religious, and
Military Order of H.R.D.M. Grand Elected Masonic Knights Templars K.D.S.H.
As t o the 'groups' which
of St. John of Jerusalem, Palestine, Rhodes, &C."
cams under Dunckerley's charge, Bro. Waite does not seem t o recognise t h a t ' t h e
Eminent of Bristol ' was the same as ' Baldwyn of Bristol' and t h a t it never
acknowledged Dunckerley's ' Grand Conclave' during his lifetime although continuing to recognize him as M.E. Grand Master of Baldwyn until his death in
November, 1795.
Bro. Waite says-' The Order of Knights Templar is said to have received
formal ' recognition froin the G.L. a t York in 1780.' There is no doubt about it.
I t is a certainty.
I n the paragraph entitled ' Modern Grand Masters,' t h a t is of the Order
of th3 Temple, we read ( I I . , 227) ' Baron Radcliffe, 1796,' and :"
. . . A a o n g the legendary or mythical Grand Masters are . . .
I n 1770 Baron Donoughmore is said to have been Grand Master of the
Kilwinnjng Lodge or Encampment of Ireland, while ten years later a
certain Joshua Springer enjoyed this rank a t Bristol, b u t if true i t
was probably a local rank. So far as evidence goes, Dunckerley was
the first person whose jurisdiction extended from York to t h e West of
England " ( I I . , 227).
For Raclclife we must read Rancliffe. The 'certain Joshua Springer ' here classed
with the heroes of legend and myt.h was certainly the M.E. Grand Master of
Baldwyn in 1780 and as such signed the Charter of Compact on December 20th.
He continaed in the office until Thomas Dunckerley was elected in February, 1791,
and resumed it when Dunckerle~died in November, 1795. H e himself made way
for John Sanders in 1804. H e was Deputy Prov. Grand Master of Glouoestershiro
(including Bristol) in the Craft 1784-1786, and of Bristol alone 1786-1789 and
again 1791. I n the Royal Arch he was Deputy Prov. Grand Superintendent for
Glouc~stershire and Bristol, 1F08. Initiated in 1762 he was for many years
recognised as not only the leading spirit but also t h e moving power in all t h a t
appertained to Freemasonry in any of its branches in Bristol, and by general
consent allowed a very large voica in all t h a t was happening therein.
' Legendary or mythical ' and ' if true ' are expressions which, applied to
Springer's Grand Mastership of Baldwyn, betray but a very slight acquaintance
with the history of that body. I n a sense perhaps the rank he enjoyed was ' a
local rank,' but in 178C his rule certainly included (besides the Baldwyn Encamp-
ment ac Bristol) the Camp of Antiquity a t Bath. I t is more than probable also
t h a t he had under him the original Vale Royal Encampment a t Salisbury and
there is practical certainty of a daughter Encampment a t Berkeley, in Gloucestershire (see A . Q . C . xxiv., p. 285). For full tLographical details concerning this
distinguished and worthy Mason readers must consult the pages of Freemasonry
in Bristol, by Bros. Powell and Littleton.
I n a n account oi the Rawlinson .lISS. a i the Bodleian there is no mention
of the work of Dr. Chetwode Crawlev (d.8.C'.
xi.).
"
A t various points the author enlarges upon his theory that : -' the moralities
of Freemasonry belong t o the eighteenth century, more especially in their application to working tools and so forth,' and practically the whole book is made to
serve as a vehccle for the communication bf his doctrine of the Great Quest in
Masonrv. On this last Bro. Waite is entitled t o s ~ e a kas an authoritv. but the
work has b2en done already, and much more successfully, by Bro. Waite himself,
in his Secret Tradition in Preenlaaonry, wl~ich was published in 1911. As an
Encyclopadia, the work now under consideration does not compare favourably
yith its predecessors, and, as an exposition of the Quest Theory, i t cannot compete
with the same author's Secret Tradition.
June, 1921.
J . E. S. TUCKETT.
J
T H E STOEY
OF T H E C R A F T . A SIA1fI'ZI< .4CCOITST OF T H E
D E 17ELOPLlfEAVT 01,' F H E E A M A S O S R T .
. . .
The appearance of this work has been eagerly awaited for various reasons,
ono, and not the least important one, being the knowledge t h a t the task of its
preparation was in thoroughly competent hands. It was in 1913 t h a t Bro. Vibert
produced his now well-known Freemaso~zry bejore the i7,xistenc~o f Grancl Lodges,
which met with deserved success and is highly valued by Masonic students, wherein
he proved t h a t he possesses t,o a remarkable degree t h a t most valuable gift the
power to condense an immense amount of valuable matter into the smallest possible
space. A t last we have what may fairly be described as a Concise History of our
O'rder, for, although the author prefers t o style i t ' A simple Account of the
Development of Freemasonry,' yet for all t h a t i t is in reality a comprehensive
abstract of what is known as t o our past, from the period when, with the rise of
that style we call ' Gothic,'.the science of Architecture became more and more the
close preserve of a single craft, down to the present day when our concern wit11
actual stone and mortar has ceased. The work now before us is a small octavo
of no more than twelve chaptars, occupying eighty-eight pages printed in large
and excellent type.
It is well bound in blue cloth, and t h e cost is buk four
shillings, which, in these days of high prices, is sufficiently remarkable, and the
thanks of author and readers are due to the publishers, the eminent firm of
Spencer & CO , of Great Queen Street.
A t the first glance one might be tempted t o think t h a t The Story of the
Craft could be perused comfortably in the course of an hour o r so, but, as a
watter of fact, the book is vtry dou* r r n d ~ t ~ g This is intended to be, and
actually is, a very high compliment, for the meaning is t h a t in practically every
sentence Bro Vibert presents to the reader's notice some matter worthy of close
attention and careful thought But let i t not Le thought t h a t the pages are made
up of snippets of historical fsct strung together in cl~ronologicalorder. The
narrative and argument flow smoothly and pleasantly and perusal is a literary
pleasure.
There is no Preface, but in a Note the author tells us that his book is
primarily intended for those
have not yet begun the study of our history,
and to such without doubt the work will appeal But the more advanced student,
who already knows something and is always rt ady to learn more, will find i t a
most useful little handbook and guide Bro. Vibert also gives the assurance that
there is good warrant for every statement of fact, and his readers may place
implicit trust in the promise so made.
Reviews.
181
A brief but instructive essay on the rise of the Gathic Style and its influence
upon the fortunes of the Building Craft is followed by a discussion of the origin
and prim~tive meanings of the familiar words ' mason,' ' Freemason,' ' lodge,'
and a comparison with their equivalents in France and Germany. The Cathedral
as the centre of artistic life and the status of the Master of the Craft are next
dealt with, leading to an excellent chapter on t h e gradual development of Craft
Gilds in general and that of the Builders in particular, with an explanation of
how it came about that Great Britain, France, and Germany each produced its
own distinct type of asskiation. ' The Saints, Legends,, and Ordinances ' receive
adequate notice. The three first chapters, dealing with what may be called the
'primitive period,' are thus summed up:"
. . . by the fourteenth century the English Craft was already a
well define11 organisation, distinctly different from t h e corresponding
organisations on the Continent. It had a terminology of its own, and
a legend of its own; i t apparently had long sinceinstituted a system
of control over large areas t h a t was introduced into Germany in the
fourteenth century, but t h a t seems to be unknown among French Gilds.
There were certainly operative secrets, as also secret means of recognition, of which, however, we know nothing. There is also nothing that
will enable us to make any statement either for or against the existence
of ceremonies of admission or initiation, and as yet there is no evidence
for the existence of non-operative members of the society further than
that i t is suggested by the fact that someone, we know not who, has
compiled a poem for the use of the Craft" (p. 24).
This is an admirable summary of what we cZo and what we d o not know concerning
the state of the Craft a t this point in its history.
The intermediate period or period of transition from the ' purely operative '
stage to the ' mainly speculative ' is the subject of t h e next two chapters, iv. and v.,
the latter of these being devoted to the Seventeenth Century with reference, however, to the Craft in England only. The author glances rapidly a t the causes
which led to the disappearance of the profession of builder in t h e Gothic style,
and shows how ' the Reformation swept away a t once the schools of the a r t and
its greatest patrons.'
The decay of the a r t did not, however, mean the disappearance of the term ' Freemason ' by which its craftsmen had been designated,
and Bro. Vibert proceeds to trace its occurrence in the Cathedral Fabric Rolls,
Statutes referring to the Craft, Records of Companies and Gilds; and in our
Old Charges, and he points out t h a t these are our only sources of information as
to what was going on within the Lodges during this phase. As to the advent of
non-operative members we read t h a t : (So long as Gothic a r p h i t d u r e was a living a r t the Lnodge was essentially
the workroom, and there was no membership of the Lodge in the sense
in which that expression is used to-day. . . . Originally when the
masons met to work, non-operatives were allowed t o be present only
because they individually had an interest in or could advance t h a t
work. But when work was no longer to be had, the masons in many
localities nevertheless continued to meet and to admit other persons as
wembers of the Fraternity. They spoke of their meetings as Lodges:
they preserved and read the Old Charges, copies of which they were a t
pains to transcribe from time to time: and they kept u p some of the
practices not, only of the Craft Gilds but also of those old Social Gilds
which had been done away with a t the Reformation. . . . And in
their hands the a d m i ~ s i ~ofn new members now [italics not in the
o r i y i ~ b n l ]becare a formal and important ceremony" (pp. 37-8).
The word 7 1 0 w , which I have ventured to put into italics, seems t o call for some
comment, because, SO far as I am aware, there is no evidence whicll establishes
conclusively that the ' formality' and ' inlportance' of the ceremony of admission
did not exi-t in the purely-operative days. Evidence is equally wanting thab these
characteristics did ther exist..
182
The Society or Fraternity in its new form had its members in all parts of
the country, and, whetljer or not there was any general organisat;on, we are justified
in stating as a fact t h a t the members belonging to one locality were free of the
Society in any other. The Society was not a Secret Society, but, on the contrary,
was well enough know11 to attracb the attention of seventeenth century antiquaries,
historians, and essay writers :" Several lists of names of members have come down to us, and we see
that the Society drew its membership from all classes. It included
antiquaries like Ashmole and Randle Holme of Chester, landed gentry,
civic dignitaries, and many others besides the regular working masons "
( P 41).
" It is, however, sufficiently clear t h a t the SocieCy had no longer any
direct concern with the actual processes of building, and t h a t its objects
were solely social, moral, and philosophical . . . But the aims of
the Society were, so far as we know, similar everywhere, and they may
be surr.med up as follows :-the preservation of the traditions, customs
and ceremonies, and moral teachings, of the old operative masons, and
their old documents, without reference to contemporary working conditions; and by persons, as to whom i t was wholly immaterial whether
they were or were not connected with t h a t or any other craft or
profession.
I n pursuance of this object they maintained the old
terminology and spoke of their meetings as Lodges and themselves as
Freemasons " (p. 42).
Remembering t h a t Bro. Vibert addresses himself specially to that large
clasa of students who have not yet commenced their studiss, I think that there
is a danger that, in the following chapter, vi., ' The Formation of Grand Lodge,'
he may unintentionally convey to their minds an impression concerning Freemasonry just before and just after 1717 which is hardly justified by the evidence
we possess. H e says .-" I n the next year a movement was set on foot to bring together the
Freemasons in the metropolis. What, if anything, was behind this
It can hardly have been political; i t
movement we do not know.
would not seem even to have been as yet 2n intellectual movement;
i t was a t all events originally controlled by wholly obscure persons,
. . . we know nothing of the membership of the Society in London'
a t this date It obviously included persons who were not masons by
trade; but t h e fact t.hat an individual was elected as Grand Master
who would seem to have been both obscure and of small means suggests
t h a t i t did not a t this time include anyone of any social skanding.
Ashmole had been dead many years " (pp. 44 and 46).
Reviews.
183
Transactions of t h e Q~rc~trror
C o r o r ~ a t iLoclge.
of Charity.
the List.
The Minutes of Grand Lodge, 16th March, 1752, state that:The h t i t i o r . of several Brethren meeting a t the Crown in Parkers Lane
praying t h a t the Lodge formerly held there might be restored & have
its former place in the Lodge Book But i t appearing the said Lodge
had been discontinued about 30 years and that no one of the Petitionr8.
had ever beell a Member thereof. Ordered t h a t the said Petition be
rejected.
No regular Lodge is known to have been then meeting a t the Crow711. Indeed the
only other Lodge whicl a t any time met there was t h e present Lodge of Honour
and Generosity No. 165, from 17'70 to 1787. By t h a t time the house was known
as the Crown and Cushion, and Parker's Lane had become Parker's Street.
Parker's Lane was first laid out bet.ween 1615 and 1620. I t runs parallel
with Great Queen Street (on the North side), connecting Little Queen Streetnow Kingsway-with
Drury Lane.
The Crown was on the North side of the
street, towards the East end, and was demolished in August, 1920.
W.J.S.
&
T h e F o u r Old Lodges.-It
is well worthy of note t h a t Grand Lodge has
lately made antofficial excursion into Masonic pre-Union history, and placed its
form-al imprimatur upon t h e statement of ~ n d e r s o n ' sC'on~tit,rt~orrc,1738, to the
effect t h a t the existing Grand Lodge of England was founded by forrr private
Lodges, and not by ,ss,the number twice asserted by AII~tltaPnrtcz\ (circa 1763),
pages 83 and 111. R u l e 302 of the present issue of the C o t l ~ t i t r r t i o 7 1dated
~,
1919
on title-page, now runs as follows:302. The collars of Officers of Private Lodges shall be of light
blue ribbon four inches broad with the exception of those of the
Officers of the three surviving Lodges of the four which founded the
Grand Lodge of England in 1717, viz., the Lodge of Antiquity No. 2,
t h e Royal Somerset House and Inverness Lodge No. 4, and the
Fortitude and Old Cumberland Lodge No. 12, who shall be permitted
to wear a stripe of garter blue one-third of its width in the-centre of
the collar.
The presumption, of course, is t h a t the novel characters of critic and arbiter
were not hastily nor lightly undertaken, and that the Rule in its present form
must bs taken as deliberately intended to settle permanently a question which has
exercised several generatioils of Masonic writers and students.
W.B.H.
N o t e s and Qurries.
185
to be often repeated, that is to say from the collation of a large number of names
of old Masons collected with some amount of persistence.
The Lodge of True Friendship No. 160 now meeting a t Rochford, Essex,
was constituted on 4th December, 1766, a t the Crown and Thistle, Tower Hill,
London. The Warrant names Thomas Samson as W.M., Jas. (or Jos.) Hickman
S.W . , John Cogdell J . W., and Jog. Hughes was Secretary. As these brethren
all appear to have been members of t h e Strong Man Lodge now No. 45 which then
met in East Smithfield, it may well be assumed t h a t t h e Lodge of True Friendship emanated from the Strong Man Lodge. Thomas Sansum was W.M. of t h e
latter in 1761. Hickman in 1763. Cogdell's name appears in its records in 1768,
and Rughes was its Secretary in 1769. There are discrepancies in the rendering
of names, possibly due only to errors of transcription.
It is doubtful whether the Minutes of either Lodge for the period in
question are still extant, and maybe such records as Grand Lodge possesses would
not indicate the connection between these two old Lodges which is suggest.ed by
the association of the Brethren named.
C. GOUGH.
" Freemason."--There
have lately been printed in N o t e s and Queries
extracts from the manuscript borough records of Aldeburgh (Suffolk), amongst
them :-
%ii viiid
viliXiid
xxxvS
W.B.H.
T h e T o w e r of London.--Whatever
may be its' value, an addition to
traditional history of t h e Craft i n pre-revival days is found in aE incident which
does not seem t o have been noted. I n ' A n Historical Account of t h e Curiosities
of London and Westminster . . . London. Printed for J. Newberry, a t the
Bible and Sun in St. Paul's Church-yard. 1765,' which includes the Tower of
London as one of its principal subjects, is this passage (page 12) :The grand store-house . . . was begun by King James I I . , and
by t h a t prince built to t h e first floor, but finished by King Willinm,
who erected t h a t magnificent room called the New or Small A r m o r y ;
in which h s , with Queen Mary. his consort, dined in great form, having
186
:rl the Rawlinson collection in the Bodleian Library, compiled by Bro. Chetwode
. . . . . . . . .
To the Editor of the Universal Spectator.
Sir,
has as much amus'd the Ignorant,
The secret of FREEMASONRY
as i t has disturb'd the Malicious, or weaker P a r t of the World; tho'
both join in the full Cry of idle Invectives against what they are
strangers to, and some uncomnion Incidents have appear'd in -parts
distant from London, in which the
[l47 verso]
Royal Craft has suffer'd by slander, and been misrepresented,
not only as Unnatural but Seditious, nay Traiterous and Magical in
their Practices, Destructive of (what their highest Ambition is to
improve, and in which they have most frequently succeeded) the Peace
and Welfart of their Fraternity in particular, as well as Mankind in
general: But alas ! how nnsucoessful have they prov'd in the Metropolitan City of this Kingdom, (where is one of the earliest and noblest
specimens of Gothick Masonry and Architecture) so inhospitably
receiv'd by one of its chief Magistrates, a Person of great Sagacity and
deep Penetration who endeavour'd totis viribus, Quixote like, to
encounter a formidable Lodge, lately erected there: wherein he
suspected Practica against the Peace of our Sovereign Lord the King,
his Crown and Dignity, as well as Breaches on Morality: Mvsteries he
smelt out like those of .the Bona Dea of old Rome; into which lot being
able, as C'lodizts did, to enter. and satisfy his Longing, he thought fit
per se,
per ali~rrn,to proclaim in the public Streets such an A rrrt
187
against that innocent and useful Society, as has no Parallel for its
nervous Stile and most exact Orthography, and as such deserves well
to be communicated to the world, as a singular Instance of t h a t warill
Maglstrate'q Genius, Industry, and Zeal for the security of t h a t P a r t
of the Commonwealth committed to his Care; and the rather, as i t was
thought absolutely necessary to be publish'd several Market Days, by his
Lordship's Deputy, the Cryer.
IVhereas a Rrport r ~ t n sthrough Cyte, T o w n and C o u n t r y , o f ntr
r ~ n l u u ~ f uAssembly
l
of a 7lutt~ber of M e n t h a t m e t togathrr n t
Tavern* iiz this Cyte, and their bound themselves ~rizder
"Red Lion urickecl Obligatzons, to d o sonrething, t h a t m a y prove of
Canterbury sad E f e c t , Therefore the Mare of this Cyte deairrs a n y
Parson t l ~ n tcan, to i n f o r m h i m aright, because the ulhole
Trltth oityht to be knoul~r,that such Dark-Lanthorns m a y be brotrght
f o Light.
This notable Proclamation, not%-itl~standin~
the indefatiqable
Diligence G: Ecclesiasticks as well as Laicks, to propagate a false Report,
injurious to the Honour of several Gentlemen of all Professions 11 the
NeighbourEood of t l ~ i sCity, answered not the designed End, b u t at
last bscanlo only tlie Object of Ridicule, and was burlesqu'd in tlie
following honest tho' rustick Manner.
OBITUARY.
Brethren :-
Rev. Richard Peek, Redor of St. Magnus the Martyr, London Bridge,
on the 18th July, 1920. Our Brother had held t h s office of Grand Chaplain;
and he was a Lire Member of our Correspondence Circle, which he joined in
May, 1888.
John W. Starkey, of Valetta, Malta, in May, 1920. Bro. Starkey had
4eld the offices of Dep.Dis.G.M. and Dis.G.H. H e acted as our Local Secretary
in Malta for more than twenty-five years, having been elected to membership of
our Correspondence Circle in January, 1888.
!
Rev. Charles Edward Leigh Wright, B.A., of Folkestane, on the 6th July,
1920. Bro. Wright attained the rank of Past Grand Deacon and Past Grand
Standard Bearer in the R.A. H e had been a member of our Correspondence
Circle since March, 1889.
FRIDAY,
1st
OCTOBER,
1920.
Rro. Herbert Bradlcy, C.S.I., P.Dis.G.?tl., Jjadras, xvas alwted Master of the
Lodge for the ensuing r e a r ; Bro. \V. H. Rylands. P A.G.D.C.. n-as ; c elected Treasurer;
and Bro. J. H. McNaughton n a s rc-elected e l e r .
