Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, Vol. 33 PDF

QUATUOR CCIRONATI LODGE NO. 2076, LONDON.
.:OII:OIOIII.
flow
THE IsABELLA MISSAL
BRITISH M U S E U M
ADD. MSS..
78.861
C I R C A . 1600 A.C
VOLUME XXXIII.
W. S. PARRETT. LTD., PRINTERS. MARGATE.

1"O.
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 ...
NOTES AND QUERIES
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
Sutton, Charles Wil:ia~il

...
Tate, John
...
...
Turner: Gcorge Ed\rard
...
Veiiables, Rowland George
...
IVrigllt, E e u . Ch;lrles E;dn-:~ril 1,eigll
PAPERS AND ESSAYS.

Some fresh material for classifying the
Rosedale, D . D .
...
...
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.
Dr. Begemann and the alleged Templar Chapter at Edinburgh in 1745.

13- J . E. S. T11ckc>tt
...
...
...
...
The. storj- of. Pritlco C11;1rlt>sICtlwa1.d Stuart and hi., 111~l1lberslli1)

of :I l't,li~l)l;~r
C'h:~ptcr a t Editl1)uryli; Dr. J5egema11il's : ~ t t ~ i n ptot
l x o r c i t n nij-ill. 40 ; Tlir acccltt:~~~ccl
of his riejrs by W.J . Clic~tn-ode
Cr:tn-1t.y allcl \V. J . H u y l i a ~ ~11
. ; Dr. 13o~enianli's argunlent considered, 43 ; Coiiclusions, 60.
Women and Freemasonry.
B - Gordon P. G. Hills
...
...
E'einininc, ilrtcrest in Frc.culaio~ir?-ill :c,ge~~d;lr?tiines. 63; -%ncient

la~idmarks;rild established cnstoins; IVon~riinot eligible to become
Freemaso~is; IVomcll \rho 11:1rc clainled to Ii;~rt.been intitinted or
t o have initiated tlicmse1~-er; T2ic Eni!)ress Marin T l ~ e r c s a ~64;
The Irish l ~ a c l rFreeinasoli, rnriatious of tlie S t o r - ; Alleged cases
of English IYelsh and Scotch ndniissions, 65; Spies and eaves,
London, 66; in
droppers, a t Yen-castle. C h : ~ t h : ~ mCanterbury,
New Zealand, France, and Ilauritius. 68; Ameriran stories of
initiations, 69; Rites of adoption and other snbstitutes, 71; A
L o ~ l d o ~Society
l
on such lines, 72; The plea t h a t a n-omnn playing
a man's part may be initiated, French and Hungarian rases, 73;
A S p a ~ i i s hheroine, 74; The o p i i i i o ~of
~ Albert P i k e ; .i \-:oman
camlot In\vfully become n ?Ilnson or I)e recognized in t h e higher
Co~iimentsb>-J. S. 31. Ward 75; R. H. Bnster, 76.
degrees, 75.
Iteply by Gordoii P. G. Hills, 7G.
L'Ordre de la FBlic~te. 1 % -J . K . Shum Turliett
...
...
Early Alldrog>-nons Societies, 8 2 ; The Order of Felicity, erroneous

information supplied b - prer-ions n-riters. 83; Not connectecl with
J l n C o r t r ~ e r i ed'.-ltlol~tion, nor n-it11 J f a s o i ~ r y ; An account of its
ceremonies, figns, jen-els, cP-v.. ill; History of the Order, 86; A
split irl t h e Order, 137; Biographical Notes, 93; The Language of
t l ~ cOrcler, 97 ; Hil>liogrhl)hy; S o l ~ g s101.
~
Corn;~~lcl~ts
by Gordoli
Hills; Gilbert C. Sliad\\.ell, 108. Zleplj- by J. E. S. Tucliett, 110.
PAPERS AND ESSAYS-con tinued.

PAGE.
The Architectural Style of King Solomon's Temple.
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.
Bristol ;uld 3ialmesbur:-
...
...
136
The Council House, Bristol, and t h e Civic Regx~lia, 136; The

City and its
137; The Cathedral, 133; Tile Merchant
Vcntnrers, 130; Collcge Green; Tlic Civic Cross, 1-10; 'The Red
The JLaso~licP:.orince
t
Lodge, 141 ; The Walls of A n c i e ~ ~nristol;
of Bristol; l~reemasons'I-Iall in Bridsc Street, 1-12; Freenvaso~ts'
Ha11 in l'arli Strect, 1x3; IIIeetin!: of the Rabert Thorne Ilodgc,
144; Hristol to Jlalinesbun.y, 116; Sherstol~ancl its Chul,c:;, 117;
1 1 l 1 c s l u r l ; Be;-crston, 150 ; Programme of Mcsic a t
Frt.e:nasons' Hall, Bristol. 153; St. Peter's Hospital, 137; Temple
Church, 158; St. Jlarj- R.edcliff, 159; The C ~ T - e s161;
,
Service a t
tlic Chthedral, 162.
The Compagnonnago.
A tentative Inquiry.
1%)-Idionel Vibcrt
. ..
191
Introduction, a ~ t d Authorities referred to, 1'31 ; l'erdiguier's

I\-iitings, Oould, ltyl:rnds, St. I k o n ; The C o i i i p a g ~ ~ o ~ ~distinct
~~ago
from Freemasonry, 192; Craft Gnilds and Journej-men, in the
liuilding Trades; I n England no travelling, 194; I n Germany
travelling prescribed 115- Guild Ordinances, 195; I n France, the
Compagnonnnge, a n Association of Journeymen, 196 ; originally
restricted t o building trades, 198 ; Legal enactlllcllts against such
associations ; The Sorboiitie disclmures, 199 ; Internal feuds, 200 ;
The Tour d e E ' ~ . t r i i c c ,late in date, 201 ; Ceremonial admissiot~,202;
Topage, G u i l b ~ c t t e ,and ILu t,lernenf, 235 ; The three clivisions ;
llegnlia, 206; Nicknames and Sobriquets. 20s; The Legencls,
Charles Martel, Solomon, Namus Grecus, Jacques, Soubise, 212;
Sun~niaryand Conclusion, 217. ' Comments bj- J. E. S. Tuckett,
223. Tteplg h>- L. Vibert, 227.
Fifty ycars of Masonic life in Belgium.
U . Couiit Goblet d'Alviella ...
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.
-i C e ~ l t u r r of JIasollic Worliing, being a

History of t h e Stability Lodge
Instruction. By F . \I7.
Golbr
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
...
-1 n e r Ellc?-c:opseclix of Frecmnso~lry (Ars

lfngna Lntomorum) and of cog~lxte
inst:tutcd
mysteries:
tlicir Rites.
Literature and History.
By Arthur
Edward Waite ...
...
...
,,
97
,,
Thr Story of t h e Craft.

of the Dere!o!:ment
T5.v Lionel Vibert
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
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Crown in Parker's Laiu?
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
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 ...
Jlalmesbury: Summer Outing ..

Jloclern Masons
...
...
113
62
62
62
62
62
190
...
Felicity, Order of
, ...
...
Fiction, Freemasonry nr
France, Trade organizations i n ...
82
79. 185
192
German>-) Trade organizations i n

Grenoble, Contlr~itetlr
...
Grtilhrette
,.,
.,
192
197
205
...
...
Lodges referred t o :-
Chapters ( R . A . ) referred to :-
St.
...
Old Charges, see Constitutions,

JL9.
...
...
Onting : Bristol and ~ l a l m e ~ b u &
13-5
Persons referred to :-
Adams. Alfred 11'.

Bdams, Arthur W.
.-litken, George ShalxAldx\ orth, ,Il?~s. ...
,-lld~\-~i.th.
Thonlas
Alford, Canon J. G.
Anclerson, Eustace
Anderson, J a i ~ l e s
Armitage, F.
...
-Athelstan, Xinq
Athole, 1111X.rof
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
,..
2
2
119
6-2
137
14r)
166
13
108
146
4l.
Persons referred to :Attwood. T .

...
...
Austen. A . E . . . .
Aytoun. P r o f r s s o ~
E.
Bacon. Alexr . S .
...
Bailey. T .
...
...
Baily. E . H . . . .
...
Hall . R e v . C . J .
...
...
13nra. Jules
...
15axter R . H . . . .
...
...
Bcanza~l.H . S . . . .
Beaton. X r s . . . .
...
Begemann. D r . TV .
...
...
Bell. Seynlour
...
Besarit. S i r Waiter
...
Ringham. S . C .
...
Bird. Eclwarcl
...
...
I?ocleiiham. J o h n
...
Bradley. Herbert
108.
Brakespear. Hnrold
...
Broaclfoot. Philip
...
13roadnay. Ricliarcl
...
I<rocknxray. Charles A . . . .
Broinehead. H r v . J . Kowill
Huckh~aster.F . H .
...
Buglass. T . L) . . . .
...
Butler. J . Dixon
...
Caldecott. R r v . \V . Sha W ...
Canina. Cont !n~ntlrrfo.
rc ...
Carr. J o h n
...
...
Cartx~right.T . . . .
...
Chatterton. F . . . .
...
Chattertoli. Tllo11.a~
...
Chipies. 3fon.s. ...
...
...
Cogdell. John
...
Colston. Edn-ard
...
Conder. Eclmard
...
Cook. D r . E . H .
...
Coombe. \V . J . B .
...
Couvreur. Allgust
...
Conper. \17illiain
...
Craven. H . T .
...
Cra~vley. D r . \f.' J .
Chetxvocle
...
Cuvelier cle ~ r i e . ' % r .o . . .
Dnshxx-ood. Sir Francis ...
Dzrvey. Arnold E .
...
Daris. Alfred
...
...
Danes. IVilliarn ...
...
cle Chambonnet. Mons . . . .
cle Chastelet. ~ ~ r i isr
i ~ t ~...~ t
de Nerral. Gerard
...
de Sauley. C o u n f
...
de Voguk. Coicnt
...
Delbruck. Bishol)
...
Dcrmott. Laure11c.e
...
Dibden. Charles ...
...
Ilickens. Charles
...
Dodge. A .
...
...
Doclridge. J o h n
...
Doaeraile. Viscount
...
Dring. E . H . . . .
...
Dunckerlcy. Tholnas
...
Dundee. Lnrtl
...
...
Eberle. Fuller
...
...
Eggleston. C. . . .
...
Feehan. A ~ c bislrol~
h
...
Fergussori. Jaines
...
Ferrier J o h n George
...
Fitzharcling. Robert
...
Fox. P . H .
...
...
Frnncoml~e, 1. T .
...
Gambier. C'trpt . .J. l\-. . . .
Gedge. Alfrecl S .
...
Gilbert. W . N . . . .
...
Goblet cI'.Alviella. Cott I. t ...
Goff. Elljah
...
...
Golby. F. TV . . . .
...
PAGE
Per*sons referred to :Gongh. Charles ...

113 185. 190
5 . 192
Gou1d.H.F.
...
...
80
Gove. D r . R . A .
...
162
Greene. D r . . . .
...
74
Hadik Barkocsy. ('oilnfess
80
Hankiu H . I . . . .
...
211
Hare. Sholto H .
...
66
Homard. J f r s . . . .
...
(52
...
Hal~lres. Z . C . . . .
$3
Hnxx kins E . L . . . .
...
1G2
Hages. l j r .
...
...
14.5
Heath. Ileyrick
...
166
Huiron. Arthur
...
252
Heivey. J o h n
...
...
Hestall. TV . B .
108 129. 168.
184. 185. 186. 243

183
Hickinan. Jaines
Hills G . P . G .
63. '78. 108. 121
114
Horsley. Ctrnon J . \V . . . .
Huglian. TTT. J .
... 6. 40. 64
183
Anghes Joseph
...
132
H u n t . Hubert \TT .
...
188
...
Iles. Col . E1. \l7
.
Ives. James
...
...
137
Jardine. Ctrpt.TV.
...
188
Johnson. 1'1. of e s s o ~S . P ....
114
Johnson. Samuel
...
161
Tiemp. l V . D . . . .
...
188
"38
liessen dblib
...
...
Keys J . P .
...
...
80
Knight. H . 31. . . .
...
211
75
Iraceg. C(tnon T. A . . . .
Lamy. Rerrlard
...
116
TAangforcl. George
...
11-5
1.aurie. lV. A . . . .
...
46
I.anraslcc. Johu
...
l08
Lepper. J . Heron
...
2$2
Lewis . 1'1.o f ~ s s o rT . Hayter
122
Lloyd I)./.. C . H
...
163
Loregrore. Henry
...
132
3facbeal1. Eclnarci
...
2
Jlacn.att. D . F .
...
80
SlcCan~i.Jaines
...
1Gi
31cLeod. Robert H .
...
3
Jlain. 1 ) ).. G . 8.
...
62
Marty F . C .
...
80
Jlichel. Genertrl
...
238
Siillar. Ja:nes
...
...
188
-Morel. F .
...
...
190
l\[orroxx.-, Conon 11'. E . R .
163
Murray-Aynsley. Mrs.
...
63
North. C. N . McIntyre ...
l19
O'Conner. Mrs . T. P . . . .
71
Oliseley. .Sir Frederirlr
...
162
Ogilvie. Lnvd
...
47
Pnine. Timothy &is
...
118
Pakeinan. G . S .
...
141
Pnnniater R . G.
...
143
Paul. a . C . S .
...
136
Peek. R r v . Richarcl
...
l P8
Pkran. Gabriel L . C . . . .
93
Percivall. George
...
157
Perdiguier. A . . . .
...
192
Perrot. AIons . . . .
...
l: X
Perth. D u k e of
...
47
Philpott. F . S.
...
14.3
Pike Albert
...
...
1
Poinbo. D r . . . .
...
75
Poole R c v . H . . . .
... 62 . 186
Po\\.ell. Cecil
... 132. 230
Poxvcll W . A . F:"
...
1 1.3
P r a t t . R P. ~
James
...
62
P r a t t . 1)r . John
...
62
P r a t t . Col . Sisson Coolwr...
2
Price. Al-thur
...
...
PO
P r i n g Martin
...
...
130
Pritchard J . E .
...
141
Procope. Couteau
...
94
..
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 ...
Roman Catholics. Antagonism of

Sheriton : Sumi~ierOuting
...
Solomon. Sons of
...
...
Soubise. Sons of
...
...
Stability Lodge of Instruction ...
S t u a r t s and Freemasonry
Summer Outing:
Bristol and
A!Ialmesbury
...
...
Templars and t h e S t u a r t s
Temple Arrhitectural Style
Solonlon's
...
of
Toprrgc
...
...
...
Trade organizations i n England.

...
France and Gern1zn)Trinity College. Dublin. Onerative
Masons connected with
...
Women and Freemasonry
Women. French Societies for
...
...
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 :
The Suspensioll Bridge
156
PAGE.
Mal~llesbury Abbey, T1:e Market

...
...
Cross
...
3 l a p showing t h e T o u r tle F1.cli1r.e
P o r t r a i t : Herbert Bradlej-
110, 118
148
136
201
F~ontispiece
......
...
148
The Fisher-Hosedale JIS.

The Songhurst >IS. ...
...
16
16
Sherston Church
...
CONTRIBUTORS.
PAGE.
PAGE.
Armitage, Fred.
Baxter. R . H.
Sradley, Herbert
...
...
..
..
...
108
31, 76, 114, 165

-1 3 , 103, 121, 223
...
...
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.
37. 108, 129, 167, 184,

183, 186. 223. 213
Hills, C. P. G.
...
63, 108, 223
Horsley, ( ' ( I I I O I L J. TV.
...
28
L a w r a ~ ~ c eJohn
,
Legi~er:J . Heron
Lovegrox-e, Henry
...
...
...
...
...
...
108
212
132
...
...
...
...
Ilobbins. ,Sir Alfred

Hose, Algernon
Hosedale, l)!..H . G.
...
...
...
...
shad\^-ell, Giibert C.
J.
S.ciie.5, C. F.
....
Poole, I(cv. Herbert

PO\\ell, Cecil
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
Quatuor Coronati Lodge of A.F. G A.M., London,

No. 2076.
FRIDAY, 2nd JANUARY,
1920.
H E Lodge met a t Freemasons' Hall a t 3 p.m. Present :-Bros. J . E.

Shum Tnckctt, P.Pr.G.R., TVilts., TV.31. ; Gordor? P. G. Hills.
P.Pr.G.TV., Berks., 1.P.11. ; Sir Alfred ltobbins, Prc.3. B.G.P., a5
8.W. ; H e r l ~ e r t Bradley, P.Dis.G.M., Madras, J.\T7. ; Canon J. \V.
Horsley, P.G.Clr., Chaplain; \lT.J. Songhurst, P.G.D.. Secretary;
Lioiiel T'ibert, P.Di9.G.W.. Madras, J.D. ; J. P. Simpson. P.A.G.R..
P . M . ; and J. H . McNaugliton, Tyler.
Also the follou-ing members of the Correspondence Circle :Bros. H . F. TVhymaii, Joseph H.- Stretton. Dr. H . G. Rosedale, P.G.CIl., H . T.
illanlv,zring, W. N. Blnir, Jun., Rev. H . Poole, Lieut.-Col. F. J. Stolr-c, P.Dep.G.S.B..
L. A. Engcl, Hervey Bnthurst, P.G.Stew., A. S. Green, G. W. Bebbington, C. C.
Parkhurst Baxter, C. F. Sylics, Walter Dewes, MT. C. Tcrr-, P. H . Fox. L. Hemcns.
Geo. W. Sutton, I,. G. \\'exrin.r, W. Mason Rrztdhear, F.' C. Bickell, MT. A. Tharp.
P.G.St.B., S r t h u r Heiron, J . Procter \Vatson, F. J. Asbury, Algernoil Rose, P.A.G.D.C .
J. H . Gaason, G. Inglefield, Maurice Beachcroft, TV. Archbald, F. R, Le Tall, Frank -4.
Ti'illiams, Robt. Blalie, H. Johnson. M a s Infield. \V. T. Hawkil~s.A. Y. JIa-ell. T. S.
Mills, and Frcd. R. Terry.
Also the follouing T'isitcrs A . Presland, 1 ~ 1 1 i tLodge
~
No. 1637; A. E. Jarmall.
Earl of Zetlilnd Lodge No. 1364 ; E. Jarman, P.M., London Rifle Brigade Lodge No. 1962 ,
Ardon Moss, Raling Lodge No. 2662; \V. Staples P r a t t l , S.TV., Smyth Lodge hTo. 2284,
G. Mumford, Cztrnarvon Lodqe No. 708; \V. Crrck, Kingsley Lodge No. 2431; Jolrn l3
Richard, P.M., \Vest Essex Lodge No. 2651 ; \V. J. ICellolv, Red Cross Lodge No. 3781,
Johu Fisher, P.A.G.St.B. ; R . E . Pape, P.M., Yarl~oroughLodge No. ,554 ; E. Hall J\'e~t
and W. Thacker, St. Paul's 1,odge No. 194.
Letters of apology for non-attendance were received from Bros. T. J. IVcstronp:

E. Conder, P.M. ; G. Greiner, P.A.G.D.C. ; F. J. TV. Crowe, P.A.G .D.C. : doll~l T.
Thorp, P.G.D. ; S. T. Klein ; F. H. Coldney, P.G.D. ; R. H. Baxtcr ; Cccil Po\\-ci!.
P.G.D. ; E. H. Dring, P.G.D. ; \Villiam TITntson. P.A.G.D.C. ; Dr. \lrynu Tf7rstrott
P.G.D. ; and TV. EI. Rylai~ds,P.A.G.D.C.
Transactions of the Quattior Coronati Lodge:
One Lodge, one Masonic Association and thirty-five ~ i e t h r e nwere admitted to

membership of the Correspondence Circle.
The Report of the Audit Committee, as foliows, was received, adgpted, and
ordered to be entered on the Minutesi-
PERMANENT AND A U D I T COMMITTEE.
The Cpmmittee met a t the Offices, No. 27, Great Queen Street, London, on
Monday, 29th December, 1919.
Present :-Bro.
J. E. S. Tuckett in the Chair, with Bros. Dr. W. Wynn Westcott,
Gordon Hills, J. P. Simpson, Sir Alfred Rdbbins, L. Vibert, R. H . McLeod, Auditor,

and W. J. Songhurst, Secretary.
The Secretary produced his Books and the Treasurer's Accounts and Vouchers,
which had been examined by the Auditor and certified as being correct.
The Committee. agreed upon the following
REPORT
FOR
THE PEAR 1919.
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.
Transactions of the Quatuor Cororrati Lodge:
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:
30th NOVEMBER, 1919.

S.
To Life Members' Fund (258

Members)
...
... 1689 10 6
,, Subscriptions, etc., received
in advance
... 170 8 8
,,, Correspondence circle, 1918
Balance in hand ...
... 734 18 5
...
... 1052 13 4
,,
do. 1919
,, Sundry ~ r e d i & r s ...
19 8 5
,, Sundry Creditors r e PUGcations
... 48 3 9
,, Profit and
Suspense
Account, being outstanding Subscriptions as per
contra, subjkct to realization
... 699 13 10
,, Lodge ~ c c o u n ' t ' S. d.
Balance 30th
Nov..
1918 78 19 4
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
,,
Profit and Loss Account ..i 2421 2 0

4492
I'1.cri7~~tcctioi~s
of
tlte
Q ~ r t r f t r o r C'oro~rcrti L o d g e .
PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT for the year ending

30th November 1919.
Dr.
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
This Balaz~ceSlieclt does not inclnde the a l - ~ eof the ~ i b r a r ?rluseum,

~,
Furniture,
or the Stork of P l ~ b l ~ c ; t t i o l(togc,ther
~s
~ a l u e c lfor Insurance a t &2,500), and is subject
t o tilt. ~ c ~ ; t l ~ a n ot
t i oA\scts.
~~
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.
~\
3, Great Janles Street,
Bedford Ron-, 1V.C.
2211d December, 1919.
-.
I3ro. H. C. R o s ~ o . \ r , ~I).T)..
,
. - -- -
P.G.Ch., read the following paper:-
SOME FRESH MATERIAL FOR CLASSIFYING THE
' OLD CHARGES.'