190
The central mlc! c1iic.f design is t11;lt of the Knight of the Prlican & Eagle aiid
Sovereign Prince Rose Croix of t h e 18th Degree. A pair of compasses extended (with the
letter G on a rose a t t h e hinge) encloses the usual emblems of the Degree-a rose imposed
on a Cross, between a n Easle and a Pelican, with the all-seeing Eye in a small triangle
al~ove. Beneath this central design :,re two sprigs of Aca.cia, crossed a t t h e stem ends.
On either side-left and right respcctivcly-are the initials J. and R., with M.B. between
i u t ~ n d e dfor Rro. F.
t h e union of t h e stems. There is also 31OREL F .' F-probnb!y
Morel, t h e maker.
The central design is iinposed on a seven po!:*ted star, but only four points are
shown.
I n t h e triangular spaces to the left and right respectivel:: .Ire the emblems of t h e
11th Degree ( t h a t of the sublime Chevalier Elu)-the one \ritli the elnbleins of Death
and n. snord, with t h e motto T I X C E R E ATT XORI, and snlall loiters O.S.H. The
other contains a sword aild three hearts and the initials R.N.S., of ~vordssignifyliig
Alliance, Covenant, Integrity. The triangular space adjoining the latter represents the
Treasurer's Jewel of t h e Royal Arch, the 13th Degr>e, and depicts a lie. above a cash box
with initials I.V.I.O.L. standing for t h e legend INVENI V E R B T I I IS ORE LEONIS.
The next space treats of the 17th Degree or Knight bf the East and West. It
sholr-S a pair of calipers ( ? ) united, xvithin a circle round which are t h e initials
H.D.S.P.H.G.F. relating to the Frcknc!l U-orcls bectntP, tliainit6, .~tr!/~sse,~~rci.sstrnce,
honn~lcr,gloira, and forcc., with level ill l r f t corner and J. in right.
Tho n e s t design typifies the 15th Degree or Knight of the East and Sword, sho~ving
t h e Triangle, Cross-swords, and :I Crown, aiid the ~x-c~!l-k~~ol~--n
Bridge c-ith letters L.D.P.
standing for LibertC de Possage.
The remaining space sholrs the 12th Degree 01. t h a t of Grmid Master Architect.
The desigil is a triangle enclosing a large A. surrounded by the initials C.D.T.I.C. of
the five orders of Architecture, with square, level, and coinpasscbs, nnd crossed rods and
(benoath the Triangle) t h e letters R.N. XI-hichpossibly are tlir first a n d last of the word
of the Dcgrec.
The ~vorkmanslupseems quite good and thrre is little doubt t h n i it is Freiich in
origin if not i11 manufacture.
There is little to indicate its age, but possil~ly i t is not more than forty or fifty
rears old.
A 11en.rty vote of thnnlrs m7as nrcorded t o ?he Brother ~ v h olrindly lent this ol~jcrt
for exhibition.
Bro. L I O ~ E IVIBERT
,
read the following paper :-
THE COMPAGNONNAGE.
A TENTATIVE ENQUIRY.
T ~ I'o~rr
P
cle Fmnce-not
ilz-dote.
IS.
AUTHORITIES.
cited as
Tllory. .l ntr(tI(>.vor.i!/i~ri.~
~nctgni C r r l l ~ r ~ r t t ~ . Paris 1812.
Perdiguier. L P 7,ivre clrc Con~pngno~rncrqe.
1st ed 1840 2nd ed. 1841. 3rd ed 1857.
1855.
Perdiguier. AIIe/~eoirtrrl'rtn Cot?1pttgrto~c.
C . G. Sinlon. gtrrtlr . . . qlrr l r Vo~~tl~ctqteorzt~crgr.
Paris 1853.
Ragon
K i t ttrl clr
J / / r ~ o 11n orer I'lorr~*tiirr. (rirr(t) 1853.
L e ,Srcrrf- rlrv ('ortlotetcirrc t/L:z~oelC.
Paris 1858.
Arnaud
AMe~troirr,sr7'trn C'ott,pn:/tton.
Paris 1859.
Chovii~ L r ('ott\f illrr (l(,\ f'o//e~t~rqtr011~.
Paris 1860
Perdiguier. (Jclestiorz T-~ttrle.
Paris 1863.
Guillaunlou. C1012 fesriote Y cl'ert~ P o n r l ~ n g ~ z o ~ ~ . Paris 1864.
Brentano's Essay on G'ilrls.
1870.
E ' E ' T ' S 40 (Toulmin Srn~th'scollectioi~of Gild docu~nents.
Gould's H i s t o r y of Free~tlccyo~?ry.
C . Gross. T h e Gilcl illrrchcrnt.
Oxford 1890.
~ P . 1901.
E . M. Saint Ldon. L P C ' O I I I ~ I ~ I ~ I I O I I I I NParis
Neredith. l:'roreo~trrc. JIi\tory of En!/lcrnr/.
l'itn~all 1908
Articles iu -1 . Q .Cf. esp. Rylailds on Cotnpng~ro1~ntrge
ill i., ii.
MS, rituals, legends, etc. in Q.C. Library.
P1 P2 P3
PM.
B.
G.
S.L.
B. c s x x v i . , e t s e q .
B. cxxxvi.
2 B. cxli., n. 8.
A.Q.C. xio., 63, 66.
".
cxli., n. 4.
6
G. i.. 139.
Meredith, 59.
l94
T I ~ U I L S U Cof~ ~the
O ~Quntzlor
S
C'orormti Lodge.
a n important place in t h e life of any one town." The fact is, i n all probability,
t h a t t h e craftsmen who built t h e cathedrals were fully organised,-we know they
had a code of laws,-although
their associations had no p a r t in t h e town life of
t h e day, and have therefore left n o record.
Now tlie very first article of t h e early craft law refers to the pay of the
fellows, which is t o be according to tlle price of victuals, and what they may
deserve; b u t t h e workman is to take no more hire t h a n what h e has served for,
and earned. We find i n this same code restrictions as t o apprentices, who must
be free of birth, &c. (the fourth article); b u t as t o journeymen tllere is no sucli
restriction; all we find ia t h a t t h e nlaster inust not employ thieves o r murderers
(the seventh). Tlle fifth point of the X r g i u s lays down t h a t t h e master must notify
t h e journeyman, a t least before ' none,' if h e has no more work for him, b u t this
provision does not find a place in tlle law, in its earlier form in the /1001; o f C'htrrgrq:
aiid this is t h e only indication a t this stage of any difficulties arising between
n..aster and journeymen in t h e craft. However, notwithstanding the absence of
reference to any difficulties of the kind i n our first codes of law, there is other
evidence t h a t they were by 110 means uncommon, and we find legislation in London
in 1383, and for t h e country generally i n 1425, directed against the congregations,
covins, and conspiracies of workmen, more especially t h e Masons. By this time
there were numerous associations of iournevmen in existence. Professor Aslllevi
has brought together a long list of trades in which they existed in the fourteenth,
fifteenth, aiid sixteenth centuries, but while i t includes blacksmiths (1435) and
carpenters (1468) i t does not include ally of t h e building trades proper, possibly
in consequence of this very legislation. These jocrrieylnen represent a distinct
class t h a t have little or no cllance of b e c o m i n ~masters. and " when i t is ~ o s s i b l e
to trace t h e history of sucll a n associat.ion over a considerable period of time, i t is
found t o pass gradually under the control of t h e masters' association. Associations
of journeyn~en Rere never i t would appear so inlportant in Englaild as on t h e
Continent; we do not for inskance find tlieln regulated by statute. It is however
plaiil t h a t they were by no ineans uncommon." l
The authorities did not c o n t ~ n tthemselves witli prollibiting covins and
confederacies, they went f ~ r t l l e r ,and
~ tliey realised that i t was incumbent on
them t o see t h a t tlie int.erests of journeymen were recognised and protected; and
we find in t h e fifteenth and sixteenth centuries t h a t tllere is formed a class of
small masters, t o which tlle jourileylnan can oht.ain admission; and t h e gro:vtll
of a body of unorganised labour outside the craft is checked by l e g i s l a t i o n , ~ i i
t h e first place securing them redress [or their grievances, at the llallds of t h e
Mayor and Alderl:icn, and in tlle second conlpelling moderate apprenticesliip
fees.
Another point on wllicll the 71ooX o f Chnrgrs and the Ii'r!/ic~s Z'orvi are
silent is t h e existence of ally orga~lisationof travelling workmen; the rules contain
110 11int of the practice of going all over England partly as a necessity to find
work, partly on purpose to 'get experience and knowledge.
" An
iinportant
difference between t h e later developnlent of tlie craft system in England and on
tlle Continent was t h a t t h e years of travelling (Wanderjahre) on tlie expiration
and in English craft literature
of apprenticeship were not enforced here"
generally tllere is hardly any trace of this system, nor does i t appear, in fact,
t h a t t h e ordinary Englisll craftsman did travel. That Freemasons migrated and
travelled all over England we inust believe, for tllere is n o other explanation of
t h e simultaneous developnlent of their craft on siinilar lines throughout t h e
country. The eighteelit11 special charge of the TT7illinn~T17trt~07,directs the master,
if lle have no work for t h e strange mason, to refresh him to the next Lodge, while
the eighth general cllarge reads: " and also t h a t you pay truly for your
meat and your drink wheresoever ye go t o board."
These directions
are clear survivals froin a time when Freemasons travelled about.
However
developmeilt i n architecture came to a n end in the fourteenth century, and in
1350 caille tile first of a seric.; of enactnlents which effectually prevented ally
syste~llsiinilar t o t h e Coinpagnonnage coming into existence in this country. By
r/
;'
>leredith, 134.
B. cxlvii.
Meredith, 136.
&kccditlt, 69.
t h a t st,atute i t was made ail offence for a labourer to leave his native district;
and tlie act applied t o all the artisan class.
I n Germany, as in France, travelliiig ill search of work was not merely
undertake11 as a necessity; ~t was prescribed by the Gild ordinailces. As early as
1361 the system of ttavelliilg journeyiuen was completely orgai~isedamong tlle
Tailors 111 Silesia, and by the sixteei~tlicentury sucll orgmlisations may be said t o
be general. The tell11 of apprenticeship ~ v a sshorter t h a n in England,? b u t t h e
jot~rliey~nan
was sometimes obliged to travel for five years, and i f he aspired to
n~astersl~ip,
he had further to make a costly and also useless masterpiece. The
soils of illasters were exeinpt froni these restrictions, which were of course framed
expressly to keep down competition.
But the arra~igenleiltswhich were inade for t h e journeyman's arrival a t a
town, his residence there and his finding work, were all made by t h e masters, and
t h e fund f r o n which donations were inade t o tliose for w h o n ~no work could be
found was one t o which tlie masters contributed.
The journeynien formed associations of their own, apparently craft by craft,
and i11 particular localities.
B u t these again were controlled by t h e inasters '
" No meetings could take place, no regulations could be framed, arid no decisions
come to without tlle presence of the masters' deputies, who were elected annually."
" Much the same were tlie journeyinen fraternities in all trades."
It is t r u e tliat
this is not invariably t h e case, and tliat we even find instances where the jurisdiction was in the hands of t h e journeymen's f r a t e r n i t ~ . ~We also read of all tlie
journey~llen of a trade,' in a place striking work and writing to those in other
districts warning then1 not t o come t o their town; b u t however independent, and
from t h e marters' point of view insubordinate, t h e journeymen's fraternities h a y
occasioilally have been, they were nevertheless officiallv under t h e masters' control,
and workillg by rules *rescribed with the masters' approval; they were moreover
local and restricted to their own crafts. These journeymen's fraternities may date
,from t h e fifteenth century. T h a t of the jouri~eynieiishoemakers was re-organised
1628,"ut
tlie fraternity is then spoken of
-at the request of tlie gild masters-in
as established of old. But, as already mentioned, journeymen are referred to in
trade ordinances early in the fourteenth century, and are found a t Bruges as early
as 1280.
Anloilg t h e building trades we find as we should expect a different system
going back to a n earlier p e r i ~ d . ~Skilled masons there must needs have beell from
a very early date; and we know of one charter to a gild of t h e building crafts in
the thirteenth century, a gild t h a t had probably been in existence for some time
previously. But a century before this tlie building trades had already organised
theni.selves, and had sub-divided into societies of rough masons, s'tone hewers, and
stone masons, tlie Steinmetzen. This craft was organised as oiie body, under one
code of laws, all over Germany, Sait.zerland and Austria; and we have their
code of 1459, besides later ordinances.
The society controlled all its members, including t h e journeymen, and no
separate organisation of journeymen appears to have been recognised; nor was
i t necessary. I n each locality t h e Lodge, t h e ' Hutte,' and all working in i t
constituted a fraternity18 masters and journeymen together. Not only did the
journeyilien travel as a d u t y ; but we find i n the Torgau Ordinances, No. 30,9
provision for sending a n apprentice on his travels if t h e master has n o work for
him, and in t h a t case lie is t o be lent a mark. H e call claim a mark as his
right wl~eilhe is out of his indenturea
The French Craft Gilds are similar to those of England and Germany, and
developed during a corresponding period, and i n a corresponding manner. They
may indeed in certain cases claim a greater antiquity; and they lnay derive from
1
6
B. csli.
B. cliv.
3
7
B. cl.
G, i.? 117.
B, cliv.
4 B. clir.. n. 5.
5 B. rlvii.
8 B. rslir. R. clv.
W. i . . 137.
G. i.. 188.
G. i.. 232.
Chol-in, 42. a n d W.
R. cxli., n. 8.
&L., 80.
9 cf. Guillxn~nou.
3 B. cli.
4 S.L., 64.
rf. P.M. i., 28 and 86.
1 0 S.11.. 118.
G . i.,226.
The Cornpagno,)/nngc.
197
Chovin, 61.
'
198
Qrrntllor C ' o r o ~ t a i i T , o ( l g ~ .
'
G, i.. 201.
G. i., 204.
@.L., 31.
$.I,.: 33.
qG,
i . , 200.
had no iiotioii of abandoning t h e organisation which was so essential to their wellbeing, and their societies tended to become (i.) secret, (ii.) ' organisations d e
combat ' ( i . r . , systeins formed for offensive purposes), and (iii.) law evading.
Tlle cleavage between masters aiid workmen t,hus became more and more accentuated.
B u t the law did not lose sight of them. 111 1601 ' all compa.gnoii cordwainers are forbidden t o greet one another on leaving their master's house, t o
stand sponsors to one another t o get work, and t o go more t h a n three together
t o an inn.
This seems t o refer t o usages very similar t o tliose described by
Perdiguier; and in 1631 a similar law is passed, directed against t h e journeymeii
carpenters.
I n 1639 a religious associatioii denounced t h e impieties of tlle conipagnons,
and in 1648 the cordwainers were interdicted on account of certain revelations as
t o tlieir initiation cerenionies.
I n 1651 a printed disclosure of the ceremoiiies
used by the saddlers got into tlie hands of the clergy. The whole story is given by
Gould.:j Not only the cordwainers, b u t several other associations then divulged
tlieir secret ceremonies, and t11e.e were condeinned as impious by the Sorbonne.
B u t tlie cordwainers or shoemakers alone were subservient; they reunited
theinselves with their masters, and agreed t o give u p their practices, and, as we
know froin Compagnoniiage literature, they were no longer reckoned as belonging
t o i t , and had t h e greatest difficulty in joining i t again in 1850 after 42 years of
~ o n k s t . ~Gould says t h a t they foreswore tlieir ceremonies together with tlieir
masters; and considers accordingly t h a t t h e inasters were associated with tlie workii?en in these doubtful practices of 1651."
B u t this is riot what. Thory, his
a~ltllority,says. Thory's phrase is " ils se rC-unirent avec leurs inaitres le 16 Mai
Six weeks, t h a t is, after they had -made the disclosure. And t h e
suivant."
masters undertook t h a t in t h e re-united trade there would never for t h e future be
such ceremonies. This clearly points t o t h e workinell being received back into t h e
n?astersl gild, with its pious and reverent traditions.
The associations coliceriled were all composed of journeymen, as is evident
fro111 the passage a t p . 232 of Gould, and this is apparently the first distinct
statellient of a general organisation of all tlle journeymen's associations throughout tlie country. W h a t is here described is, as Saint-LBon points out,R precisely
what tlie printers had been directed t o discontiiiue in 1539, namely, a n organisaofficers, secret watchwords, oaths and meeting places a t taverns.
tion
It is t h e opiirion of this writer t h a t the proceedings of 1655 were instigated
by the masters, aiid t h a t , tlle Sorbonne revelatio~is notwithstanding, t h e compagnoiis as a whole9 were a religiously ii~inded body of men. Perdiguier says
t h a t in his tilue the practice of monthly masses had fallen into disuse,1 apparently
wit.liiii recent times, b u t i t is significant t h a t i t is precisely t h e gavots who a r e t h e
co~lspicuousoffenders in bringing about this state of things. And t h e Sorbonne in
1655 seem to be a t least as much disturbed by tlle admission of I-Iuguenots as
tlley are by the compagnous' assumptions of sacerdotal functions. B u t this is no
n7,ore tllali we would expect froin t h e body which was t h e animating spirit of all
t h e persecutions directed against Protestants, and which justified, though i t had
not advised, tlie inassacre of S t . Bartholon~ew.
I
1
1 any case, we llear of no m6re ecclesiastical censures, and t h a t proiiounced
by tlle Sorbonne had hardly more effect in the direction of suppressing the Compagnonnage t h a n t h e previous legal enactments, for t h e Compagnonnage is again
nientioiied in Paris itself in 1683. Froin now until the Revolution we meet with
a series of enactments against t h e system all over France, and all would seem to
have been equally ineffectual.
B u t tlie general tenour of t h e complaints against t h e compagnons is t h a t
tl~.e.iboycott t h e masters as they like, and have a n absolute monopoly of labour;
nothing appears as yet of public disorders further t h a n t h a t they beat and drive
out of t h e town such workmen as do not join their society (Toulouse in 1682).
The great scandal t h a t Perdiguier sought t o remove was the internal feuds t h a t
'
S.L.. 39.
i . . 2 111
S.L., 60.
.' G..
0
T,.. 3:).
3 G . . i.. 231. r f n ~ r l .
T~IOI-F.
Anil.. 331.
7 vctle Appeudis.
10 P.M.,
ii., 130.
S
Sinlon, 110.
".TJ., 42.
200
SWlrrrlrLAmo
MEOITERRAN EAN
c f . A~.naucl,Y B L .
P 2. ii.: 196.
G cf. Simon, 119.
2, ii., 194.
202
1
5
S~II~O
55.
II.
P.11. i . , 100.
3 Cuillnirtnoii. 01.
B. cssuiii. G. i., 193.
299.
U. i., 191.
l -11.n:lnd.
T h e Con~paynonnnge.
203
G. i . , 177.
T. Ann : 335.
3 r l t . Rylands.
A.Q.C. ii.. 53 n .
2 G. i . , 152, e t s ~ g .
".L., 106, vzde also note at p. 216 and c f . Arnaud, 164, 218.
The hatters have a special cerenlony of their own for tlie public departure
from a town, wliich again has analogies in later t i ~ n e s ,aud liere also a dialogue is
mentioned.
Tllory does not refer t o any dialogue anlolig the charcoal-burners, but
Hec2etliorn gives one a t length v~ithoutquoting his antliority.' Unfortunately,
this pathetic dialogue appears verbatim in Ragon's printed ritual of t h e Fendeurs,
one of a long series h e published in 1853 or thereabouts; and tlie whole syste~n
of Fendeur degrees is of eiglltee~ltlicentuiy manufacture.
B u t there was dialogue of some kind in the ceremonies of 1655, and this
is a ~vllollydistinct type of ritual, quite unrelated t o tlie church ceremonial on
~.izichthe rest of the practices appear to be modelled. Ilialogne was used by the
Vehmgericllte, t o go back 110 farther, and tlie very earliest printed accounts of
our Lodge ceremonies, or rather alleged discoveries of thein, in 1724, give us a
ritual in dialogue forni, wllile tlle practice was increasingly elaborated by tlie
craft a t a later date. W e still preserve i t t o a certain extent in our present day
working, though Brethreri will be aware t h a t there is as yet no evidence of its
being practised in tlie English craft before the forination of Grand 1,odge.'
We
see, Iiowever, t h a t i t was a type of ritual already f a ~ n i l i a ralnoilg French journeymen in tlle previous century.
tlle Conlpagnonrlage did in t h e eighteenth cent,ury does not appear
t o be known. During this period societies sprang u p in all directions with the
most elaborate cere~llonies, often divided into numerous degrees.