B ] - BRO. H . G'. ROSEDd L E , U D . , I'.G'.Cflr((p.
MONGST tlle efforts which have been made t o ii~lpress German

ideals upon t h e Grand Lodge of England, tliere stand o u t
prolllinently tliose of D r . Begemann, a well known Mason of
Berlin, xiho, by dint of t h a t curious devotion t o minutia: so
characteristic of all Gernlan students, made t h e Masonic world
believe t h a t t h e practical ideas of our own eminent Bro. Gould
with respect t o the Ancient Charges (of purely British origin)
ought t o be ignored, in order forsooth t o make way for t h e
Doctor's own complex, useless, and, I venture t o say, false system of classification,
a claszification of purely German nlailufacture based on t h e weakest of all
argunlents, coincidences of sound.'
To-day tl~ouglitiulstudents of Masonic lore are awakening t o t h e fact t h a t
Dr. Eegen~ann's classjficatioll of t h e Old Charges is neither useful nor correct.
Tlris opens a wide door, and there lies before tlle Nasonic world a road of liberty
along which they lilay pass t o a n intelligent classification of t h e Old Charges,
based upon historic facts a n d demonstratirlg tlie purely British iilfluences which
'liave made Masonry what i t 'is.
L e t us, however, be j11st. Wlllle i t is t r u e t h a t D r . Begemann was first a
i t is t r u e t h a t we have alIowed
German and afterwards a l l a s o i ~ i cscholar,
ourselves to accept his dicta without argument, still we owe something t o him.
He is a student of no mean ability, and his industry in verbal classification, of a
purely nlecl~anical kind, is enormous. F u r t h e r , though everyone who knows liis
Josephus must have been fully aware of t h e source of t h e Hiramic Letters found
in the later Charges, yet i t is entirely due t o liis reseatcli t h a t we have become
acquainted with tlle fact t h a t the quotations found in t h e Charges were taken either
from t h e 1655 or 1670 editions of Josephus as, is proved b y tlie use of t h e word
Macedonians instead of Sjdoilians. We are f u r t h e r indebted t o 'Dr. 'Begemann
for emphasizing t h e general view t h a t t h e Iiriqo Jottes document is of 'a date
pcsterior t o 1655, and for many other matters well known t o Masonic students.
When, however, we come to classification, we n7ust reconsider the whole question
and fall back solnewhat up011 Bro. Gould's classification, which, as D r . Begemann
l~imselfack~lowledges," is good for Historical ends," and those are the only ends
which are of illiportance and utility. If I niay venture to offer a suggestion t o
f u t u r e Gernlan writers, I would s a y :
Remember t h a t tlie Englishmen who wrote and copizd these Charges
were not, like t h e modern Gernians, t h e slaves of minute detail. They
wanted t o express a thought and they did so in t h e language t h a t
seemed t o then1 t h e most expressive. They were for t h e most p a r t not
learned, and tlle copyists, being often unable'to read t h e Manuscript
from which they were copying, inserted words t h a t seemed t o them
nlost likely t o give senss
I n other words t h e Brihish Mason was
indifferent to t h a t exactuee: in detail and n~inuteness of expression
wl~icllso delight t l ~ eTeuLonic Mason.
l
I t is kno\rn now that Dr. Bcgema~lnhas produced n ncxv c.lnssi6cation inore in

:tccord nit11 I~istorr. This niust. of course, bc c;lrt.fully critiqized; but, so far, students
1r;tlc depc~t~clrd
on' tlre clnssi'fication which appears lu Hughan's Oltl ( ' h u i g c s and which
Dr. Bcgcnlant~scxcnls to hnvc relinqulshud.
1
Transactions of the Quatuor C'oronati Lodge.
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
craft & curious science

3d is Dialectike
& that teacheth a man to
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
Some Fresh Naterial for Classifying t h e
---
Charg~s.'
trumpets
6; trump & the 7th is called Astronomy
which teacheth a man t o know the course

of the Sun the Moon 6; Stars. These be
the seven liberal sciences which 7 be all
founded by one science vizt Geometry
And this a m a n may prove that the
Science of all work is founded by
Geometry for Geometry teacheth a m a n
Mette and Measure Ponderation & weight
of all manner of things on the Earth for
there is no m n that worketh any craft
but he worketh by some Mett or Measure
& no man that buyeth or selleth but he
buyeth or selleth by some Measure or
some weight all of which is Geometry.
' Old
the which Sciences take their

foundation oj Geometry for Georhetry
teacheth a man Mete Measure & Weight
of all manner of things here on Earth;
for there is no m a n that worketh by any
Science or Craft but that he worketh by
some %ete or Measure o r weight & this
is Geometry. . And Merchamts & all
Craftsmen the other 6 Sciences use
especially the Ploughmen tillers of the
Earth for all manner of grains seeds
vines Plumb trees, planters of fruit for
neither
Grammar
Arithmetic.
nor
Astronomy nor nune of the other Sciences
can' find M e n Mete Measure without
Geometry wherefore methinks that the
Science Geometry is most worthy from
whence the other proceeds;
(omitted)
first
S o w how this worthy science was

begun I shall tell you.
Before Noah's
flood there was a man called Lamech as
i t is written i n the Bible in the 4th chapter
(omitted)
of Genesis theae 4 children founded the
beginning of all the C r a f t & Soiences in
(omitted)
the world for the eldest son Jabal founded
the Craft of Geometry & he parted flocks
of Sheep & Lands in the field & first
Lambs
rough house of Stone & Tree as is noted
wrought
timber
in the chapter above said (verse 21) And
(omitted)
his brother Juball found out the Craft of
Science
Musick & Tongue H a r p & Organ & the
as (omitted)
said brother Jubalkaine found
33
Tuba1 ,
a t
Smiths Craft of Gold Silver Copper Iron &
Steel & the Daughter found the Craft of
Weaving & these children knew --well
t h a t God would take Vengeance for sin
either by fire or water wherefore they
wrote their Sciences they found in 2.
writt these
(omitted)
pillars of stone t h a t they might be found
after Noah's flood & one
the
pillar of
stone was
Marble for t h a t
called
would not burn with any fire & the
could not be burned
other Stone
stone whereof the other pillar was made
was Latern &
would not
was called Latern
it could
drown in the waters
any
Our intent is to tell you truly how &
in what manner these stones were found
-- whereupon these Sciences
a t that
were written
on
The great Hemnaines that was Cub,b
The Great Hermes that was the Son of
his Son which Cybb was Chum his Son &
Cush who was the S o n d f S e m who was
H a m Noah's Son. This said H e r m i n e s
the son of Noah.
same Hermen
was afterwards called Hermes the father
of the wise men.
H e found one of the
(omitted)
2 pillars &
the Sciences
found
written thereon & he taught i t t o other
men
and so on through0, u t the entire MS.
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 :-
A TCII ESOIV-HA T'E*lT.

B E A C-lf O S T .
~ o o dBrethren and Fellons, our
Good Brethren and Fellolvs, my
purpose is t o tell you in whrrt .sol t
pnrpose is to tell yo11 'l11 tchrct sort
ctntl manner this worthy Craft of nntl manner this worthy Craft of
,Masonry was first founrlecl, and afMasonry was first fozcnded and afternards mentnined'nncl ~rpholrlen tervards ho7r i f 7vns mnintnined
bj mnny Kings, Princes and other rrntl tcphol(1en b y worthy Kings
cc.nrrhipfu1 men, and also t o them trntl Princes nncl mnny other ~ c o r s h i p
fctl men, and also to them that rrre
that he. here we shtrll declare
here, lie 1c.111 declare fhen the Charges t h
the Charges lchich belongeth to
belongs to every frue Mason t o keep
every f r u e Mason to keep, for i t
for i t is a northy craft and n viris ( 1 science fhnt is ~c.ortht/f o O P
tuous science, i t being one of the
ence t h a t i s orthy thy t o be k e p t for lcppt f o r a worthy craft and
seven liberal sciences.
virtuons science, for zt is
a worthy craft and virtuous sci,
ence, for i t is one of the seven liberal one of the seven liberal
sciences
sciences
Good Brethren and Felloas, . o ~ r r , ,

purpose is to tell you how nncl i n
11-hntmanner this worthy Craft of
Masonry was hegun and afterwards how i t was upholden nnd
maintained by m a n y ~ c o r t h y
Rings and Princes and other
~ c o r t h !men,
)
and also to them
that be here we shall declare
the Charges thnt belongeth t o every
f r ~ eMason t o keep, for i t is a sci-
I n anot,her group t h e L%Tewcnstleand t h e I'orl, L1fSS. vary considerably.

Turning t o t h e small Lnnndouvze family i t will a t once be noticed t h a t two out of
three MSS. omit t h e name of Euclid, whilst t h e third, t h e L n n s d o u v t r , mentions
i t , and, further, t h e A n t i q ~ r i t y and I'rol,it?y Jf,C,C. digress on the important
matter of wages, for t h e p r o b i t y alone mentions t h e sum o f elevenpence per week
and elevenpence for drink, which .cannot have been copied from either the
~ a w s d o w n e - o rt h e A a t i p t r i t y . T h e S t a n l r y and Clnphnrn vary in many particulars, whilstLto return t o t h e fi~tclin7urnand t h e B r n ? t m o i ~ t not
,
only do they record
different amounts of pay, b u t also i t may be observed that t h e R ~ o z r t n o n t alludes
t o t h e Oath, which does not appear in t h e earlier document, t h e f i ~ t c l ~ n n c r n .
These differences, and many of even greater importance, n~iqlltbe multiplied
till they filled a volume; b u t i t is needless t o d o so, since any really critical student
will quickly come t o the'conclusion t h a t D r . Begemann, in inaking his selection,
was f a r more guided by concidences of expression, due either t o locality or period.
t h a n t o t h e all-important matters of history or purpose.
True, he has not altogether evaded t h e outstanding landmark of the wages
paid i n t h e time of St. Alban, b u t even here he hhs sometimes been drawn away
by some other le3s important detail. I n dealing with what may be called the
' Hermetic group,' t h e facts are so obvious, t h a t h e has not been able in this case
t o confuse t h e issue, though I frankly acknowledge t h a t , reading his article i n
A . Q . C . , vol. i., many times, i t leaves me with a n o s t confused idea of what he is
endeavouring t o demonstrate.
One has only t o attempt to classify t h e MSS. t o realise t h a t they naturally
resolve themselves into historical groups,
each t h e result of some social, political
or religious movement.
Unfortunately, we cannot go back beyond the fourteenth century, a period
'when t h e Craft w8s already recognized, even in contemporary documents. If we
could, no doubt t h e whole history of Masonry would be far easier t o understand.
W e must, however, be satisfied to take u p t h e study where documentary evidence
begins, and so t o avoid all mere speculation,'though a t this point I would raise a
strong protest against those writers who h'ave no historical perspective and who
will eccept no views as admissible unless they are supported by dafinite MSS.
which eliminate all theory and c0nstitut.e fact and fact only.
1 Under Dr. Begemann's amended rlxssificntion this group, n-ith the Trn- version.
forms x new family antecedent to the ' Standard ' form of the BISS.
Somr P r ~ n hilfnterinl for Clnsaifyiny th? ' Old Ghnrg~s.'
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
'
Tranpactions of t h e Qzcattror Coronnti Lodge.
officer. I t meant t h a t the old religious practices began to be of less importance,

and in their place grew up more materialistic and democratic m.ethods of
administration and probably some form of Ritual t h a t was less Ecclesiastical.
Many of their earlier possessions had ceased to belong to the Craft Gilds, and
tlzei; speculative side had t o depend on memories of the past. I n consequence of
the dangers involved in t h e possession of religious writings, as well as in
consequence of the disappearance of the Chaplain, MSS. were rare, and they no
doubt were zealously guarded by certain well trusted members of the community,
to be brought out only when necessary. The written traditional History, modified
by time, became rarer and would have t o be barned by t h e most capable brethren
for recitation in Lodge. Hence the lack of MSS. during this period.
Towards t h e mend of t h e reign of Queen Elizabeth t h e country had settled
down to more peaceful conditions.
The fear of Roman influence was not so
intense, and t h e need for severe repression of all t h a t revived t h e hope of its
return was gone. . The Stuart, King James I . , coming from the North, where
the old Craft Gilds had been able t o survive in their more ancient form, and
where the religious side of their work had not ceased (as in this country) to play
a large role, would be able to appreciate t h e value of such an organisatid as
Masonry in leading and moulding the ideas of .the industrial classes, who were
beginning to clamour for some recognition, or a t least for some measure of justice.
James I . , like all the Stuart Kings, saw in this an opportunity, and granted a
considerable number of Charters to Craft Gilds, an a d which must have stimulated
the revival of many old ideals and practices, more especially as Roman Catholic
influences were slowly and secretly percolating back, not only into Scotland, but
into the rest of the British Isles.
Whatever be the actual Masonic cause, i t is clear t h a t a t least one-half of
the known MSS. were written during the Jatter part of the Stuart period, and
that, with t h e e ~ p a n s i o nof operative Gild life, t h e necessity for t h e reiteration
of the traditional history, as well as the codification of the laws t~
be observed by the Craft, which we still call 'Charges,' would lead
the architects, or those presiding over Lodges or Gilds, t o make rapid
It would, most probably, owing t o the
transcripts of t h e few known copies.
difficulty of discovering their whereabouts, compel them to transcribe the history
from memory, or from t h e dictation of those who in each generation were, during
the period of persecution, t h e custodians of t h e unwritten traditions.
In a
recently-recovered document connected with the Horners' Company, " The Old
Orders," to which I-have alluded both in my Old Book o f t h e H o r n ~ r s ' C o m p r z y
and in my History of the same Company, we have the analogue of the ancient
Charges, varying like our own, accordinq to periods, added to, altered and
elaborated, as necessity demanded.
This book was kept for the benefit of
apprentices and craftsmen, and no doubt hung in t h e office of the Clerlr of the
Gjld for reference.
That in MSS. written from dictation, similar sounds conveying different meanings would lead to differing forms of words is obvious, and
this entirely coincides with what even t h e casual observer will find in the ancient
Charges.
No one who reads these curious records with anv care can fail to see that
many of the differences are due t o words with dissimilar meanings boinq inserted
as approxilrately representin: t h sams
~
sounds. The various forms of Naymns
Grecus, Charles Martell, Marshall, Mersell, or Medon are clear evidencss of this
' Glorious' M a ~ o n sinstoad of ' Curious ' Masons and hundreds of other
fact.
exapples of this sort lrjyht b. adduced. A t the same time i t is equally evident
that some of the MSS. were copies of others, and %he peculiar variat.ions can bs
traced to t h s iqnorance of copyists, such, for instance. as 1 mile for 50 miles11 pence a week for two shillings a week-Menon
for Namon-Nan
finches for
Noonfinches or Non findinqs, and a multitude of similar words.
So much for the second croup of MSS. We now come t o comparativelp
n>odern times. I n spite of our late Bro. Gould's gibe that Bro. Speth, one of o-lr
greatest Masonic scholars, had ''expressed his faith in t h a t most unhistorical of
statements t h a t Freemasons were partisans of the Stuarts and t h e ' Third Degree '
Sottze Fresh Alfaterial for Classifyiny the ' Old Charges.'

was the outcome of a Jacobite plot," l I can see nothing to make anyone who is
acquainted with the history of the period around 1700 deny t h a t during t h e whole
of the seventeenth century the efforts of Rome to re-entrench herself in this country
account largely for the growth of Freemasonry a t this time, not only as a trade, but
also as a social movement. There are signs t h a t the revival'of t h e religious gilds in
the form and under the name of Masonry or Freemasonry had already begun in
the time of James I . With the Civil W a r t h e countrv was divided into two classes :
those who wished to bring back the old Stuart regime, including t h e Romish
Church influences, and those who were fighting for a large measure of freedom
and individualism.
Masonic bodies were, if we may judge by the Charges, on the side of the
King and Church, and, where accessible to foreign influences, would have strong
R,oman leanings. Certainly the prophecy of Bro. Bacon, speaking of Charles I.
as a Martyr, indicates anything but t h e contrary view. This sort of spirit was
good ground in which those who mere interested in t h e Jacobite movement could
sow their seed. Both in Scotland and England, whether justifiably or not we can.
not say, but certainly in the opinion of the public, Freemasonry in those days
stood as an ally of the Jacobite movement.
Thus those MSS. whicll were the
cllerished possession of t h e older Lodges and formed the backbone of Ancient
Masonry up to the end of the eighteenth century are nearly all of one type, viz.,
definitely in sympathy with dogmatic Theology.
Beginning with a Trinitarian Invocation, they recount:The Seven Sciences all summed up in Geometry.
The Story of Noah, Jabal, Jubal, Tubal, Tubal Cain and Naamah.
The Pillar discovered bp Hermes after t h e Flood.
Nimrod using Masons a t Babylon.
Euclid teaching Geometry to the Egyptians-his
Charges.
Solomon using Masons under Hiram's son t o build t h e Temple.
Naymus Graecus brings Masonry to France.
Charles Martell, King of France, adopts Masonry.
St. Alban adopts Masonry when brought to England for the first time.
His payment t o Masons and t h e establishment of an Assembly.
Revival of Masonry under Athelstan and his son Edwin.
Permission t o hold an Assembly once a year.
Edwin holds an Assembly a t York.
Edwin collects all Masonic MSS. and produces a history of t h e Craft
to be recited whenever a Mason was made.
Method of administering the Oath.
Ancient Charges - always calling for Loyalty to Mother Church,
avoidance of Heresy, and ending with
An Admonition.
That there are innumerable minor differences is not to be wondered a t if
we understand that they emanated from different parts of t h e country and were
influenced by the ever deceptive memories of individual brethren, and that only
by comparing these versions with the original sources-few
and comparatively
unknown,-could
the corrections be made. I n spite of all this, the MSS. are
extraordinarily similar.
The main differences noticeable are due, as will be
obvious, to local tradition, or the bad writing and insufficient scholarship on the
part of the copyist or reciter, namely :I n t h e actual words of the Invocation.
The pay t o Masons under St. Alban.
The inclusion or exclusion of the Oath from the MS.
The number of miles necessary t o traverse1 t o t h e Assembly.
The form of admonition.
Introduction and additions to t h e usual scheme.
'
Gould; A.Q.G. i., 78.
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
Sott~eFresh -1futerinl for C l u s s i f y i ~ zthe

~ ' Old Cfharyes.'
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.
as a Presbyterian minister. H e would prefer any teaching or practice which,

owing t o its greater 'scholarship and the fact t h a t i t associated Masonry more
extensively with the British Crown, made itself attractive to a day both of classical
scholarship and of subservience to Royalty.
Whoever i t was that drew u p those ancient Charges t h a t incorporate the
IIiramic Letters, whether it were some earlier author or Dr. Anderson himself,
which is unlikely, or someone else who made use of a slightly 'earlier text, are
interesting questions, b u t do not alter t h e fact t h a t between 1723 and 1735 an
entirely new series of MSS. made their appearance, which from the scholarship
evinced would seem to have emanatad from some branch of London Mmonry.
Our late Bro. Speth, with that breadth of mind which he, unlike a large
number of Masonic st;dents, so obviously possessed, admits t h a t " previous t o
1717 there existed an a m ~ l e rRitual than some modern Masons were will in^ to
concede," and he adds: " W e may further assume t h a t a large influx of gentlemen
was in 1713 ready to swamp the old operative element." l Surely i t was with the
decay of Jacobinism and t h e influx of a certain ' Puritan ' element, or a t least a
Protestant body, that the great changes in t h e form and ritual of Freemasonry
took place. Clear it is t h a t before 1723 there is no reference in the Ritual to
Hiram as we know him. The Third Degree would seem to date from t h a t year,
or probably 1724, b u t it evidently roused such opposition amongst Masons that
in September 1724 a notice appeared in a journal inviting all "old real
Masons " t o attend i a order " t o found a Lodge for regulating the. Modern
abuses which had crept into the Fraternity."
The new Third Degree was
not popular,-was
communicated only in 'Masters Lodges,'-and
for years not
regularly taken, a t least, so says Gould, and the evidence, so far as I can ascertain,
~ is interesting to note in this c_onnection t h a t Dr. Begeman11
is in his f a v o ~ r . It
concurs t h a t the Third Degree was iiitroduced in 1724, and suggests that those
ancient Charges w'hich contain what we call the Hiramic Letters were " produced
in order to maintain the antiquity of the legend," h n d though this writer
will not allow any Andersonian authorship, there are not a few details of those
Charges, not omitting the characteristic introduction of dates so dear t o that
worthy's heart, which make the student wonder. How the legend and the Third
Degree came to be adopted is a subject too long to consider here.
When Dr. Begemann, in 1888, wrote his article on the classification of the
Ancient Charges only four of these later versions were known: The Spencer,
which t h e publisher states t o have been copied from a MS. written 500 years
earlier, the Dodd and Cole (possibly reprints of the Spencer), and t h e doubtful
Znigo Jomes M S S .
Since then a t least two other versions have been discovered, and probably
several others are in existence. On,e of these is in t h e possession of t h e Quatuor
Coronati Lodge, and is called t h e Songhrrrst ilfS. The second, found by Bro.
Fisher amongst his father's papers, was handed to t h e writer, and was the
Such a MS. may fitly be called the Fisheroriginating cause of this paper.
Rosednle M S .
Of these the Songhztrst and t.he Fisher-Rosedale are not only identical, but
These
are written by t h e same hand and bound in exactly t h e same binding.
precious little gems are on paper in red morocco binding, beautifully 'tooled '
In gold, the design on both books being almost identical. The ,edges are plain
The, former is Gains. by 4ins., with 74 pages and 15 lines to a page.
gilt.
Sixteen pages of this book are blank. The latter is 6Wins. by SWins., and has 60
pages, of which 8 are blank. There are 18 lines t o a page. The writing is t h a t
01 an artistic scrivener of 1725-1735, clear and somewhat florid. Though I am
not able to adduce any actual proof, it does r ~ o tseem to me a t all unlikely that
t h e writer was t h e same person who dmevised the Znigo Jones M S .
0
1
2
3
-1
C.
i., 127.
k : g : C . I.,
27.
Begemann; A.Q.C. i., 154.
Some Fresh Jfaterial for Classifying t h e ' Old Charges.'
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
Trnnsactions of the Q ~ I C ( ~ ?Coronati

IOT
Lodge.
Lodge further eliminated many other doubtful statements.) Further, i t aimed

a t the introduction of antiquarian and classical learning into the traditions of
Masonry, now associated (at least to some extent) with more elevated social circles.
I do not assert it, yet it may be t h a t the writer demonstrates the worldly wisdom of
appealing to the sentiments of t h e more educated and cultured Masons by adopting
a tradition which had a secret meaning only to those who were members of his
own party.
Of the six versions which mark thte introduct'ion of a new era in Freemasonry,
i t is difficult t o say which was t h e earliest. Though t h e Znigo Jones MS.,seems
to me to be t h e iatest of the three versions, certain elements show it t o have
been influenced by an earlier tradition than the remaining five versions. I am,
therefore, disposed t o place it in a category by itself as marking the transition
period, just as the Cooke series marks the transition from the Monastic to the
Operative series. '
The reference to Euclid instead of Hermes, as appears in the other MSS.
of this group, would make me suspect t h a t it had not had t h e supervision of those
master minds who fashioned the other copies, and, of course, it is possible that,
in consequence of it not being altogether in accord with t h e ideas of Dr. Anderson
and ot.hers, t h e writer of this fine MS. inserted the fictitious date inscribed upon
i t in order to add t o its prestige.
This MS. seems to be quite t h e latest form of t h e Traditional History, and
I am going t o venture a suggestion which seems to me worthy of some consideration.
It may be t h a t the original from which the Znigo Jones MS. was copied
dates back to the vear 1657. and t h a t the date 1607 is merelv the substitution of
the 5, either by deliberate fraud or because t h e figure was not easily discernible. .
It is clear, from several errors which occur in i t and more especially
from the use of t h e term " Italidom," an obvious mistake for " Hallidom," that
t h e MS. was a copy.
Then, again, it is the only MS. which in t h e second Charge alludes
not to the ' King ' nor t o the ' King of England ' or the ' Prince,' but
This fact points ta t h e Commonwealth
enjoins obedience to the ' Government.'
period, and consbquently t h e original cannot have been written after the year
1670. nor. on t h e other hand. can it be earlier than 1655. since it contains t h e
extract from Josephus with %heerror wllich mentions the Macedonians rather than
the Sidonians, and as t h e first edition in which this error occurs is the 1655 edition,
we may safely judge t h a t t h e original MS. dates back to the period 1655-1670.
I f , as is generally believed, the design accompanying the extant MS. is not an
absolute invention, it may be a bad reproduction of a design drawn to mmmemorate Inigo Jones, the great architect, b h o had died in 1652. The days of
the Commonwealth, t h e days in which Milton was Latin Secretary, were days of
classical erudition, and this would readily account for t h a t correction of ancient
history which for the fir>,t time comes into prominence in t h e Ancient Charges of
the Dodd group, and, if I am not wrong, i t was about that period t h a t the word
' Constitutions ' appears for the first time with its present meaning.
Supposing for t h e moment t h a t this view is justified, i t is not difficult to
conceive t h a t on the revival of Masonry after 1717 this MS. which had come t o
light would be re-edited in accordance with a truer chronology
-. and t h e old form
o r t h e Charges replaced by a later and more literary form.
I suggest that the re-edited version of t h e original of the Znigo Jones MS.
appears in the two newly-discovered versions, and t h a t the Spencer and Dorid
prints were reproductions of these, or of other MSS. of t h e same sort.
I will venture another suggestion, which may . b e more open t o criticism.
The Cole engraved version so closely resembles t h e Fisher-Rosedale MS. t h a t I
cannot but think t h a t this may have been t h e origin of those charming little
works, which were, so far as one can judge, slightly varied reproductions of the
Fisher-Rosedule and Songhtc;st MSS. Further, i t would surprise most people if
they compare the written and even some of t h e drawn letters of t h e Znigo Jones
MS. with the writing and title-pages of the two MS. books under consideration to
find such curious resemblances. Will it be too much to ask t h e members of the
From the Fisher-Rosedale iWS.
-- - --
--
From the Fisl~er-Rosednle JfS.
From the Songhrirst NS.
From the Songhfrrst 2IfS.
Some Fresh LJ!lnterial for Cla.~sif~ing

the ' Old Charges.'
'
17
&.C. Lodge to ruminate on t h e possibility of all these three versions, as

well as the Cole reproductions, being the work of one and t h e same person at
different periods? With regard to the Dodd version, we know its date, viz., 1739,
while the Cole editions were a little earlier, viz., 1728 and 1731. Whether the
r s t (neither later than 1725) be the earlier
Fisher-Rosedale MS. or the S o r ~ g h ~ ~illS.
of the two is difficult t o say, b u t from t h e fact t h a t they are almost identical in
every way, except t h a t the Songh~crsthas in three or four places obvious omissions
of a few words from the text, one would gather t h a t t h e Songhurst was t h e later
of the two. Certain i t is that whoever wrote these MSS. was not only a scribe of
considerable ability, but also one who shows great artistic skill.
I n conclusion, we may now revise our estimate of the whole realm of
' Ancient Charges ' and by thus classifying them under their relative Historical
periods see in them t h a t silver thread of Masonic life, which has a t all times
adapted itself to changing times and changing conditions, running through our
National and Political existence. Their value will be enhanced by t h e fact t h a t
they are not only a true record of English History, b u t also help to elucidate
for us much of the hitherto unknown story of Masonic evolution.
APPENDIX A
Suggested Classification of ' Old Charges ' according to their Periods..-Church Period-Before
1400
Regius
Chirrch and Craft Period-1400-1450

Cooke
Supreme Council
Woodford
Henry Heade
Crane No. 2
William Watson
Plot
Craft Period (Post Reforma tion)-1550-1717
All MSS. not specifically mentioned
Pre-Revolution-5
Post-Revolution-67
Transition Period-1650-1723
Inigo Jones original
Grand Lodge Period-l717
onward
Fisher-Rosedale
Songhurst
Spencer
Inigo Jones
Cole 1728
Dodd 1739
This does not include missing versions.
Trnnsnctions of t h e Quatuor Coronati Lodge.
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.
S o m e Presh 111aterial for Classifying the ' Old Charges.'

Title Pages.
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
For there be seven Liberal Sciences, o f which S e v e n i t is one of t h e m ;

the Names of t h e Seven Sciences be
these:
T h e first i s l 5 GRAMMAR,16 and t h a t teacheth a Man t o speak and write
"
truly."
T h e second is
l8
RHETORICK, and t h a t ,teacheth a Man t o speak fair
l9
in soft terrqs.
T h e third is
2 0 LOGICK, and t h a t teacheth a Man for

Truth from Falshood.
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.
Transactior~sof the Quutuor Coro7iuti Lodge.
20
The fifth is 2 8 GEOMETRY, and t h a t teacheth a Man the Mett and 2 9

Measure of the Earth, and of all other Things, the 3 0 which Science is called
MASONRY.
The sixth Science is called 31 MUSICK, and that teacheth a Man the Craft
of Song, T'oice, Tongue, a n d 3 2 which gives a Man Skill of Singing, teaching
him t h e A r t of Composition, and playing upon diverse Instruments, as the Organ
and Harp, methodically.32a
And the seventh Science is called 33 ASTRONOIMY, and that 34 teacheth a
Man for 35 to linow the Cozirse of the Sztm, of the 36 Moon, and of the 37 Stars.3833
Npte, 1 pray you,39 t h a t these Seven are contained under GEO'METRY;
for it39ateacheth a J I a n 4 0 Mett a n d 2Cf e a s ~ r r e ,Ponderation
~~
and Weight, for 4 2
every Thing in, and upon t h e whole Earth, for you to know.43 That every
Craftsman works by Measure,44 H ~ s b a n d r n e n N
, ~a~v i g a t ~ r s , planter^,^^
~~
and all
of them use Geometry; for neither G r ~ r n r n a r ,Logick,
~~
nor any other of the said
Sciences, can subsist without Geometry: Ergo, most worthy and h o n ~ u r a b l e . ~ ~ .
You nsJ; ~ n ehow this Science was invented? My Answer is this: That 5 0
before the General Delrtge j1 which is commonly called Noah's Flood, there was
a Man called Lamech, as you may read 52 in the 4th Chapter of Genesis, who had
~ ~ Adah 53
the other Z i l l ~ h . By
two Wives, the one was jZa called ,4~Zah,~3
and
he begot j6 two Sons, Jabal and Jubal. By Zillah 55 h e begot 56 one Son, called
These four Children found 58 the
T ~ ~ b a l and
l , ~ a~ Daughter called Naamah.
Hegimning
of all tile
Crafts in t h e World. Jabal found out Geometry, and
he divided Flocks and
Sheeps
H e first built a House of Stone and Timber.
His Brother Jubal found 6 3 t h e A r t of Musick, he was the Father of all
such as handle the H a r p and Organ.
Ttrball 'j4-Cain was t h e Instructor 65 of every Artificer in Brass and Iron.
of Weaving.
And the Daughter found ozrt G5a the Croft
These Children knew very 6 7 well, that God would take T'engeance 67a for Sin,
either by Fire or Water, wherefore they wrote their Sciences t h a t they had found 68
in two Pillars, t h a t they might be found after Noah's Flood.
One of t h e Pillars was Marble, for that 69 will not burn with any Fire,
and the other 7 0 Stone, was called 'l Laternes, for that 72 will not drown with 73
any Water.
how, and in what Manner, these
Our Intent next is t o tell you
Stones were found whereon these Sciences were w r i t t e ? ~ . ~ ~
The great Hermes, sirnamed 7 6 Trisn~agisftis7 7 (or three times Great) being
both King,78 Priest and Philosopher, i n Egypt 7 9 h e found one of them, and lived
J . omits. C. The fifth is Geometrv which teacheth the Mensuration of lines
Superfices Solids &c. which Science is the Basis of Masonry.
Mete. Sp. Mett or.
3 0 J. omits.
J . omits.
C. The sixth science is called Musick which teacheth ve Proportions
Harmony & Discords of Sounds &c. which qualifies a man in the Art.
3 2 J. omits.
32" C. &c.
3".
omits. C. Lastlv the seventh Science is called Astronomy which teacheth
the Motions of the Luminaries Planets Fix'd Stars &c. & to measure their
magnitudes and determine their distances.
3 4 J . which.
35 J . omits.
3 6 3 7 J . omits of the.
38 J. starrs.
39 C. omits.
ma C. which.
4 0 J., G., Sp. omit.
41 C. The Mensuration.
42 C. of.
43 C. For T'is well known.
44 J. adds: He that buys or sells is bv weight or Measure.
C. As also.
45 C. the Husbandman.
4 6 4 7 C. omits and adds: &c. after 'Planters.'
48 F R . , S. Grammer.
4 9 C. after ' Planters &C.' has : For without Geometry
those Arts can no more subsist than Logic can without Grammer.
5 0 C. The first Rise of this Science was.
51 J., Sp. Geeerall.
F R . , S., C.
Deludge.
5 2 C. mentioned.
5 Z a J . omits.
53 J. Ada.
54 J . omits.
55 J. Zilla.
56 J . begat.
Sp. had.
5 7 S., C. Tuhal.
58 S., C., add: out.
59 J . begining.
6 0 J . omits.
61J., F R . , S . , C . , S p . O f .
J ., Sp., C. sheep.
63 S. adds: out.
64 J., Sp., S., C. Tubal.
65 J., F R
S., Sp., d. Instructer.
65a SP. omits.
6 6 J. Art.
6 7 J ., F R . , S., Sp. C, om&.
67a S. Vengance.
68 F R . , S., C. add: out.
6 9 C. which.
7 0 C. adds: Pillar or.
71 J. omlts.
72 C. which.
73 S., Sp. in.
74 J ., F R., S., Sp., C. truely.
75 F R ., S., writen.
7 6 J ., FR., S., C. surnamed.
7 7 C. Tresmagistus.
7 8 S., C. omit.
7 9 J. in brackets.
C. omits.
28
2".
3l
Some E'resh ,Vaterin1 for Classifying the ' Old Charges.'
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
.,
Sonze I;rr.sh .linterictl for Cfla.q.*ifYi~lll

tke ' 01(7 Chnrges.'
23
thre 1 4 R by Sea, by my Servants, whom I will'comn~aild

down, I will send i t to
(and furnish with convelliellt T7es\rls"O of Burthen l'")
to t h e End they may
deliver the same in what Place of thy Iiittgdon~15' i t shall best please ther,li2
tliat afterwards thy Subjects may transport them to Jerusalem. You shall provide to furnish us with Corn,15+whereof we stand ill Need because we inhobit"'
an Island.
Solomon, King David's Son, t o finish the Temple t h a t his Father had begun,
sent for Masons, into divrrse l"" Countries, and gathered them together; so that
he had Fourscore thousand Workmen, t h a t were Workers of Stone, and were all
named Masons; and he chose
three Th6usand of them t o be Masters and
Governors 157 of his Work.
And Hiram King of Tyre, sent his Servants unto Solomon, for he was
ever a Lover of King David; and he sent Solomon Timber and Workmen t o help
forward the Building of the Temple. And he sent one t h a t was named Hiranl
Abif ( I Kings 7, 14.'j8) a Widow's Son of the Tribe
of Saphtali.lGO H e was
, ~ ~Workmen,
'~
and Casters
a Master, of 161 all his Masons, Carvers, I ~ ~ g r n v e r sand
of Brass, and all other .4Jetals,lG2t h a t were used about the Temple.
King So1omon confirmed both the Charges and Manners t h a t his Father
had given to Masons, thus was the worthy Crc~ft
of Masonry confirmed in
Jerusalem, and many other kingdoms, and lie finished the Temple Anno Mundi
3000.164
Curious Craftsmen walked about full wide, in cliocrse l" Countries, sonie
to learn more Craft and Cunning, others to teach then1 t h a t had b u t little
Cunning.
Anno Mundi 3431,1GG a t t h e Destruction of t h e first Temple by
i V e b u c l ~ ~ l ~ ~ e zafter
z ~ r ,ilt ~had
~ stood four hundred and thirty years.
~~
Years after
The second Temple began in the Reign of C y r l ~ s , ' seventy
the Destruction; it being hindered, it was forty six Years i n Building, and was
finished in the Reign of Darius l G 9 n n oMundi 3522.
I n the Reign of I'tolomy 1 7 0 and Cleopatra, Anno Mundi 3813, 0nilts 171
built a Jewish Temple in Egypt, in thr l i l a Place called R,tbaqtic, c1?z(7 called
it 173 after his own Name.
1ucrc
~ li5. built by Herod in
The Tower of Straton, alias C a e ~ n r i a , l ~
P ~ l e s t i n e , 'Anno
~ ~ .Tfzcn(li 3962,17Tand many other curious F o r k s of Marble, as '
the Temple of C n r s ~ r178 Agrippa, to his Memory, in the Porrntry 178a called
Zenodoras, near to a Place called Panion.
Anno iliCltncli
3946, he also pulled down the second Temple, t h a t was
~ ~ appointed one thousand Carriages t o draw
finished in the Ilrign of D a r i r r ~ , land
Stone to the Place, and chope l" out ten thousand cunning and expert Workmen to
hew and mould Stone, and one thousand he chose l s O out and clonfhed,lsl and
made them Masters and Rulers of the Work, and built a new Temple, Aniio
Mundi 3947, on the Foundation which Solomon l1a4 laid, not inferior to t h e first,
and was finished nine Years before t h e Birth of our Snvioztr,ls2 Anqzo iliqrndi l s Z a
3956.
l i R C . ye.
1 4 9 S. omits; brackets.
J . omits.
152 J ,e.
1 5 l J Kingdome.
J . . F R . , S . , C . v .essells.
1
:
155 J., C. divers.
34 F R . , S, inhabite.
J. Corne.
15".
'Chuse.
J., F R . , S., Sp., C. Governours.
F R . , S., C. omit. J. in n~argii,.
1 6 0 F R . , S., C. Naphtili.
J . Line.
F R., S., Sp., C. add : Geometry and was Master of.
J. adds : Geometry and
l G l a C. Engravers.
was of.
J ., F R . , Sp. Mettnlls.
S., C. Mettals.
1" J. Work.
J . MMM.
165
J . divers.
J . adds : And.
J ., F R . Nebuchadnezar. S., C. Nebuchadnezer.

l G 8 J., F R . , S . , C.Syrus.
J. Darius his reign.
l i OJ. Ptolmic.
F R . , S., C. Ptolome.
J., F R . , .S., Sp., C. Onias.
S., C. a.
17" F R . Omits.
17".
Omits.
C. Cesaria. J . brackets both n-ords.
1 7 jJ., Sp. omit.
So. adds: A.M. 3842.
J. Palistine.
F R . , S., C., Palastine.
l 7 7 Sp. 3842.
178 C. Cesar.
178a S., C r(nnn+~nn
1 7 8 b a.
I
J. Darius his reign.
1 8 0 S., C. chuse.
l 8 1 F R . , S., C. clothed.
l
'I
W
..
J. Savior.
,-;+E.
"....U.,.
V""..Y'VJ.
l Y 0"
o~nizs.
Transactions of the
24
Qztatlcor
Coromti Lodge.
After the Birth of our Saviour, 183(Az~rwriagus

l s 4 being King of Britain,18j
Claudius the Emperor l a 6 came over with an Army, and he l g 7 fearing to be overthrown, made a League l s 8 with him, and gave him his Daughter in Marriage,
and t h a t he should hold his Kingdom of l8%ornmans, and so the Entperor l g Ol g l
returned, in t h e Year forty three,lg2 after the Birth of Christ.)
ilfonastery l g 3 near unto
Masons came into England, and built a good
Glassenbury, with many Castles and Towers.
Now l g 4this sumptuous l g 5A r t of Geometry, was l g 6profest by B m p e r o r s , l g 7
Kings, Popes, Cardinals, and Princes innumerable, who have all of them left us
the permaGent l g 8 Monuments of it ' in their l g 9 several 2 0 u Places of their
Dominions.
Anno Chhsti i 1 7 . ~ ~ 'Nor will this I presume be denied when well considered, t h a t mnowned Example t h e Trajan C ~ l z r r n n i, t~ being
~ ~ one of t h e most
superb 2 0 3 Remainders of the Roman 2 0 4 Magnificence, to be now seen standing,
and which has more immortalized the Emperor 2 0 5 Trajan, than
a11 t h e Pens
of Historians.
It was erected t o him by the Senate and People of Rome, in
, ~ ~ t~o the End
Memory of those great Services he had rendered the C o z ~ n t r y and
the Memory of it might remain to all succeeding Ages, and continue so long as
the 2 0 8 Empire itself.
Anno Christi ' 0 9 300.2102 1 1 I n St. A l b a n ' ~Time,
~ ~ ~t h e King of England,
t h a t was a Pagan, did wall t h e Town about, and 2 1 2 a t h a t was called T'ertilam.213
And St. illban was a worthy Knight, and Steward of t h e King's Houshold, and
had ' l 4 the Government of t h e Realm, and also of ntaking 2 1 5 the Town Walls.
H e 2 1 6 loved Masons well, and cherished them much, and he made their Pay right
good Standing as the Realm 2 1 7 did; for he gave them two Shillings a 2 1 8 Week,
and three Pence t o their Chear; for before that Time, through all the Land, a
Mason had but a Penny a Day, and his Meat until 2 1 9 St. Alban amended 2 2 0 it.
for 2 2 3 to hold
And he gave 2 2 1 them a Charter of the King and
a general Council 2 2 4 and gave it t h e name of an Assembly, and w'as therein 2 2 5
himself, and helped t o make Masons 2 2 6 and gave them Charges, as ye 2 2 7 shall
hear 2 2 8 afterwards.
It happened presently after t h e i l f a r t y r d o m 2 2 9 of St. Alban (who is truly 2 3 0
termed England's Proto-Martyr 2 3 1 ) t h a t a certain King invaded the Land, and
destroyed most of the Natives by Fire and Sword; so 2 3 1 a t h a t the Science 2 3 1 b of
Mlasonry was much decayed until 2 3 2 the Reign of Ethelbert (Anno D ~ r n . '616
~ ~ 234)
King of Kent, when. 2 3 5 Gregory the first, sirnamed 2 3 6 Magnus, sent into the Isle
of Britain 2 3 7 a Monk, with other learned Men, t o preach the Christian Faith,
for this Nation as yet had not fully received it.
This said Ethelbert built a
Church in Canterbury and dedicated it to St. Peter and St. Paul, and as 2 3 8 is
supposed, to have built, or restored t h e Church of St. Paul's in London. H e also
built the Church of St. Andrews in Rochester.
F R . , S., Sp., C. omit brackets.
1 8 5 F R . , S., C. England.
F R . , S., C. Aururiagus.
1 8 s F R . , S., C. Leauge.
1 8 7 J., Sp. onlit.
C. Emperour.
1 9 1 J. adds: then.
1 9 0 F R . , S., C. Emperour.
C. off.
1 9 3 J . , F R . , S., C.
adds: Anno Christi XLIII.
1 9 2 a J goodly.
Monastry.
1 9 4 J., Sp., C. omit.
1 9 5 J ., F R . , S., C. sumptious.
1 9 7 S . , C. Emperours.
J F R . , S., Sp., C. i t being.
J . Permanient.
C. Permant.
1 9 9 S. the.
2 0 0 Sp. severall.
J. ' Anno Christi CXVII.' in margin.
F R . , S., C. omit.
J ., F R . , S., C. Collum.
2 0 4 J. Romans.
2 0 5 S., C., Emperour.
F R . , S., C. superbe.
2 0 7 F R . , S., C. Countrey.
2 0 8 J adds : very.
F R . , S., C. then.
F R . Dom :
S., C. Domini.
2 1 0 J. CCC.
2 1 1 J. adds : And.
J. Albanes.
2 1 2 a F R . , S., C. omit.
J., F R . , S., C. Verulum.
2 1 5 J . omits.
21" J. adds : got.
F R . , S., C. and.
2 1 7 J adds : then.
2 1 8 J. per.
J ., F R . , S., C. untill.
220 J
mended.
2 2 1 J . got.
2 2 2 J. omits.
Sp. Councill.
2 2 3 F R . omits.
2 2 4 J. Councell rearly.
Sp. Councill.
J., FR., S., Sp., C. thereat.
2 2 6 J Mason.
2 2 7 J. Yea.
S., C. you.
J have.
" 2 9 F R . , S. Myrterdom.
2 3 0 F R . , S., Sp., C. truely.
2 3 1 a J . , S., Sp., C. omit.
F R . , S. Myrter.
C. Martyer.
2 3 2 J., F R . , S., Sp. untill.
2 3 lb J . Sciences.
J., FR., S. Domini.
2 3 4 J . DXCVI.
2 3 5 J., FR., S., Sp., C. omit.
J., F R . , S., C, surnamed.
237 J
Britaine.
2 3 8 J. omits.
J.,
J.,
S.,
S.,
J.
.,
Some Fresh -4Interial for Cln.~.~ifying

the ' Olcl C h a r g ~ s . '
25
Sibert, King of the East-Saxons, by the Persuasion 219 of E t h e l b ~ r t King

,~~~~
of Kent, having received the Christian Faith, built the JIonastery 2 4 0 a t Westminster, Anno DO^,^^^ 630. to the Honour of God and St. Peter.
Sigebert, King of the East-Angles, began t o erect t h e University of Cambridge; Anno. Dom. 2 4 2 915.24J
Athelston 244 began his Reign. H e was a Man beloved of all Men. H e
had great Devotion towards t h e Churches, as appeared in the Building, adorning
and endowing of Monasteries.21J He built one a t Wilton, in the Diocess of
Salisbury, and another a t Michelney, in Somersetshire; besides these, there were
but 245a few famous Afonasterirs 21"n
this Realm, but t h a t he adorned t h e same
either with some new Piece 245b of Building, Jewels,246 Books, or Portions of
He greatly enriched t h e Chztrch 247 of York.
E ~ l z o i n Brother
, ~ ~ ~ t o King A t h e l ~ t o n loved
, ~ ~ ~Masons much more than his
Brother did, and was a great Practitioner 250 of Gqometry, and he drew him 251
much 252 to commune, and talk with Masons, t o learn of them 253 the Craft; and
afterwards,254for t h e love 255 he had to Masons, and t o t h e Craft, he was made a
Mason; and he got of the King 255a his Brother, a Charter of 2 5 6 Commission,
A n n o 2 j 7 932.258 t o hold every Year 2" an Assembly, where they would, within
the Realm;260 and t o correct within themselves Falilts and Trespasses t h a t were
done within
the Craft. And he held an Assembly 262 a t York, and there he
made Masons, and gave them Charges, and taught them 263 the Manners 2 6 4 and
~ ~ gave
"
them t h e Charter
commanded t h a t Rule to be kept for ever ~ r f t e r , ~and
and 265 Commission to keep, and made an Ordinance, That it should be renewed
from King to King.
And when the Assembly was gathered together, he made a Cry, That all
old Masons and young, t h a t had any Writing or Understanding of t h e Charges
and Manners that were made before in this 265a Land, or 266 any other, t h a t they
found
should bring and show them. And when 2 6 7 i t was proved, there
some in French, some in Greek, and 268" some in English, and some in other
Languages, and 2 7 1 they were all to one Intent and Purpose;2bg he made a Book
thereof, how the Craft was founded; and h e himself bad, nnd "70 commanded,
That i t should be read, n?ld 271a told when any Mason sho~cld2 7 2 be made, and
for to give him his Charges, and from t h a t Day, until 2 i 3 this Time, Manners of
Masons have been kept in t h a t Form, as well as Men might govern it.
Furthermore, a t diverse 2 7 4 .4 ssenzblies 2 7 5 certain Charges have been made
and ordained, by (he best Advice of Masters and Fellows.
Every Man that is a J f c i ~ t p r take
, ~ ~ right
~
good Heed to these Charges; and
if any Mlan find himself Guilty in any of these Charges, that 2 7 7 he ought to amend,
and 278 pray to God for his Grace;279 nncl 2 7 9 a especially you that are t o be Charged,
takme good280 Heed that ye " l may keep these Charges282 right well, for it is
a great Peril 2 8 V o r a Man to forswear himself upon a Book.
FR., S., C. p_e~~~yasion. SP., C. omit The.
J . perswasioas.
23ga J . Athelbert.
2 12
J,, C. Domini.
245 J., FR., S., C. Monastries.
J ., S., C. Athelstane.
elstan.
45bS., C. peice.
245a J ., Sp. omit.
246a J. Lands.
2 4 7 C. Churches.
248 J. Edwyn.
J., S., Sp., C. Je=-ells.
FR. Athelstan.
250
J . Practizer.
J., S., C., Athelstane.
J .. himself ..
252 J. omits.
253 J. omits.
254 J. afterward.
2"
J . adds : that.
255a J . omits.
256
J., C. and.
257 J., FR., S.
Domini.
C-omits date.
Sp. puts it before 'of commission.'
2 6 0 J . adds; once a Year.
'G1
C. withen.
2 5 9 J. omits.
258 J. DCCCCXXXII.
2 6 3 J . omits.
Sp. be i t Lodge or
J . himselfe.
2"
FR., S., C. himself.
in Chamber.
2 6 4 J. Manner.
265 FR., S. add: the.
2 6 4 J . 3iIanner.
2eia Sp. omits.
26"
J . the.
in Chamber.
2 6 6 J. adds : in.
2 6 7 J. omits.
2 6 8 J . omits.
268a J ., S. omit.
J. omits: bad, and.
26' J., FR., S., Sp., C. add: and.
2 7 0 C. ordered.
2 i l J . omits.
271a J . or. ,
J. sho~ild.
273 J
FR., S., Sp., C. until.
2 7 1 J . divers.
" 7 5 J . Assemblgs.
2 7 6 J:: FR., S., Sp., C. Mason.
2 7 7 J . omits.
2 7 8 FR., S., C. omit.
279 FR., S., C. add: to amend.
279a J., Sp. omit.
... 2 8 0 C. omits.
2 R 1 J. Yea.
S., C. You.
2 8 2 J . this Charge.
2 8 3 J. perrill.
FR., ,Sp. perill. S. Perril,
26
Transactions of the Quattcor Coronnti Lodge.
T h e first C h a r g e is,284 T h a t ye 2 8 5 shall 2 8 6 b e t r u e M e n t o God a n d the 2 8 7

H o l y C h u r c h , a n d 2 8 8 t h a t ye 2 8 9 u s e n o Error or Heresy b y your Understanding
or Discretion, b u t be ye 2 8 9 wise discreet N e n , or ?Pisemen in each Thing.290

Also t h u t ye 2 8 9 shall 2 8 9 a be Liegenzen t o the K i n g of England,291 without
~ ~ ~that
~ ye k n o w n o Treason or Treachery,
Treason, or a n y other F ~ l s h o o c Z ; ntrd
but you amend privily, if ye 2 8 9 rimy, or else warn t h e hrir~g or his C71/ncZ'l
thereof.292 2 9 3
Also ye 2 9 4 shall 2 N 5 t r u e to one
t h a t i s t o say,297 t o every
Mason of t h e C r a f t of Masonry, t h a t be Masons, allowed, ye 2 9 7 a shall d o u n t o
t h e m , a s ye 2 9 7 a would t h e y should d o 2 w u n t o you.
Also t h a t ye 2 9 7 a shall 3 0 0 keep a l l t h e Colrncils 3 0 1 of y o u r Fellows
be it i n L o d g e o r 3 0 3 C h a m b e r , a n d a l l o t h e r Cozrncils 3 0 4 t h a t o u g h t t o b e k e p t
b y w a y of Brotherhood.
Also 3 0 5 t h a t n o Mason shall b e a Thief,306 or Thief's Fellow,307 o r conceal
a n y such u n j u s t Action, s o f a r 3 0 8 a s he m a y wit 3 0 9 o r know.
Also ye 3 1 0 shall b e t r u e zrnto each o t h ~ r , ~ laln d t o t h e L o r d o r Master
his A d v a n t a g e .
t h a t ye 3 1 0
a n d t r u l y 3 1 2 t o see u n t o his Profit 312" and
and
Also 3 1 4 ye 3 1 5 shall call X n s o n s 3 1 6 y o u r Fello~us3 1 7 o r
none otlter foztl Name.319

Also ye 3 1 9 a shall n o t take your Brother or Fellow's W i f e in ?'illany,320 nor
desire un.godly his Daughter, or
his S e r v a n t , nor put h i n ~t o a n y 3 2 2 Disworship.323
Also 32" t h a t ye 3 2 5 p a y trzcly 326 3 2 7 f o r y o u r m e a t a n d D r i n k , where 329
ye 3 2 5 00 t o 3 2 9
A n d also t h a t ye 3 2 5 hall d o n o T'illany,320 whereby t h e Chraf t 3 3 1 m a y be
slandered.332
These b e the true 3 3 3 C h a r g e s i n
t h a t 6ul072g 3 3 5 t o every true 336
Mason, to keep,337 b o t h 3 3 8 M a s t e r s a n d Fellows.
R e h e a r s e I will o t h e r Charges i n s i r ~ g r r l a r , ~f~o~r "Masters a n d Fellows.
F i r s t , T h a t n o Master 3'3%r Fellow 3 4 0 shall t a k e u p o n h i m a n y L o r d ' s
W o r k , n o r a n y o t h e r M a n ' s W o r k , unless he k n o w himself able a n d sufficient
J . adds : This.
2 8 5 J . Yea.
286S., C . YOU.
J . omits.
2 8 7 J . omits.
2 8 8 J . Second.
2 8 9 J . Yea.
S., C . you.
28"
Sp, should.
2 9 0 J . reads : Heresy wilful ; or run into Innovations, but be yea wise Men and
2S4
discreet in Everything.
2"
292
293
S. Leigeman t o the King.