The Bucks,
;I . ..Q.Cf.
iii., 40; tlie Gornlogons, icl. viii., 14; and for a list of ot,llers ~,it/ed .Q.(,'.
.
vili., 138. I11 France we have the F6licit6, .l.Q.('. xxxii. ; and the Mayounerie
Forestihre, with its six grades; Cliarbonnier, Fendeur (.l .Q.(.'.
xxii., 37), Maltre
Fendeur de Devoir, Moins Diable que Noir (i.e., not so bad as he looks), Sawyer,
and Carpenter. All these rituals have been published, and in the Library of the
Lodge there is a manuscript of another, t h e Fendeurs Cliarpentiers de Salomon,
accompanied by a n elaborate legend and code of laws, \t.hicil, liowever, notwitlistanding a great parade of antiquity, betrays itself as of post-Revolution date by
a n unfortunate reference t o centimes.
I t gives us a travesty of religious
observances f a r illore objectionable t h a n anything t h a t was ever disclosed t o tlle
Sorbonne. This feature is not present in the rituals of the Fe-ldeurs, and when
v-a conle t o the nineteentl~century it has \\rllolly dipappeared from the practices of
t h e Compagnonnage.
111 1858 there was published Le Srcrrt cler; Cortlollniers tlri~oilC,which purports t o give t h e full r i t u a l a n d pass-words, not only of the original ~ o ~ n ~ a ~ n o n n a ~ e ,
but also of the various schisniatic bodies which arose anlong the jouriieynieii from
1803 onwards. Saint-L@onwas also able to refer to a manuscript ritual of a later
date, whicl~sllows t h a t even since 1858 the dialogue 11as been recast in the parent
society. From this we learn t h a t t h e cerenlonies are tlle following:-I?ziticctio~t,
the details may differ in each craft; snlnt (Ze borrfiqtrr, or cerenlonial sunllnoning
of tlie compagnous t o a nleeti~ig; r~itru'ed e chntnbre, or presentation of the compagnori t o t h e premier ell ville on his arrival a t a town, when he proves lli~nselfa
compagnon by giving tlie passwords; c o ~ t d ? t i f ror
, farewell to a departing compagnon, w h e ~ ihe is escorted t o t h e outskirts with a special ritual, including the
embrace known as t h e gctilbrettr; and, finally, the funeral ceremonies, a t whicli
some crafts keen, or howl. There is f u r t h e r t h e l'optrye, wliicli is the greeting of
a strange con~pagnonon t h e highway, wit11 whom you proceed t o fight or drink
according as he is or is not a hereditary foe by reason of his craft, or division of
t h e Devoir. There is also t h e n p p ~ lco,tc2mgno?~niq1cr,whicli is p a r t of t h e snl~ct
d e bozrtique, b u t nlay be used separately. T h e u~holeof this apparatus of ritual is
unfortunately completely modernised, and betrays a t every t u r n its indebtedness
t o craft usages; I give a inore detailed account of i t in t h e Appendix t o tllis paper.
There are elaborate dialogues, but Saint-Lkon has printed in parallel
columns tlle Compagilonnage dialogue and t h a t of a French Lodge of Freemasons
of Auvergne in 1769, from which it has obviously been adapted wholesale; and
all French craft ritual of t h e period is nlerely t h e supposed conteinporary Englisli
1
A.
Tope.
What trade?
Compagnon ?
B.
H.
B.
Tope.
Carpenter.
rcplies with t h e prescribed
formula, a n d goes on:
And you, p a y s ?
Rylands, 11Q.C.
.
ii., 58.
Arnaud, 281. S.L., 259.
P.M. i., 109, 197, 199.
4 G . i., 225. S.L.. 257.
5 P 3. ii., 78.
P 2. i., 60.
7 G. i., 229.
cf. P.M. ii., 8.
Guillaumou, 51, Le Secret d6voil6, 29, 122,
9 S.L., 251 n ,
3 ~ f .
6
tlie particular use that is associated wit11 using one poiut or botli, there seeins t o
be no trace.
Saint LBon ' tells u s that in addition to tliese eiilbleiils t h a t are used
openly there are a number of " mystical enlblenls " of whicll secret explanations
are given during tlie ceremony. The list includes three ornaments; three moveable and three immoveable jewels, and nluch else, inost of wllich is inanifestly
simply adapted from Craft working. These einble~ns are iiot referred t o in t h e
exposure of 1858, aiid Perdiguier seeiiis t o have known nothiiig about them.
A coiistaiit cause of feuds was tlle attenipt by sonle junior and inore recently
adni.itted craft t o wear its ribbons in a iilaiiner reserved for a senior body, a
practice wllicli inevitably led to fights a t sight. I n these conflicts tlle trophy of
the victor was the cane. or tlie ribbons. and tlie cane was a forinidable affair, four
cr five feet long witli a heavy head.
I n fact, the greater p a r t of the differences tliat existed in Perdiguier's day
were due to the introduction to t h e systenl of new crafts, who brought with tlleiii
their own fashions, and who were purposely enjoined t o adopt tlie Coinpagiioiinage
emblems aiid names witli a difference, a n iiistructioiz they were not always
prepared to obey.
B u t with tliese coiiiparatively recent develop~nents we are n o t now concerned. It is more to our purpose to recognise tliat originally t h e Tour was
confined t o four crafts, namely, the stone masons, joiners, locksmitlis, and
carpenters, all inore or less building trades.
Between t h e Sons of Jacques and the Sons of Soubise there is no distinction t o be drawn in respect of t h e i r ceremonies. Both alike use t h e title Compagnons d u Devoir. The Sdns of Jacques, with tlie exception of tlle three senior
crafts, and tlie Sons of Soubise without exception, llo~vl.and all tope. All agree
in ill-treating their novices, and all use ' t u ' i n addressing one a ~ l o t h e r . Also all
agree in only admitting Roinan Catliolics t o their mysteries.
B u t with the Sons of Soloinon tlie position is different. They do not tope,
with this exception, t h a t t h e stoneinasoas follo~vthis practice when ~neetiiigSons
of Jacques. They do iiot howl. And they treat t l ~ e i rnovices well, and are in
coinplete harnlony with them. F u r t h e r , their locksinitlis aiid joiners forbid tlie
use of ' tu.' The Sons of Soloinon also call tllernselves Coiiipagiions d u Devoir d e
LibertB, and adinit Huguenots aiid noii-Catholics.
While all the rest of tlie Compagnoiinage, whatever division they belong to,
call each other ' pays,' wliich to-day meaus country, and is presu~nablya corruption ,of some inedizeval for111 of address, t h e stone nlasons of both divisions use yet
another form, ' coterie,' \vllich to-day nlearis circle of acquaintance, set. F u r t h e r ,
each coinpagiion on adiiiission selects a nickilame, and these are framed on a
special system, wliicll varies with each division, and sonletinles witli the particular
craft. The three divisions also have distinct sets of sobriquets for their iiovices
and compagnons, and even within tlie one division different nanles are given. To
all this I refer in detail later on.
There is yet another distinction, and t h a t is t h a t anlong t h e Sons of
Soloinon tlie Rotrlr~rr,or agent i n cllarge of the business of finding employnleiit
for compagrions in each town, does not tell tlie employer if t h e workmen h e
brings hiin are full coinpagnons or only novices," and the master pays all alike.
Anlong the Sons of Jacques and Soubise t h e master kiiows which are novices and
pays thein less accordingly. B u t in every case the master has t o take the men
t h e rolilettr, who is himself a conlpagnoli, cliooses t o bring him.
I think t h a t an analysis of these points of difference leads t o the conclusion
t h a t many of them go further back t h a n t h e era of new admissions; and tliat
sonle indicate t h e e x i ~ t e n c ein the very earliest tiines of bodies with different
observances. Bro. Rylands"as
pointed o u t t h a t no newly forined association
would call tllenlselves " Sons of Solomon "; and considers for t h a t reason t h a t
tlie Soils of Soloinon are tlie oldest bran cl^. Nevertlieless, some of tliese differences
suggest t o lne t h a t the Sons of Solomon, as tlley existed in Perdiguier's time,
were a reformed association; and I an1 inclined t o believe, as I sliall show, t h a t
1
S.L., 261.
P 2, i., 52.
l'ra~~sactiolls
of t h e Q r r c c t r~orCorol~ccti Lodge.
208
(i.)
(iii.)
v.)
There call be no doubt, I think, tliat t h e locksnlith and joiner of Jacques preserve
a geilui~lemedizval nickname, and t h a t t h e stone ~ n a s o lhas
~ one almost as good,
and, indeed, more useful in tiines of persecution, as i t entirely sinks t h e identity.
Tlie third systeln will pass muster, i t is better i a French t h a n i t is i n English;
but the fourth appears to be a variation made for tlie sake of variation, regardless
of euphony.
Perdiguier2 found an inscribed stone in La~lguedoc,showing this system was
ill force in 1640, a t least as f a r as t h e stone cutters were concerned; b u t a t t h a t
date tile stone. cutters of Jacques followed tlie f o u r t l ~system. They do not now
do so.
W e may next consider the sobriquets. Previous t o 1803 only two degrees,
so to call them, were recognised throughout the Compagnonnage, t h o s e namely
of novice and compagnon, except in the case of t h e joiners and locksmiths of
Solomon, wlio are stated t o have recognised two grades of compagnon, but how
early they did so does not appear. I11 each division these degrees were called by
special nanles, thus : Stone masons: Soils of Jacques; Conlpagnons passants, Loups garoux,
Boils enfants.
Novices : Aspirants.
Sons of Solomon ; Coinpagrloiis Btraagers, Loups ;
Novices : Jeuiles H o m n ~ e s .
Joiners & locksmitlls : Sons of Jacques; Devoirants, Cllieus;
Novices : Aspirant!:
Sorls of Solomon ; Gavots (two sections) ;
Novices : AffiliBs.
Sons of Soubise: Co~npagnonspassants, Drilles or Bonsdrilles, Devoirants.
Novices : Renards.
Later additions to the Sons of Jacques follow the iio~nenclature of t h e joiner?
and locksnliths of t h a t division.
If tlie original term was devoirant, which would be a natural epithet of
followers of tlle Devoir, this is easily turned into devorants=devourers, a n d , in fact,
t h e word in Perdiguier's time is more often so written; and being given devourers,
wolves, dogs, and foxes are a natural development. B u t were-wolves as a sobriquet
seems likely t o be a later form, a n attempt t o outdo t h e dogs of t h e joiners and
1
Simon, 91 a.
P 2, ii., 85.
P 2 i., 57.
2 10
the wolves of Solomon. It nlay be as well to point out that whereas " were-wolves "
among ourselves are a wholly unfamiliar idea, almost rgquiring a foot-note, the
lot~p-yuron.has always been a familiar figure in the drritrrcctis yersonce of tlle folklore and t.he nursery in France.
Perdiguier himself, as i t happens, provides an illustration of this. H e tells
us in his llfr,tnoirs of tlle old grandmother who thrilled his infancy with stories of
demons, ghosts, and /otcl~r-gccrotix.~The fact t h a t the 1o(t11-gct(.ot~is a fictitious
beast is not, I think, material.
I t only suggests t h a t the name was taken a t a
time when the existence of the creature was still believed in, and for t h a t the
seventeenth century is not too late, nor, indeed, would the eighteenth century be
among the French peasantry.
Again it is quite natural in a society tlie distinguishing feature of which is
its organised Tour for its members to style tliemselves Con~pagnonsppcrssants in
contradisbinction to freemen or journeymen of fraternities in the towns they passed
through who made no Tour de France. Cott~l)cig1101t.s
Ltrutlqers is perhaps simply
allother version of the same idea. Among the stonenlasons themselves the tradition
is that they were all originally C t r c ~ t l y e r s . ~
Gavots is explained as meaning hillmen, or persons who took refuge in barges
(yuuotcige) on the river during a persecution, and the former of these two explanations, a t all events, is admissible, as Perdiguier "ays
i t still survives as a local
name for hillmen in Provence. Either interpretation suggests a connection with
the Huguenots or other heretics, whom the Sons of Solomon allow to join their
societies; assunling the second explanation to have a value, it renlinds us of actual
incidents of the Huguenot persecutions, and tlle Albigenses and other early heretics
were also hillmen to a large extent.
The story t h a t has been constructed to explain the sobriquets which
Perdiguier gives in his Qtrestion Vitule niay be dismissed as late and wholly valueless, as Bro. Rylands4 points out; but in passing we should note that tlie whole
system preserves only two archaisins, gctvots and ho~rstlrillcs.
Taking next the practice of howling a t funerals; this very ancient custonl,
known t o Celts and Bret,ons, and also in the East, is practised by the Sons of
Soubise, and all the later additions to the Sons of Jacques, but not by joiners,
locksmiths, or stonemasons, wlietlzer of Jacques or Solomon.
The seceding
carpent,ers who have tried t o join tlie Sons of Solomon both howl and tope,
preserving in their new society the usages of their old one. The Sorbonne disclosures make no reference to the practice. The fact that all the later crafts have
the practice perhaps indicates that iC survived to a late date outside the Conlpagnonriage anlong tlle peasantry, with whom i t was a custoni from pre-historic
times, a custonl maintained among the workmen's fraternities.
P.M. i . , 56.
zP2i.,37.
3A.Q.C.ii.,55.
P1,186.
4.1.Q.C.ii.,68.
Being building trades, these associations have long since been accustomed t o
travel, and have already organised t h e arrangements for assisting travelling journeymen, if, indeed, they have not got t o t h e stage of prescribed itineraries. B u t they
are distinct societies with their own usages, their own names, and perhaps their
own legends. The one thing they have in conimon is t h e I ) ~ v o i r ,t h e Charge t h a t
Solonlon gave them all a t tlie Temple; they are all devoirants.
Perdiguier's
phrase is precisely ' Salomon leur donna u n clrtwir..' ' H e uses t h e actual word,
just as we say in our Old CIJtnrgcs t h a t Uavid or Euclid gave their masons a Charge.
Owing t o t h e developinent of Huguenot opinions in Southern and Western
France, these organisations are divided on the question of the admission o r non~ d m i s s i o nof heretics, and both the stoileinasons and tile joiners a n d locksmitlis
ara nffected. The party of tolerance call themselves C o m p g n o n s drr Dr?,ozr du
i.ibcr~B,and include stonemasons ancl seceding joiners and locksmfthu, n h i c h 1,ltter
now style themselves gavots, as a reminder of the persecutions, or of tlie mountains
in which the Albigenses and other early heretics lived. It is of a piece with their
tolerance in matters of religion t h a t they now also adopt a better attitude towards
their novices, who are llenceforth well treated and conceded privileges.
B u t such stonemasons as are not prepared t o adopt t h e new ideas transfer
their allegiance to Jacques, and to distinguish
themselves froin their old associates,
the ' loups,' they now call themselves ' loups-garoux.'
They still, however,
preserve their special form of address ' cotkrie.' A n d while they conform t o t h e
usage of their new Society, and call theinselves ' passants,' they preserve t h e
recollection t h a t they were originally ' Btrangers.' The reformed locksmiths and
joiners take the opportunity t o drop t h e vulgarism ' t u . ' A s a smaller detail, they
also strengthen their position as against t h e masters by adopting the practice of
not letting them know whether workmen are full compagnons or not. This is
another benefit conferred on t h e novices, although i t is t r u e i t is a t t h e masters'
expense.
There is a general tendency among them also t o irreverence in their
ceremonies, which brings about t h e events of 1655. B u t tlie Sons of Jacques,
on the other hand, are strict in their adherence t o and reverence for religion and
~ a t a later date we find t h e Church supporting their societies.
the C l ~ u r c h ,and
After t h e Sorbonne disclosures there is a period of abeyance, o r a t least of
quiescence. B u t we hear of a journeymen's organisation in Paris i n 1683; and
they exist, albeit more or less clandestinely, all over France. T h a t a t Paris is t h e
hat-makers, Sons of Jacques, and this division has b y this time commenced t o
throw open its ranks t o other trades. T h e ceremonies of howling and toping are
maintained by all t h e newcomers; and in 1730 occurrs t h e first outbreak of actual
hostilities between divisions of which any account has come down t o us; t h e
Sons of Jacques and Soubise joining in a pitched battle a t Crau against t h e
quondam reformers, who are now a n exclusive society, holding advanced and unpopular views, and in a minority. From t h a t time onwards the history is the long
story of feuds of all kinds t h a t I have already alluded to. Althougll I can find
no specific reference to battles between Sons of Soubise and Sons of Jacques earlier
than 1836,? they inust have occurred long before.
The only detail left unaccounted for in this scheme is the present system
of nicknames, and this also can be fitted into i t . W e know t h a t t h e stonemasons
of Jacques, seceders from Solonlon according t o my hypothesis, adopted a system
t h a t was followed by four of t h e accessions t o t h e Sons of Jacques, namely, L a
Rose le Bordelais; and Perdiguier, when he visited St. Gilles, found two sucll
names of dates 1655 and 1656. They must a t some later time have dropped this
awkward fashion, and reverted t o their old style of L e Rose de Bordeaux, which
their brethren of Solonlon had always preserved, as this is the style they follow
a t the time of Perdiguier.
It is not too much t o assume t h a t the seceding joiners and locksmiths adopted
ainong t h e Sons of Solomon t h e style t h a t the carpenters of Soubise were already
using, as t h e simplest way t o distinguish them a t once from their colleagues of
~ o l o m o n ,and their own &aftsinen of Jacques.
1
P l i., 159,
S.IA.,60,
Sirnon, 53.
All newcoiners except four adopted the system of Soubise and the joiners
of Solon~on.
This reconstruction of the political history of t h e D r ~ i o i v is adnlittedly
I~ypotllesisfrom end t o end; but i t appears t o fit the facts, and soille explanation
is required of t h e extraordinary con~plexities and diversities of the system as
exhibited in tlle table a t p . 215 of Gould
A hypothesis of soine kind is necessary
before we can attempt t o form any opiiliolls as to the connection between the
C ~ o n ~ ~ ) a g ~ l o n ~asi atgoe its
, legends a t all events, and the Craft in England
From its earliest foundation Paris must always have been on a traffic route
going down t h e valley of t h e Saone and Rhone to nlarseilles; and by t h e end of
t h e thirteenth cantury S t . Mary Magdalene's cell a t Sainte Baunie, near Marseilles,
was a place of pilgrimage for all France.' Sin~ilarlythe valley of the Loire was
also a traffic route from t h e earliest times, and Tours, another great place of
pilgrimage, lies on t h e river. Again the pilgrilri routes t o Conlpostella lay along
the shores of t h e Bay of Biscay and the Gulf of Lyons.
F o r pilgrims on their travels there were hostelries in every important town,
if not i n every village of any pretensions a n the line of march; and a t a very carly
date we find t h e Cistercians in Southern Germany' in a position t o assert that
brethren of their fraternity could make the journey t o Rome, stopping in their
o s n hostelries t h e whole way.
Thus w h a t we Inay c211 the 11.echani~111c f
pilgrimage or journeying was organised a t a very early date, and tlle compagnorl.;
may well have travelled in these regions long before they bridged the gap in
between, t h e gap forilled by Guienne aitd Gascony, provinces of a hostile power
as late as 1453.
It is quite possible, therefore, t h a t during t h e fifteenth century there were
organisations of travelling journey me^? on two great routes, Paris, Lyons, Marseilles,
and Paris, Orleans, Tours, Nantes, who visited all places of arcliitectural importance. From Toulouse t o Montpellier. where there was a gild of masons whose
statutes of 1586 are reproduced by Gould," was also French territory, although it is
significant t h a t the reason for the enactnlent a t ?o late a date as 1586 is t h a t the
old laws had bean lost in t h e wars and disorders. Gilles, in L a n g ~ e d o c ,was
~ a
place mucli visited by t h e stone cutters in the liliddle ages, althougll neither
B u t Perdiguier visited i t
Perdiguier nor Arnaud give i t as on t h e Tour.
independently.
B u t t h e complete circuit was not laid out by craftsinen interested in architecture, a t all events not the circuit known to Perdiguier, and i t may well date
from a later time, although the observances were probably in force as soon as
travelling among journeymen became organised, and t h a t must have been as soon
as t h e journeymen theinselves were organised communities.