C. Leigeman t o t h e King of England.
2 9 1 a S., C . Falsehood.
S . omits: ' a n d t h a t ye ' to end of paragraph.
. reads : Third That yea
be not disloyal1 n o r Confederates i n treasonable plotts ;

B u t if yea hear of HUT treacherv azainst t h e Governmelit vea ought to
discover it, if yea c a ~ l n o totherwise g e v e n t i t .
29" S., C . you.
2 9 5 J . Fourth t h a t yea.
2 q G Sp. one t o each other.
2 9 7 J . brackets.
2'7a S . , C. you.
J . yea.
2"
J . to.
2 9 9 J . doe.
3 0 0 J . Fifth t h a t yea.
3 0 1 J . Councell.
Sp., C . Councills.
3 0 2 F R., S., Sp., C . truely.
3 0 3 J . , FR., S., Sp., C . a d d : in.
304 J
Councells.
3 0 5 J . Sixth.
"6 FR., S., C . Thiefe.
3 0 7 J . , Sp. omit.
3 0 8 J . adds : forth.
3 0 9 FR., S. witt.
Sp., C . will.
3 1 0 S., C . you.
J Seventh t h a t every 'Allowed Mason.
31-p.
also That ye
shall be t r u e each unto other.
J . omits.
FR., S., C . each unto other.
3 1 1 a J . whom he serves.
" 2 FR., S., Sp:, C , t r ~ e l r .
J . omits.
3 ' Z a Sp. Profitt.
31".
shall serve hlm faithfully to.
u4J . Eighth that.
3 1 5 J . yea.
S., C . you.
" 6 J . such Mason.
317 J . Fellow.
318 J
Brother.
3 1 9 J . neither shall you use t o him anv scuriluus Language.
C , no instead of none.
31"
S. C. You.
3 2 0 FR., S., C . Villianv.
3 2 1 C. nor.
FR., S., Sp., C . no.
J . h e a d s : Nineth; t h a t r e a shall not desire any unlawful1 Communication with
yor Fellows w i f e nor cast a wanton Eye upon his Daughter with desire to
defile h e r ; nor his Blaid servant or any wise p u t him t o disworship.
3 2 4 J . Tenth.
3 2 5 J . , S., C . you.
3 2 6 FR., S., S., Sp:, C . truely.
3 2 7 J . adds : and honestly.
328 J
Gherever.
3 2 9 J . omlts.
J . adds: t h a t t h e Craft be not slaiidered thereby, and omits the next paragrap'l.
3 3 1 FR., S., Sp., C . Craft.
3 3 2 J . omits.
3 3 3 J . omits.
3 3 4 J . , S., Sp. generall.
3 3 5 J . Belongs.
3 Z G J . , Sp., free.
337 J . be kept.
3 3 8 J . adds : by.
3 3 g a J . Singuler.
3 3 9 J . Blasters.
340 J . Fellows.
J
>
.
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 ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Comments were offered by Bros. J . E . S . Tuckett, Sir Alfred Robbins,

Canon Horsley; L . Vibert, R . H. Baxter, W . J. Songhurst, W. B. Hextall, and
Algernon Rose.
Bro. J. E . S.
TUCKETT
said :-
It is with very great pleasure t h a t I propose a hearty vote of thanks to

Bro. Dr. Rosedale for his decidedly
Paper. B u t it would ill-become
- suggestive
-me to offer anything of the nature of criticism, seeing t h a t I can lay claim to
no 'more than a very superficial knowledge of the " Old Charges," my own studies
being more particularly concerned with other and later phases of our history. Disclaiming, then, any right to criticise, I would yet urge very strongly t h a t the
new system of classification based on histbrical or historico-political considerations,
.rr?ust be very carefully thought out, and eoery known version of the " Old Charges"
assigned to its proper place, before we can attempb to decide to what extent, if
any, i t differs from, or is superior to, t h a t of Dr. Begemann, which has hitherto
remained unchallenged.
4 1 8 J . without he hath some one
417 J . adds : City or.
or other.
4 1 9 J. to.
4 2 0 J . omits.
4 2 1 J . places.
4 2 2 J . Fifteenth.
4 2 3 J . that.
424 J . adds : him.
4 2 5 J . hath.
4 2 6 J . omits.
426" C . have.
S. hath.
4 2 7 J , reads: and make satisfaction accordingly if they are able; But if not submit
to their reasonable Award; Then they shall go to Common Law.
J. omits whole of following paragraph.
4 2 8 J . Sixteenth.
4 2 9 FR., S., C . omit.
Sp. or.
4 3 1 FR., S., Sp., C . nor.
4 3 0 FR., S., C . omit.
Sp. nor.
133 FR., S., SR., C . nor.
432FR., S., SP., C . no.
434 J . to Mould Stoiles withall but such as are allowed by the Fraternity.
4 3 5 J . Sewnteenth.
436 J . adds: shall.
437 J . Country.
4 3 8 J . at.
4 4 1 J ., FR., S., Sp his.
C . Their.
4 d o J . he hath.
4 3 9 J. brackets.
4 4 3 J . Eighteenth.
444 J . , FR., S., Sp., C . truely.
4 1 2 J . to carry him to.
4 4 5 J . omits.
445& C. others.
i 4 4 a J . adds : shall.
4 4 6 J . Ycn.
S., C . You.
446" J . the.
447 J , Itallidom.
FR. Halidom.
S., Sp. Rallidom.
C . Hallidon.
4 5 0 FR., S., Sp., C . omit.
4-19 J . has ornamental tailpiece.
a-18 J . omits.
416
J . Fourteenth.
Discussion.
29
Dr. Rosedale's reference t o Jacobite influences within and upon Freemasonry

could not fail to interest one who has been described as a ' Speculative Jacobite.'
While not accapting quite everything he has said, I do not hesitate to declare my
profound conviction that the Jacobite or Stuart Cause and Masonry were very
Here we touch upon an alleged Jesuit
greatly concerned each in the other.
intrusion into Masonry, so often asserted and as often vehemently denied, of
which, however, according to Dr. Rosedale, traces are plainly to be seen in the
evolution of the " Old Charges."
One of the features of Dr. Anderson's 1738 Constitzcta'ons is the appearance
of a series of dates assigned to remarkable events in Masohry, amongst them
being :St. Alban formed the first Lodge in Britain
A.D. 287
K. Athelstan granted a Charter to Freemasons
,,
926
Grand Lodge formed at York under Prince Edwin
,,
926
K. Edward 111. revised the Constitutions
,, 1358
Inigo Jories constituted several Lodges
,, 1607
Earl of St. Albans regulated the Lodges
,, 1637
Elias Ashmole, and other gentlemen of distinction, initiated ,, 1646
I n order to demonstrate the truth of their contentions, those who, in the latter
half of the eighteenth century, brought forward t h e theory of Jesuit interference
in the affairs of Freemasonry, made great play with this chronology.
The
Brethren may be interested (and possibly amused) t o hear how this was done.
According to the Jesuit-Theory :-K. Charles I., Saint & Martyr
Saint Alban, Martyr
K. Athelstan
= K . Charles 11.
Prince Edwin, Brother of
=Prince James, Duke of York,
Brother of K. Charles 11.
K. Athelstan
The Grand Lodge of York founded
=The Jesuit College founded by
James, D. of York, a t London,
by Prince Edwin A.D. 926
A.D. 1682
=Inigo de Guipuzcoa (Ignatius Loyola,
Inigo Jones, the Architect
Founder of the Jesuits)
=The new SpecVe. F.M. was founded
The first Lodge of F.M. was founded
in Britain under K. Charles I . ,
in Brjtain under Alban, Saint and
Martyr, the Friend of Masons,
Saint and Martyr, by Ashmole
and other Friends of the King,
A.D. 287. 2+8+7=17
A.D. 1646. 1+6-'-4+6=17
After the Martyrdom of St. Alban
=After the Martyrdom of K. Charles
Brikain was rent by internal
Britain was rent by internal
dissension and the Cromwell
dissension and usurpation.
usurpation.
The beneficent rule of Masonry was
=The progress of Masonry, and
interrupted until the accession
with i t t h e Restoration of the
of K. Athelstan restored Peace
Royal and Papal Power, was
interrupted until tb restoration of K. Charles 11.
K. Athelstan loved Masonry and
-K. Charles 11. was disposed to favour
Masons, b u t
the Papal Cause and Romanists
b u t he could not entirely be
trdsted, b u t
His Brother Prinee Edwin loved i t
=His Brother James, D. of York, a
and then1 even more
Papist, was pledged to the Cause
heart and soul
Under K. Athelstan Masons received
a Charter, and-
=Under K . Charles I T . t h e Papal

P a r t y regained a footing in
Britain, and-
30
Transactions of tlte Quatuor Coronati Lodge.
Prince Edwin founded the Grand

Lodge of York.
A.D. 926. 9+2+6=17
The Constitutions of Freemasonry were
' Revised ' in A.D. 1358
=James, D. of York, founded the

Jesuit College at London.
A.D. 1682. 1+6- 8+2=17
=The Lodges were first ' Regulated '
by the Earl of St. Albans, Grand
Master, in A.D. 1637. I n this
year William Laud, Archbishop,
' almost a Romanist,' l persuaded the King to unite the
English and Scottish Churches,
regarded as ' a first step on the
return to Popery.'
A.D. 1358. 1+3-:-5+8=17
A.D. 1637. 1+6-'-3+7=17
= The formation of the premier Grand
Lodge was the result of an AntiWuart and Protestant movement
witl~inMasonry. I n consequence
t h e centre of Roman-JesuitMasonic Activity moved to tlie
Continent. Stuart-Masonry was
' Revised ' by the inception of
the Additional or High Degrees
in the following year
A.D. 1718. 1+7+1+8=17
And so on, t h e point being the re-appearance of t h e number 17, which was
possessed of some mysterious and tremendous hidden Jesuitic meaning-what
t h a t was I know not. These arithmetical nlanipulations are, of course, quite
valueless, and the Brethren are earnestly requested to take note t h a t all this
represents not my views but those of an anti-Jesuit writer of the year 1788introduced here in order to lead up t o a theory of my own which has to do with
the Inigo Jones X S . It is remarkable that this particular MS. seems to lend
colour to the Jesuit-Theory just outlined to an extent which none other of the
MS. Constit~ctionscan be said to do. Thus:(1) I n i t St. Alban is styled the ' Proto-Martyr,' suggesting a reference to
t h e Saint and Martyr Charles, who was the first t o suffer in the
Jacobite Cause.
I
n
i
t Edwin is called the Nrother of Athelstan, an essential point in
(2)
This is found ouly in the Znigo-Jot~esand its
the Jesuit-Theory.
twin the Spencer M S .
(3) I n i t the History is arranged chronologically with actual d a h assigned
to 'remarkable' occurrences, but i t is t r u e that the dates do not
entirely agree with those in the 1735 Constitutions.
(4) It is associated with Inigo Jones the Architect. The Jesuit-Theory
maintains that Inigo Jones stands for Inigo de Guipuzcoa, better
known as Ignatius Loyola the Pounder of the Company of Jesus.
(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
have not verified.
(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.
Tre superscription of the Z ~ ~ i g.70/2es

o
ilfS., ' The Antient Constitution of the Free
some ssem to imagine-a
and Accepted Masons, 1607,' is not necessarily-as
It is not even a claim t h a t the
claim that t h a t MS. was written in 1607.
original from which it was copied was written in 1607. W h a t i t does claim is
that the ' Antient Constitution' (i.e., the subject mattsr) dates from 1607, the
year when Inigo Jones was busy ' constituting' Lodges.
The Znigo Jones .VS. is certainly a copy from some earlier document which
we may well call the Origi~zctlZiligo Jones MS. Dr. Rosedale has given us convincing reasons for assigning this Original to t h e very eignificant period 1655-1660,
that is the five or six years immediately preceding the Restoration of King
Charles 11. Dr. Rosedale suggests that :" on the revival of Masonry after 1717 this MS. . . . would be
re-l?dited in accordance with a truer chronology. "
E u t I venture to make the suggestion t h a t the Inigo Jones JIS., as we have it,
is substantially a True Copy of the Original Znigo Jonrs MS.; and t h a t no reediting was necessary. This, in the absence of any clear evidence t h a t any reediting actually took place, appears to be the more natural conclusion. The date
' 1726 or even later,' which Dr. Rosedale assigns to the Copy, implies that the
Original must have survived &helamentable holocaust of 1720. B u t did i t ? We
learn from the 1738 Coizstitt~tions:" This year (1720), a t some private Lodges, several very valuable Jlanuscripts . . . (particularly one writ by M r ,Vicholas Stone the
Warden of Zniyo Jonrs) were too hastily burnt by some scrupulous
Brothers; that those Papers might not fall into strange Hands." '
And in William Preston's Zlltrstrafions of ~lfasonry :" A n old MS. which was destroyed with many others in 1720, said to
have been in the possession of Nicholas Stone, a curious sculptor under
Inigo Jones, contains the following particulars :-"
the ' particulars' which follow being an exact quotation of the St. Alban passage
as i t appears in the Inigo Jones MS.
The theory I propose for consideration is t h a t the iTTich~~as
&qtone MS.,
which perished in the flames of 1720, consisted of two parts:(1) he Original Znigo Jones illS. written in 1655-1660 hat not by Stonc.
(2) Notes concerning Masonic affairs in the early half of the seventeenth
century. This being the part ' w r i t by Mr. Nicholas Stone,' who
died in 1647.
Again turning to the 1738 Constit,rtions, we read that:" The Grand Lorlge in n n ~ p lForm
~
on 29 Sept. 1721, . . . His
Grace's Tt'orship and the Lodge finding Fault with all the Copies of
the old Gothic Constitzttions, order'd Brother James Anderson, A.M.,
to digest the same in a new and better Method." l
A n explanation-which
is a t least a plausible one-of
t h a t act of destruction in
1720 is that i t was an attempt to conceal from t h e prying eyes of the Hanoverian
Protestant, Dr. Anderson, the written evidrnce of Jacobite and Roman intrigue
within Freemasonry. And the real ' Fault ' which perturbed the minds of ' His
Grace's Worship and the (Grand) Lodge' was the conviction t h a t such u~ritten
( ! o n s t i t ~ c f r o n s ,1738, pp. 99, 111 e t seq.
At p. 174 in the ' new ' (really the 4th) dition of 1788, and at p. 167 in the
' 8th ' (really the 5th) edition of 1792.
1
32
Transactions of the Qirafztor Coronati Lodge.
evidence did actually exist.

Both Inigo Jones and Nicholas Stone, it must be
noted, were devoted Royalists.
This puts the date of the Znigo Jones MS. (the Copy) back from ' 1726 or
even later' to ' 1720 or even earlier.' Bro. Hughan's opinion is seen in his note
in the Cntalogrce (1891) of the TPor_cestershire i7fnsonic Library R* M i r s ~ u m:" F o r reasons mentioned but not t o me satisfactory, Dr. Begemann
relegates the document to post 1723; b u t I doubt his taking that view,
if he actually saw the document." l
Dr. Begemann argues t h a t the Scribe who made t h e Inigo Jones i l f S . did so with
b u t it is far more likely that Dr. Anderson,
the 1733 Constitzctions in front of
aware of the existence and destruction of the LVicholns Stone M S . (i.e., the Original
Inigo Jones MS. with the accompanying Notes by Nicholas Stone) was a t pains
to get access to the Copy.
That Dr. Anderson succeeded in getting possession of the Znigo Jones MS.
is indicated by the fact t h a t whereas in the 1723 Constit~itionshe calls Edwin
' t h e youngest S o n ' of Athelstan, he has altered this in the 1738 edition to
' Brother,' which, as already mentioned, is a special feature of the Znigo Jones
MS.3
The statements concerning Inigo Jones in the 1738 Constittct'ions are much
more precise and detailed than those in the earlier 1723 book. Dr. Anderson
accounts for the added information in the following marginal note:" so said Brother Nicholas Stonef his Warden, in a Manuscript burnt
1720."
So that, besides the Znigo Jones US., Dr. Anderson was evidently in possession
of a transcript of t h e seventeenth century Notes, or a t least a summary of them.4
William Preston appears to have seen this transcript while writing his Illustrations
of i l f ~ s o n r y but
, ~ what has since then become of i t ?
If the Original Znigo Jones MS. really contained the same peculiarities as
have been noted in the Znigo Jones MS.--which we do not know to be a fact,
b u t may reasonably regard as likely-a
fairly strong case for the theory of
Romanist-Masonic intrigue might be made out, and the whole subject of StuartMasonry would assume an importance not a t present conceded. to i t by some of
our most trusted authorities. And i t might go far towards establishing the date
of the first appearance of the Legend of the Third Degree.
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 :-
It is known now that Dr. Begemann has produced a new classification

more in accord with history. This must of course be carefully criticised;
but so far, Students have depended on t h e classification which appears
in Hughan's Old Cha.rges and which Dr. Begemann seems to have
relinquished.
This is actually written in 1920 about a cl~sificationt h a t was available to English
readers in 1903, in no less well known a work than Gould's Co7acise History; and
apparently Bro. Rosedale has not yet been able to acquaint himself correctly with
it. To say that Begemann has relinquished Hughan's classification is wrong.
Bro. Rosedale also asserts t h a t ~ e ~ e m a n based
k
his classification on
coincidences of sound, and I am afraid this is another statement t h a t cannot be
accepted, for Begemann's whole case is t h a t there was one original text in 1520
or thereabouts from which every later version is derived by a series of transcriptions.
Again, Bro. Rosedale alleges that Hughan never seems t o have fully accepted
Begemann's scheme. Will he refer us to the passages in Hughan's writings on
which this allegation is based? How does he reconcile it with Hughan, a t
A.Q.C. vi., 199, note l ? The two students naturally differed aver details from
time to time, but few will agree t h a t the author of t h e Old Charges of British
Freemasons did not believe in the classification given i n t h a t work.
Of course, the similarity of the great bulk of the MSS. is obvious. But
who has ever denied i t ? Certainly not Begemann, who insists on one single text
as the original of all the families below t l ~ ePlot. Bro. Rosedale has surely misconceived the whole object of the classification into branches and the reasons underlying it.
Starting, as I believe he does, from erroneous premises, it is not surprising
that Bro. Rosedale arrives a t t h e conclusion t h a t Regemann's classification is
neither useful nor correct. B u t he wishes us t o understand t h a t in this conclusioil
he does not stand alone; he says, "thoughtful students are awakening to the
Will he name these Brethren, or any of them; and will he refer us to
fact."
the appropriate passages in their writings?
34
Transactions o j the Quatuor Coronati Lodge.
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 :--
I fancy Bro. Rosedale has already realized t h a t i t is much easier t o destroy

to
than to construct. I suggest t h a t he should now consider whether it is
pull down an edifice betore making certain t h a t it is either useless or dangerous,
and that the proposed new structure will really be better than t h e old one.
It is quite possible t h a t Dr. Begemann's classification of t h e Old Charges
is bad in method and result; or, as Dr. Rosedale puts it, " neither useful nor
correct." On this point I express no opinion, but may mention t h a t for the past
thirty years its utility as a basis for comparison has been accepted by 211 students
of the subject. It is, therefore, a pity t h a t after so severe a condemnation Bro.
Rosedale does not tell us in what particular points the classification is faulty, nor
in what way his own will bring a better result. H e says t h a t his new classification would be "based upon historical fact," and he refers t o certain events in
English history which may have had an influence upon building construction, or
upon Trade Guilds, or upon what we call Speculative Masonry; b u t it is not
possible to test his theories, because he has made no attempt t o tabulate any of
the known copies of t h e Old Charges under these various historical headings.
Somehow I suspect t h a t if Dr. Rosedale had made such a tabulation the grouping
would have been found just about the same as t h a t which was evolved by Dr.
Begemann. I am led to this view because in t h e one instance where Dr. Rosedale
does identify a particular d o c u m e n t t l i e Zqzigo d o n r s XS.-as
belonging t o the
Commonwealth period h e apparently acquiesces in its retention as a member of
36
Transactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge.
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
Tra?asactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge.
Bro. Dr. ROSEDALE

replies as follows:To those who have appreciatively criticized my attempt to raise a point
which in my opinion deserves much careful examination, I am equally grateful,
whether they support my views or otherwise.
The issues raised are all well
worthy of being dealt with on t h e part of those better read in t h e literature of
be, with my limited supply of Masonic works, whilst
the Craft than I can
the kindly remarks cannot b u t offer some encouragement to one whose only object
in writing on t h e subject is to evoke further investigations into matters which
seem t o him to have been left in an unsatisfactory condition.
My chief critics are Brothers Vibert and Songhurst, both of whom I know
are great authorities, consequently I do not propose to contest the fact that the
probabilities are entirely in favour of their arguments being of greater weight
than my own, b u t whilst on certain details I may be shown to be in the wrong,
I none t h e less, after carefully considering what they have said, am glad to have
raised t h e matter again, even if i t only serves t h e useful purpose of enabling
others to avoid falling into very natural pitfalls.
With regard t o Bro. Vibert's remarks, I may frankly acknowledge that /I
have not seen Dr. Begemann's new classification until to-day, but even if, as may
be the case, i t turns out to be similar or even identical with any sound historical
classification, I venture to believe t h a t in its present form it is too complicated
and too involved to be of much practical value to the ordinary student, and,
without attempting to go into details, I would venture to say t h a t any classification which accepts the extract from Plot's Katztral History of Staffordshire as
constituting either a separate MS. or justifying t h e name of a family, seems to
me to be building on sand. Secondly, I fail to see the sufficiency of the arguments
which are raised in favour of the Tew Family, which is, with some variations,
in all probability merely part of t h e great mass of MSS. wl~ichBro. Vibert calls
the Standard type. B u t most of all do I contest t h e claim of the Cama MS. to
be t h e origin of the Spencer or Post Grand Lodge Group. One has only to set
some of the passages side by side to see t h e very great variations-all too great to
render it reasonable to suppose them to have more than a fortuitous relationship.
I gather t h a t Bro. Vibert, in his whole-liearted desire t o support Dr. Begemann's
views, requires t o find some definite antagonism in Bro. Hughan's writings, and
that, failing this, he would claim t h a t there must be total agreement. May I
suggest to him t h a t there is such a thing as ' Damning by faint praise' ? And
that is how I read the matter i n view of the natural courtesy which it was that
good Brother's wont to exhibit.
I can assure Bro. Vibert t h a t I am not a t all ufider the impression that
I am offering anything new. I n fact, I am not offering anything-I
am only
trying to express what is a' common feeling, viz. : That the present classification has very little meaning t o most ordinary Masons, and t h a t what we want
is a really useful one. My hope is t h a t someone else will take up the matterI merely throw out an appeal for some practical ussfulness-that Bro. Vibert
or someone else will produce what many a Mason is earnestly desirous of having:
a scheme which can a t least be partially understood by the average Mason. I
do not propose to defend what I have written, because no one will expect on so
complex a matter t h a t anyone should make no mistakes; b u t I claim to have
done my best, even if t h a t best be a poor one.
As for Bro. Songhurst, who is steeped in Masonic lore, I can only say
he mistakes ine if he thinks I only want to destroy. I repeat that I should be
quite satisfied if he, o r someone else, even Dr. Begemann, would draw up a
connected and really consecutive account of these MSS. showing where the
historical events were related ,to the text as demonstrating Masonic evolution.
It is with a sense of great gratification I listen to Bro. Songhurst's able attack
on t h e evidence adduced t h a t Sir Christopher Wren was Grand Master. The
publication of his remarks will be of great value to many of us, even though
they may have been already known t o t h e very learned; but I would draw
his attention to t h e fact t h a t I deliberately abstained from making any
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
Transactions of the Qzlat rror C'oronati Lodge.
DR. BEGEMANN A N D THE ALLEGED TEMPLAR

CHAPTER A T EDINBURGH IN 1745.
B P B R O . J . E . S . T U C K E T T , M . A . , T.P.,V. ,0076,
Baldwyn Preceptory K . T .
H E most romantic and fascinating of the many traditions and

legends which connect Prince Charles Edward Stuart with Freemasonry or allied bodies is the story of an alleged Chapter of
an Ordsr of the Temple said to have been held a t Holyrood on
Tuesday, 24th September, 1745, when the Prince ' looked most
gallantly in the white robe of the Order ' and ' took his profession like a worthy Knight,' while (according to another version)
he then and there was elected to the Grand Mastership of the
Order. Prince Charles entered Edinburgh on the 17th, won his
great victory a t Gladsmuir (Prestonpans) on the 21st, and remained in the
Scottish Capital until the 11th November, when he set out upon his spirited but
ill-fated expedition into England. With regard to this Temple Chapter on the
24th September the scanty evidence so far available is not sufficient t o warrant
any confident statement that i t actually happened. Dr. G. E . W. Begemann, of
Charlottenburg, has, however, written a treatise upon .the evidence, which has
been hailed as proving that the whole story is an irnpssible myth. The object
of these pages is t o show t h a t our German Brother's deductions are wholly
unwarrantable and that the arguments he brings forward to prove that the Chapter
could not have taken place are unsound and not in accordance with actual facts.
The present intention is to prove t h a t i t corild have taken place and to examine
t o what extent the Tradition is l i l ~ e l yto be true. It must be clearly understood
that it is not for one moment .pretended that in these pages will be found any
proof that the alleged Chapter is an actual historical fact.
Dr. Begemann deals with the subject at pp. 56-63 of his Die Tempelherrn
und die Freimaurer.
Entgegnung auf die gleichmmige Schrift des Geheimen
Archivrats Dr. Ludwig lieller, von Dr. TT'ilhelm Begemann.
B e n
1906.
The evidence is contained in a Letter said to have been written by the Duke of
Perth from Edinburgh, dated 30th September, 1745, and addressed to David Lord
Ogilvy son of the 4th Earl of Airlie, versions of which Letter appeared in the
Statutes of the Reliyiozis and Military Order of the Tentp7e as rstahlished in
Scotland. Edinburgh. 1843 (repeated in the editions of 1877 and 1897), in the
Edinburgh Advertiser for December lst, 1843, in the Nentoirs of Sir Robert
Strange, K t . , the eminent rngrover, and his brother-in-law, X r . 9 n d r e w Lrimisden,
I'rivate Secretary to the Stuart Princes at Rome. B y James Dunnistoun. London.
1855. Two volumes, B'"., and in the Freemasons Xagazine for 27th September,
1862, p. 256.
Before dealing with Dr. Begemann's own treatment of the evidence for and
against the authenticity of the Letter, and the truth or falsity of the statements
contained in it, i t will be well t o quote t h e opinions expressed by Bros. Dr.
Chetwode Crawley and W. J. Hugl~an, for there is no doubt a t all t h a t the
approbation bestowed by these eminent Brethren upon this portion of Dr. Begemann's tract has led English readers to suppose that his arguments are unanswerable.
These opinions are contained in Bro. Hughan's well known work
T h e Jacobite Lodge at Rome, in a Review of t h a t work by Dr. Chetwode Crawley
in our Transactions, and in the same Brother's series of articles on The Templar
Legencls in Freemasonry, also in A.Q.C. :T h e Jacobite Lodge at Rome. 113'5-7. W . J . Hughan. Torquay. 1910.
Chap. iii. " Prince CharFe " and Freemasonry.
Dr. Begemann and the Alleged Ternplar Chcipter a t Edinburgh in 1745.
41
One of the earliest references t o the Prince relates t o the Order of

the Temple, and is to be found i n the Statutes of t h a t Organization
for Scotland (Edit. 1897). The following occurs in t h e Historical
- Notice appedded thereto by Professor Aytoun :"From a letter in the archives of an old and distinguished
Scottish family, which has been repeatedly published, we learn
" that John, Earl of Mar, succeeded Lord Dundee in the Master" ship (of the Temple); t h a t on his demission the Duke of Athole
" assumed the administration of t h e affairs of the Order as its
"Regent; and, finally, t h a t in 1745 Prince Charles Edward
" Stuart was elected to the high office of Grand Master, in a
" solemn Chapter held in t h e Palace of Holyrood.
"This letter [dated 30th Sept., 17451 is written by t h e Duke
" of Perth to the Lord Ogilvy, eldest Son of the Earl of Airlie."
"
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 :-
" Nowhere before 1843, when t h e letter appeared in the Statutes

of t h e Temple, is any trace of it to be found, and from t h e
numerous authorities consulted i t is quite certain t h a t no
Duke of Athole could have been present in Edinburgh on t h e
24th September, 1745.
When the Princ,e came to Scotland the younger brother was
Duke of Athole, and resided in the Castle of Blair, and when
the Prince came near t h a t Castle, t h e Duke, who had no mind
t o be mixed u p with' H.R.H.'s affairs, left Blair and went to
t h e South. (Jesse i., 224; Thomson ii., 115; Ewald i., 162;
von Hassell, 105.)
His elder brother attended the Prince as Marquis of Tullibar.dine, and occupied t h e Castle of Blair, and h e was styled Duke
of Athole by t h e Jacobites. (Home, 132; Chambers, 2 and 9 ;
Maxwell, 31 ; Thomson ii., 114; von Hassell, 105.)
H e reached Blair Castle on the 30th August, b u t while the
Prince went on t h e day following, t h e pretended Duke of
Athole remained there .tcntil the middle of October. (Thomson
ii., 114; Bell, 188, 219.)
Thefe are also three letters, two of Lord George Murray's,
dated 7th September, from, Perth (Chambers, 75), and t h e
29th September, from Edinburgh (Chambers, Memoirs), and
one of James Frazer, dated 9th October, from Edinburgh
(Home, 132, 327).
These three letters are addressed to the Jacobite Duke of
Athole, then a t Blair Castle.
From all these evidences, it is certain t h a t qo Duke of Athole
could have been i n Edinburgh on September 24th, and it is
quite beyond all possibility t h a t a Duke of Athole could have
' demitted as Regent' as stated.
The historical facts, as
ascertained from reliable sources, do not favour t h e genuineness of t h e letter in question.
l'?
lr~~suclions
of the Quat i ~ o rCoronati Lodge.
It is stated t h a t the Lord of Mar was predecessor of the Duke

of Athole, and successor to the Lord Dundee. B u t the latter
was killed in t h e Battle of Killiecrankie i n 1689, and the
Lord of Mar was not of age before 1696. (Thomson i . , 8.)
So i t was impossible t h a t he could have become Grand Master
in 1689,
Besi4es which he was deeply in debt and not noted for his
morality. (ibidem.)
He raised t h e Rebellion in 1715, and fled from Scotland with

the Pretender, and died in 1732. (Home, 16 : Jesse i., 140 :
Thomson i., 220: von Hassell, 13-19, 28.)
The Marquis of Tullibardine, who adopted t h e title of Duke
of Athole in 1745, had been abroad from 1715 to t h a t year,
so i t is most unlikely that he could have succeeded the Lord
Mar in a Foreign country.
Besides there is a letter of Murray's, of Broughton, oontaining a description of t h e Duke of Perth, and stating that he
was bred in France until 19 years of age; he never' attained
perfect knowledge of the English language, partly because of
his extreme fondness to speak broad Scotch (Bell, 188),
so t h a t the Duke of Perth is not a t all likely to have written
the letter in question in plain English."
Dr. Chetwode Crawley.
Review of Hughan's Jacobite Lodge at Rome,

A.Q.C. xxiii., 199.
. . . Bro. W. J. Hughan . . . submits conclus~ve

evidence to the effect .that t h e young Pretender never was a Freemason.
I n a communication, which must stand as a model of synthetic
evidence, Dr. Begemann shows conclusively t h a t the alleged letter of 30
Sept., 1745, on which so much stress is laid in the Statutes of the
Order of the Temple in fjcotland, is a pure fiction due t o the invention
of t h a t deli6htfpl romancer, Prof. W. E. Aytoun.
A t this point it is sufficient to remark :-(l) That Bro. Hughan submits no evidence
of his own. I n connection with the subject under discussion he simply quotes
without comment Dr. Begemann's digest of his own argument; and (2) that Dr.
Begemann does not ' show conclusively ' t h a t ' t h a t delightful romancer Prof. W. E.
Aytoun' invented the letter. Dr. Begemann does not once mention Prof. Aytoun,
either in the digest or in the full argument. But in some Notes on Prof. Aytoun
in A.Q.C. xxvi., p. 232; it is asserted t h a t t h e Historical Notice (in the 1843
Statutes of 0 . of the T.) is ' universally ascribed to his (Aytoun's) pen '-the
assertion being made b y DT. Chetwode Crawley himself and repzated by Bro.
Hughan in chapter iii. of t h e Jacobite Lodge a t Rome.
Dr. Chetwode Crawley.
The Templar Legends in Freemasonry.

A.Q.C. xxvi., 233.
Like the former letter, t h e latter was addressed to the Edinburgh

Advertiser, in which it appeared on 1st December, 1843. . . . It
professed to relate how t h e Grand Mastership devolved on and was
accepted by the young Pretender . . . It has been frequently reprinted, and in spite of duplicate versions has maintained it.s ground
to our own time. . . .
Dr. Begtrnann.and the A21eged, Ternplar C'hapter a t Edinburgh i n 2745.
43
. . . the authenticity of the lether, always questionable because

uncorroborated, has been completely set aside by t h e investigations of
Dr. W. Begemann. . . . Dr. Begemann has subjected the letter
to the canons of historical criticism with a thoroughness of search and
a cogency of conclusio~lt h a t have never been surpassed. . . . The
result a t which Dr. Begemann arrived was:That the letter could not have been written by t h e personage
to whom it was ascribed;
That it could not have been received a t the specified date by
the personage t o whom it was supposed to be addressed;
That the happenings it purported to narrate were imaginary.
Whether or not the Letter is ' completely set aside' by t h e investigations of Dr.
Begemann it is now our business to discuss. Again the present writer wishes to
disclaim any pretention t o establish its (the Letter's) authenticity, b u t he does
hope to show in the following pages that Dr. Begemann fails to make out all
three of the conclusions set forth by Dr. Chetwode Crawley.
Dr. Bgemann's argument occupies pp. 56-63 in his Die Tempelherrn. It
is here translated into English in full, and in this form is now presented to
English readers for the first time:Dr. Begemann.
p. 56.
Die Ternpelherrn &c.
1906. p. 56 et seq.
A t my request for more than ten months past, well-informed gentlemen

in Scotland and England have been hunting for t h e original of t h e
Letter-so
far in vain. The question is one of importance, because
the Letter has been printed in two different versions.
S
The one version contains the assertion t h a t t h e Prince was elected to

the Grand mastership. The other version does not.
To be exact- then t h e Journal [Freenmxons Magazine, Sept. 27, 1862,

p. 2561, which Keller quotes as his authority, offers t h e shorter form
of the letter, therefore he can have made no examination here himself,
. b u t must have copied another statement, indeed certainly t h a t i n the
H a d b u c h [2nd Ed., 1867, iii., p. 3371, khe author of which statement
however cannot have made use of t.he Journal, otherwise the difference
between the two forms of the Letter could not f?il t o have struck him.
The Journal borrows the Letter from t h e work entitled :-' Memoirs of
Sir Robert Strange . . . and of his Brother-in-LUUJ Artdrew
Lumisden . . . B y James Dennistoun. (London. 1855. 2 vol.)
Footnote.-The
Statutes of 1843 and the account of the election of the Prince to t h e Grandmastership are also mentioned
by Kloss (i., 76), but as he does not allude to t h e F.M.
Magazine Keller cannot have borrowed from him t h e information concerning this authority.
p. 57.
The longer version of t h e Letter is contained in the 1843 Edinburgh

edition of t h e Statutes of the 0'.
of the T. and also in the later editions
of 1877 and 1897.
6
A ' Historical Notice of t h e Order of t h e Temple ' precedes t h e Statutes.
(1877, p. xi.-xxiii. 1897, p. v.-xxi.)
For a year past I have been seeking in Scotland, England and America
for a copy of the 1843 edition and I have a%last discovered it in London.
The owner has collated t h e later editions with t h e 1843 edition on my
behalf and he has verified t h a t t h e wording of all three editions is
.absolutely identical.

A t p. xvi. of t h e 1843 edition'(p. xxi., 1877, p. xvi. 1897) it is stated :From a letter in t h e archives of an old and distinguished
Scottish family, which has been repeatedly published, we learn
t h a t John, Earl of Mar, succeeded Lord Dundee in the Mastership (of t h e Temple) : t h a t on his demission the Duke of
Athole assumed the administration of the affairs of the Order
as its Regent; and, finally, t h a t in I745 Prince Charles
Edward Stuart was elected to the High W c e of Grand Master,
in a Solemn Chapter held i n the Palace of Holyrood. . . .
The Letter is dated 30 Sept. 1745 and the following is an
extract.
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.
I place t h e two versions side by side, the differences being in italics :A

It is truly a proud thing to
see our Prince in t h e palace
of his fathers, with all t h e
best blood of Scotland
around him. H e is much
beloved of all sorts, and we
cannot fail to make that
pestilent . England smoke
for it. Upon Monday last
there was a great ball a t
t h e Palace, and on Tuesday,
by appointment, there was
a solemn Chapter of the
ancient chivalry of the
Temple of Jerusalem held
in t h e audience room.
* * * Our noble Prince
looked most gallantly in
t h e white robe of the order,
took his profession like a
worthy Knight; and, after
receiving congratulations of
all present, did vow t h a t
he would
restore the
Temple higher than it was
in the days of William the
Lion.
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.
D r . Begentaq~vaand the dllel/~cZTetnylur Chapter at Edinburgh i n 1145.
45
I n order to arrive at a sure judgement concerning t h e contents of the

L e t t e ~ besides
,
Dennistoun's ' Memoirs ' I have gone through with care
all such works, especially dealing with t h e Prince and t h e Rebellion of
1745, as were attainable by me, particularly the following:[Dr. B. here gives Titles and dates of t h e well known works
by :-Home, Johnstone, Chambers, Maxwell, Jesse, Thomson,
Ewald, von Hassell, Bell, and Andrew Lang.]
p. 59.
Besides these I have looked through a n u ~ n b e rof other writings of

which any further details can remain unnoticed. Those cited include
the notes of contemporaries or rely upon such.
From these authorities as a basis the following conclusion can to begin
with be with certainty deduced, that the G.M.ahlp could not, on the
24 Sept. 1745, have passed from the D. of Athole to Prince Charles
Edward Stuart.
A t the time of t h e Prince's arrival in Scotland a younger son of the
previous Duke occupied t h e chief family Castle of Blair and bore the
title Duke of Athol, because the eldest son had taken part in the
Rebellions of 1715 and 1719, and since then had lived attainted in
in foreign parts.
I
I n 1745 as Marquis of Tullibardine he was in personal attendance on

the Prince, while the then legitimate Duke his younger brother wished
to keep himself aloof from the Rebellion and in consequence escaped
to the South when the Prince and his adherents drew near Blair Castle.
(Jesse, vol. i., 224 : Thomson, vol. ii., 115 : Ewald, vol. i., 162 : von
Hassell, 105: Mahon, Hist. of England, vol. iii., 363.) H e has no
further concern in our oljscussion.
His elder brother a t once occupied the Home of his Ancestors and from
this time was recognized by t h e Jacobites as Duke of Athol. (Home,
132 : Chambers, Memoirs, 2, 9 : Maxwell, 31 : Thomson, vol. ii., 114 :
von Hassell, 105.)
H e and t h e Prince reached Blair Castle on the 30th Aug., b u t while
the Prince went on on the following day, the actual Duke of Athol
remained a t Blair until the middle of October, partly because he was
old and infirm, partly in order to beat up further recruits. (Thomson,
vol. ii., 114; Bell, 188, 219.)
Three Letters may also be cited as evidence, two from his younger
brother Lord George Murray dated 7 September from Perth (Chambers,
31) where the Prince halted from 4 to 11 Sept. (Home, 75), and 29
September from Edinburgh (Chambers, 44), khe third from James
Fraser dated 9 October (Home, 132, 327).
The certain historical fact then is that neither the legitimate

nor the Jacobite Duke of Athole attended the pretended
Templar Chapter in Edinburgh on 24 September 3 745, and
(neither) could (then) have resigned the G.M."ip.
The Jacobite Duke who from 1715 t o 1745 lived abroad as a refugee
cannot be seriously regarded as G.M.
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.
Transactiol~sof tAe Quatuor Coronati Lodge.

I n 1689 a t the Battle of Killiecrankie against William 111. Lord
Dundee lost his life as a Leader of the Scottish Stuart Party.
According to the testimdny of the Abbe Calmet he is said to have been
G.M. of the 0 . of the T. in Scotland. (Historical Notice of the Order
a.a.0.)
There are references to Templars united with Hospitallers in Scotland
during the 15th and 16th centuries down to the year 1563, being
represented in foreign parts through their grandmaster.
Footnote.-The Aut,hor of the Historical Notice (1877, xviii.
et seq.: 1897, xiii. e t seq.) is here dealing with authentic
accounts, and Laurie (The History of Free Masonry, Edinburgh, 1859, p. 78 et seq.) follows him.
But whether Lord Dundee as G.M. in 1689 has been sufficiently verified
appears to be open to question.
I n any case i t is inconceivable that the Earl of Mar was his successor,
for in 1696, being then just of age, he left his native land (Thomson,
vol. i., p. 8), and he cannot by any means be supposed to have already
attained the G.M."hiPin 1689.
Moreover he was overwhelmed with debt and his manner of life was
such that he was called the ' shame of his name.' (ib.)
From a perverted greed for honours he stirred up the Rebellion of
1715 but as soon as the cause became doubtful he fled with the Old
Pretender to foregn parts, was attainted, and in 1732 died a t Aix-la
Chappelle, after in 1723 falling into complete disgrace with the 03d
Pretender. (Home, p. 16 : Jesse, vol. i., 140: Thomson, vol. i., 220:
von Hassell, 13-19, 28.)
Thus both the Earl of Mar and the Jacobite Duke of Athol were abroad
from 1715 and i t is quite incomprehensible how they could have
officiated as G.M.,
namely when and how by the ' Demission' of the Earl of War the
Duke of Athol ' assumed the administration of the affairs of the Order
as its Regent' (see Historical Notice, ante, p. 57) . . . since both
of them must have quitted Scotland for ever in 1715.
It is evident : both Orandmastera are fancy-creations of the

author of the Historical Notice of the year 1843.
The question now arises whether the version .of the Letter in Dennistoun is genuine and original or a shortened form of B.
As the original Letter has never been found, nor is any printed version
earlier than that of 1843 known, and as moreover the three asterisks
in the middle of Dennistoun's version A are an indication that something has been left out, I conjecture t h a t Dennistoun made use of the
Historical Notice version B and that he cut i t down because to him
the pretended G.M. appeared to be altogether too dubious.
The same opinion is applicable to the reserve shown b p the Scottish
Masonic historian Laurie *, who was acquainted with the Statutes of
*Footnote.-william
Alexander Laurie was G. Sec. of the G.L.
of Scotland 1831-1858. After his resignation of the OEce he
published ' The History of Free Masonry and the Grand Lodge
of Scotland' (Edinburgh, 1859), an extensive work of 527
pages, of which the first general part (History of Free Masonry,
pp. 1-94), is in many respects certainly unable to face criticism.
Dr. Begernann and the Alleged Templar Chapter at Edinburgh in 2745.
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,
For of the Let,ter he employed only: that portion printed by

Dennistoun, while he observes :During his short stay a t that Palace, Charles Stuart
is stated to have taken his profession as a Templar,
and to have " looked most gallantly in the white robe
of the Order ", which is not; improbable, (p. 83).
[The Quotation from Laurie is correct.-J.E.S.T.]
Laurie makes no use of the G.M."ipS of the Earl of Mar, the Duke of
Athol, and the Prince, t o which attention is drawn in the, vefsion of
the Letter which appears in the Historical Notice, although in another
place he makes plain his belief in the hereditary G.M.shiPof t h e Kings
of Scotland (p. 93).
The author and the source of the Historical Notice, which first appeared
in the 1843 edition of the Statutes, were naturally well known to
Laurie who in Edinburgh was placed, a t the centre of Masonic life.
If he did not assign any importance to the passages in the Letter

referred to, i t is probable that this was because he knew them to be
simple additions.
Even the shorter version of the Letter seemed to him to be doubtful,
for he prefixes to the above mention the remark :-
If credit is to be given to a letter of the Duke of Perth

to Lord Ogilvie in 1745. (p. 83.)
[The Quotation from Laurie is correct except t h a t of should
be from.-J.E.S.T.]
a
This caution on the part of Laurie is quite unusual; a t other times

he exhibits an astonishing credulity in (accepting) t h e wild tales of
Thory, Clavel and other fabulists.
'
The pretended ball on the 23rd September arouses doubt and suspicion.
p. 62.
Some authorities speak of a ball on the 17th September on the day of

the first bloodless entry of the Prince into the ancient Capital of his
Ancestors,
But other immediate eye-witnesses, such as Lord George Murray
(according to Chambers) and Murray of Broughton (according to Bell),
have nothing to tell us conoerning festivities.
The latter testifies rather precisely t h a t the Prince on 22nd Sept., on
his re-entry into Edinburgh after the bloody battle of Preston on 21st
Sept., deprecated all demonstrations of loud triumphant joy a t the
success, and on the 23rd Sept. issued a Proclamation forbidding the
citizens to celebrate the victory. (Bell, p. 209.)
This excludes the possibility that on the same day in the

Palace of Holyrood '<Lagreatiball " could have taken place,
as the letter affirms.
A clergyman, Dr. Alexander Carlyle, watched the Prince a t t h e gate
a t Holyrood and ' beheld his countenance thoughtful and melancholy ';
the Court a t the Abbey was 'dull and sombre, the Prince was
48
Transactions of the Qztatuor Coronati Lodge.
melancholy; he seemed to have no confidence in anybody, not even in

the ladies, who were much his friends.' (Lang, 109.)
Another witness', Henderson, avers t h a t the Prince disobliged the ladies
by declining to give even one ball. (Lang, 110.)
When he was blamed for his neglect of the ladies he ~ o i n t e dto a bearded
Highland Sentry and exclaimed :-' These are my beauties.' (Lang,
111.)
D
Consequently a great ball on the 23rd September is also an

historical impossibility,
(and it follows that) The Templar Chapter on the 24th Sept.
its last remaining feature cannot escape its fate also.
I
Of Scottish Noblemen who were conceivably Templars only four can

with certainty be found amongst the retinue of the Prince on that
day: The Duke of Perth, Lord George Murray, Lord Nairn and Lord
Elcho.
Some one or two more are named by some authorities
to other advices these were only admitted later.
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.
Moreover the Prince was in a serious and depressed state of mind as

to the ultimate issue of his Enterprize, so that the triumphant promise
t h a t " h e would restore the Temple higher than it was in the days of
William the Lion" accorded very ill with his very slender Hope of
Good Fortune.
Further i t is not apparent why on the 30th Sept. the Duke of Perth
should have despatched a letter of the kind to Lord Ogilvy who was
daily expected and who actually reached Edinburgh on the 3rd October.
(Home, 128.)
Finally John Murray of Broughton, who was personally and intimately
acquainted with the Duke of Perth, says concerning him that as he was
bred in France till 19 years of age he never attained perfect knowledge
of the English language, and what prevented it in a great measure
was his over-fondness to speak broad-Scotch. (Bell, 188, note: Lyon,
1900, 200.)
So t h a t the lluke of Perth would have been incapable of

inditing a letter written in faultless English.
Without ,exception nothing contradicts the. opinion that the whole
Letter is a forgery,
manufactured for the Historical Notice of 1843 for the purpose of
endowing the then-existing Masonic Order of the Temple with *he
prestige of a greater antiquity.
This recent Order first reached Edinburgh in 1798, was constituted
from Ireland in 1806, and was established as a Conclave of Kts. of
the H.T. and S. and of St. J. of J. by England in 1811. (Lyon,
1900, 313.)
Dr. Begemann and the Alleged Tenrplar Chapter at Edinburgh in 1745.
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.
Pransactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge.
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
' h e was in personal attendance on
' the Prince.'
. . from this time was recog. nised by t h e Jacobites as Duke of

' Atholl.'
'.
Comment.
H e was in attendance as -Duke of
Atholl. Those of the opposite party
of course styled him Marquis of T.
' After the death of his father in 1724

'
he was recognised by the Jacobites
' as Duke of Atholl.'