W e must suppose a time when the three organisations which I believe to
have existed originally lived side by side i n perfect liarnlolly and nlet on their
travels. Tlie seveilteentlt century sees the travelling organised as a n actual circuit,
a t r u e ' Tour d e France '; tlle same century sees t h e question of the admission of
Huguenots become a burning one, culminating in the split and re-arrangement I
have suggested, which inay have taken place a t Orleans. There is a corttenlporary
deterioration i n the ceremonies of one division, due t o anti-clerical and radical
elements, and this is very certain t o be denounced almost as soon as i t has declared
itself. W e may take it, I think, t h a t the pious association of 1639 was denouncing
a new development, and not ally long-standing and well-known practice of the
compagnons.
T h e only difficulty about all this is t h a t we do not hear of actnal battles
between t h e divisions until 1730. Perdiguier, however, speaks of tlle conditioils
of feud and strife as having begun a t Orleans, in 1401, and lasted ever since; ancl
while I do not think we can accept his date, the tradition itself is probable enough,
and may represent a n actual fact. The revelations of 1655, a t all events, intro1
4
G . i., 111.
G . i., 203.
duced a cause of strife if i t did not already exist. The cordwainers seceded, not
to be re-admitted to the Devoir till two centuries later; and other crafts, as, e . g . ,
the tailors, the worst offenders, seem to have retired from it for good and all and
never sought re-admission. But aillong those t h a t remained i t is easy to see t h a t
there must have been much ground for recriminations and ill-feeling.
Although there seems to be no historical ground for Perdiguier's allegations
as to a dissension a t Orleans i n 1401. there was an incident i n 1567 which is not
without significance, as the Huguenots on t h a t occasion burnt the cathedral. It
was in 1601 that the fouildation of the new building was laid, and Bro. Rylands l
has pointed out t h a t the architect's name was Jacques Gabriel, and no doubt stonemasons of both divisions were employed on the work as it progressed. I f , as is
probable, the divisions were already a t enmity, there would be ground enough for
the tradition to exist a t a later date.
The different crafts celebrated their own patron saints on the appropriate
days,2 even in the cases where the crafts were divided between Solomon and
~ a c ~ u eand
s , in so doing were no doubt perpetuating a practim t h a t was anterior
to the Tour de France; the stonemasoils took as their anniversary the Ascension.
But the Sons of Jacques all made a great feature of the pilgrimage t o Sainte
Baume, the cave where the Magdalene was said, in t h e Provenqal legend, t o have
ended her days, and where her relics were discovered in 1279.
Although the Sons of Solomon are not associated with any pilgrimage,and this is only what one would expect, a t all events in 1655, from their whole
attitude,-yet the locksmiths and joiners of Solomon claim an association of their
own wit11 this same locality. Perdiguier G a y s : " When the compagnons of the
Devoir of Liberty, coming from Judea, landed in Provence, they re-assembled on
the heights of Sainte Baume, and thence descended to the valleys and plains "where they were accordingly called gavots. This seems to me to be a confirmation
of my hypothesis; i t suggests that the seceding locksmiths and joiners not only
adopted a new sobriquet, but felt it incuinbent on them to give a new explanation
of their association with Sainte Baume. As Sons of Jacaues
i t was their alace of
I
pilgrimage, as it has been for Sons of Jacques ever since; b u t as Sons of Solomon
they worked i t into a legend of their coming from Judea, and Solomon's Temple,
to Provence. A legend of the craft being a t King Solomon's Temple, where he
gave them a Charge, was apparently the common property of the building trades.
This almost involves a further l e ~ e n dof their c o m i n ~to France. and the stonemasons who called themselves Sons of Solomon must surely have had some story
to that effect. W e may, therefore, add to the suggestions as to the first dispositions of the three associations t h a t the original Sons of Solomon have a legend
of their having been a t the Temple, and t h a t the Sons of Jacques make t h e
pilgrimage to Sainte Baumq; but the Solomon legend in its earliest form probably
made no mention of this locality.
I n any case, we have a t an early date three divisions, the Sons of Solomon,
which included the stonen~asons,and, as I suggest, consisted of them alone; the
Sons of Jacques, which included the 1ocksmit.h~and joiners; and the Sons of Soubise,
as to whom there is no difficulty. They have always been the carpenters, and
until a comparatively late date included no other crafts. Solomon we know, b u t
who were Jacques and Soubise?
'
It is, perhaps, not remarkable t h a t a craft gild or association of stonemasons should adopt Solon~onas their founder, and as we see from the exposure
of 1858 the Compagnonnage actually then had as two of its passwords Boaz and
Jachin, which Brethren perhaps need not be reminded are t h e names of the two
pillars a t the entrance of K.S.T. I n the Dezqoir these are taken as passwords,
the president gives J , and the candidate replies with B. Whether this was the case
in the sixteent.11 century, or even the seventeenth century, we do not know, b u t i t
is noteworthy that one of the nledizval gates of Orleans was a t one time called
Jaquin.* According to the same exposure, the D ~ v o i rde LibertP, t h a t is the
1
AQ.C., ii., 62
P 2. i., 64,
A.Q.C. ii., 61 n.
Sons of Solomon, ubed these words somewhat differently t o tlie Sons of Jacques,
and added a further password, Tubalcain; but once more it ~vouldhe quite unsafe
t o assume t h a t this was a n early practice.
There is a trace of another tradition among tlie stonemasons of Paris, but
apparently n o t elsewhere. These claimed t h a t as special p r i ~ i l e g egranted t l l e ~ n
by Charles llilartel they were exempt froni watch d u t y
But whetlier this lras
anything t o d o with t h e journeyinell inasons of a later date does not appear, and
Charles Martel appears t o be unknown in C ~ m p a g n o n n a ~legend.
e
H e is, of,
ccuice, a familiar figure t o us i n our own O l d Charges.
Perdiguier refers to t h e legend of Solomon, h e was himself of this division.
He tells us t h a t Solomon gave the stonema~oiis,locksiniths and joiners a charge
and incorporated them in a fraternal nianner while they were within the precincts
of t h e Temple, a n d t h a t t h e two other divisions also claim to have come from the
Temple under their respective founders. H e goes on t o s+y : " The stonemasoils
are t h e oldest of all t h e Sons of Solomon." " A s t o them, people p u t about a n
old tale which refers t o H i r a m , as some say, b u t others say Adonhiram; there are
crimes and punishments in i t ; b u t I leave this fable for what i t is worth." The
phrase is identical i n all three editions. It seems t o confine the fable, whatever
i t was, t o t h e stonemasons; and i t is clear t h a t Perdiguier is not making veiled
allusions t o a cherished secret, b u t is mentioning a story h e has hinrself a profound
contempt for and disbelief in. A t a later page he says he believes as little in the
story of t h e murder of Jacques as h e does in t h a t of H i r a m ; and in the second
edition he says3 in terins " Tlie coinpagnons 6trangers have no autlientic details
of this fable which is quite new t o them " : and goes on t o suggest i t is borrowed
from Freemasonry. Saint-LBon gives us t h e full text of this H i r a m legend, and
this places t h e matter beyond all doubt. It is t h e legend as we find i t in the
eighteenth century examinations, with t h e names of the three villains as Holem,
Sterkin, and Hoterfut, b u t otherwise practicalIy word for word. Bearing in mind
t h a t we have alreadv seen t h a t t h e examination. as i t was ~ r a c t i s e din Perdieuier's
"
time, was taken straight from a French translation of a contemporary English
lecture, we need look n o f u i t h e r for t h e origin of this story, and i t is gratuitous
t o endow t h e Sons of Solomon with any I-Iiramic legend a t an earlier date, in t h e
complete absence of any evidence for it. It was t h e Sons of Solonlon who introduced into t h e Compagnonnage, in 1803,&a new and mazonic degree, tlre cause of
endless strife and discord.
Nothing is said i n t h e Sorbonne disclosures of any legends, with the single
exception of t h e reference t o t h e three first compagnons. I do n o t believe this has
any connection with t h e tlrree Founders, Solomon, Jacques, and Soubise. The
Compagnonnage legends are wholly free from objection on t h e score of impropriety;
they do not to-day offend on t h e score of irreverence; and t h e tailors, like all other
crafts, had their own iaitiatiou ceremony; lnoreover they left tlie Compagnonnage
for good i n 1655.
W e are left, then, 15-ith the statement, made in 1830, t h a t tlre compagnons
claim t h a t Solonlon gave t l ~ e m a charge.
Solomon does not give a charge
according t o our legendary Iliqtory, b u t David does, and his charge is confirmed
by Solomon. A n d t h e French phrase does not convey quite t h e same meaning.
The act is t h a t of t h e founder of a n order, and impIies what monks spoke of as a
R u l e ; i t is something more t h a n a mere set of moral instructions, i t implies
privileges as well.
T h a t skilled masons originally came t o France and England from tlie East,
or a t least from t h e South, niay be called a llistorical statement. 111Enqland a
tradition is in existence as earl? as tlle noel, o f C ' h r r t g r ~ , ' say., in the thirteenth
century, in ~ , I i i c ht h e original home of t h e nlasons iq not P a l e s t ~ n ebut Egypt, and
t h e founder of t h e Order is Englet, or Euclid. Tlie cl-aft p a s e c from land t o
land, and Athelstan reforms i t in England.
1
4
A t a later date an elaborate history is written in which Solomoii is mentioned, but is in no way specially prdnlinent; but tlle science comes froin the
Temple into France, and Charles 11. is credited wit11 the reform of tlie craft in
that country. The date of this conlpilation is towards the end of the fourteenth
century. A t a still later date, early in the sixteelit11 century, the history is recast, Charles 11. is now replaced by Charles Martel, and a mysterious personage
is introduced who brings geometry illto France from King Solomon's Temple.
(By a later interpolation in the text he is made to teach it to Charles Marte1,l
b11: we call safely say t h a t that is not how lie first appeared in the narrative.)
It is, perhaps, not assuming too niucll if we say t h a t in the thirteenth
century tlie English masons had their tradition of Egypt and Euclid, while the
French had theirs of Palestiile and Solomon; the English reformer being
Athelstan, while the French was either Charlemagne, or Charles Martel; possibly
both in legends of the North and South respectively. The writer of t h e C'ooke T e x t
has heard somethillg of tlie French legends;-he constantly makes allusions t o old
books of masonry;-and
accordingly lie introduces into his narrative a reference
to them. The writer of tlie revised text in the sixteenth century has heard, or
read, a story of an actual individual who brought geometry t o France from
Solon~on's Temple, and he introduces him, and calls him Nanlus Grecus,-or
whatever i t was he did call hinl originally. Now Nainus Grecus is nothing like
Jacques or Soubise, but the inost generally received Coinpagnonnage legend is
nevertheless precisely this, that Jacques and Soubise were a t King Solomon's
Temple, and came from thence into France with their skilled masons. There is
then some ground for supposing that, by about 1500 a t all events, t h e Conlpagnonnage had, in addition to the tradition of an origin in Judea, which was
commoil to all the building trades, a definite story of a founder who brought the
craft i11 person into France. But this is, apparently, not a story t h a t is told by
the original Sons of Solomon; i t is a legend of the secoild division, the Sons of
Jacques.
Perdiguier's words imply that, apart froin iilodern innovations, the
Sons of Solomon, stonemasons, have no legends. It is difficult to imagine t h a t
they never had any story of their conling to France; I have already suggested
that when tlie joiners and locksn~ithsof Solomon recounted the story of their
assembling on the heights of Sainte Baume they were amplifying for their own
purposes a legend t h a t was already current anioiig the stonemasons.
Perdiguier himself and others have attempted t o rationalise t h e story, to
say that the Jacques who founded the society was Jacques Molay, the last of t h e
Teinplars, or Jacques the architect of Orleans. The legend itself is given in full
by G o ~ l d ,from
~
Perdiguier, who cannot refrain from making the remark that
i t will not stand serious examination.
The most patent anachronism in i t is precisely t h e original anachronislii
of Nalnus Grecus, namely, that a t the time of King Solomon's Temple there was
no civilisation to come to in France.
But the general plan of the legend is that of one of the Lives of the Saints,
as Bro. Ry1arids"las pointed out. I n fact, there is no St. Jacques t h a t will fit
in, and the pilgrimage of Sainte Baume was made to St. Mary Magdalene and St.
Maximin, who do not help us. Bro. Rylaiids suggests that t h e original ceremony
of initiation being, as we know, often based on incidents in the New Testament,
the whole legend is an elaborate parable of tlle life of Our Lord, purposely disguised; and he also considers it is of quite modern construction. I am inclined
to think that a t a very early date there was n story of some actual person who
came froill K S.T. to France; the anacllroilisnl iilvolved could hardly escape
detection if such a tale was invented a t ally late date; and t h a t on t h a t foundation the elaborate legend as we now have it was pieced together, details being
added up to comparatively recent times. A t Jacques' death, his girdle is given
to the carpenters, an incident that is an obvious imitation from a legend of the
Virgin. This incident must needs be of a date anterior to any feuds between
the t y o divisions. On the other hand, Soubise, or liis followers a t all events,
1 A.Q.C.
iv., 215.
G. i., 217 ( n i d e A p p e ~ ~ c l i x ) .
916
of them.
P 2 i., 26. cf. Arnaud, 314 for insta~~ces
2 i., 31.
4 P 3 I . , 40.
3 P 3 ii., 255.
3P
2 P 3 ii., 277.
=.I.Q.C. i., 163.
APPENDICES.
(a)
T H E L E G E N D O F 31AITRE JACQUES.
Colnpagnons made of him a quasi-saint and constructed for him a regular life,
the Old Charges did no more than to introduce liim as one of the characters in
their History. But I call offer no suggestion as to the origin of tlle name k>
which lle is known in either country.)
Maitre Jacques was born a t Carte, now St. Roinili; (this locality is in fact
unidentified); and in his cllildllood he learnt to cut stone. A t the age of fifteen
Ile set out on his travels and visited Greece and Egypt, and having heard that
Solomon was making an appeal for the assistance of skilled artists, he came t o
Jerusals1:i 111 the twenty-first year of his travels and joined the workmen engagad
on the Temple. Here among other works he cut two twelve sided pillars, known
as Vedrera and Macaloe, on which Old Testament scenes were sculptured. H e
was then made master of the stone-cutters, masons and carpenters. When the
Temwle was comwlcted he left Jerusalem with Maitre Soubise. But he and Soubise
soon fell out, and whereas the latter went to Bordeaux Jacques went to Marseilles,
with 13 compagnons and 40 disciples. For three years he travelled in France,
but he was constantly attacked by disciples of Soubise, from whom on one occasion
he had to hide in a marsh. H e finally retired to the hermitage of Sainte Baume,
and there he was betrayed with a kiss by a traitor among his disciples t o five
assassins, who stabbed him t o death. With his dying words he forgave them and
instructed his compagnons that for the future they should give t o all whom they
made compagnons the kiss of peace that he now gave them. After his death there
was found on the body a small piece of reed, a memorial of t h e reeds which had
once saved his life. He was buried with great solemnity, and his garments wefe
then divided, being thus distributed: his hat to the hat-makers, his tunic to
the stone-cutters, his sandals to the locksn~iths,his cloak to the joiners, his girdle
to the carpenters, his pilgrim's staff to the wheelwrights. The traitor threw
llinlself into a dry well which was, afterwards filled in.
The similarities to the Story of the Passion are obvious. I t will be alsonoted that from the very first Soubise is associated with Western France and
Jacques with the Midi.
(c)
T H E ADMISSION O F A NOVICE.
209.
2 P.M.
i., 98,
220
to
at
an
no
T H E S A L U T D E BOUTIQUE
[Saint Lion says that this has entirely gone out. It is referred to by earlier
writers and given at length in the Secret. Moreau makes merry over it.]
The Rouleur's duty is t o summon each compagnon iiidividually for the
meeting. This he does by going to the workshops, or to the lodgings of the compagnons. When they are ready t o receive him, he places his cane on the floor,
and a second cane is placed across it a t right angles.
Each compagnon then stands, with his h a t held against his right ear, in
one hand, and t h s other hand on his heart, leaning his l ~ e a dto the right. The
Rouleur says, or rather mutters, " Honneur aux bons enfants, s'il y'en a," three
times. The compagnon who is being summoned replies twice, also muttering and
not speaking out, " Assurement il y'en a." Then they stand with their feet in
the angles of the canes, each holds the others left hand in his, and keeps his hat
in position; and they thus go through a dialogue; during which they step out of
the cross to repeat t h e " appel," only now, instead of saying " enfants," they
compagnons," t h e Rouleur giving t h e appel twice, and the conlpagnon
say
replying once.
he rest of t h e dialogue is gone through; it is not worth giving
in full; i t relates to the duties, etc., of the " bons enfants," b u t the last question
and answer are interesting: they are as follows: Compagnon : Where is your kit ?
Rouleur: It is not my kit, i t is our k i t ; but in passing through the forest
of Trois-Buis~ons,~
the rain, hail, and distress were so great, that I have left only
fragments
( I hope
of kit t h a t I have on me; b u t as soon as there is work it will
the
semblance
J you will let me take part 'in it., and the kit will be renewed.
(all renew itself.
On t h e termination of t.he dialogue the Rouleur announces the time of the
meeting.
( f ) T H E INITIATION.
I'
dialogue, the candidate is invited to abandon his religion, to join in coining false
money, or to join in sharing the cash belonging to the novices. Saint LQon mentions a test of a later date. H e is called on to stab a supposed perjurer. H e is
told he has failed in the test and a pretence is made of pushing him out of the
room; but when, in answer to a question, lie declares he still wishes to join the
society, he is restored to light, and takes an obligation as to tlie secrets. After
he has repeated, " I swear; I swear; I swear," a compagnon says, " And you,
brethren, if the ' pays ' becomes a perjurer, say what he will deserve," and the
co~llpagnonsreply, " Death." Then he is made to drink a mixture of wine and
salt, to choose three compagnons as godfather, godmother, and priest, and to select
by lot his future nickname; the lot is a pretence, he has chosen i t already. H e
is then baptized with it. H e is given his ribbons; and the ceremony may conclude with the reading of a inoral lecture.
The red ribbon is explained as being tlle blood of Maitre Jacques. H e is
also given his " affaire," the equivalent of our Grand Lodge Certificate; but i t is
issued by the Ville du Devoir over the signature of the Premier-en-ville.
Saint LQon gives an account of the ceremony in the U ~ r i o nc o n ~ p a g n o n n i q u ~ ,
but, as he says, it is merely a close imitation of Craft usages; and t h e society
itself has only been in existence since 1889.
I n the Secret are also detailed the cereillonies of the Societaires, Independants, Devoir de LibertQ, and *re nouvelle. All are creations of tlle nineteenth
century; and we need devote no further time to ceremonies t h a t are conscious
inventions.
But in the ceremony as outlined above we can see t h e traces of an earlier
system; we can presume that there was always a test of character, an oath
(although there seems to be no elaborate penalty as part of it), and a drinking
of wine and salt; as also a baptism. The last we find in 1655; the bitter cup
is an obvious reference to an incident in Holy Writ.
(g)
T H E GUILBRETTE.
The peculiar posture which the compagnon has t o adopt when first
introduced to the premier-en-ville is the same as t h a t he and t h e rouleur adopt
when going through the dialogue of the Appel Compagnonique, vicle Appendix (e).
But for the conduite and funerals yet another posture is prescribed, and this used
to be known as tlie Guilbrette, althougli as noted in the text St. LBon tells us i t
is now generally called the Accolade.
Tho canes being laid cross-wise, the two compagnons stand respe.ctively in
the second quadrant facing the first and the foul-t11 quadrant facing t h e third.
They then turn inwards placing their right feet in t h e opposite quadrants, and
grasp each other's right hands. They then embrace, i . e . , each kisses the other's
cheek. There does not seen1 to be any gesture precisely equivalent to 'left hand
over back.' Words are whispered, and a t the funeral these would appear to be
the passwords. The rest of the ceremonial a t funerals is described in the text.
Bootmakers and bakers a t their funerals do not inerely whisper a word b u t go
through a prescribed dialogue. I n any case all present go through the procedure
in pairs and then kneel and pray a t the edge of the grave, into which they then
each tllrow three spadefuls of earth.