D.N.B., 1909, xiii., 1306, and
every contemporary Jacobite
authority.
From this time h e was frequently
styled D. of A . even by the Hanoverian
H e and t h e Prince reached Blair

Castle on the 30th August.'
They reached the Braes of Atholl on

30th Aug. and next day 31st Aug.
came to Blair Castle.
TVnnd~rrr,38; Charles l I . , 2! ;
Klose I . , 228; Lang, 77 ;
Norie I . , 225; Hadden, 153.
' . . . the Prince went on on the

' following day ' (i.e., 31st Aug.).
The Prince stayed a t Blair Castle from

31st Aug. t o leitlher t h e 2nd or 3rd
Sept.
Jacobite Memoirs, 26 ; Lyon
I., 208; TVa'nndrr~r,39; Home,
75 ; Browne, 39 ; Henderson,
36; Macpherson, 22; Chambers, 65 ; Johnstone, 15 ; Walpole I I . , 62; Ewald, 97;
Charles I I . , 22 ; Klose I.. 228 ;
Hadden, 154; Norie I., 230-1 ;
Lang, 78.
'
1i
Dr. Begemann and the Alleged Te~rtplarC'hapter a t Edinburgh i n 1745.
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 :"
. . . the actual Duke of Athol remained a t Blair until the middle

. . .
*' 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.
' . . . Meantime our Duke of Athol's eldest brother (i.e., Duke

' William) has returned from Perth to Dunkeld, as i t is believed, to
' raise men. Few followed him from Athol to Perth . . .'
Letter from Lord Mil'ton to M a ~ q u i sof Tweedale dated
Edinburgh, 7th Sept., 1745; Home, 295.
That the Duke of Atholl accompanied his brother Lord George Murray
t o Perth and there presented him t o the Prince 4 Sept.
Chambers, 69 ; Macpherson, 25-6.
' 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
It is quite evident t h a t t h e idea t h a t the Duke of Atholl remained stationary a t

Blair Castle from 31st August to t h e end of October is a complete fallacy.
But Dr. Begemann mentions certain Letters, namely :(l) from Lord George Murray, dated 7th Sept., from Perth
,,
(2)
3,
(3)
,, James Frazer
27
1,
,, 29th ,,
,, 9th Oct.,
,, Edinburgh
,, Edinburgh
I n Die Tempelherr~bhe does b u t mention these Letters, b u t in chapter iii. of The

Jacobite Lodge a t Rome he makes the more'precise statement that:-
' 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
Dr. Begemanm and the Alleged Te~nplarChapter a t Edinburgh i n 1745.
53
addressed, of which there is no indication. The evidence t o be derived from t h e

contents of Letter No. ( l ) destroys Dr. Begemann's contention utterly.
' 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.
' It is certain t h a t no Duke of Athole could have been in Edinburgh

' on September 24th '
.7aco6ite Lodge, ch. iii.
These are false dedilctions based upon t h e false notion entertained concerning the
Duke's movements. The Jacobite Duke COULD have been in Edinburgh on 24th
September.
011 t h e 26th he was a t Dunkeld, arriving there on t h a t day. H e
COULD have been on his way back from a hurried visit to Edinburgh for the
Chapter on the 24th. I do not say t h a t he was, b u t it is NOT a ' certain historical
fact ' that he was n o t . Dunkeld is roughly forty-four miles from Edinburgh, and he
would have had from the morning of t h e 25th t o any time on t h e 26th for t h e
journey.
(neither of t h e Dukes) ' could ' (then) ' have resigned the Grandmaster' sh:p.'
Here Dr. Begemann does not even quote correctly t h e Letter he is examining.
The Letiter says nothing about ' resigning t h e Grandmastership.' However, he
corrests this slip in writing to Bro. Hughan:-
' . . . It is quite beyond all possibility t h a t a Duke of Athole could

' have " demitted as Regent " as stated.'
This is an amazing statement. Even supposing t h a t the Duke could not possibly
have been present--6hich
is not actually t h e case-did
i t not occur to Dr.
Begemann that the Duke could perfectly well have ' demitted7 by proxy or in
writing? Such an ' a c t ' in writing would have been quite valid, and t h e sending
to and fro of Letters and despatches was going on constantly.
' 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.
' The Templar Grandmastership of C h a r l e s , ~ d w a r dStuart is, from the

' facts cited, naturally also finally set aside.'
The ' f a d s ' cited are some of them correct and more of them incorrect, b u t none
of them either add to or take away from t h e probability of Prince Charles Edward'a
54
Transactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodye.
' 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.
. . . He was overwhelmed with debt and his manner of life was

' such t h a t he was called t h e " shame of his name." '
What has this to do with i t ? Was not the Duke of Wharton G.M. of Freemasons
in spite of smiliar troubles?
' . . . after in 1723 falling into complete disgrace with the Old
' Pretender .'
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.
. . . warmest acknowledgements t o my friend W . A.
Dr. Begemann and the Alleged Tentphr Cfhapter at Edinbtrrgh i n 1746.
55
At p. 56 Burnes writes:During the whole of the eighteenth century t h e combined Order of t h e

Temple and Hospital in Scotland can be but faintly traced, though I
have the assurance of well-informed Masons t h a t thirty or forty years
ago they knew old men who had been members of it for sixty years.
\
I n a Memoir of Jnmes Bzcrnes, LL.D., X . H . , F.R.S., B y John Grant,

E s q . , Reprinted From Dr. Corbyn's ZruIia Beviewi for September 1860. TPith
a n Appendix-Calcutta
. . . 1810, there occurs:Dr. Burnes . . . his . . . History of t h e Knight Templars,
having been encouraged to undertake t h e work by offers of valuable
documents in the possession of old and noble families.
I n The History of Free-Jfusonry and the Grand Lodge of Scotland . . . b y
lVilliam Alexander Laurie . . . Edinbzirgh: S e f o n & Afackenzie. London:
R. Spencer. Calcqctta: R. C . Lepage & Co. MDCfCCLZX., a t p . 84:During the whole of t,he eighteenth century the Scottish Order can be
but faintly traced, though Mr. Deuchar had in 1836 t h e assurance of
well-informed Masons t h a t thirty or forty years previous they knew old
men who had been members of it for sixty years.
These extracts prove nothing as to the Letter, but they do show t h a t from 1836
several eminent gentlemen were interesting themselves in Templar matters,
namely :-Burnes, Paterson, Pringle, Keightly, Deuchar and others, and ' valuable
manuscripts ' and ' valuable documents in the possession of old and noble families '
were handled by them in the cdurse of their investigations. Whether it is easier
to believe t h a t Prof. Aytoun or any other ' delightful romancer' deliberately
' invented ' (' forged ' would be the correct word) the Letter, or t h a t t h e Letter
must have had some foundation in fact, must be left t o individual judgment.
For myself I prefer to think that some such letter did actually exist, was seen,
got lost or destroyed, and was reconstructed later from memory and possibly with
embellishments.
B u t here we come to what is Dr. Begemann's one solitary genuine argument,
and, so far as i t goes, i t is a strong one. The reserve shown by Laurie tells in
favour of Dr. Begemann, for, as he remarks:-
' 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 :-
. . . t h a t charm which his (the Prince's) presence imparted to

' t h e gay assemblages in Holyrood, during the few evenings when the
56
Transactions of the Qzcatuor Coronati Lodge.
' old palace was lit up by loyal smiles from, lovely eyes, and anxious
' forabodings were for a time suspended by music or the merry

' strathspey. '
Dennistoun, vol. i., p. 81.
The real meaning is clear. The Prince's stay in Edinburgh was brief, b u t music
and dancing enlivened t h e evenings.
Since Chambers is quoted by Dr. Begemann, let us curn to Chambers:Chambers.
Chap. xiii.
Prince Charles a t Holyrood.
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
' entertainments in the palace (Holyrood), which were attended by all

' the persons of rank and fashion assembled in the Capital.'
Samuel Boyse. A n I m p a r t i d H i s t o ~ y
the Late Rebellion. 1748.
of
I
' On returning in the evening h e held a drawing-room for t h e ladies

' of his party and not unfrequently closed the day by giving them a
' ball in the old picture gallery of Rolyrood. . . . A t his balls,
' he was careful t o call alternately for Highland and Lowland tunes.
. . . .
Lord Mahon. T h e Forty-Five. Lond. 1851;

also vol. iii. of his H i s $ , of England, 1836-54.
Dr. Beyemann and the ~lllegeci?Templar Chapter at Edinburgh in 1765.
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.
' His (the Prince's) evenings f i n Edinburgh) were occupied by concerts,

!balls,
and other entertainments.'

tI(lose i., p. 289.
. . a t Holyrood . . . holding Court for distinguished sym-
' pathisers, giving balls to the Jacobite ladies . . .'
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 :-
' Doubtless, with so many young Highland gentlemen present, there

'were
"
dancing and derray," white roses, and tartan sashes.'

I
Lang, ,110.
The fact to be noted is t h a t a Ball or Dancing was a general or frequent happening

in the evening during the sojourn of the Prinoe in the Scottish capital.
It is true t h a t Prince Charles ' deprecated all demonstrations of loud

triumphan6 joy ' a t his victory a t Gladsmuir, and also t h a t h e issued a Proclamation forbidding the citizens'to celebrate t h a t victory. B u t a Ball in the evening
does not come under the heading of ' deinonstration of loud triumphant joy,' nor
does i t constitute a co?travention of the Prince's order t o t h e citizens. H e would
not allow the city t o be illuminated, as i t had been on his entry, and there were
to be no processions in the public streets. The Ball in t h e Palace was (as has been
pointed out) a normal feature in the day's programme.
n
t h a t the' Proclamation :But Dr. ' ~ e ~ e m a nconsiders
' exclude the possibility thati on t h e same day i n the Palace of Holg-
' rood
"
a great ball '' could have taken place.'
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:-
' consequently a great ball on t h e 23rd September is also an historical
' impossibility. '
58
Tra1~~~7ctiotz.s
o j the Qrcatuor Coronati Lodge.
It is generally considered t o be a vain effort to prozie a negative, but the use of

the. term 'historical impossibility' indicates t h a t Dr. Begemann thinks t h a t he
has achieved that result.
' 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.
of Scottish Noblemen who were con-
' wivably Templars only four can with

' certainty be found amongst the re-
' tinue of the Prince on t h a t day.'

' i t is not easy t o see how so few men
' would (cou1d)~liqveheld a Chapter.'
'
1,ord Murray and the Prince . .

. . . occupied . .
were
anxieties of every possible kind.'
.
.
A n y officer or gentleman of the Prince's

Army or suite is ' conceivable ' as a
member of this Order of the Temple
i f i t existed.
Does Dr. Begemann mean so few as
or so few as t e n the number
stated in Version B of the Letter?
I b it known how many were necessary
+&
hold a Chapter?
four
See the description given by contemporaries of the Prince's evenings.

Dennistoun, 81 : Chambers, 144-5 :
Klose, 289: Hadden, 197-9: also
Boyse, Mahon, &C., &c.
' . . . . the triumphant promise . . . accorded very ill with

' his very slender Hope of Good Fortune.'
This is a very feeble style of argument. Prince Charlss was naturally anxious,
but he was sanguine, -and, indeed, counted upon success. Even if he did not, he
would be very careful not to advertise his want of confidence. It was naturally
his policy to appear certain of triumph. His standard unfurled a t Glenfinnan
bore the legend T a n d e m Trifimphans.
The account of the Duke of Perth, quoted by Dr. Begemann a little further
on in his a r g u m e n t i t is by John Murray of Broughton, of unhappy remorymay be accurate enough, and yet, taken alone, it may convey a quite inaccurate
picture of t h e Duke, as an uncouth and unlettered man.
James Drummond
(1713-1746), 6th Earl and 3rd Duke of Perth, was the eldest son of James
Drummond, 5th Earl and 2nd Duke. H e was born 11th May, 1713, a t Drummond
Castle, and remained there until 1720, when his father died. His mother then
took him to France, where he was educated first a t Douai and then a t Paris, and
i t is known t h a t h r showed marked proficiency, especially in mathematics, and
was, in fact, for the times, above the average of young men of his rank in culture
and attainments generally. On resching manhood-Murray
says nineteen years
of age--he returned to Scotland and interested himself in agriculture and manufactures. Although the attainder of his father deprived him of an.y claim t o the
title which the established Government would recognize, i t is remarkable t h a t
he invariably styled himself, and was styled by others, Hanoverians and Jacobites
alike, Duke of Perth. Soon after the Prince 13nded in Scotland an attempt was
made to capture him, bl-f he manayed to escape and elude the vigilance of the
Government agents searching for him.
H e joined the Prince a t Perth on. the
Dr. Begetnunn and the Slleged l'ernplar C I ~ a p t e ru t Edinburgh in 1745.
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
Transactions of the Quatuor C'oronati Lodge
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
have been received a t the specified date (pa,rticularly as

no date for the reception was anywhere specified) by the
personage t o whom i t was supposed to be addressed. (I do
do not say that i t was.)
COULD
That the happenings it purported to narrate are

( I do not say they are.)
POSSIBLY
actual facts.
FRIDAY, 5th MARCH,
1920.
HE Lodge met a t Freemasons' Hall a t 5 p.m. Present :- -Bros. J. E.

Shum Tuckett, P.Pr.G.R., Wilts., 1V.fil. ; Gordon P'. G. Hills,
P.Pr.G.\V., Berks, 1.P.M.; Lionel Vibert, P.Dis.G.W., Madras, as
S.W. ; Herbert Bradley, P.Dis.G.M., Madras, J.W. ; W. B. Hextall,
P.G.D., P.M. ; Cecil Powell, P.G.D., P.,M. ; and W. J . Songhurst,
P.G .D., Secretary.
Also t h e follolviiig members of t h e Correspondence Circle:Bros. Harry Tipper, P.G.St.B., John Church, Ralph Nicholson, H. T. Manwaring,
Fred. S. Terry, P. C. Penwarden, Wm. C. Terry, Arthur Heiron, G. T. Harley Thomas,
P.A.G.S.B., E. W. Marson, John Thompson, H. Wolde, W. C. Jones, E. B. IVells, C . F.
Sykes, F . J . Asbury, F. W. Hailcock, P.A.G.D.C., John Lawrance, Walter Deyes, L.
Hemens, Sbdul Rahman, G. C. Parlrhurst Baxter, P. E. Reinganum, E. C. Cobbold,
Albert Presland, Geo. W. Sutton, Cecil D. Hills, T. G. Lumley Smith, James R . Potts,
S. A. Palreman, F. C. Bickell, L. Spencer Compton, Howard J. Bonser, Robert Colsell,
P.A.G.D.C., Robert F. J. Colsell, IV. Corinvall, George Lewis, G. F. Ely, William A.
Tharp, P.G.St.B., Chas. J. Laker, R. H. \FTood, Percy F. Kensett, Hervey Bathurst,
P.G.Stwd., Percy H . Horley, C. Wright Mnrles, A. W. Tliomson, H. Huxley, F. Stanley
Henmood, Joseph H . Stretton, G. Mumford, J o h n B. Michael, Ernest E. Sharp, W. H .
Pocklington, P.A.G.P., J. H . Seakins, Henry Hyde, H . T. C. de Lafontaine, P.G.D.,
L. G . Wearing, H E. Simpson, C. Lewis Ed~yards, P.G.D., F. W. Le Tall, J. A. S.
Bullock, H. Johnson, F. Knight, W. N. Blair, C. Gordon Bonser, J. H . Pullen, E . C.
Harkness, C. Gough, Thos. L. Found, W. F. Keddell, H . McLachlan, Ed. Glneser, \. C.
waiter, H. F. Bayliss, H u g h Western, P.G.Stwd., E. A. Seyd, Stanlep Palmer, A. J.
Collier, G. H. Fennell, E. Chappell, W. J. Williams, C. R . Macauley, J. Inkster, F. J.
Boniface, Digby L. Cropper. R . Harrison Archbald, Walter H . Brown, P.G.Stwd., J.
Goldberg, Fred. C. Knight, J. F. H. Gilbard, J. A. Bell, and J. Procter Watson.
Also the following Visitors:-Bros.
R. J. Bush, of St. Clair Lodge No. 2902; A. M.
I5rikertou, R.N. Anti-Aircraft Lodge No. 3790; E. J. Jones, Epworth Lodge No. 3789;
C. E. Lawford, Valentia Lodge No. 3097; G. L. Porter, Westminster & Keystone
Lodge No. 1 0 ; H. W. Barnes, P.M., Unity Lodge No. 1637; H . Oveiiden, Tranquillity
Lodge No. 185; E. A. Bristow, P.M., Malden Lodge No. 2875; Chris. R . Dewhirst,
Musgrave Lodge No. 1597; F. Howard Hnmphries, St. Andrew Lodge No. 48 (S.C.);
Jnmes 1. Moore, P.M., A l e ~ a ~ d Palace
ra
Lodge No. 1541; L. C. Goodger, W.M., Perfect
Ashlar Lodge No. 1178; W. L. F. Lind, Burton Court Lodge No. 3864; and W. Berry,
Burdett Coutts Lodge No. 1278.
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
Tra?zsccctions of tlre Qtcatzcor ,Coronati Lodge.

One filasonic Library, one Lodge, and tliirtglnine Brethren were admitted t o
membership of t h e Correspondence Circle.
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.
By Bro. Rev. H. P o o ~ s ,Gedbergh.
MARK JEWET.; Chisel, Key-stone and Alallet pendent from n grcsen ribbon.
Probablv from fifalta or India.
By Bro. Dr. G. A. MAIN, Stockport.

Msuar,; silver-gilt, with inscriptions engraved:
" H.
Rugg Boyiie Lodge No. 224."
'' Z.
C. Hawkes Cork Lodge 540."
Formerly owned by Bro. Henry
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;
; three, of Mark degree.
St. Mark's Lodqc. Glasgow.
Bro. GORDOSP. G. HILLS read t h e following paper :-
Il'~irl~sctctions
o J the Qriatilwr Coronati Lodge.
WOMEN AND FREEMASONRY.

71Y 7 j I l 0 . GGZGDON P. C . H I L L S , Z.l'.ilI., 2076; L.B.; P.Pr.G.lV.,
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
Looking back t o an early date, in accordance with the precedents set by

some of our less critical Masonic historians. I would venture to supeest
that a
ww
very early, if not t h e first, case of a speculative lady Mason may be found in t h e
person of the QUEENOF SHEBA.' Certain allusions of long-established use mention
her participation on an occasion of very special Masonic significance; b u t now-adays there is a pndency to overlook this old tradition. Nevertheless, a knowledge
of the part t h a t the Queen plays in the legends about King Solomon, and the prominent position accorded t o her representation, as well as'to t h a t of the Wise King, in
t h e elaborate schemes of statuarv which adorned t h e great churches of mediaeval
times, show t h a t she was a personage of great importance in t h e estimation of
those days. Under these circumstances, i t is much more likely than otherwise that
she would figure in the ancient legends of t h e Craft, so t h a t I do not think that
what is possibly a relic of an old operative tradition should be too readily dismissed.
With regard to ancient. sperative usages of t h e Maeonic Craft we may
safely accept the judgment of t h a t careful student, Bro. H ~ g h a n t, h~a t " h e did
not believe t h a t females were ever admitted as members of Lodges in the olden
time."
That t h e same disabilit,~prevailed in Scotland, Bro. Murray Lyon's
researches have rendered quite clear.3
Coming t o the time of our Speculative Grand Lodge, we find the rule that
women cannot b-come Fre,emasons firmly adopted as a fundamental principle and
landmark of t h e Order, and summed u p and settled for us in that clause of the
Antient Charges prefixed to t h e Book of Constitutions of 1723 and continued to
t h e present day, which lays down that:-"
The Prersons admitted Members of a
Lodge must be good and true Men, free-born, and of mature and discreet Age,
no Bondsmen, no Women, no immoral or scandalous Men, but of good Report."
The various stories of Women Freemasons are pre-eminently cases of
' exceptions which prove the rule,' and, as I shall show, stories about such hardly
ever occur without emphasis being placed on the exceptional circumstances which
have led to the transgression of the rule that Women are not eligible tq become
Freemasons, as well known to the world outside as to the Brethren within the
Craft.
The story Bro. Anderson tells of Queen Elizabeth in his history annexed
t o t h e Book of Constitutions of 1723 shows clearly t h e feeling of those times.
H e writes that, " the learned and magnanimous Queen ELIZABETH,
who encourag'd
otlzer Arts, discourag'd this; because, being a TVonzan, she could not be made a
.Veson." Bro. Charles Johnson, in his dedication of a play-the Comedy, entitled
Love i?a a Forest-dated
1723, enlarges on t h e same theme:-"
It was owing to
the Unhappiness of her Sex t h a t a most Illustrious Princess of our own cou7d not
ba admitted, and if her Curiosity was piqued a t not knowing a Secret, perhaps
i t was the only Point in her whole Reign t h a t ever the Woman got the better of
the Queen."
This story may have arisen from a flight of imagination, but the sequel is
not incompatible with the t,endencies of human nature even of the most exalted
rsnk !
Queen Elizabeth is said t o have satisfied herself by enquiry as to the innocent
character of Nasonic pursuits, but there is a story of the Empress Maria Theresa
which, if true, shows her even more determined to be informed regarding the
Viennese Lodges. I t is said t h a t about 1751 she paid a visit to a Lodge attended
by a maid of honour botlz disguised in male attire, in order to satisfy herself that
none of her own sex attended the r n e e t i n g ~ . ~
By f a r t h e best known, and what may be accepted as a thoroughly weil
authenticated instanca of a woman being made a Mason, is t h a t of t h e Hon.
I n e ~ dnot dwell upon this
Elizabeth St. Leger, afterwards Mrs. Aldworth.
W
'
Ezng Solomon and the Queen vf S h e b a , by Bro. F. J. W. Crowe. A.Q.C. xix..
112, 120, 126.

2
3
A.Q.C. i., 71.

Kennzng's JInsonic Ctlrlopadia
A.Q.U. vii., 57, 58.
Gould's History iii., 287
"
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
The Hon. Mzss S t . Leger and Freemnsonry, by Bro. ~ d w a r dConder,

'
A.Q.C. viii.,
p. 16, and p. 53, Notes on Zrzsh Freemasonry, l . Supplemenfary Note on the L a d y Free-
mason, b y Bro. W . J. Chetwode Crawley, L.L.D.

2Quoted by Broadley in A Hzstorg of St. Mary's Lodge, N o . 707, Bridport (1907),
2.
3 Punch xii. (1847), p. 7.
The Xnobs of England, By One of Themselves, xliv,
Club Snobs.
t h e midst of t h e Lodge assembled; and was elected, by a desperate

unanimity, Deputy Grand-Mistress for life. Though t h a t admirable
and courageous female never subsequently breathed a word with regard
to the secrets of the initiation, yet she inspired all our family with such
a horror regarding the mysteries of Jachin and Boaz, t l ~ a tnone of our
family have ever since joined the Society or worn the dreadful Masonic
insignia.
Another humorous version, from which Brethren may gain some amusement, is a racy metrical form of the Irish story written by H. T. Craven,' in a
style reminiscent of the Ingoldsby Legends. I n this case the writer, disclaiming
being a Mason himself, fully arails himself of poetic license; b u t the account has
too much of the picturesque and too little of tlte historical to .commend it to our
present consideration. Other accounts, especially by non-Masons, are unintentionally funny, as ih a recent case where a lady writer tells how Miss St. Leger,
opening the door to make good her escape, " met Tyler, Lord Doneraile's butler,
who was evidently a Mason, for he a t once called his master." The writer of the
novel Lour a n d thr F r e ~ r n a s o n puts his version into the mouth of a lady typical
of many whom I have referred t o as keenly interested in t h e history and doings
of the Craft, so f a r as outsiders can-be.
There are traditions current in many quarters, of ladies who have emulated
the example of our famous Irish Sister, and of initiations which have arisen out
of t h e supposed necessity of admitting a woman who has more or less successfully
attempted t o penetrate our mysteries. These stories vary a good deal in their
circumstances, some having an element of accident or ignorance about them, and
not amounting t o intentional eaves-dropping by the parties concerned; whilst
others were deliberate cases of spying without any mitigating features.
I will start our consideration of these with a bevy including English, Welsh,
and Scotch heroines.
The Palladian Lodge, No. 120, a t Hereford, ha3 preserved a tradition that
in 1770, when it was only a young Lodge of eight years' standing, a MRS. HAVARD
was proposed as an Honorary Member and initiated in t h e first Degree. Unfortunately, t h e earliest Minute Bmk which should cover this date is missing, and so
no record remains of. t h e actual circumstances of the case. ' N a v a r d ' seems to
have been a well-known name a t Hereford in those days, and frequently occurs
in t h e Minutes, which are preserved from 1778, in which year a Bro. Havard
was raised who became J . W . the next year..?
Probably the key to this incident is to be found in t h e designation Honorary,
and i t arose out of a compliment paid to the lady, which did not really involve
actual initiation or membership of the Craft. It may have been founded on little
more than the pleasant faniliar courtesy with which in his letters Bro. Dunckerley
was wont indifferently t o send " hi:: wife's " or " Sister " Dunckerley's greetings
to his Masonic friends and their wives, as appears from his correspondence
published in Bro. Sadler's life of t h a t worthy Mason.
The newspapers of the day record t h e death, aged eighty-five, on Tuesday,
May l l t h , 1802, of MRS. BEATON,in St. John's Madder-market, Norwich, and
tell us :She was a native of Wales, and commonly called here [ i . e . , a t Norwich]
the ' Free-mason ' from the circumstance of her having contrived to
conceal herself in t h e wainscotting of a lodge-room, where she learnt
t h a t secrrt, t h e knowledge of which thousands of her sex have in vain
attempted t o arrive at.-She was a singular old woman, and as a proof
of it the Secret died with l1er.l
1 The Lady Freemasrin, by H . T. Cravelf, in Humorous Readinos and Recifafions
. . . selwted and edited by Leopold Wagner (k3. Warne & Co.), 1892.
Love and the Freemason, by Guy Thorne (Werner Laurie, LM.).
3 llltscellanea L a t o m r u m 1. (N.S.), 10, 101; Freemason, January 18th, 1910,
p. 454.
4 Quoted thus, Miscellanea Ldomorum 111. (N.S.), p. 82, from Norfolk (?hronicIe
o r 3orfolk Gazette, 15th May, 1802. A slightly different paragraph is quoted A.().('.
vii., 58, from the Annual Regzster, 1802, May l l t h , p. 506. See aIso other versions of
same, lllzscellanea Latoncwunc IV. (N.S.), 6.
i
!
8
I
W o m e n and E'reernason~y.
67
I t does not necessarilv follow from this t h a t it was a t Norwich t h a t Mrs.