A voto of thanks to Ero. Vibert for his valuable paper was unanimously passed,
and comments were made b~ Bros. J. E. S. Tuckett, Gordon P. G. Hilis, W. B. Hextall,
Herbert Bradley, and E. H. Dring.
s ~ i :dBro. J. E . S. TUCKETT
(2)
(3)
224
l'~tr,~sciction.s
of t h e ( ~ ( t u t l l o rC'ot,orlccti L o d g e .
Neither Perdiguier nor any other of the Compagnonnage authorities state that
prior to the late introduction of a ,qfccsonic Hiramic Legend the Compagnonnage
was destitute of all 1:nowledge of H.A.B. I s i t not quite reasonable to understand
that Perdiguicr is objecting t o and expressing contempt for the elcborated ilfcisonic
Hiramic Legend with the added details concerning crimes and the punishments
meted out to Eoben, Sterkin and Oterfut-in
fact, the ' H i g h ' Ilvfasonic Degree
Version of the Story? The doubt between Hiram and Adonhiram indicates that
this is what is i n his mind. Quite rightly he calls attention to the absence of
' authentic' details, and. ~ o i n t"i nout
~ that file Bible has no mention of even
the murder itself, he states his own conviction t h a t the murder is not a11 historic
fad--an opinion in which very many Freemasons to-day would readily join.
By this opinion he means t o imply t h a t still less can any reliance be placed in
the minute details which are the characteristic feature of t h e particular version
of the Legend to which he refers. The three extracts given above do not then
necessarily mean that Perdiguier is t o be qvoted as authority for t h e .nonexistence of a gennino Compagnonnage-Hiramic Legend. Other portions of his
writings quoted by Bro. Rylands (A.Q.C., vol. i.) show him t o be a witness and
a powerful one on t h e opposite side. Thus: (1) H e gives a Compagnonnage Song ( I . , 211) containing :" Jerusalem
. . . abode of our Founder (Solomon) . . .
There was built the Temple of glory and by Hiram all was
directed. All his Labours rest in the memory of the Compagnons du Devoir etranger. "
(2) Another Song of t h e Etrangers (I., 216) has : " Behold the bright Star . . . On t h e . horizon brilliant
with fire, Hiran1 compass in hand seems to trace for you the
outline of the shores and banks of Jordan."
I
n
the
Engraving
of t h e " Departure of the Tllree Founders " wliicli
(3)
illustrate- the 1857 E d . of Perdiguier's book a most pronlinent place
is assigned to Hiram wlio, with octstretched arm and compass ill
hand, stands next t o K. Solomon on his left hand (L. dti C'., 1857).
[ A t A . Q . C . , xxvii., 16, is a reproduction of
Clearance Compagnonnage Certificate (date 1860) showing Eliram compass in
hand with a plan of K.S.T.]
(4) " . . . This expert and skilful mars is without doubt that other
Hirain wlio is looked upon as one of the Architects of the Temple"
( N o t e by Perdiguier on h-. fIiru,n'.s L ~ t f e r ) .
(5) " . . . Maitre Jacques, one of the Head Blasters of Solomon and
colleague of Hiram " (L. r2u G., i., 34).
(6) Perdiguier says t h a t Jacques pro~lounced the ACTE DE For a t his
reception before Solomon,. EIiram, and the ' Grand Sacrificateur.'
(7) " . . . (The Joiners) wear white gloves because, as they say, they
did not steep their hands in the Blood of Hiram " (I;. d r ~C., i., 46).
(8) Perdiguier says that the Coinpagnons call tlleinselves C'hirns because a
dog1 discovered the hidden body of Eliram ( L . d z ~C'., i., 6 1 ) .
So f a r from being gratuitous t o endow the Conipagnons with a genuine Hira~nic
Legend of their own, i t appears impossible to, escape t h e conviction that such
really did exist. The difficulty is that we know next to nothing concerning its
contents. We dare not even assert t h a t i t included the Story of Hiram's Death,
but we s!:ould be entitled to feel the liveliest surprise should ~t ever be proved
that the f a d were otherwise. The presence of IIiram in the engraving mentioned
above does not tell against this view, for in the background may h seen the
Temple Buildings still in process of construct;on and far from neoring completion.
Nor have we reliable evidence as to t h e date of this presumed legend, but perhaps
A
waa
the following may be regarded as some slight icdication in favour of its pre-1717
existence. I n 1651-55 the Sorbonne Doctors had before them a " Legend of the
Three First Compagnons " and by the " Three First. Compagnons " must surely
be meant the Threo Founders of whom K. Solomon was certainly one.
The
genuine original Compagnonnage Hiramic Legend may very well have formed
part of the Solomonic Legend which did exist in 1651-55. Unfortunately there
is no certainty, and i t mu& with regret be admitted t h a t no fresh light has been
shed upon the origin and history of the Legend n i our M.M. Degree. B u t further
discoveries may be made and t h e Compagnonnage must still be regarded as a
possible source of enlightenment upon t h a t impcrtant subject. I n the course of
a valuable paper, The Qz~ntuorCoronati i n Belgiztrn, which appears in Vol. xiii.
of A.Q.C., Bro. Count Goblet d'Alviella (p. 80) says :I am more inclined than many of our English brethren to believe in
the genuineness of the legends r e t a i n d by t h e French Compagnonnages
. . . whabver they became in recent days, they represent, not, as
some French authors will have it, a secret oppositio~~
society formed
within t h e corporation against the tyranny of t h e Masters, but the
survivals of these corporations themselves, the remnants of an o r g a ~ i z a tion akin t o the Flemish ambachten, to t h e German Fraternities, and
in England to .the trade guilds, which, mixed up with elements proceeding from other quarters, have given rise to our Free-Masonry
. . . (The Compagnonnages) bear, in their rulcs as well as in their
ceremonial and way of thinking, the stamp of t h e Middle Ages . . .
what is common to all their organizations must be older than their
division. am on^ the traditions t h a t were held bv al! . . . were
. . . that the Compagnonnage dated from the building of Solomon's
Temple, that their Charges or Devoirs proceeded either from the great
King or from one of his principal architects (and) t h a t this Master was
betrayed and murdered by some fellows of t h e Craft
Bro. Count Goblet d'Alviella then goes on to suggest the theory t h a t the Murder
of Jacques and t h e Murder of Hiram are really one and t h e same:The science of Mythology teaches t h a t names are much more easily
altered or exchanged than legends; t h e hero varies, the myth remains.
Against this view, however, there is t h e evidence-apparently
sufficient-that
Hiram and Jacques both play some part in the Legend of t h e Foundation of the
Compagnonnage. But even a story rightly belonging to one might in process of
time become transferred t o the other.
Bro. Vibert acquiesces tpo readily in t h e chargea of irreverence and
impropriety made by t,he Sorbonne Clerics against t h e proceedings of t h e Compagnons in 1651-55. The m110143 of the evidence is in Bro. Gould's History, and
each can read nd judge for himself, but after most careful consideration I can
find nothing which deserves to be described as " Skits on the Mass and blasphemous
accordingly." On the contrary, a simple, homely, but rough kind of reverence
is shown throughout, betokening a very real faith and comparing very favourably
with the uncouth buffoonery which is to be found in many of t h e so-called
' Pardons' and Religious Mystery Plays which were producsd under immediate
clerical patronage.
B u t the Compagnons were undoubtedly gcilty of two very
serious offences frow t h e point of view of t h e orthodox Roman ecc1esiastio:-(l)
Performing tho Act and using the Words of Consecration. This would, of course,
be shooliing t o the Clericals, and it is to this they refer l when they say "what
more enormous sacrilege than t o sport with t h e mysteries of r~ligiuo . . . than
to abuse the sacrad words."
A considerable part of the Compagnonnage never
came under the authority or control of the ecclesiastics, and for t h a t reason alone
would be regarded with suspicion and 6reated in a hostile manner.2 (2) Refusal
to divulge the Secrets of the Society in the Confessional when called upon to do so.
1 Bro. Gould thought that what. a a s denouuc+ was the use of Scriptural Names
as Passutorrls, but this appears less hkely (Hist.,
I., 238).
a gee A.Q.C. 'xiii., p. 80. Count Goblet d'blviella puts this even more strongly.
I n spite of its utter futility i t has always been a favourite argument with those
who advocate compulsory auricular confession t h a t wherever there is a refusal to
disclose a matter i t must necessarily be because t h a t matter is foul and shameful,
and charges of ' impurity ' and such-like follow with or without evidence in support.
We do not lmox!r tlie ' Lcgend of the Three First Compa,onons,' but we may rest
assurcd t h a t because a body of Roman Catholic Divines labelled it as " full of
impurity " (la qrcellr r*f plritir rl'i~npzireti)it by no means follows t h a t the Legend
contained the slighted trace of 'impurity ' in our sense of the word. Bro. Rylands
( B . Q . C . i , p. 123) very wisely cautions us t h a t " t h e Franch words, irnplrrett
and icoles publiques d'impudicit6, in t h e mouth of an ecclesias~icare capable of
other interpretations." Nor must we allow ourselves to be led astray by Thory's
additional details conccrning a picture of the gallantries of three tailors and a
banquet-lecture concerning those obscene adventures, for Bro. Gould (Hist. i.,
p, 238) warns us t h a t ~ h o gives
r ~ no authority for his statement, and we must
aIso remember that in moments of relaxation such things were formerly admitted
as legitimate topics of conversation in the best and politest circles, both a t home
and abroad.
A very interesting detail in Compagnonnage observances j~ the g uilbrett e
or ceremonial form of greeting. Bro. Speth proposed as a possible derivation for
this curious word :gltil=guild
brette (bret) = a cry or lamentation.
Accepting this, th.3 meaning of guilbrette= the cry or lamentation of the guild or
brotherhood. Now let us consider t h e action.
Two Compagnons meeb-lay down their canes so as to form a crossstep into opposite angles---each makes a half t u r n on the left foot-at
samo timo advancing the right foot to next angle-they are now facing
inwerds and one foot is a t rest in eacli a n g l ~ h a n dto hand--embrace,
i.e., hand over back-kiss
eacli othe:-remain
for a moment clasped
in :ach other's arms-somrfhing
is wl~isyeredwhile ill this position.
A t a funeral the Compagnons all perform the guilbrette, presumably in pairs.
After the coffin hzs been lowered :A Compagnon descends into t h e graves sheet is stretched across its
mouth--cries of lamentation come from below-those
above respondif tho deceased belongs to the Carpenters, Sons of Soubise, a t this point
' something occurs' below t h e sheet, but we are loft by Perdiguier to
guess as to its nature.
If I understand Bro. Vibert correctly lie does not know exactly what is said in a
whisper during tlis guilbrette, b u t he thinks t h a t i t includes Lhe Passwords and a
cry ' A Moi, Rouleur.' Now ' B moi' is a call for help and ;S the exact equivalent
of C'ome to my aid. With such a derivation and meaning r.s t!mt proposed by
Bro. Speth attaching t o such action as has been described with tlie words given by
Bro. Vibert and hPsassurance that the whole ceremony is of c~nsiderablenntiquity,
most of us will feel t h a t tlie gi~ilbrefteis of great Masonic interest even if in the
end we are forced to the conclusion t h a t it is devoid of Masonic significance. But
Ero. Speth-an acconiplished 1inguisGseemed to be far from surc of the derivation,
and i t may not be amiss to venture on some others as possible, which is, however,
a question for the expert philologist.
g~lille, s.f. (thirteenth century)=finesse, fourberie, fausset&, ruse.
Described as ' mot fort ancien ' occurring in Les Igablinux de
Ilccrbazccn, Le Roman de In I?o.sP, and i11 Le Ronlcrt, dil Rrnurd.
Said t o be akin to ' ghile ' (Arabic?). Hence guiller=to cheat,
to fool.
breste, s.f. (twelfth century)=snare.
brette, s.f. (still used)=rapier, sword. Eence brettailler and bretailler
= t o fight, t o tilt. Also 6retteur and bretail/cur=a fighter, a
bully. Also bretuder= to crop.
brett, s.n.=board, plank, table.
b r ~ter,
t
Bro. VIBERT,
in repty, said:-
'
I must gratefully acknowledge the very kind way in which the paper has
been received. Naturally brethren have realized t h a t i t has not been possible
this evening to read more than a condensed version of it. The cardinal point of
interest in the enquiry is the question whether the Compagnonnage possessed the
Hiramic Legend independently.
Bro. Tuckett has brought forward several
passages in support of t h e contrary view to t h a t I have expressed; b u t t h e
difficulty is that all are, as I think, of too late a date. The songs are of 1836 or
later. We should distinguish between references to Hiram as the architect and
builder and the definite narrative with which we are familiar and which alone
constitutes the Hiramic Legend. I still think t h a t nothing has been adduced
that will demonstrate t h a t the Compagnonnage had this narrative before t h e
nineteenth century. The Compagnonnage Legend is one of a murder in France
of the Founder who brought the Craft from Palestine, and who therefore corresponds to our Namus Grecus. There seem to be no similarities of detail between
the two stories, and I believe them to be independent creations. I cannot suggest
a t what date the Jacques Legend first took shape, b u t I cannot see how either
legend can be considered as a mere variant of the other. It certainly is the case
that in both countries the Craft a t some time constructed a murder legend in
connection with a Founder or Master, but the details as well as the personages
and localities of the two stories are entirely distinct.
With regard to the charges of irreverence and impropriety I quite agree
that we should not attach too much importance to the language of the ecclesiastics;
but I am afraid there are hints from other quarters of something of the kind,
which, however, as I have said in the paper itself, are t o be attributed to the
articular attitude of one division of t h e Compagnonnage, and are not t o be
considered as a universal characteristic of it.
Into the question of the philology of the word Guilbrette I am not qualified
to enter. I certainly feel t h a t the custom must be an old one, b u t when Bro.
Tuckett asks what evidence there is for it before the eighteenth century I must
admit I have none.
Yet I can hardly think t h a t such a practice would be
universal in the Society if it were not also of extreme antiquity.
I welcome Bro. Gordon Hill's suggestion t h a t as Grenoble was a military
outpost the Conduite de Grenoble may have been originally a military punishment; I can only
- say
- t h a t the French authorities have offered no explanation
of the phrase.
I may perhaps be allowed to add that Monsieur Martin St. LBon, with
whom I have had a good deal of cormspondence, has been kind enough to speak
in very flattering terms of the paper and accepts my reconstruction of the
political history. EIe has also drawn my attention to the efforts now being made
by himself and others interested in economic and social problems to revive the
Compagnonnage. H e writes: J u s t now the French Compagnons are making an
attempt to revive their old associations and while lreeping what is essential in
these institutions to p u t them in harmony wit11 the present needs and ideas of
the working class. They are bringing together an increasing number of working
men, the best and most moderate part of Labour which lias nothing to do with
Eolshevism, and they hope, owing especially to the excellent organisation of their
teclinical teaching, to effect the renewal of t h e Compagnonnage.
The new movement publishes a paper, L r C'om11n,qno~1wt,qr,
and its influence
is wholly on the side of law aad order and the peaceable amelioration of the
conditions of industry.
MONDAY,
NOVEMBER,
Letters of apology for absence mere reported from Bros. Thos. J. Westropp; Dr.
IVynn Westcott, P.G.D., P.M. ; S. T. Rlein, L.R., P.M. ; Cecil Powell, P.G.D., P.M. ;
Count Gohlet d'Al-iiella ; John T. Thorp, P.G.D., P.M. ; F. J. W. Ckowo, P.A.G.D.C.,
P.M. ; Sir Alfred Robhins, Pres.B.G.P. ; MT. H. Rylands, P.A.G.D.C., P.M. ; and
William \Vatson, P.A.G.D.C.
m'.
The Meeting had been postponed from t h e 8th November in consequence of t h e '
illness of the Master-Elect, who was compelled to leave immediate17 afier his installation,
230
the
Correspondence Circle
Bro. Herbert Rradley, C.S.Z., Past District Grand Rfaster of Madras, t h c MasterElect, was regularly installed i n t h e Chair of t h e Lodge by Bro. J. E. S. Tuckett,
assisted by Bros. TV. B. Hextall, J. P. Simpson and Edward Armitage.
The folio\+-ing Brethren were appointed Officers of the Lodge for t h e ensuing
year :Bro. Lionel Vibert
S.TIT.
.,
R. H. Baxter
J.T.
.,
:,
,,
Canon Horsley
Chaplain
W. H. Rylands
W. J. Songhurst
F. H. Goldney,
Treasurer.
,,
., T. J . Westropp
,, Sir Alfred Robbins
,, TVilliam \Vatson
,, J. H. McNaughton
Secretary
D.C.
S.D.
J.D.
I.G.
Tyler.
Bro. James
Edward Shum Tuckett, M . A . , P.Pr.G.Reg., TITiltshire, having completed his year ot.
office a s Worshipful M a s t s of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076, the thanlis of the
Brethren be and hereby are tendered t o him for his courtesy in t h e Chair and for 1114
efficient management of the affairs of the Lodge; and t h a t this Resolution be suital~lv
engrossed and presented t o him.
Bro. Cecil Pox-ell, on his appoint~nentto the raali of Past Grand Junior TVardcn
of the Grand Lodge of Canada.
Bro. Count Goblet d'iiluiella and Bro. John T. Thorp, on the completion of their
Masonic Jubilee.
Bro. \V. TVonnacott, on his appointment as Sub-Librarian of the Grand Lodge
of England.
FIFTY
23 1
1920).
132
The result has been t h a t , for nearly two generations, the anti-clerical
parties, t h e Liberals and a few Socialists, have alone ?ought admission t o t h e
Lodges. These newcomers would not be human i f , under t h e roof of t h e Temple,
they did not take advantage of Masonic seclusion t o talk over their grievances
against t h e powcr of t h e priests.
I n 1854 the Grand Alaster, Pierre-ThBodore
Verhaegen, leader of t h e Liberal party in t h e House of Representatives, recognized
officially this situation and had removed, although not without opposit.ion, the
clause of our Statutes which prohibited discussion of political and religious questions
within tho Lodges. This barrier once fallen, there followcd a flood of discussions
and even of motions which had nothing to do with Masonic work. Some Lodges
went so far as t o map out programmes of public reforms for which they claimed
t h e assent and support of their members. Freenlasonry was i11 danger of becoming
I confess t h a t I was
a set of political clubs, if not a sectarian instrument.
myself at-first carried away by t h e stream and t h a t I indulged in some inotions,
which were more or less appropriate in outside circles, b u t about which, a few
years later, I should not have asked t h e opinion of the Lodge.
A reaction was inevitable. It was t h e work of a fow able and earnest
Masons, of whom Bro. Pierre Tempels, no-.v i n his ninety-sixth year, is one of the
few survivors. They realized t h a t t h e only chance for Belgian Pllasonry to escape
from this suicidal tendency was, on one hand, to promote among its members t h e
spirit of historical research which should bring back t h e t r u e principles of t h e
Craft, and, on the other hand, t o revive the taste for symbolis~nwhich answers
to t h e ethical and nlystical sides of t h e Order. They understood t h a t , a t least
in Belgium, they could not revert to the utter prohibition of talking religion or
politicis in the Lodges, b u t t h a t , on t h e contrary, they ought to examine all the
pressing problen~s of t h e day in a calm, scholarlike and truly Masonic spirit,
without deciding between t h e diverging opinions of their members, t h a t is to say,
without ever asking for a vote on any question outside the affairs of the Lodge. This
arrangement Bro. Tempels once inodestly called t h e Belgian System; i t might as
well have been called t h e Tenipels System. I t s followers, a t first few in numbers,
having entered t h e Chapters of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, began by
sI~ r e a d i 0
n p their views in these calmer surroundinps. then extended their
propaganda to their respective Lodges, which they brought over gradually, and a t
last gained a footing i n t h e Grand Orient, which is our Grand Lodge, with
such result t h a t to-day no one in Belgium would dream of dict.ating to t h e
Brethren their p l a t f o r ~ no r their religioustenets through t h e agency of t h e Lodges.
As for me, I had soon joined this new school with heart and soul. I may add
t h a t henceforward I never diverged from t h a t path, and, aitl~oughI have since
attained influential positions, both in Masonry and in politics. my friends are
witness t h a t I never tried to make use of t h e first t o serve my views or my
interests in t h e second. This may seen1 only natural to my English Brethren,
but on t h e Continent t h e meaning of the Masonic tie is not always thus
understood.
I n 1874 I wac, oppointed by my Lodgo one of its delegates to ;he Grand
Orient. Hardly had I taken my seat there than t h e Grand Master, Pierre van
Humbeeck, chose me as his deputy to London, very likely on account of my
knowledge of English, in order t o open negociations with t h e Grand Lodge df
England. Our official relations had been broken when Verhaegen removed the
of discussing politics and religion in t h e Lodges.
Our P r o Grand
Master, Bro. August Couvreur, had just succeeded in renewing our relations
with several Grand Lodges in Germany, and i t was surmised t h a t t h e same
result might be obtained in England, so much more t h a t t h e last Grand
Master of t h e English Grand Lodge, Lord Ripon, having turned Roinan Catholic,
had just given u p his Masonic allegiance and 1I.R.H. t h e Prince of Wales (later
King Edward V I I . ) had been elected Grand Msster in his &ad.
Although
I w ~ kindly
s
received, I scon perceived t h a t there WC.; no use pressing
t h e subject. All I could get was the verbal admission from the Grand Secretary,
Bro. John Hervey. t h a t Lodges should ~ o be
t forbidden to rcceive, under their
awn responsibility, Belgian visitors who were propcrly qualified and f u r n i ~ h e dwith
U
933
234
acquaintance with the Old Charges and with their critical treatment in the
Proceedings of the Qttatuor ~'orolzatiand in the unimpeachable Iristory of the late
Bro. Gould.
I n 1880 I made my first journey to America. My father-in-law had directed
a Lodge a t Mobile (Ala.), and my wife's family counted some other members of
I also
the Craft who introduced me willingly to their Lodges and Chapters.
remember attending a meeting of that curious Order, the Eastern. Star, which revived, although in another and better spirit, tile llfa~onneriennclrogyne of the
eighteenth ce~ltury. I have heard since that i t got a footing in England, but I do
not know with what success. I had expected to meet a t W tshington the celebrated
Grand Commander of the Ancient and Accepted Scottisli llitr- Ero. Albert Pilre,
for whom I had already the greatest regard as a synlbolist ?rid an historian, but he
was away on a tour of inspection, and I had to be content vrith viciting the House
of the Temple, where I was most kindly received. I n fact, Z wa? much impressed
with the activity of Masonic life and the importance of Xssonic buildings in
America, a feeling still enhanced when, twenty years later, i a 1904, I re-visited
the States, receiving a still more cordial welcome, not only a t Washington and
New York, but also a t Philadelphia, St. Louis, Chicago and Sail Francisco.
The lectors of Brussels had sent me to Parliament in 1878. The war
against the organization of public schools was then a t its highest point, and the
members of the Eight did not lose an occasion to follow tlie Press of their party
in accusing Freemasonry of standing behind the policy .3f :he Liberal GovernOne day I lost patience, and when a member of t h e opposite party
ment.
rewroached the Minister of W a r for not forbidding the officers of the Armv to
join Freemasonry, " an Association incompatible with military discipline and
loyalty," I replied by quoting the first articl2 of the Statutes of the Grand
Orient: "Freemasonry, as a cosmopolitan and progressive institution, has for
object to seek the truth and perfect humanity. It is founded on liberty and
toleration; i t formulates or invokes no dogma; i t only requires from those who
present themselves to its initiation to be honest men and to possess an intelligence
able to understand and to spread Masonic principles," and I added. " I n rec-ding
from this standpoint Freemasonry would commit suicide.
?'ou may deny the
But what you have no right t o contradict is my
authenticity of -a text.
affirmation that, if Freemasonry, or any other institution to which I belong, tried
t o impose upon me either opinions which I reject or obligations opposed to what I
consider as my public or private duties, I should not remain in i t for twenty-four
hours more. And I am convinced that all my Masonic Brethren who sit here
would do the same."-All
the Masons who were in the House assented a t once by
word or sign, and the Minister of Justice, Bro. Jules Bara, ,ittcred from his seat:
" Might all your Bishops say the same ! "
I n 1898 the Grand Orient chose me as Grand Master. But a few weeks
after this election my position became rather awkward 411 face of the feelings
caused by the triumph of the clerical party, which turnetl out of Parliament
nearly all the members of the L e f t , including, of course, a score of well-known
Masons. There was not a Mason Ieft in tlie two Houses. T'nder the sting of
this general exclusion, I had hard work to prevent +lie Grand Orient from
altering his policy of abstention from active politics.
The only measure I
readily assented to was the opening of a public subscription f o r sustaining the
public schools closed by the new Cabinet and for supporting the scl~oolmasterc
dismissed without compensation. On the 21st of November of tlie same year I
received officially in our Temple about three hundred ~ t u d e n t sfrom the University
me with a silver mallet, in comrrlernoration if
of Brussels who" came to
the part taken by our first Grand Master Pierre Theodore Verhaegen, fifty
years before, in the opening of a University founded on the freedom of thought.
In expressing my thanks I took great pains tb explain to this young and
enthusiastic audience that Freemasonry, in spite of what its enemies said, was
neither a religion nor a political association, but simply a societv of free and
honest men who objected for others as well as for themselves to all interference
with the autonomy of their reason and of their conscierce. Many of these young
D
236
237
238
Liberal witllout restriction or qualification, who have passed thirty years of my life
in preaching the unity and hoinogeneity of Belgian Liberalism, I regret here the
deparlure of the last Catholics who still frequented our Lodges, half-a-century ago.
and I rejoice a t the initiation of Socialists, even if their presence sllould have as ii:i
only result to prevent us from becoming a branch of a special party."
I had
returned, as a gift, to t h e same Lodga's Library, the Certificate i t had delivered
in 1812 to my maternal grandfather, Bro. Count dlAuxy, in proof of his initiation,
a n d which I had found ill my family papers.
The Librarian, in return, had
presented me with a copy of the questioils which had been put to my grandfather,
on t h e day of his initiation, according to the custom still prevailing, and of t h e
answers h e had made-which shows how well t h e documents of the Lodge had
been preserved for more than a hundred years. When, soon afterwards, my so11
presented himself to the initiation in t h e d m i s 2'hilanthope.s ,IT0. 9, I asked t h e
Master who had succeeded to me in t h e Chair t o use t h e same questions for t h e
new candidate, and I can say t h a t t h e answers of t h e great grandson were quite
equal to those of the graat grandfather, a t the distance of a century.
My increasing duties as Grand Commander did not prevent me from
following t h e meetings of my Lodge and t h e Sessions of t h e Grand Orient, although
i t was sometimes hard work to combine these duties with my other occupations of
Professor a t the University and of member of t h e Belgian Senate, where I had
been returned in 1900 by my native Province, Brabant, and where I sat as
Secretary until 1910, and then as Vice-President. I even had t o renew in t h e
Upper House t h e public defence of Masonry which I had offered, nearly thirty
years before, t o t h e House of Representatives. On May 17th, 1912, a Senator
from t h e Flemish Province of Limburg, t h e worthy and charitable, but too often
one-sided Abbe Keesen, referring to a n order issued long ago by the Military
Authorities, b u t never applied to Freemasonry, which prohibited Officers of t h e
Army to join "Secret Societies," asked the Minister of W a r why he tolerated
t h a t Wicers should enter Masonry, " a Society of w l ~ i c lthe
~ tendencies were in
opposition with their military duties."
I rose t o remind him of t h e answer I
llad made in 1883 t o the same imputation, an2 added: " How could I speak
okh-rwise? We have in our Association Free Thinkers, Rabbis, ministers of
Protestant Churches, 'leaders of Theosophy and Spiritism, Liberals, Radicals,
Socialists, Flamingants and Wallonisants. All these meet on good terms, because
they know t h a t they can express their visws in all sincerity, without t h e Lodge
taking sides between them, as ,they s'alld on a ground where divergence of opinion
is tempered by the feeli.1: of fraternity. This is t h e very r-ason why Catholics
have ceased t o f r e q n m t t h e Lodges. As for us, we consider tliis understanding,
or, if you prefer, this ~ r o m i s c u i t ~as, a n advantag? and an hoilour. Can you
establish a single case where a Fresmasoi~has been placed between his Masonic
obligations and his private or public duties as a n officer or a citizen? F a r from
entering into conflict with t h e professional dutiss of officers, Freemasons exact
from them loyalty to their flag and respect for their oaths. 111a n age torn as
our own by quarrels of race, religion, party, a n association which unites men
for t h e common aim of study and charity deserves the encouragevent of all good
people. It is for having fulfilled this r61e tliat Freemasonry survived t h e many
revolutions which have shaken t h e world, and, if i t did not exist, i t ought to be
created, as a counterpoise to t h e disturbing elements which t h r e a t w our civilization."
A n d t h e Minister of W a r , General Micl~el, alt!?ou,ali belonging to a
clerical cabinet, did not hesitate t o declare immediately: " I n t h e Army we do
not occupy ourselves with politics, religion or secret societies. We live together
without ever agitating these questions. I do not enter the di-cuseion, I simply
tell the state of mind which exists in t h e Army." '
As Freemazons, and as Belgians, we always hailed all attempts t o dispel
t h e international misunderstandings which suspended over our heads t h e menace
of a war between our near neighbours. W e therefore received with a feeling of
1
All the quotations in this paper are translated from the Annalcs PnrTemenfnirex
Orient.
and t h e R 1 t l l ~ f 1 n .rl~i
9 Crcrn(l
relief tllo account of the visits exchanged in 1912 and 1913 between t h e Grand
dlhcxs or the Grand Lodge of England and the Grand Masters of Germany,
whlcll war3 so pr~illisingfor the future. The reassuiing uords, uttered on these
occasions, were still enhanced by t!le announcement of the conference which was
to take place on the 15th of August, 1914, a t Francfort, where the German
Masons were to meet altii the represeiltakives of tlie French hlasonic organizations in tlie interests of general peacs. It sounded like the herald of a n e r a of
d.isarn?a~l~ent
and goodwill amongst the nations, a t least in Western Europe. We
were rudely awalrened from t h e k goldell dreams, when, on the 4th of ~ u ~ u s t ,
the Armies of tile Kaiser, u i t h the approval of the whole German Nation, Maso~ls
included, sprang treacherously on unprepared Belgium, to carry there fire and
saord on their way to the conquest of the world.
The rapid advanca of tlla Germans obliged us to close in turn all our
Lodges, wlllcll immediately used their buildings for hospitals and ambulances,
A few still held secret
while the Brethren everywhere opened relief worlrs.
i~.eetings a t the peril of their liberty and even their life. The Grand Master,
Ero. Magnette, did his duty nobly, when, in face of the horrors committed by
the invaders on our civil population, he wrote, as early as the end of August,
to the Grand Masters of the Grand Lodges of Germany, imploring them to acoept
the oreanization of a Committee instituted bv neutrals to investipate the conduct
of the German soldiers. For this courageous request, end for his renewed protestatioxs, when Germans began to deport Belgian workmen to Germany, to
p-,risll there from hunger and from cold, he was himself arrested and temporarily
iin~prisonedat Lii.ge. On lily part, before following the Belgian Government to
Ant~t,erpas MiaisLer of State, I had prepared a solemn protest addressed to all
the Supreme Councils of the world against the outrages perpetrated by the
Germans against the mozt sacred principles of justice and humanity. It ended
thus: " Whatever sacrifice the future 1ioIds in reserve -for us, we are determined
to stand by oxr duty, with tlie aszistance of the nations which have decided to
support us in our fight for the liberty of Europe and perhaps of t h e world. One
must not lose sight that, in this terrible conflagration, there is something else
than the direct interests of the involved parties. There is a cause dear to all
Freemasons: that of J x t i c e and Civilization endangered by t h e dream of
universal domination, from a people which formerly stood in t h e first rank of
modern culture, but who now reverted t o the behaviour of the barbarian
invaders."
This circular wae still in the hands of the printers when Brussels was
occupied by the enemy, but I had taken with me a proof-sheet, and as soon as,
after the fall of Antwerp, I reached Havre, I found in t h e Supreme Council of
France willing friends t o have i t printed anew and forwarded to all its
destinations.
Several hundred thousand Belgians, flying with their families before t h e
invaders, as in the last centuries o: the Roman Empire, had escaped t o the
neighbouring countries, where they received, especially in the British IsIes, a full
and unprecedented hospitality, which our hearts will never forget. The Freemasons-who were amongst these refugees sooz sought each other, and founded
spontaneously, with the assistance of the local fraternities, Provisional Lodges, a t
London, Paris, Havre, The Hague, Calais and la Panne, the two last being near
tile line of fire, and, therefore, mostly frequented by Officsrs. A Chapter of the
18th Degree was opened a t London by our Rsfugees in the building of the Suprem.:
Council of England. T h e ~ eorganizations, which lasted until the end of the war,
have rendered invaluable service, not only for the part they took in assisting
waterial!~ tl-o poorer refugees, but also for helping t o kesp alive, in those hard
times, the flame of patriotic feeling and Masonic principles. I visited most of
then?, and can testify that their proceedings were conducted everywhere with the
utnlost zeal and regularity.
I often ran over to England in those busy days, as I was entrusted with the
mission of reportin,? officially on the principal centres of our refugees. I paid also a
short visit to Ttalv on an official errand, with two of my colleagues from the Belgian
Cabinet, of Havre, 31. (now Count) Carton de Wiart, representing the Catholic Party,
0
24i)
Bro. Vander Velde, t h e Socialists, and myself, the Liberals. W e were warmly
received a t Rome, and had a n interview with the King a t his Genera! Quarters,
then near Venice, on the very day of J u n e , 1918, when the Italian Armies began
the great battle which was t o avenge the defeat of Carporette and expel definitely
Austrians from t h e Italian soil. Our mission being over, t h e Belgian Envoys were
able t o devote a few hours t o their private aims. M. Carton de Wiart, of course,
went t o pay a n unofficial visit t o t h e Pope; Bro. Vander Velde repaired very likely
t o t h e leaders of loyal section of t h e Italian Socialist P a r t y , and I p u t myself
in communication with t h e heads of t h e two Masonic rival organizations, which,
unfortunately, have for some years divided the Italian Brethren, t h e one recognized
by the Confederacy of t h e Supreme Councils, the other by the Grand Orients of
France and Belgium. Both tried t o impress me with the legitimacy of their claims,
and I undertook vainly t o indhce them t o resort to arbitration. May they find
in t h e near future their way t o some understanding, as i t is of great importance
t h a t peace should prevail amongst the two branches of tlle Craft in Italy, as
elsewhere.
When t h e Great W a r was over, the members of the Provisional Lodges, like
t h e other refugees, repaired to liberated Belgium, where they were greeted, with
great demonstrations of joy, by those who had endured four years of misery and
Freemasonry was amongst t h e first national institutions to revive.
oppress!on.
I t - h a d several i m p o r t a n t duties t o f;lfil a t once, and these were promptly complied with: Mourning for the fallen victims, rewards for the most worthy of the
survivors, dismissal of t h e former Gernlail members, abolition of all relations with
t h e German Lodges. A great manifestation was prepared in gratitude to Bro.
Magnette, who had so fearlessly sustained t h e llonour of Masonry in face of a
victorious foe. I muzt also mentiol: a visit officially paid to the Belgian Masons
by seventy-eight American officers and officials, inenlbers of the - I I I I Y ~ ~ ' C ( (.M~/SOIIZC
IL
Club i t b Grr~rtccny,attaclle'd a t Coblentz to the American Ariny of Occupation.
They were under t h e guidance of their President, Bro. Coloi~elL. J . V a n Schaick,
who brought them on the 5 t h J u n e , 1920, to congratulate both the Grand Orient
and the Supreme Council for the happy recovery of Belgium
There is no doubt
t h a t the exchange of good feelings on this occasion will tend t o strengtllen fraternal
relations between t h e Freemasonry of the two couiltries. The proceedings of this
meeting have been printed, both in French and in English, by the Grand Orient,
and were largely distributed amongst t h e Grand Lodges of the United States.
There is a last event of which I cannot speak a t lellgth, because i t is too
personal, even for this page of autobiography. I t is the celebration by my Lodge
I shared this rare jubilee with two
of my fifty years of Masonic standing.
other members of the Supreme Council who had been initiated in the same
Lodge a t least fifty years ago, Bro. Tempels, of who111 I have nothing nlore t o
say, after what I have remarked above, and Bro. Engels, a n architect of repute,
late I n s ~ e c t o r of t h e Palais d e Justice a t Brussels.
I will onlv add t h a t
this ceremony, t h e crowning of my Masonic career, was marked with an
ertraordinary display of cordiality which way IVY best reward for half-a-century of
love and labour. Amongst t h e gifts t h a t were bestowed upoil us on this occa~ion
by both t h e Lodge and t h e Supr-me Council, I must personallv mention an
unique copy of a book of 460 pages, containing, under a rich and artistical binding,
the seven Rituals I have composed for the uppar degrees of tlle Ancient and
Accepted Scottisll Rite. No present could have made me happier and prouder,
as, in these Rituals, which i t took me twenty years to complete, I have inserted
not only t h e principal conclusions of nly 'historical studies, but perhaps the
best p a r t of my moral and philosopllical aspirations, cemented by some touch of
mysticism, which I have not t o disclaim, as nlysticism has always been the very
salt of Freemasonry.
I would feel fortunate, even if they were tlle only p a r t
of my writings t h a t should survive me, although a work anonymous and
impersonal, restricted comparatively t o a few chosen ones. These Rituals have
been also adopted by the Supreme Council of Holland, which we helped t o found
in 1913, and I have been told they are a t least partially practised in Italy and
Switzerland. The principle from ~vhich I started in this work is that, while the
Blue Lodge is complete i n itself, and while the possession of the three symbolic
degrees is silfficient t o make a good and t r u e Mason, if some Brethren wish t o push
further the same method in adding more steps t o their Masonic ladder, i t is only
fair t h a t each additional degree sllould bring with i t a new moral or intellectual
lesson.
How I strived t o introduce these lessons I can explain in a few words. I take
for granted t h a t the traditional Rituals have preserved denomiaations, passwords,
signs and symbols wllich constitute their unity through t h e different jurisdictions,
and, therefore, have t o remain ~lncllai~ged.B u t I add tlle idea t h a t each degree
ought t o refer t o one of the great Rdigions or Institutions which have helped
sp&jtual or moral progress of 11;:nan c u l t i r e . I have therefore placed before e k l l
initiation a purely hislorical Instruction, referring t o the history of this Religion
or Institution, and tllen, applying its synlbolism and even its legends t o our
Masonic forms, I show how its teacllings might be interpreted accordiilg to the
principle of our Order in such a way t h a t a unity of purpose runs through tlle
:rllole System.
I am sorry I was not able t o begin this work earlier, as i t ought t o have
It was outlined in my
been extended t o t h e liturgy of t h e Chapters as well.
mind some time before I took the Cliair i n t h e Supreme Council of Belgium.
Both are rarely combined in
B u t some have the ideas, others have t h e power.
the same individual and in the same time. My fellow workers of t h e first hour
Lave most of then1 passed away, and I cannot claini a nlucll longer space of liCe?
before tlle gates of a crematory close on my mortal remains.
B u t may be t h a t
amongst t l ~ eyounger generations some will rise to take u p the flaming torch. I
ought myself t o be thankful t o t h e Unseen Powers for having allowed me t o do
my duties during half-a-century, lot,gtrnz n.1.i . ~ p ~ f i u in
n ~my
, small corner of tlle
I
general Masonic worksl~op.
interest :-
1609 To 2 Heliers for repayring the defects of slates and tiles after
6s. 8d.
16d. a peecc the day
1610 To Steeven Curreyn Apr. 20 f,or his quarter wages for keeping the
25s.
slates and tiles in reparacon
Michaelnlas 1611 To ye Xason for setting of brickes in ye Chapel1
1s. 6d.
SeptemLer 19. 1612 To Steeven the Helier for his quartridg ending
a t Mich 1612
25s.
From tlie numerous entries referring to quarterly payments made him this
Steeven Curreyn seems either to have been enlployed by ~11ecollege as a constant
worknl.an, or to have taken a contract to keep k11e slates in repair for a yearly sum.
I n the record of college proceedings-kept by Provost Bedell in his own hand
under date 18th April, 1629, there is a brief and somewhat tantalising entry :Tlie petition of the free Masons & Bricklayers c ~ fDublin answered.
There is nothing in this book to show tlie points of the petition, the nature of the
rsply, or why the workmen were addressing the Provost and Fellows.