Beaton gained her knowledge, but i t is curious that, supposing th,ere was any real
foundation for Thackeray's story which connects Bungay with a lady Xason, his
case would most likely have involved the Lodge of Unanimity, No. 102 which
was a t Bungay in 1814, and possibly traces back to a Lodge associated with
Norwich as long ago as 1758, when Mrs. Beaton's adventure might have happened.
It doss not appear t h a t this lady was in any way recognised as a Mason by
the Craft.
Melrose Lodge, No. 1 bis on the roll of t h e Grand Lodge of Scotland,
preserves the tradition of a woman initiate, ISABELLA SCOON,known in the
vernacular as Ti6 SXin. The story runs t h a t after removing from Newstead, the
meetings were held in hired rooms for some years, and
the matron, a true daughter of Eve, somehow obtained more light upon
the hidden mysteries than was deemed a t all expedient, and, after due
consideration of t h e case, it was resolved t h a t she must be regularly
initiated into Freemasonry,
which was actually done, with t h e best results, the initiate being greatly impressed
with the solemnity of her obligation, remaining ever a trure and faithful Sister
among the Brethren, and distinguishing herself in works of charity. The Lodge
Minutes, however, contained no record of the o c c u r r e n ~ e . ~
The officers and about forty privates of the 22nd Regiment quartered a t
Newcastle in 1769, being Freemasons, celebrated St. John's Day in Winter by
attending service a t St. Nicholas' Church. This publicity would appear to have
excited the curiosity of the Landlady under whose roof t h e Lodge was held, for
in the Newcdstle Chronicle of January 6th, 1770, t h e following advertisement was
inserted :This is to acquaint the Public t h a t on Monday the first inst., being
the lodge (or monthly meeting night) of t h e Free and Accepted Masons
of the 22nd Regiment, held a t t h e Crown Inn, Newgate, Mrs. Bell the
landlady of th; house broke open a door (with a
t h a t had not
been opened for some years past, by which means she got into an
adjacent room, made two holes through the wall and by t h a t stratagem
discovered the secrets of iVlasonry, and she knowing herself to be the
first woman in the world t h a t ever found out t h a t Secret is willing to
make it known to all her own sex; so that any lady %hat is desirous
of learning t.he secrets of Freemasonry by applying to t h a t well learned
woman Mrs. Bell (that lived 15 years in and about Newgate St.) may
be instructed in the secrets of F r e e m a ~ o n r y . ~
' If Mrs. Bell did actually acquire the knowledge t h e advertisement claims,
i c is clear that shp had by no means learnt t h e lessons which we are told were so
deeply impressed upon some of the other lady candidates; b u t there is great likelihood that this story is nothing more nor less than a hoax. Probably Mrs. Bell
heard a good deal about t h e doings of t h e Lodge held on her premises, and was
inclined to let her tongue wag too freely and to pretend t o know more than really
was the case.
The advertisement, in t h e spirit of those times, was I suggest,
intended t o hold her up to ridicule and warn her t o be more discreet.
Other stories bear witness to the fact t h a t when Lodges are held on premises
to which women have access, female curiosity may lead to escapades of a like
character.
Capt. J . W. Gambier, a non-Mason, in his Lin7~sin my Life on Sea a n d
Land (pp. 138-9),4 writes :I n 1861 I arrived a t Chatham and met my father. W e went ashore,
and dined a t t h e old inn by t h e pier a t Chatham, sacred t o t h e
memory of Pickwick and his companions, and but for a f a t old waiter
'
1
2
3
4
Lane's Ilfasonic Records, p p . 117, 118.

c miscellanea L a t o m o m m 111. (N.S.), 8 1 ; A.Q.C. v., 145.
iYnrthumbrian Masonry, by Bro. John Strachan (Kenning, 1898), p. 80.

Mzscellaltea Latomorunt 111. (N.S.), 135.
Transact;ons of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge.
. . . regaling us with pot-house legends . . . we should have

been dull indeed. Amongst other anecdotes this venerable old Ganymede told us was how once a woman had hidden herself in a cupboard,
which he showed us in t h e room, to overhear what went on a t a Masonic
meeting, but that, being discovered, by her dog scenting her out, she
had been hauled out and then and there made a Mason with all due
Masonic rites.
The identification with Dickens' associations is, I think, clearly a mistake,
confusing Chatham and Rochester; but t h e pier would seem to be the Sun Pier,
which may link up t h e story with t h e Sun Tavern, a t which t h e old Royal Kent
Lodge of Antiquity, present No. 20, dating back to 1723, met for the first time
as No. 10 so long ago as 1790.
It appears, from Bro. H. F. Whyman's history of this old Lodge, t h a t after
the disastrous fire in 1820,l which destroyed the tavern and incidentally the Lodge
belongings, this body returned t o the premises rebuilt as t h e Sun Hotel, and
still was under t h a t ,roof in 1861. Thus t h e old waiter would clearly appear t o
have exhibited a cupboard a t t h a t inn then associated with No. 20.
Bro.
Whyman does not, however, include this story in his chronicle of the Lodge.
When such stories are told, for the amusement of the general public a t
the expense of the Craft, there is sometimes a tendency to assume that an
initiation was the necessary sequel to t h e adventure. I n such circumstances as
the last mentioned case it seems very unlikely that any attempt would be made
to confer such an honour; but someLirnes i t is quite clear from the descriptiona t any rate t o any Mason,-that no real initiation did take place. I am indebted
to Bro. W. R. Makins for a reference to the following account which illustrates
this point. It appeared in the Newcastle J o ~ r r n a lof 1765 under the heading of
" LONDON
"news, April 29th :One evening this week, a t a lodge of Free-Masons held a t a tavern
in the Strand, a sprightly young girl found means witfully t o introduce
herself, disguised in men's cloaths, into the lodge, when she had the
happiness of satisfying her curiosity (so inseparable from the fair sex)
and of being initiated into the sublime mysteries and arcana of that
ancient and most honourable Society; she remained some time i n the
Lodge, but t h e awkwardness of her behaviour in her new apparel,
and some other circumstances, created a suspicion, which occasioned
the supposed gentleman to be taken into another room, where her sex
was discovered. Some of the rigid old Masons were as much offended
as the Roman Matrons were when Clodius was detected in a woman's
dress a t the feast of Cybele, to which none but females were admitted,
but the younger Masons were much pleased with her spirit and
adroitness, and, with great politeness, sent the lady away, highly
satisfied with t h e novelty of the adventure.
About t h e year 1864 Lodge Tongariro, No. 705 E.C., met a t the Rutland
Hotel, a t Wanganui, New Zealand. P a r t of t h e premises, adjoining the room
used by the Lodge, had ceased to be occupied, and had become somewhat
dilapidated, and hence t h e following story as told in the recently-published
History of the Lodge :The landlord who was a member of t h e lodge, had a sister living in
t h e house. She was an elderly lady with a great thirst for knowledge;
and she determined to filld out all about Freemasonry. Accordingly
she went t o this disused part of t h e building and succeeded in removing a knot from t h e wooden partition, and from this spy-hole was able
to witness unobserved some portion of t h e proceedings. , S h e did not,
however, possess t h e gift of silence, and one evening while serving.
behind t h e bar told a gentleman who a t t h a t time was not a member of
History of the Royal Kent Lodge of Antiquity, No. 20, Chatham (1910).
2
Reviewed A.0.C'. xxsi., 152.
tbtomen and Preemasonry.
69
the Craft, although he afterwards became a Mason and subsequently

occupied t h e Master's Chair in the Lodge.
The good lady was
especially impressed with t h e third degree, which she described as
" very dreadful."
She stated she was going again t h a t night, and
that it was her intention to enlarge t h e hole in order t o get a better
view. She informed her hearer t h a t there was not a great deal to see
until the Lodge had been opened about half an hour. There was to
be ' a third ' t h a t night, and if her friend would join her in about
half an hour, he might take his t u r n a t t h e peephole. Unfortunately
for her plan, her brother who was standing near, though unobserved,
overheard this conversation, and when th8 old lady had climbed up to
her accustomed place, he crept softly behind her, and taking a firm
grip on her ear, conducted her without any ceremony t o her rightful
place behind the bar. Unlike the Hon. Elizabeth St. Leger, t h e lady
who concealed herself in a clock-case a t an Irish Lodge, she was not
initiated into Freemasonry so could not equal this famed lady.
A series of prints published between 175$ and 1802, and a picture belonging to the Lodge of Relief, No. 42, a t Bury, Lancashire, refer t o a widely disseminated story-at the expense of t h e ~ r e t h r e nof a Canterbury Lodge, in which
" Molly,"
t h e maid of t h e Inn, eavesdropping in a loft over t h e Lodge-room, is
represented to have made a precipitate dgcent owing t o the ceiling giving way.
It is not suggested t h a t this intruder was made a member of the Craft, any more
than was done in the cases of two barmaids who Bra. Speth l recorded as having
hidden themselves on t h e glass roof a t the Albert Hall when King Edward, as
Prince of Wales, was t o be installed as Grand Master. These ladies were duly
discovered by the vigilance of the Stewards, and politely conducted off the premises
a full hour before Grand Lodge assembled on t h a t memorable occasion.
An
injudicious spirit of enquiry on t h e part of a Devonshire landlady, about 1870, is
said by Bro. Mackenzie (Royal illasonic Cyclopczdia) t o have brought about t h e
removal of a Lodge which had met on her premises. More severe punishment was
meted out to an offender in France so recently as December, 1903, when it was
reported in the St. J u T ~ ~ Gazette
s'
(December 17th, 1903) :A Woman aged twenty-nine has been sentenced t o thirteen months
imprisonment a t Montpellier for having contrived to penetrate into the
masonic temple a t Cette, and for having endeavoured to initiate herself
into t h e mysteries of the Craft.
A case a t the other oxtreme of treatment'was recorded some years since on
the information of Bro. H. F . T w i s ~ . ~I t appears t h a t during the eighteenseventies a lady obtained some knowledge of the Craft ceremonies performed by a
military Lodge a t the Mauritius. Through a slit in the wall of the bungalow she
witnessed some part of the ceremony and afterwards disclosed the circumstance
to her husband, who was a member of the Lodge and had been present a t the
initiation. H e felt bound in his turn t.o disclose it t o the Lodge, which treated
the matter in a very common sense manner, neither attempting t o inflict a penalty
nor force an initiation, because they considered the knowledge gained was really
of no moment, in fact, " ludicrously imperfect, inconsequent and unmeaning."
The Bristol Times and Mirror in 1907 printed t h e following particulars
from " a little pamphlet published by J. P. Babington a t Bowling Green
Virginia " of CATHERINE
SWEET, an alleged girl-Freemason, who witnessed the
proceedings of a Lodge of which, luckily for her, no less than five relatives-her
uncles-were members. The story, which is well though somewhat lengthily told
with other, and characteristically -American touches of description, proceeds as
follows :I n the town where she was brought up, t h s school which she attended'
occupied the first floor of a two-storey frame building. The top floor
1
TVhnt i s Freemoson~!l? A Lecture by Bro G . W. Speth. 1892. (Kenninp).

Bro. H. F. Berry, as he was then known. Member of the Lodge, 1907-1919.
d.q.C'. viii., 23.
Transactions of the Quatztor Coronati Lodge.
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.
IVomen and Freemasonry.
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,
Transactions of the Qzcatuor Coronati Lodge.
72
The Public Advertiser for March 7th, 1759, containeh an advertisement

as follows :' l FORFEMALE
SATISFACTION.".
W H E R E A S THE MYSTEEYof Freemasonry has been kept a profound
Secret for several Ages, till a t length some Men assembled themselves
a t the Dover C'astle, in the parish of Lambeth, under pretence of
knowing t h e secret, and likewise in opposition to some gentlemen that
are real Freemasons, and hold a Lodge a t t h e same house; therefore,
to prove t h a t they are no more than pretenders, and as the Ladies
have sometimes been desirous of gaining knowledge of the Noble nrt
(sic), several regular-made Masons, (both ancient and modern,) members of oonstituted Lodges in this metropolis, have thought proper to
unite into a select Body a t Beau Silvester's, the Sign of t h e Angel,
Bull Stairs, Southwark, and stile themselves UNIONS,think it highly
expedient, and in justice t o the fair sex, to initiate them therein.
provided they are women of undeniable character; for tho' no Lodge
as yet (except the Free Union. Masons) have thought proper to admit
women into the Fraternity, we, well knowing they have as much Right
to attain to the secrets as those Castle Humbugs, have thought proper
so to do, not doubting but they will prove an honour to the Craft;
and as we have had t h e honour to inculcate several worthy Sisters
therein, those t h a t are desirous, and. think themselves capable of
having the Secret conferred on them, by proper Application, will be
admitted, and the charges will not exceed the Expences of our Lodge.
This effusion was evidently a hoax a t t h e expense'of the Brethren who are politely
6,enom'inated the " Castle Humbugs," an argumenturn a d absurdurn t h a t one
might as well perpetrate the folly of making women Freemasons as recognise these
male pretenders a t Lambeth.
Another facetious advertisement of a little later date, and very similar
purport, is quoted from a newspaper of 1762 l:C . LOGE C.
Pour vincre que les Francs Massons
AVERTISSEMENT
AUX DAMES,etc.
ne sont pas telles que le public les a representks en particulier l a sexe
Feminine cet Loge juge a propos de receivoir des Femmes aussi bien
que des Hommes.
?V.B.-Les
Dames seront introduits dans la Loge avec la Ceremonie
accoutum6e ou le Serment ordinaire e t , le reel Secret leur seront
administr6es.
On comrnencera a recevoir des Dames Jeudy 11 de
Mars 1762, a t Mrs. Maynard's, next door to t h e Lying-in Hospital,
Brownlow Street, Long-acre. L a Forte sera ouverte a 6 Heures du
Les Dames et Messieurs sont pri6es de ne pas venir apr&s
Soir.
sept. L e prix est 2 1 , 1s.
One need only comment t h a t the writer's French was as weak as his humour.
Bro. Sadler, in his inaugural a d d r e s ~ ,drew
~
attention to a song entitled
" Tke Modern Masons,"
published about 1750, which refers to a convivial society
admitting both sexes t o its ranks. It cIearly was only Masonic in name and gloried
in its inconsistency. The burden of t h e verses is:
Let Ancient Masons boast their stile
On scenes of Mirth we build our fame
Contented with a Modern's Name.
The illustration heading the music depicts ladies and gentlemen together a t a
meeting, and we read :From Huntingdon's Great Earl we take
The Badge which our Grand Master wears,
! Hzstor!~ of Szgnboards
Piccad~llg,1867), p. 417-8.
2
A.q.L'. (1910) xxiii., 328
. . . Larxvood and Hotten
(John Camden Hotten,
Women and Freemasonry.

and the ladies are exhorted:
Let every Sister too be there
With gayest Form and beauteous Face
and in another verse:

Then to the Forest haste away
There we'll the Hours in Mirth improve
The Chase we'll Follow all the Day
And revel all the Night in Love.
Bro. Sadler recorded a body calling themselves the ,%fodern Diasons Lodge,
meeting a t Silvester's Gardens in 1741, and an advertisement 'of February, 1774,
couched in facetious kerms, of a similarly-named body holding a " Grand Lodge"
a t Reading; but whether these gatherings were off-shoots of the society celebrated
in the song or admitted women is quits uncertain. This society would be very
much on the lines of some of those I have referred to as in vogue on the Continent.
Amongst the Lodge Collections, Bro. Songhurst has a curious old play-bill
referring to a performance by "Mr. Barrington & Family" given a t the Black
Horse Inn, Qxenden Street, and elsewhere. It was a miscellaneous entertainment including " The World as i t goes, or a Cap to fit us all," and amongst other
items " An Eulogium on Masonry, by Sister Barrington," and
Part the Third

An Operatical Piece in one Act, (never performed here,) called
THE FEMALE
FREEMASON;
Or, A Peep into the Lodge Room
With an Exhibition of the various
Symbolic Emblems of Masonry,
Written by Companion Barrington, clo3thed in the full Order
of the most Excellent Super Excellent
ROYALARCH
The whole performance to close with
The ~ & c i ~ l e of
s Free Masonry.
Written & to be spoke by Brother Barringtom.
The bill was printed by Epps at Rochester, and has written on i t the name of
the Inn as above and the date Friday 14th January, but unfortunately no year.
There
are some cases on record in which as an exceptional honour t o a
woman playing a man's part an initiation has been attempted.
The French Masonic historian Clavel, in his History (Histoire Pittoresque
de la Franche Mqonnerie), tells us the story of MME. DE XAINTRAILLES,
as .
follows :Although the rule which forbids women admission to Lodges is
absolute, yet i t has once been infringed under very remarkable circumstances. The Lodge of " Les Fr'eres Artistes," presided over by
Brother Cuvelier de Trie, was giving a f8te of Adoption. Before the
introduction of the ladies, the brethren had begun their ordinary work.
Among the.visitors who were waiting in the ante-chamber was a young
officer in the uniform of a major of cavalry.
H e was asked for his
certificate. After hesitating for a few momenh, he handed a folded
paper to %he Expert, who without opening it, proceeded to take i t to
the Orator. This paper was an aide-de-camp's commission, issu'ed to
Madame de Xaintrailles, wife of the general of t h a t name, who like
some other republican heroines had distinguished herself in the wars
of the revolution, and had won her rank a t the point of her -sword.
When the Orator read to the Lodge the c o n k 4 h of this Commission,
-
Trro~suctionsof the Quatuor Coronati Lodge.

the astonishment was general.
They grew excited, and i t was
spontaneously decided t h a t t h e first degree, not of Adoptive Masonry,
but of real Masonry, should be conferred there and then on a lady,
who, so many times, had displayed all the virtues of a man, and had
deserved to be charged with important missions, which required as
much courage as discretion and prudence. They a t once proceeded to
Mme. de Xaintrailles, to acquaint her with t h e decision of t h e Lodge,
and t o ask her if she would accept a hitherto unprecedented favour.
H e r reply was in the affirmative. " I am a man for my country," she
said, " I will be a man for my brethren." The reception took place.
with proper modesty; and from t h a t time Mme. de Xaintrailles often
assisted
the work of t h e Lodges.
I find t h a t Bro. Cuvelier de T r i e l was one of the founders of the Lodge in
question in 1797, and occupied the chair in 1802, which serve6 t o give a date to
this episode.
The case of t h e COUNTESS
HADIKBARKOCZYarises out of the same line of
argument.
This lady, born in 1833 and married in 1860, was her father's sole heiress,
and, being the last of her race, the Hungarian Courts allowed her to take the
Her friends in Freemasonry were equally willing, it would
place of a son.
appear, to concede to her t h e privileges of a man in t h e Craft, for in 1875 she
was initiated in a Lodge held under the Grand Orient of Hungary. For this
violation of t h e principles of the Order, t h e governing body instituted proceedings
against t h e Deputy Master of t h e Lodge (Bro. GBza Mocsary), who conducted the
initiation, for " breach of t h e Masonic vow, unjustifiably conferring Masonic
Degrees, doing t h a t which degrades a Freemason and Freemasonry, and for
Proceedings were also taken " against the
knowingly violating the Statutes."
Orator, khe Junior Warden, and t h e Secretary for the same offences, excepting
t h e third, and against all the other members- of t h e Lodge for the last-n&med
offence."
All were found guilty, and the judgments ranged in severity from
expulsion from t h e Order for ever t o three months' suspension from membership.
Tlie Grand Orient decided t h a t t h e initiation was null and void. t h a t the Countess
was not t o be admitted into any Lodge under its jurisdiction under penalty of
erasure of the Lodge, and requested all Grand Lodges to do the same.
The
Countess was requested to return the invalid certificate.
It is said thak t h e Countess, who was a well educated woman, took great
interest in Freemasonry, mastered the rituals of almost all the degrees, and was
well acquainted with a few Masons, through whom she eventually succeeded in
being admitted into t h e Craft.
I n the Freemasons' Qzcarterly Review of 1839 (p. 325) an account is given
of a Spanish lady, who, in order t o save the life of her brother, whom she much
resembled, impersonated him a t ,a Masonic Lodge of which he was a member.
She was taken there by her father, who was a Mason and had given her sufficient
information to enable her to play t h e part. After some romdntic adventures,
both brother and sister are stgted to have escaped ftom the troubles-apparently
political-which
threatened them, and to have retired to England. The story
needs further particulars to confirm i t as any more than a romantic tale.
A Naval Brother afforded information of a curious experience of Spanish
Freemasonry of a kind which occurred at Minorca in 1887. Being a t P o r t Mahon
with the British Fleet, he received invitation, in common with other Freemasons,
t o visit t h e Lodge ashore.
Upon being ushered into the meeting, after usual
ceremonies, t h e visitors were surprised to find several ladies seated in the Lodge
and wearing the regalia of t h e Order. The ladies took equal share with t h e men
in t h e Lodge work, and acquitted themselves most creditably, and, wh9t is more,
did not neglect charges more peculiarly their own, for two of %he Sisters had their
1
f e n n i n g ' s Masonic CyclonrrtIicc. 143.
Mzscellanea lhtomomm 111. (N.S.), 117.

Miscellanea Latomrum 111. (N.S.), 35.
A.$).C1. v., 66, and Titbits, January 6th, 1892.
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
A . Q . ~ .vi., 1 1 6 7 ; vii., 169.
76
Transactions of the Quatuor Coromati Lodge.
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 :-
1 much appreciate the kind reception accorded t o my paper and the

interesting comments which its discussion afforded.
With regard to Bro. Baxter's remarks, I am not, of course, concerned to
champion t h e authenticity of any of the cases I have mentioned, b u t I think
that, i n t h e light of Bro. Conder's and Bro. Chetwode Crawley's very careful
researches, confirmed by the endorsement of such authorities as Bros. Hughan
and Speth, he is unnecessarily sceptical about t h e case of Mrs. Aldworth.
It is a very general experienoe that when an incident becomes a matter of
common knowledge there is an 'unfortunate tendency for people to be careless
to mention tlie current press
about dekails. Numerous memorial tablets-not
notices-afford frequent examples of such improbabilities in details. It has been
reserved for an iimerican Masonic contemporary (Brotherhood, February, 1920)
to take severely to task an English newspaper (the Manchester Dispatch, January
13th, 1920), which, on the recent death of Lady Mary Aldworth, daughter of
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.
NOTES AND QUERIES.