I t seeps to me a noteworthy point in connection with the history of Trinity
College, that i t call be demonstrated that operative masons were busy about tlie
place just prior to the composition of the famous Tripos Speech with its Masonic
allusions. I n The History of t h e Uqaiversity of Dublin, by J . W. Stubbs (Dublin,
1889), a t page 117 an entry is quoted from the Register of the Diocese of Dublin
showing t h a t the new chapel of T.C.D. was consecrated by-the Archbishop on the
5th October, 1684
A t page 125 (op. cif.) an extract is given from the College
R?-i.i,t?r under date 17th January, 1687, N.S., stating that the Provost and Senior
Fellows considering that building ~ a t e r i a l swere cheap and workmen to be hired
a: easy rates determined to finish buildings, for which foundations had already
b3en laid. at. the south side of the Great Court: they therefore resolved to ask
leave of the Visitors to sell plate for this purpose.
This leave was ultimately
It appears from a map a t page 119 that the buildinq5 in question
granted.
consistsd of the old Front Square, which was nullsd down about 1751. I t is
sllown still in exj~tence on Rocque's map of Dublin, 1753. Tlie date of t1.s
building of the chapel is given in Stubbs as 1683, so we may fairly assume tl?zt
from tbis date till 1688 operative worltmen niust have been cominq and goin:
about the college, mixing with the students, possibly fraternising, but certainly
attracting the notice of the curious to their peculiar customs. The presence of
such workmen in tlie cnllege coinciding with the Tripos Speech seems to me not
insignificant.
J. HERONLEPPER.
Sotea
a d
Queries.
243
'244
T f v n v ~ c t i o nof
. ~ t h e Qlintuor 'Goronati Lodge.
OBITUARY.
T
U.S.A.
JOHS,
13~11BARONELPHISSTOSE.
District Grand Master of Sladras, 1840.
22th
FROM THE I S A B E L L A M I S S A L
ERITI. H MUSEUM
CIPPL
"
ADD.
.'P-
MSS,
(8.861
"
December, 1 9 2 2 0 ,
-W---
IT.
S. PARRETT, L T D , PRIBTER'.,
1910
M4RGATC
HEARTY
lLTlS H E S
GOOD
TO T H E
hZE1CZBERS O F
BOTH
CIRCLES
FI<OAI T t l E
MASTER
AND
OFFICERS
01' THE
QUATUOR
CORONATI
ST. J O H N ' S
DAY
X.D.
LODGE
IN
No.
2076,
WINTER,
1920.
I look t o you, Dretllreii, t o use your best eiideavours to Increase tlie 1iuiiiber:i
of o u r Correspoiid(~uceCircle, oil t h e nieil~bersof wliich we depend for recruits for
t h e Lodge, a n d aitl-iout %,l-icli tlie Lodge itself could n o t exist. T h e iilenlbers of
t h e Corre~poiideiic. Circle a r e s u r e of a fraternal reception at our meetings, a n d
we a r e always rend? to \velconie iiem students i n tlie field of Masonic research.
i o iours,
i
wllicli does
W e a r e liviiig it1 ytraiige tinies, a n d sucil a i ~ , i i i s t i t ~ ~ tas
so iiiucli t o recoiicile t h e diEerelices n - l ~ i c hseparats illell f r o m one aiiotlier, nlust
HERBERT
BRADLES,
W.M.. N o . 2076.
L O R D ELPHINSTONE.
Jolln, 13th Earon Elphinstone, was born on 23rd .June, 1807. H e was
Governor of Madray from 1837 to 1842, and held t l ~ esame important position in
Eombay during tl?.: Mutiny. During this period of unrest lle succeeded in maintaining coinparative peace in his Presidei~cy, and was able practically t o denude
.
H e died,
it of European troops, who were sent t o the niore disturbed areas.
unmarried, on 19t,h J u l y , 1860, whe11 the peerage became extinct.
Very little inforlnatjon can be obtained about his Masorlic career. The
records of Grand Lodgo state t h a t in 1837 he was a inember of the Lodge of
Friendship No. 6, London, and there is sonie evidence shewing that. 11e was
a,dmitted to the Rr,yal Arch. I n the Archives of Grand Lodge a scrap of paper
lras been preservecl with what is apparently his original petition for ~ n e n ~ b e r s h i p
of a Rose Croix Chapter ill Madras.
It is entirely in liis llandwriting, and
reads as follows : Madras 27th December 1839
...
Your name
Profession
...
Profession of fait11
Degree of IvIaso!iry
W h a t is tile wisll
heart.
...
...
...
...
...
...
, ...
received
of your
...
...
Jolln Elphinstone
Military
Cltristianity
Royal Arch
to be made a Rose Croix
Knight
ELPHISSTOKE.
.<<.
6
lf'.1Z.G'.,9.,17.S..4. T h e
E m s , Lelyhrcti~.-It-e~lue,Stl,ecttl~ccrn,L o ~ ~ t l uS.TT:.l(i.
i~,
2.59, l l i i , 1691, P.&1.,
P.Dis.G.U., Malta. Past Grand Deacon ; Past Assistant Grand Sojourner.
(Joinccl C.C. Jla~.cll 1800.). Juined 9th Koveml~rr 1891.
8 Malczovich, Ladislas AurBle de. Be1 i i < l ~ t r ~ i i l i s t e ~ ' Buclnpc,*t,
i~tn~,
I1 11 r ~ y a ~ y .Lodge
Szcnt lhtvan.
Fornler1:- 311leiber of Cou~icil of the Order, Hungary.
Representative of Grand Lodge, Ireland.
(Joined C.C. January 1890.)
Joined 5th J a n u a r y 1894.
9 Conder, Etl~\-:-:lrd.
J . Z ' . , E'.,S'.I.
Tile C ' o i t i ~ j ~ ~ Se e ,r c e n t , G l o t t c e s t e ~ ~ s h i ~1036,
~ e . 1074,
L . l t . ; '80. l'ast 31aster. Local Secretary for Osfordsllire and Gloucestershirts. (Joirted C.C. N a y 1S03.) Joined 5th J a n u a y 1894.
10 Greiner, Gotthelf. 33 TT'tt~.~,rur
Sq~ccire;,St. Leoncri,cl's-on-&Sect. 92. 1'.J1., 1842. Past
7
12
Crowe,
Past Grand Deacon; Past Assistant Grand Sojourner. Past Grand Warden,
Iowa. past Ilaster. (Joined C.C. January 1895.) Joined 8th November
1900.
16
Watson, \Villiam.
17
18 Simpson,
19
dring, Edmund H u n t .
TT.enttco~t11,The Ridgetray, S t t f f o n , ,9lt~rcy. 1297> P.&l.,
3444; 1?97, P.Z.
Past Grand Deacon; Past Assistant Grand Sojourner.
20
21
22
P a s t Master.
X . A . , N . R . Z . A . , Pres.R.S..4.Z.
115 Sfroncl Rootl,
,Sccndymounf, Dublin. 143 (I.C.), P.31. Past Grand H i g h Priest, Ireland.
Senior Dcacon. (Joined C.C. RToreinber 18'37.) Joincd 2dth J u n e 1912.
23
24
ord don
I . ' ~ I . ~ &C'ooll~trm
IJ~,
l j e n n , nerli..l, ;I,,.
Pettigrew Grahain, A . R . I . B . I .
2416, P.BI., L.R., 2228, P . N . , 3684; 3416, P.Z.. P.Pr.G.\I7., 13~~1:s. Past
l l n s t r r . (Joined C.C. JIay lFR7.) Joiucd 211d Octo11c.r 191d.
25
Hills,
26
2'7
P x t Jlastn.
(Joined C.(!.
\\'orslli:~iul 3Iaster.
28
29
30
HONORARY MEMBER.
31
Master;
T h e Asterisk
1920.
before t h e n a m e indicates L i f e - M e m b e r s h i p .
T h e R o m a n n u m b e r s refer
GOVERNING
Grand Lodge of Texas
BODIES.
Waco, Texas
.IOlh El).
March 1920
257
814
,, 1235
,, 3882
., 3991
,,
Phcenix Lodge
Parrett
Axe Lodge
P h ~ n i xLodge of S t . An11
Niger Lodge
Lodge Gratitude
Southsea, Hants.
Crem-kerne, Somerset
Buxton, Derbrshire
Warri, Southern Nigeria
Manchester
November 1920.
October 1920.
J u n e 1920.
October 1920.
May, 1920.
Rotterd:lm, Holland
Starnilger, Xorway
Hnnnnond, I t l d i a ~ i : ~
Kangaroo Isl:riid, S. Australi:~
J u n e 1920.
illay 1920.
May 1920.
March 1920.
OTHER ASSOCIATIONS.
Adams Lodge of Instruction No. 158
St. Hubert Lodge of Instruction xo. 1373
The Lolldoll Association of Iilasoiiic llrsenrch
Spoliane Masonic Library
Slasters & P a s t 3laste1~;'Association
Mount ; h a y a t Imdge of Perfection, So. 1
Sheerness
May 1920.
Alidover, Harits.
Janlinry 1921).
Lorido~l
January 1920.
Hpoli;~iit~,
\Vi~shii~::toil
Juiie 1920.
1Castc.ril Colclficlds. Ti:~l:~c:ol~lit~ Ortobcr 1920.
3Zaaila. P.I.
JIny 1920.
BROTHERS.
::;a-Abrrbrelton,Robert Relton de Relton. 161 sixth' .4vc,r1tc, .lftrr~orPtrrli, London, EL?.
463, 2318, 3394. Jailnary 1920.
Abrahams, Gabriel. 5 AIIorri~tlfieltlHovel, L'ltrj~ton, Lor~tlon,S . 1 6 . 2763. October 1920.
Adams, E. F. 291 Icing's I<otrd, C ' l ~ ~ l s e tLr ,o n t l o ~ ~S.117..j.
,
3221. November 1920.
Aldwell, Edn a r d Cymri. 230 E l n ~S t r e e t , San JIateo, Ctrlifor~ticr. 226, P.?II.; 106,
P . H . P . M a - 1020.
Alien, Edn-in. Ranrlicicl, Gphill Rorrrl, TTeston-sul)cr-JIu~rc. P.Pr.G.St.B. J u n e 19".
*:Allison, Williaal. B.R.I.B.B., 1'.3.,Y.l. 9 Tuvistock ,b'q~~nre,
Lontlon, TT-.C.1. 1389.
November 1920.
Allison, 11'. P. Lnnstlo~cta T-illa, C'ctstlcfortl. 1542. J u n e 1920.
Ames, John. 82 T7ictoria S t y e e t , Lontlon, ,Y.TT7.1. 1766 ; 1766. J c n e 1920.
Anderson, Edwin 3lart-n. 5 Sttssex C u r t l ~ n s ,Fostbourne. 2676. May 1920.
Archbald, Rnlph H ~ r r i s o n . (:,re!] IZortse, Burgh I I c a t h , 'I'rrdtvot,th, S u r r c ' ~ ~ .2840.
March 1920.
Ashman, Gerald C9llins. C a t l ~ c c c ~C'npea,
t,
Sottth S f r i c a . 2@2; 386. J a n u a r y 1920.
Atkinson, Joilll Ro~r.land. Grcet~siclt.,I<entlnl. P.Pr.G.1). May 1920.
Atkinson, Tom. 31 C!la?endon J-illits, H o v e . 1597, P.11. Rlay 1920.
Baker, H o ~ v a r dNenell, N . D . P ~ e i s o n ,Znrm, 72.S.A. 607. J u n e 1920.
Balkin, Cllfford J i . P.O. Boa 225, f'ololntlo Ryt.i~zgs,Colorado, C . S .4. 104. March 1920.
Ball, *4rtllur F r a l i k l ~ n . 30 TT7esfucc') Itotctl, TT7ctict7srrorth Common, Lontlon, S.TT'.l,?,
2398, J.JV. Noreniber 1020.
\\'illiam Thornas.
l?yremoitt. F u i ~ l i ! / h t I v c n u e , T r o o t l f o ~ t l C r c r n , E s s c s .
October 1920.
Barentzen, W i l l i i l ~ n .Josel)l~. f
r
j 4
j f f r e n 1 1 r 1 Xnrdstjerncn.
March 1920.
Barnes, Hcrbert \Yilli;~m. 1.56 C'lrtcin bri ltt ynr I?occtl, S . [ T y . l O . 3420, 1637, P.11. ; 'C!)&.
March 1920.
Barnes, Samuel Rurcham. 66 Jiolr.src.o~tlr Sfr,ec,f, l ~ o c l i t l t r l ~T,trncs.
~.
298. Jn11c 1920.
Bashford, Charles Hcadley.
82 i
t
t e
t 1 o 1 1 1,
l
. %' T; 1.
Janricry 1920.
Beachcroft, Jlnuricc. .lini,~,r It..L.I<'., O.H.l<. 45 Tire Ritlgetriry, (;ultlc?~'sG't.een, Lontlon,
Barber,
S.1P.b. Past Assistant Grand Director of Ceremonies; Past Grand Standard Bearer
January 1920.
Bcrrum, Tiir~et.Einar Lam le 11aii-e.
$0
71
72
'73
74
'75
76
91
Earley, TVilliam John. 1 Rusmrntl Roorl, L o r ~ d o n ,JT7.11. 2696; 948. J a n u a r y 1920.
92 * E a t o n , Freeman John. 30 Cctstlereagh St,reet, ,S'ytIn~y, S.S.TTT. 85, P.31.; 9 , P.Z.
93
94
95
96
97
98
May 1920.
Edwards, Ctrpt. Alexallcler Lindsay, M.C. ' 0ffic.iutiny TT700d Technologist, 10 Civil Lines,
Bareilly, U.P., Intlia. 1870; 1870. October 1920.
Edwards, T17alter. Crinylefortl I l n l l , Sorlcich. 93. October 1920.
R o a d , Slioofrr~sIlill, Lontlon,
Elliston-Erwood, F r a n k Charles. .Je.srtir,~ztlI)cne, 1~'or-t~oft
S.E.18. 2147. J u n e 1C.20.
Errington, John.
25 Ttrvistork Xourl, S c t r . c n s f l P - ~ r ~ ) o t i - T ! l t ~ e 16iG,
.
P . J I . ; 406, J.
October 1W3.
Eusta.~., Stlrnit~cil Jolln Bridges.
l ) c l i t o n , lT*okin!llictm, 11(~,rlis, 261" P.31. ; 16'9.
Map 1920.
Gales, TVilliam S ~ r i n b u r n e . 128 Porl; Roatl, Itrest H(c.rtlepoo1. 1357; ;?OD. J u n e 1920.
Gamblin, Sidney Herbcrt. 126 S t o c l i ~ c ~ e Ptet,R
ll
Izoad, S t o ~ l i ~ ~ eLloln, d o n , S.1T7.9. 3050.
October 1920.
*Gibbs, Artllur Samuel, LL.13.
143
144
Noveniber 1920.
145
146
147
148
3larch i920.
Kishere, IZarry.
1920.
1020.
1920.
9.50.
Octoljer 1920.
2 i ,St. .lirlcrrc's S t r.crlf, I j e r r . ~ l r c ~ n(.'r,
~ . It~slri,:~tl-olt-T!yrte. 3423,
Novwr1bc.r 1920.
Macdonald, Thcophiln : Ailesandcr l'oncl. C'ctllc J l t t i l ~ r c 1Pi. Ij1rrrro.s . l i ~ . r . s . 617, P.Al. ;
61;. J a n u a r y 1920.
Maclachlan, Lelvis, J I . B . , (,'.X. 2 TT-esf Ctrr,cler~Stt,c.et, (,'lusyo~c. 363, P.11.; 79, P.Z.
May 1920.
M a c l u m p h a , N O ~ I I I ASI t~u a r t .
No. W l t e (!l~cilets, U p p e r ,S'f. Jfichael's I i o n d ,
Aldershot. 1276. 3larcll 1920.
Macpherson, Archibald, E'.('.$. 79 C'rrr~lsitle ,qt~.c,c~f.(:lrts!lurc.. 0 ; .?, D.C. $fay 1920.
M a d d i g a n , Sidncy. 148 TT7rsfhor~otr!lliI(orrc1, I l ~ c ~ s t : ~ l i f f - o r ~ - SE
c tsr .s ~ r . 2808. 31ay 1920.
Martensz, Ja?nes Au'rrey. c / o J1rssr.s. E'. .I.
(:. fie Strr,ccrrr, P.O. ]?ox 212, C o l o n ~ b o ,
C'e!/lorr. G 1 1 ( S . C . ) , I . G . October 1020.
M a r t i n , Arclidall Ch<:rr-. I ' t r r ? : t r t i l ~ t i ~T7isuyccpcti(ct~~
~,
I)isf.t.ic.t, JItrt11.trs l's,cs., Z r ~ t l i o .
2356. No\-cmher 1920.
Mason, J o h n \Villian Victor.
23 Go1tle.r'~ Green C~.c'.sccrtf, Gult1cr~'s G,r.een, Lontlon,
S.TT;.4. 1891. N o v e ~ l ~ b e1920.
r
Matheson, H e n r y A., L . D . 9 . 150 B r o m p t o n Iloctd, S o ~ c t lI~< c i r s i ~ ~ g t o nL,o n t l o n , fl.JV.3.
2978, l'.>[.
Noreniber 1920.
M a y e r , H a r r y . Dovet', D e l u ~ c u , r c ,C.S.A. Grand Master. J a n u a r y 1920.
Meadowcroft, I I a r r - Harolcl. Rock IIuttl:, X i l n ? . o ~ c . ,Ltrrtcs. 1120; ?.;
Marcli 1920.
* M e r r i m a n , Ccipf. Edu-ard Clande Barcrstock.
23 1'or.ehc.st~r ,Vqrrtcr.e, I,onclon, TV.,?.
2773, 1V.M. ; 1.?9. May 1920.
M i l l a r , Ernest Brucr. 28a U r r s i n g l ~ t r l lS t r r e f , T ~ ~ n t l o r E.C.2.
t,
2108, P.11. Jiay 1920.
M i l l s , Frecl Sargeant
dsltl(~ri.rr,G(otic.csfer. Rorrt!, I i i t t y s f o n I l i l l . ,Sul.~.e!l. 3680; 889.
January 1920.
M i l l s , J o h n Ashn-o:th.
dslrfic~ltl (;'otftrclc, 1)c.eplish Uotctl, lloclttltrle. 298, P.31. ; 298,
P.Z. March 1920.
M o i l l i e t , Alexmider Keir.
Lcc I(r,finp.r.ic!, Jlirrcctitlttn. TTer.rr C r . ~ i z , J l p ~ i c o . 19.
Afarch 1920.
M o l o n y , Alfred. Tlrc Etlycr~.' I f ~ t ~ Tjttfh.
l,
1930. P.31.; 2346, P.Z. J a m ~ a r y1920.
M o o r , Arthur R o l m t . 13 I ~ I I T IT-ircc3,
I ~ ISlln((e.i.ltr11t1.
~ ~ ! ~ ~P.Pr.G.St.15.
~II
October 1920.
Moore, J a m c s 'I'enl!)lc
11. l l ( l f f 0 t ~( ; I ~ I Y / ( J LOrttlc~r~,
II,
h'.('.l, Ii541, 1',31. 3i:,y 1920
Maccoy, Joilll Orers1,-.
8.D.
Morrish, F r a n k .
llo.scnstle, Lwttrustel . ~ L ' P I I I ~ L ' , ILitchirt, I Z ~ r t s . 119, P.11.; 449.
Noretnber 1920.
Morton, Godi:ey Jleggitt. So,rth rroltl, Il~esfe,r.t~
I<octtl, C'l~elfcnlitcni,C;/us. 338, S.TY.
J a n u a r y 1020.
Motta, Stc,,>hcn. (.';(L J1c.c. tle l ' c f . El .-l!lt~iltc,,S..4., dl,cer.futlo 113 bis, Xcleico: U.15'.
3, P.G.31. October 1920.
M y a t t , Willialn Joseph. ( A e n Oltlerr, I'ert~~sylvunicc,T;.S.d.
2%; 20'4. J u n e 1920.
Myers, Rollalcl 3Inurice. 47 TVhec1e~'s l?ocitl, k'clybnsforr, 13ir.rrtir~:~:ictn~.W . Oct. l$?O.
Mycrs, George. 39 (iilesgiitc, Uui.l~unl. 1932, P . J i . ; 124. Nag- 1920.
Newby, L e n i s Bertranl.
6 I n r ~ c sStr,c'ef, Hospitnl ITill, I i i t ~ y 11-ii1itrn1's Torrrt, Cape
I'r'ovinre. P.l)is.G.1F1. ; P.Dis.G.Treas. J u n e 1S20.
Nice, Albert Ed~r-ardCollins.
26 C'I~erito: 8 q t ~ t oe , U:tllrt~!r~,
Lu~ttlorr, S.T17.1;. 3375 ;
1501. N o r e ~ n b e r1920.
Nicol, 1:obert Alexailc?er. L.U.S., lZ.F.i'.S. .4virnorr, 1 dr,yyle l'lcccc, ll'otIres:iy, Scotltrrlti.
292; 163. October 1920.
Oldfield, Claud Courtellay, F.S.I. 5 1 Ptrrk L u n e , Sortrich.. 943, \\-.X.; .I,.
Oct. 1020
Oliver, \Yillinm L)ay:ison. 13 Iltcc,risor~I'ltcce, S e t c c r r s t l e - u p o ~ ~ - T y i 1 e . Pr.G.lt. ; P.Pr.G.J
November 1620.
Orr, Dr. James. 3 1 Crosluittls I'arlc, Uor.rorc-in-Furness.
iU21, W . 3 1 . ; 1021, J
J u n e 1920.
Page, I<.ichnld Ed\i-ard.
70 L-l~torl L a n e , E'ur,est G'cctc, Loritlorr, i:'.;.
531, P.31.
Jlaruh 1920.
Pailthorpe, IT'. A . 1:.
P.O. Box 54, Sair.obi, B r i t i s h E u s t d f r i c u .
3384, P.31.
J n n u a r y 1920.
Pakeman, Gcorge S t e ertson.
~
43 E'i.c~rnuntle Itotrtl, C'uthtrn~,l I ~ . i s f u l . :36GY? P.M. ; IS;.
Nrkvelubcr 1'329.
Parr, i f . i
i
i 1.4.1'.
21 1'ur.l; 1-irtc, S e t c J1ultlert, ,Yu~.r,t'y, P'LDY, S.1).
i\Iarch 1920.
I
Pidgcon, Joiltl Cn:;i~~irli. 36 Cltrir,vic~tr I(owt1, St~.ccctI~ccrn,Lon(lorr, S.ll..l(i.
2105.
J l t ~ y1920.
Porter, Gera!d L:iclilitn. 28 ilsh /lli?'n I'luce, Lorrtlon, S.1l7.7. 10. Ji a y 1920.
Powell, ltobert ?IJa!,lil1:1m. 4 Sicholl l(otrt1, E'ppirtg, L'sst?s. 3;49; 406. October 1920.
Powney, ('01,. Cecil 1)u Prt. P e ~ i t o n . 24 I!':ler,fon Tt~r.r.ccc.c,Lottt:orr, S.lTv.J. Past Grand
D e a c m ; Past Grand Sojourner. >lax 1920.
P r a t t , E c n r y . T h r I)irr!/l~,,G'oltIieslie l<otrtl, T r ~ l t l eC,reen, Hir.rrrir~yhtrrr~. 178% P.31.;
48.2, J. 3Iay 1923.
Presland, Aibert Snmnel. i G S u l f r , a n ~('r~escertf,I'trtl~liic:~~itc,
Lorrtlotr, TT..!).
l63i.
J;liiualy 1030.
*Prince, A r t h u r Do\\..
1 Sirnpsor~ S t r e c f , Lorr.ell, .lftrs.s., l*.,S..~l. Grand Master.'
J a i l u a r ~1020.
Read, Archer George llorcnhanz IIctll, H/c~rctluti,h'tlfloll;. 3334. 312rclr 1020.
Reid, Walter S
420 T e s t Entl .lvenue, S e t c T u i k , S.17., C.S..l.
233, P.M.
J a n u a r y 1920
Rind, Warter Loc!rhart.
23 R u x f o n Cttrdens, B c t o n , Lonclon, 717.3. 3864 ; 507.
May 1920.
Robb, George. 1 Coltlen ,Square, .lbci,cle~n,Scotlnntl. 3-1, P ?IT.; 37, P.Z. J a n . 1920.
Robinson, George E Zngf~elrl,Iltrtltlon. Torli5. J a n n a r j 1923.
Rogers, A r t l ~ u r P e r ~ y ,A.Gf.Z.S. 146 lietll(crn, U l t t t l i b u ~ n ,7,crrrc.s. 128. October 1920.
Rowlands, Willianl Henry.
62 Sttffora C o r c ~ t Rontl, Ch~stclcli, Lontlon, Tr.4.
3396.
N o r c ~ u b c r1920.
Royle, J o h n Walter.
Cnrtr8ef, A l r ~ e ~ Rontl,
s
L o u y h f o n , E s s c s . 2 2 2 , J.D.; 820.
Nol,cr~&er 1920.
Rugg-Gunn, Andrev. 9 1Tirnpole S t r e e f , Loittlon, 11.. 363; .iG3. J a n u a r y 1920.
249
V o g e l , Louis.
.4~11rtt11tlo 16. L n Refinetice, J f i r ~ r e f i t l t t n , T7ertr Cr.rcz, 3lr.riro.
October 1920.
250
W a k e f i e l d , Jaiilrs Alfred.
I ' i t f s b u ~ y k A t h l r t i c C11el1, Z ' i t t . s b r ~ t ~ ~I'tr..
h,
TI.S..Z.
Past
Grand Sword Bearer. October 1920.
W a l l a c e , TVilliam. T*ic.for.ia 22otrt1, TT-rst I I r r r ~ t l c ~ ~ oP.Pr.G.
~ ~ l . D. ; ;(;d. J u n e 1920.
Wa.ller, Artllur .J~lne5. S c o t c h C o l l ~ ( l e ,(:l~rrfctt.ie, I<o.etl, H / ~ t c t I t u t ~ r rT7ictorin.
,
230,
J.K.; S. l i a r 1920.
W a l m s l e y , Tllomas. .J.Z'. 8 I'r~ll~it~trr
S t r e e t , Z{orl1(7etlr. 1129. 8.n'. 3kirch 1920.
W a r d , H:lrr?- l\iartill. Sctrcr.oft, TITt'st ('toss, K.S.O., (:ltrm. 1573; 1.12.;. 3larcI1 1920.
W a t s o n , Saillut.1 l$ lrest.
I i o t ~ c e y u ~ .l~i t,t l t r i i ~ P . 0 . (:ceclrtrt,, Intlicc.
2726, P.31.
January 1920.
251
'15%
253
4
25j
l!)
15
Webb, Darid D a n i ~ l . 10 S l r f f o n Coltrt liootl, I'licrsto~r~,E.1.7. 3050. J7ay 1920.
Weeks, Herbcrt AI-thur.
IItr!yamc~rr~,L o n y c t a f f A v c t ~ r c ~flnrpcntlrn,
,
J I r * ~ f s . 112.
October 1920.
Wells, i l r t h u r E.
3308.
Jlnrch 19-00.
DECEASED.
Austen, Arthur Elvey
L a f r o f dohnnnesburq
March, 1920.
I l ~ o o k l y n ,L- X..4.
l=
,,
Sottlngham
,,
London, S.E.
Bodenham, John
,,
S e w p o r t , S(tlop
Buckmaster, Fredericlr H .
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
Lontlon
Lolrestoft
E ( t s f J[olr\r
l]
B~istol
Adelaitle, S . .lltsftnltn
C)oyclon, Stcirey
Tucomn, TT'ash.
S t . Ives, H u n t s .
,,
,,
Stdmoltfh
Millar, James
,, Liverpool
,, Inverness
,, R o c h e s t ~ r ,U.S..1.
,, Melbottrne
,, 0 1 1farto
,, B u ~ n o sAires
,, Alaska
London, S.E.
Chepstolc, Mon.
,,
,
Lontlnn
Starkey, John W.
T-c~lctfn
May, 1920.
Zon(1on
,,
Jlc~nchester
Tate, John
,,
,,
Belfast
March, 1920.
Blnndford
Os~crstry
..
FoIX psfonp
~ e m p William
,
David
Keys, John Patterson
Knight, Herbert Manning
Macwatt,
Judge Daniel F.
Price, Arthur
Leigh
1919.
1919.
LOCAL SECRETARIES.
GREAT
Derb~si~ire
Inverness
Lancashire, East
,,
North
.,
West
.
Northamptonshirr Huntingdonshi re
RTorthi~n~hcrland
Oxfordshire & Glouwstershire
Somersct
Staffordshire
~Tarrriclrsliire
TITestrnorland CC Criniberland
Torcestershire
Tiorlrshir~. North & East
Ridings
.. Bradford
Leeds
.
.
Sheffield
BRITAIN
AND
IRELAND.
T. H. Thorpe
A. F. Jfackeneie
R. H. Baxter
J. R . Nnttall
TT'illinn~Plntt
S. B. n'ilkinson
C'orn~ell Smith
.
E. Concler
Lioncl T7ibert
Franli Hughes
F. G. Sn-indcn
Rev. Hcrhrrt Poole
m-. S. Derey
GPO. L. Sliaclrles
John Robinson
J. Elston Cawthorn
Darid Flather
EUROPE.
William Jfallir?g
J. C. G. GrasC
Denmarli
Holland
Hojbroplads 5 , Copenhagen, K.
Naarden.
ASIA.
India. Bengal
H . Hadolv
-4. R . Catto
John R. C. Lyons
Frederick Apps
C. F Hooper
Japan
Siam
Singapore
AFRICA.
W. S. Mannion
H. K. Baynes
R. G. C. \Vhite
F . G. ltichards
C. IV. P. Douglas
cle Fenzi
S. R. Garrard
E. A. Uttley
H. Squire Smith
W. H . Tiffany
T. L. Pryce
G. P. Jlathews
Bloemfontein
Egypt
Jagersfontein, O.F.S.
Kimberley
Natal
Rhodesia, i\Iashonaland
,,
Matabeleland
Sonth Africa, E. Division
,,
,, W. Division
Transvaal, Johannesburg
,,
Pretoria
Box 261.
Box 1400, Calro.
Box 6, Jagersfo~~tein.
Sydney or1 Vaal.
P.O. Box 233, Pietermaritzburg
Brundish House, Sinoia.
Bos 48, Bula\vayo.
Box 9, J<i11g IYilliain's Town
130s 387, Cape Town.
Box 247, Johannesburg.
Box 434, Pretoria.
CANADA.
llauitoba
Newfoundland
Saska tchetvan
Ontario
G . l\.lacdonald, 31.D.
Dr. TV. A . De JVolf
Smith
R S. Thornton, 31.B.
TV. J . Edgar
F. S. Proctor
S. \V. J . Ha>-don
Arkansas
Florida
Georgia
Indiana
New Jersey
New York
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Washington
Troy W. Le\\-is
E. P . Hubbell
\v. F. Bo\ve
C. Mayer
H. E. Deats
J . C. lilinck
Ji7illiam H. Scott
G . A. Pcttigrem
J. H. Tatsch
Alberta
British Columbia
Calgary.
Pafraets Dael, New Westminster.
Deloraine.
Box 1201, S t . John's.
Cupar.
564. Pape Avenue, Toronto.
U.S.A.
CENTRAL
AND
-1rgentina
C h t a Rica
JVilliam Co~vlisham
A . G . AI. G ~ l l o t t
T. L. Rowbotham
C. H. Jenkins
S. C. Bingham
D. C. Cameron
P&er Letvis
G. Roberism
Fred. Jollns
-irtliut. Thcn-lis
AMERICA.
AUSTRALASIA.
1,
Friday,
24th June.
Friday,
7th
October.
ABBREVIATIONS.
-
--
P
-
MASONIC.
Arch, Assistant.
Assib'tant G r a n d .
L.
L.1;.
T.odge.
Lolldoll R a n k
Ilearer.
Board of General I'urposes.
N.
Mem.
U.E.
BI.TV.
Master, Jlost.
JIember.
Most. Excellent.
Blost \Vorshipfui
N.
(S.S.).
Sehe~niah
Nova S c o t ~ a
0.
Or.
Organist.
Orator.
C.
Ch.
Chap.
Ccm.
D.
D.C.
(D.C.).
D.11.
Dep.
Dep. Dis.
Dep. P r .
Dis.Ci.
Div.
G . Chap.
G.D.
G.D.C.
(+.H.
G.H.P.
O.J.
(+.L.
(;.M.
(;.Sec.
G.St.B.
G.Stem.
G. So.
G. Sup.
G Sup. W
G. Treas.
(;.TIT.
G.Z.
Grand, G u a r d .
G r a n d Chaplain.
<+rand Chapter.
C;raud Deacon.
G r a n d Director of Ceremonies.
G r a n d Haggai.
G r a n d High Priest.
(:l n ~ c r i c a ncf. Iris11 C.:l. l.
Gl.nnd Jodhua.
G r a n d Lodge.
G r a n d h'laster.
G r a ~ l r lOrganist.
(+rand P r i n c i p a l (R.S.).
Grand Plnsnirant.
Cfrand Registrar.
G r a n d Sword Bearer.
C:r:nid Scribe Ez1.a.
G r a n d Secretary.
G r m d S t a n d a r d Bearer.
Grand Stemmd.
G r a n d Sojourner.
G r a n d 811pt.rintendent (R..-l.).
G r a n d Superintendent of TITorlra.
G r a n d T1.ras1irer.
Grand Warden.
G r a n d Zernbhabel.
R.
R.A.
Rep.
R.lV
l?efiist~.:~r,
Right, Roll, Roster.
Il'oyal Arch.
I?epl,esent:~tire.
R i g h t lITorshipfal.
S.
S.B.
(S.C.).
Sc.E.
Sc.X.
S.D.
Stac.
So.
Stem.
St.
Treas.
Trea~urer
Y.
\-.TV.
Very.
Ver.y TVorshipfnl.
TV.
TV.hf.
W a r d ~ n Worlis.
.
Worshipf~il.
Worshipful Master.
Z.
Zerubhabel
Sc.
FTaggai.
High P r i e s t ( . - f n t c r i c ~ ~,P nIrish R..4 .).
I.
(1.C.).
I.G.
Jlrs.TV.
Inner, Irish.
Trish Constitution.
Inner Guard.
Inspector of Works.
3.
J.D.
.T.W.
Joshua. J u n i o r .
.Trunior Dearon.
Junior Warden.
K i n g (American & I r i s h R . . 4 . ) .
20
A.S.C.
Bart.
B.C.S.
C.B.
C.I.E.
C.3I.G.
C S.I.
D.1,.
D.S.O.
Hon.
I.C.S.
1.31.
I.1I.S.
I.S.C.
1.S.O.
Aidede-C l m p .
A r m y Service Corps.
Baronet.
Bombay o r l3engal Civil Service.
J.P.
Kt.
J u s t i c e of t h e Pcace
Knight.
M.H.1.
Cori~pn~lion
of Order of t h e B a t h .
Compai~ioilof Order of t h e I n d i a n
Empire.
Compaliion of Order of SS. .Xichael
a n d George.
Cornpallion of Older of the Star of
India.
(N.B.-I<.
o r G. prefixed t o t h e
above signifies K n i g h t Cominander o r K n i g h t G r a n d
Cross, o r Iiilight G r a n d
C o a l n ~ a ~ i d eof
r the Order
concer~~ed.)
Deputy Lieutenant.
Distingushed Service Order.
H o n o r a r y , Ifonourable.
Iiidimr Ciril Serrice.
I n d i a n biariiie.
Illdial1 Iledical Service.
I n d i a n Staff C?l.p.q.
I n ~ p n i a lSerricib Ol.der.
3I.L.C.
J1.P.
O.B.E.
1/
P.C.
R.A.Ji.C.
R.F.~~,
R,c;,A.
R,H,-~.
R.>[.
R.J1.:1.
R.N.
R.hT.R.
R .R .
T.
T.D.
Y.D.
V.O.
P r i v y Conncillor.
Royal A r m y JIcdical C o r p ~ .
Royal C o l o ~ ~ i Institute.
al
Reserve Distinction.
Royal Engineers.
Royal Field Artillery.
Roynl G ; i r ~ , i s o ~
:l
lrtillery.
Royal Iiorse ..lrtillery.
Royal 3lari11es.
Royal h l a r i n e Artillery.
Royal Kavy.
Royal Naval Reserve.
Royal Naval \ T o l n ~ ~ t e Reserve.
er
Tcrl.itorii1 F o ~ , c e .
Territorial Disti~rctio~~.
T70h~nteerDinti11c.tio11.
Victorian Order.
PROFESSIONAL.
American Guild of Orgn~iists.
A.I.
Auctiolieers' I n s t i t u t e .
A.S.1I.E.
American Society of lleclranical
Engineers.
A.K.C.
Associate of King's College.
A.M.
Master of Arts.
~ m . S o c . c . E . American Society of Civil Engineers.
A1ner.1.E.E. Americmi I n s t i t i ~ t eof Electrical
Eilgineers.
B..\.
Bachelor of A1.t.;.
D.(: 1,.
,,
of Civil Law.
R.Ch.
,,
a f Surgery.
B.D.
,,
of Divinity.
B.]'.
,
of Philocophy ( C ' . S . A . ) .
m c .
,,
of Science.
C.I.
Chartered Accountant.
C.]?.
Civil Engineer.
C.T.S.
C h a r t e r e d I n s t i t u t e of Secretaries.
C.P.A.
Certified P u b l i c Accountant
(Rhode Islnnd).
C.S.
Chemical Society.
C.Ji.
Master i n Surgery.
S.G.0.
L.D.S.
LL.B.
LT,.D.
S,I,.lI.
Lic.11~6.
L.S.
JI.A.
J1.B.
1RI.D.
3Ius.Doc.
Doctor of Pllilosophy.
Presiderlt.
Profc~sso~-.
.
Public IT-orlis Dcpartnrent.
I?oyal A c ; ~ c l ~ n ~ y .
, Asiatic ' h r i e t y ( . l l e n ~ b ~t v. . ~
,, Astronomical Society ( F c l l o ~ ~ f i ) .
,, Coloni;ll I n s t i t i ~ t e .
,, College of Physicians.
,,
of Si~rgeons.
,,
of Vete1.ina1.y S~irgeons.
,, G ~ o g ~ . a p h i c nSociety.
l
m-.
Doctor.
Historical S n r i ~ t y(Fcllo7r.s).
D.C.T,.
,,
of Civil Law.
,, H o r t i c a l t n r a l Society (Fc/lo?os).
D.D.
,,
of Divinity.
,, Infititnte of P a i n t e r s in W a t e r
D.Lit.
of 1,iterature.
Colours.
D.Sc.
,,
of Science.
R.L.4.
,
I r i s h Aradenrv.
E.S.
EntomoIogical Society.
R.I.R.A.
,
I n s t i t n t r of Rvitiih .4vchitectn.
R.3I.S.
,, hficroscopical Society.
Facizlty of Insnrance.
F.I.
, Society.
R.S.
G.S.
Geological Society.
R.S.A.
,, Society of Arts (Fel1oir.s).
R.S.A.
,, Scottish .4rade1ny.
I..%.
I n s t i t u t e of Actiiarieq.
R.S.E.
,, Societv, Edinbin.gh. I.C.
,,
of Chemists.
R.S.L.
Society of I , i t e r a t ~ i r e .
1nst.C.E.
,
of C i r i l Engineere.
T.R.R.
,,
of Electrical Engineers.
S.A.
Society of Antictnarics (Frl1olr.s).
T.M.X.
,,
of Mining Engineers.
S.A..4.
,,
of Accountants and Auditors
1.Mech.E.
,,
of Mechanical Engineers.
(Incorporated).
I.N.A.
,,
of Naval Architects.
S.C.L.
Studcnt of Civil 1,av.
T.S.E.
.
of S a n i t a r y Engineers.
S.I.
I n s t i t u t e of Surveyors.
1.1.
I m p e r i a l Inetitute.
S.S.
Statisticpl Society.
S.1.
I n s t i t u t e of Journalists.
V.P.
Vice-Prwident.
K.C.
King's Counsel.
Z.S.
Zoological Society.
NOTE.-S., M., o r F.. p r ~ f i ~ ct od l e t t e r s indicating a n I n s t i t u t e o r Society stands for
Associate. Member, o r Fellow of t h e Society i n question.
Ph.D.
Prei.
Prof.
P.\17.D.
R.A.
E..\ .S.
R.A.S
R.C.I.
R,C.P.
R.C.S.
R.C.T7.S.
R.G.S.
R.1Iist.S.
R.H.S.
R.I.