E F R ~ R EAMERICAIN.-since the appearance of P a r t I. of
Vol. xxxii. of A.Q.C., wl~ichcontains my paper on The Origin
of Additioncrl Degrees and the Uisctission which followed the
reading, I have received the following interesting communication from Ero. Chas. A. Brockaway, of Brooklyn, U.S.A. :I
I n the library of the G.L. of Pennsylvania there is a Certificate

issued by Stephen Morin, who was commissio~zedin 1761, by
the G.L. of France and the Council of the Emperors of the
East and West in joint Session, t o establish a lodge and
"perfect and sublime Masonry." This Certificate was issued
to Ossonde VerriBre, a planter, resident of Port-au-Prince and
inember of the lodge L a Parfaite Union, one of the lodges
of which Franqois L a Marque is credited with being a member as quoted by you 8 . Q . C . xxxii., 53. On the back of this
Certificate are four endorsements. The second one reads:" 1766.
J'ay B t B r e p Prince de Jlm (i.e., Jerusalem) dans
" la loge Ecc. la Parfaite Harmonie du Port-au-Prince en
" Mars, 1766, f r Boyer Major du Regim. d'Angoumois tenant
" le Septre, e t f r Lamarque de 17Angleterre .
. . [here
" are
three words illegible]."
I thozght you wauld be
interested in the statenlent here t h a t La Marque was an
Englishman.
Bro. Brockaway's communication is most welcome.
Referring to difficulties
caused by eccentric names he goes on to say t h a t he has met a companion whose
baptismal name is Royal Arch Mason, and concludes:-"
What trouble this may
" get some investigator into some day ! "
J. E . S. TUCKETT.
Constitutions.--Bro.
Gordon P. G. Hills's definition of the term Gonstitulion in A.Q.C. xxxii., 106, is capable of expansion from the use of the term in
ecclesiastical law.
I n the English Code of 1604 it is used as synonymous with Canon both in
tile title (Constitictions d3 Canons; Latin version: Constztzitiones sive Calzones)
and in the body of the code. Constitution occurs in the English version in
Canons 10, 12, 42, 110, and 141; and translates comstifzctio in the Latin version
excepting the first example, where the Latin has sas~ctione.~.
Canon E . G. Wood, probably t h e most eminent English canonist, has two
definitions of the term in his work The Regal Power of the Cltlirch (Cambridge,
1888) : " Next it [sc. the canon law] is said t o be constitrrtzr~n, that is, i t is duly
forlnulated either in canons or decrees " (p. 21).
Under this term are
" The remaining source of canon law is constitutions.
included three classes of the written law, (I)the canons of councils, (2) judicial
decisions or decretals, (3) the dicta of the Fathers" (p. 87).
Canon T. A. Lacey draws a distinction between canons and constitutions:
" Canons are rules of conduct, Constitutions are detailed directions " (TIundbooL
of Church Law, London, 1903, p. 11). The last sense of detailecl directioms is
e~ninentlysuitable to the use of the term in the Hook of C'onatittctions of Grand
Lodge.
The Concise Oxford Dictionar?/ gives t.he historical meaning of the term
as "decree, ordinance," and quotes for an illustration the Constitutions of
Clarendon (1164).
CHARLESGOULD.
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.
Transactions of the Qztatuor Coronati Lodgy.
OBITUARY.
is with regret tliat we have to record the death of the

following Brethren :-
.Harris Samuel Beaman, of ~ e n n i n ~ t oP na r k , ' ~ o n d o n ,

on the 31st March, 1920.
Bro. Beaman was a P.M. of the
Ionic Lodge No. 227. H e joined our Correspondence Circle in
October, 1905.
John Bodenham, of Newport, Salop., on the 15th
February, 1920. Our Brother had held the offices of Assistant Grand Director
of Ceremonies in Grand Lodge and Grand Sword Bearer in Grand Chapter. H e
was a Life Member of our Correspondence Circle, which he joined in November,
1887.
Arnold E. Davey, of Adelaide, South Australia, on the 13th March,
1920, a t the age of 58 years. Bro. Davey was a P.M. of Lodge No. 38 (S.A.C.).
H e joined our Correspondence Circle in June, 1905.
Dr. Royal Amenzo Gove, of Tacoma, Wash., U.S.A., on the 21st
January, 1920.
Bro. Gove was a Past Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of
Washington, and for 13 years acted as our Local Secretary for that State.
Herbert lngle Hankin, of St. Ives, Huntingdonshire, on the 19th

March, 1920.
Rro. Hankin attained the rank of Pr.G.W. in t h e Craft and
tliat of Pr.G.Sc.N. .in the R.A. He was a Life Member of our Correspondence
Circle, which he joined in January, 1900.
John Patterson Keys, of Rochester, P a . , U.S.A., on the 5th January,
1920. H e was a member of Lodge No. 229 and Chapter No. 167, joining our
Correspondence Circle in November, 1917.
Judge Daniel F. Macwatt, of Ontario, on the 12th February, 1920.
Bra. Macwatt had held the office of Grand Master and Grand Z. in Canada.
H e became a member of our Correspondence Circle in June, 1911.
H e had held
Francis Charles Marty, of Buenos Aires, during 1919.
the offices of Pres.Dis. B.G.P. and Dis.G.J. in t.he Argentine.
Bro. Narty
was a Life Member of our Correspondence Circle, which he joined in May, 1898.
Arthur Price, of Chepstow, Mon., on the 10th January, 1920.

Bro.
Price attained the ra.nk of P.Pr.G.D. in Craft and t h a t of P.Pr.G.So. in t.he
R . A . H e joined opr Correspondence Circle in October, 1914.
John Tate, of Belfast, in Narch, 1920. Our Brother had held the office
of Dep.Dis.G.M.: Bombay, and was a Past Grand Deacon of-England. H e had
been a member of our Correspondence Circle since Odober, 1893.
Rowland George Venables, of Oswestry, Salop, on the 9th March,
1920. Bro. Venables held the offices of Dep.Pr.G.M. and Grand Superintendent
in Shropshire, and had been appointed Past Grand Deacon and Past Grand
Sojourner in Grand Lodge and Grand Chapter respectively.
MAY,
HE Lodge met a t Frceinasons' Hall a t 5 p.m. Present:-Bros. J. E.

Shum Tuckett, P.Pr.G.R., Wilts., W.M.; Gordon P. G. Hills,
P.Pr.G.W., Berks., I.P.M. ; Lionel Vibert, P.Dis.G.W., Madras, ns
KM'. ; Herbert Bradley, P.Dis.G.M., Madras, J.W. ; W. J. Songhurst,
P.G.D., Secretary; Sir Alfred Robbins, Pres.B.G.P., Steward; W. B.
Hextall, P.G.D., P.M.; J. P. Simpson, P.A.G.R., P.M.; and J. W.
McNaughton, Tyler.
F . J. Asburg,
Also t h e following members of the Correspondcncc Circle :-Bros.
Robert Blake, R . J. Houlton, L. G. Wearing, \Talter Dewes, Sidncty Maddigan, W. H.
Phillips, John Law~ance, Hurry Tipper, P.G.St.B., P. H. Fox, G. C. Pnrkhurst
Baxter, F. C. Uickell, D. D. Wehb, Fred. Armitage, Wm. C. Ullman, George Norman,
P.A.G.D.C., A. H . Dymond, Leslie Hemens, C. F. Sykes, H. \V. Darnes, 9.Presland,
Percy H. Hor!ey, A. Gilchrist, F. Howard Humphris, C. R . Macauley, P. 11'. Howard,
F. W. Golby, P.A.G.D.C., F. W. Le Tall, J. Proctor UTatson, R. Wheatley, Herbert L.
Simpson, E. Glaeser, H . Johnson, J. Iiikster, T. Atkinson, W. J. \frillinms, F. J.
Boniface, H . Mills, J. F. H. Gilbard, mid Walter Berry.
Also Bro. H . Hadolv, P.M., Kerala Lodge No. 2188, Visitor.
Letters of apology for non-attendance were reported from Bros. F i l l i a m \\Tatson,

P.A.G.D.C., S.\V.; Edward Conder, P.M.; \fr. H . Rrlnnds, P.A.G.D.C., P . M . ; F. H .
Goldney, P.G.D., P.M. ; John T. Thory, P.G.D., P.M. ; Edward Armitage, P.G.D.,
P.M. ; Cecil Polvell, P.G.D., P.M. ; R. H. Bnxtrr, I.G. ; and G. Groiner, P.A.G.D.C.,
P.M.
Four Lodges and fifty-eight Brethren were admitted to the membership of the
Correspondence Circle.
A vote of congratulation was passed to t h e following members of t h e Correspondence

Circle who had received honours a t t h e recent Fcstival of Grand Lodge :-His IIonour
Judge Turner, Junior Grand Deacon ; I. A. Symmons, Assistant Grand Registrar ; J. W.
Stevens, Assistant Grand Superintendent of Works; Charles Curd, Robert Audley,
Cecil D. Hills and Percy Allen, Assistant Grand Directors of Ceremonies; F. W. Ward,
Assistant Grand Standard Bearer; W. Shepherd, Assistant Grand Pursuivaat; Sir
Ernest Cooper, P a s t Grand Warden; Dr. W. 0. Steinthal, P a s t Grand Deacon; and
Major W. TVilliinsot~, J. H. Roocock, K. W. Mounsey, E. W. Roach, and G. Hollom~ay,
Past Assistant Grand Directors of Ceremonies.
Bro. J. E. SIIVM TUCKETT,P.Pr.G.R., Wilts., W.M., read t h e following Paper :-
Transactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge
L'ORDRE
lIP /In0
DE LA FELICITE.
J . 1;. S . 1117C'lils'T1', T.D.,111.9. (Cnrrtclb.), P.C.S.,

lV.&I., A o . 2076.
URING the eighteen years which followed the foundation of

Charles Radcliffe's Lodge a t Paris in 1725 Freemasonry i a
France came more and more into view and the number of Lodges
and Brethren, not only in Paris but throughout the Provinces,
increased rapidly. The attitude of the Government and Police
towards the new Society became one of suspicion and hostility,
but by the general public i t was viewed with wonder and
curiosity. And when, as happened during the later years of this
period, the profane world became cogilizant of Masonic Degrees and Orders endowed
with imposing Clrivalric Titles, those feelings began to be tinged with something
0:' envy.
If contemporary references are to be trusted this was particularly so
with the fair sex, wllich is represented as seriously piqued at its persistent exclusion from all participation in Masonic labours and intercourse. It was not long
before attempts were made to create a Society or Order in imitation of Freemasonry
but drawing its members from both sexes and obviously intended to eclipse its rival
and drive it into obscurity and oblivion. The Order of Mopies founded in Vienna
in 1738 was a t first confined to Roman Catholics of both sexes and was a r ~ r b s t i t u t e
for Freemasonry then coming under the Papal Ban. The earliest effort in France
was undoubtedly the Ordre cle /(L FPlicitC, about whicl~ but little has hitherto
appeared in English, and that 1it.tle not altogether reliable. Two other Orders
were founded a little later, L'Ordrr (!PSSEIJT S A G E S , Co1npngno7r.s tl'Ulycsr, 071
Z'Orclre d e Sfinervr, and I'Orrlre clr P(11l~rclir~m
~ I Sott~,rr,rin
I
Conuril tlr lcc Snqrr.cr
(which claimed to date from 1637 but is certainly later than 1737). But androgyne
8ociCtCs Burlesques were by no means a new invention. T,'Ortlrr c/es Egyptiens,
founded a t Metz in about 1635, is described in the . ~ / L I I I O of
~ I the
~ P SAbbe Arnauld;
L'Ordre d e s cote nu^ is rzferred to by Boileau, L a Bruyiire, and by Des Maizeaux
L'Orclrr , / P SC J I P I et
~.CJ~CZ
(?P
~ ./cc J O J E , founded
in the V i e d e Sairrt-F:~1r11110/7~?~;
in 1696, printed its S t n t ~ r t rin 8' in 1698 ; L'Ortlrr ( / e 1.r JIoiuson, founded a t Avignon
~ ~ cl? In B . ; L P Rtgi7trrnf cle It1
in 1700, published its journal Lrs I V n r t ~ ~(I?I l I'O.
C'nlotte appeared a t about the same time and added several words derived from its
observances to the French Language; L'Ortlrr tle ltr J f o ~ t c h rd Jfi.1, founded bv
il3e I>ucliesse de Maine in 1703, possessed its Meda! of Membership inscribed
L.BAR.D.SC.D.P.D.L.O.DL . M A.M. (Loztinr, Bnronnr d e Scrccttr, Directrice prrprt~relle d e I'Orclre cle I ~ LJfortchr ri J f i e l ) , of which an engraving may be fouild
in the RPcre'ofions Numismatiques of Tobiesen-Duby,
1786. These Societies had
their Grand-Masters. Grand-Mistresses, Trinkets, Tokens, Jewels, and Medals, and
oxacted an Oath or P r o m i ~ efrom their Csndidatdes, but-and
this is what marked
a new departure in the Ordre cle In FPliciti-there
is no indication that they
worked a Ritual or conferred any Degrees.
1r1 no sense were they ' Secret
Societies ' or even ' Societies possessing Secrets,' which is by no ineaiis the Fame
1hing .
I n 1738 a t Rouen was founded an O r d r - ctes Chet~ctlirrsRnmrurs et D n n ~ ~ s
Rameuses which met with b u t little success there. This was probably the germ
from which sprang the Orclre d e In FilicitP which appeared in Paris a t some time
between 1740 and 1743. Lenning says 1742 and Thory 1743. Clavel intplirs 17.70,
but I think this is an error due to reliance upon Le Parfctit A J f n ~ o n1744,
,
wllich
is supposed to contain evidence t h a t Mnro7,nrrie dJ.4doptio?, comnienced as early
as 1730. The error has been further bolstered u p by the fact t h a t Willaume in
the Tziilercr states that the Ordre d e l a F i l i c i t i and J l a ~ o n n e r i ed ' d d o p t i o n are

identical.
Clavel's note on the Orclre cle l a F t l i c i t l is quoted by Bro. E . L.
Hawkins in a Paper in A . Q . C . xxiv., p. 7, as follows:'' . . . about 1730 ( 1 ) Female Freemasoilry was instituted. W e do
'. not know who was its inventor; but i t made its first appearance in
" France, and i t is evideritly a product of French wit.
The rules of this
" Masonry, however, were only definitely settled after 1760, and i t was
" recognized and sanctioned by tlie governing body of Masonry only in
" the year 1774.
A t first it assumed various names and various rituals,
" which have not reached us.
I n 1743 i t had some nautical emblems and
" a vocabulary: and the Sisters used to make the fictitious voyage from
" tlie Isle-of-Felicity u n d e r t h e sail of tlie Brothers and piloted by them.
" It was then the Order of t h e H a p p y Ones (E'tlicitairea), which com" prised the degrees of
Cabin-boy, of Captain, of Commodore, and of
" Vice Admiral, and had for Admiral, t h a t is to say, for Grand Master,
" Brother de Chambonnet. v110 was its Author.
The Candidate was
" made t o swear to keep the secret colicerning the ceremonial that accom" panied
the initiation. If i t was a man he swore ' never t c take
" ' anchorage in any port where a vessel of t h e order was already found
" ' a t anchor.' If it was a woniali, she promised ' not to receive a qtrange
" ' vessel in her port, so long as a vessel of the order should be there a t
' anchor.' She was sworn sitting in t h e place of the Commodore or
A split i n this
" President who was kneeling during this formality.
" order gave birth in 1745 to t h e Order of t h e 1i'ni.qhts nncl L a d i ~ sof t h e
" A n c h o r which was only a refinement of the first and preserved its
" ftrms." (Clavel, H i s t . pittor. cle ZCL P.ilJ., p . 111.).
Uro. Woodford in a brief notice of the Order says t h a t i t was founded by ' M. de
' Chambonnet and some sea officers.' Ragon says ' M. de Chambonnet and sollle
other sea officers.' Woodford continues t h a t tlie ' Society was not Masonic b u t
' Social-some say too much so, though there is no proof of it.' He gives the 4
Degrees as (1) Mousse, (2) ,Pntron (which he translates ' Patron ' instead of
' Captain l ) , (3) Chef d'Bscadre, (4) Vice-Aniiral. He goes on .to say :" The Sign of the Order m-3s an Anchor sucpended from three silken cords.
" It had a ritual and vocabulary made u p of nautical teruis.
It did not
" last long for owing to a quarrel in 1745 a portion of tlie Society formed
" a new Society called ' Ordre des Chevaliers e t Clievalikres de 1'Anclire.'
" The first account of i t seems to be given in " L ' A n t r o p o p h i l e o u l? Secret
" " et lea fllixtkres d e l7O7drc d e Irc F t l i c i t t , devoilts pour le honl~ezird e
" " folct l' Univers. A -4rctopolis. 1716."
I t s Word of Greeting is
" said to nave been the Hebrew ' Shalom Alechem,' Peace be with yoi:.
" It was one of thoso meaningless Androgyna Orders which did, we feel
" compelled
to say, Frencii Free-Masonry much harm."
(Masonic
Cyclopdia.) .
I n these acconnts there is much that is correct and more t h a t is misleading or
untrue. The work L ' B n t r o y o p h i l e &c. I have not seen, b u t i t certainly was not
the first exposure of the secrets of this Order, for I have in my collection two
earlier ones which I shall presently describe and translate. Before doing so i t is
desirable to offer a few remarks by way of introduction.
I n the first place the Order of Felicity was not in any sense an addit.ion t o
Freemasonry nor can it bo regarded as an early form of, or even the germ from
which developed the M a ~ o n n e r i ed 7 A d o p t i o n , which ultimately secured the recognition of the French Grand Lodge or Orient. Clavel, Willaume and Woodford
and (in following them) Bro. Hawking are misleading on Lhis point. The Order
was, and loudly proclaimed t h a t it was, a ' rival ' institution:Rival de la Ma~onnerie
Notre Ordre est d'autant respectk,
I1 a de plus la nouveaut6
E t des Dames la c3mpagnie.
' C
84
Transactions of the Quatuor Coronuti Lodge.
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.
Corr. to W.M. of Lodge

,,
M.C.
,, Sec. and Orator
,, S.W. ( 1 )
,, . J.W. ( 1 )
,,
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
Transactiom of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge.
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
Forn~ularyl of the Ceremonial l in Use I in the Order of Felicity I observed

in each Degree a t tlze time of I the Reception of the Knights and I Ladies
of the said Order. I With l a Dictionary of khe Nautical Terms l in
Use in the Squadrons and their 1 Significations in French. I To this is
added a Collection of Songs which I have so far been composed on this
subject. I M.DCC.XLV. I (12').
rev.
2
3 4
blank.
p. 5
Fornlulary I of the Ceremonial l in Use l in t h e Order of Felicity. I

Union being the basis of the Order no one should be admitted
(into it) without the unanin~ous consent of all the members of a
1 1. blank.
P. 6
P 7
P. 8
Squadron. To hold a Squadrcn a t least five are necessbry and no one

may receive (candidates) unless he is in possession of the required
Authority for the purpose conferred by his Warrant for the Roadstead
within which the Squadron is held.
When a Squadron is assembled and it is desired to enter the
room in which it is held two knocks are given upon the door, the
Cherubin replies by t h e same signal and then goes to warn t h e Commodore t h a t there is an Alarm. Having received permission to find
out who has knocked a t the door, if i t is a Brother, he is examined as
to t h e Planks of his Vessel before he is admitted; if i t is a Candidate
for the Order he is introduced in a manner t o be described later on.
To be received into the Order three essential qualities are
demanded, Charm of disposition, gentleness of character, and skill for
Sea service.
The l" Degree to be reached is t h a t of Cabin-boy.
The 2nd is t h a t of Captain.
The 3rd is that of Commodore.
The 4th is t h a t of Vim-Admiral.
There are several Grand Oficers of the Order. There are other Officers,
private and inferior (in rank), and lastly there are Packet-Boats.
When anyone presents himself for admission t o the Order, the Master
of Ceremonies remains outside the Squadron with the Candidate. H e
knocks a t the door in t h e customary manner, the Cherubin opens and
finds out if the Candidate has the zeal and talent necessary. He then
goes to report to the Commodore and with his permission he introduces
them both. The Commodore himself questions the Candidate to make
sure whether it is really genuine zeal or merely curiosity which makes
him desire the Order of Chivalry. The Commodore being acquainted
with the Candidate's niotives causes him to be placed on the N. side
and there t o recite the Supplication t o Saint Nicholas, Patron of the
Order, as follows:Oraison
A Monsieur Saint Nicolas
Toy qui dans l'horreur du
naufrage,
Soutiens le cceur des Matelots,
Toy, qui d'un mot calme
I'orage
E t fais taire le bruit des flots;
Saint Nicolas sois favorable
Au z&le qui m'appelle b toi;
Fais que ton Scrutin redoubtable
m'admette L vivre sous t a loi;
Qge sur tes Escadres brillantes,
Je serve & commande B mon
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,
Transactions of the Quatuo~'Coronati Lodge.
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
The Commodore next makea him promise Fidelity to the. Order

in general, Obedience to the Grand Master, and to his,Superiors, in all
which concerns the Order, to wear the Anchor moored to his Heart by
the Cables corresponding to his Degree, to contribute by all means in
his power to the happiness, the comfort and advantage of all the Knights
and Ladies, to allow himself to be led to the Isle of Felicity and to lead
others there whenever he knows the way, to answer summonses, to
submit t o all fines and penalties which. shall be inflicted upon him when
he has failed in respect of any of the Statutes. And never to cast
Anchor in any Port where a Vessel of the Order is actually a t the time
Footnote.-If
i t is a Lady she is made to promise:a t Anchor.
' never to receive a strange Vessel in her Port so long as a Vessel of the
' Order is there a t Anchor already.'
[Note.-Vaisseau
(Vessel) =Homme (Man) : Port (Port) = Cceur
(Heart). ]
p. 15
After the Obligation the Commodore demands of the Knights

if they are satisfied with his promises, and they signify approval by an
Oar-Stroke; all (the members of) the Squadron then raise the right
hand upon the head of the new Knight and lay down their hats until
the Commodore has concluded the Communication of the Secret to him
and has given him the Accolade with the Sword. The Master of the
Ceremonies (then) conducts him to share (the Secrets) with all the
Knights and Ladies, and the Commodore's Oarsman who affixes an
Anchor and Cable to his button-hole commands him ever to wear i t
over his heart, saying: - ' May your Anchor never drag: May St.
' Nicholas ever lead you straight. to the Port.'
[Note.-Port
(Port or Harbour) = C a u r (Heart). ]
"
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
She then takes the Obligation in which there is no other mark of

distinction than those already indicated above. After the Obligation
the Commodore places both his hands upon the shoulders of the Lady
while communicating the Word.
[Note.-Thory states t h a t the ' Statuts et Formulaires ' were read
- directly after the Obligation.]
Ceremony
for the Reception of Captains.
The Knights and Ladies present dispose themselves in a circle
intertwining their arms which are pas& behind the back. The Master
of Ceremonies introduces the Cabin-Boys ( ?the Candidates), the juniors
being m the left of the one whom he receives (first) because they are
instructed later in the Secret. They are examined as to the Planks of
the Ship and of the Frigate and also in the Language of the Order.
[Note.-Vaksseau
(Vessel .or Ship)= Homme (Man) : ~ r e & t t e
(Frigate) =Petite Femme (Young Lady) .]
Having satisfied they are made to place their right hands upon their
heads and promise never to reveal the new Secrets about-to be entrusted
to them.
After this has been done these (new Secrets) are communicated to them with an explanation and they are then examined
as to what they remember concerning them. Then they interlace their
arms with t,he other (members) and the Ceremony ends.
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
I n the Reception of the inferior Office& of the Order hands are

laid upon the shoulders while the Word is given and the Accolade is
given with the Jewel of their OBice.
I n the Reception of Packet-Boats the Accolade is given with a
Stick or Whip.
[Pages 20-35. Chadsons. See Addendum.]
Transactions of t h e Q,uatuor Coronuti Lodge.
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:-
1 1. blank, not included in t h e pagination.
p. 1 Title
The Means l whereby to rise to 1',110 Highest Rank l in the Navy

without serving a t Sea I or I The Secrets of the Knights of the Order l of
Felicity. 1 Dedicated I t o the very polite and very veracious I Bro. Profane Leonard Ga I banon, Author of tlie Cate I chism of the Freemasons. I
By Madame Pirate. I A t the Bottom of the Hold, I A t the House of
Seaman Boreas a t the Golden Anchor. I And a t the House of the
Widow Sailoress a t tlie Household Gods. I With the Approval arid
Permission of ,Zolus.
P. 2
verso of Title, blank.

[Note.-Leonard
Gabanon, whose real name was Louis Travenol,
published L e C n t C c h i s m ~ des Francs-Ma~ons . . . ri
Jerzcsalem et Limogrs in 1740. The later editions of 1747 and
1749 connect Fresmasonry wit.h the Knightly Orders. H e was
' Profane,' both t o Freemasonry and Felicity.
Pirate (Pirate) = Enne jni d e Z'Ordre (Enemy of the Order).
A Fond d e Cnle ( A t t h e Bottom of the Hold).
V e u v e Matelotte (Widow Sailoress) = Widow Pitiless.
The Dieur L n r ~ soccur in the Degree of Commodore.]
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.
[Note.-Le Parfait M q o n ozc les vtritable Secrets des qrcatre

Grades d'Aprentis, Compagnons, Ma.itres ordinaires et Eco.ssois
appeared in 1744. La F r a n c m a ~ o n n e , ozc Rtvtlatioiz des
mystdres des ,Francma~ons, par Madame V e u v e * * *,
Bruxelles, 1744, 12' The former tells of several Scots Degrees,
the latter t h a t there were seven Degrees of Freemasonry a t
that date.
Gabriel Louis Calabre PBrau (not P e r a u l t ) was born in
1700 at. Semur ( A u x o i s ) of humble parents, who destined him
for the Church. In obedience t o their wishes he was educated
with this purpose in view and presently received minor Orders.
But his heart was not in it and in addition he became involved
in a love affair which caused some scandal, but he repented
sincerely of his conduct and obtained permission to resume his
studies a t the Sorbonne.
When the time came lie refused
finally t o take Priest's Orders declaring himself to be unworthy,
and henceforth he devoted himself to literary work in which
he attained t o some considerable reputation. He commenced
but did not finish an edition of the Lettres d ' P c e s d e Chartres,
he completed tlie T'irs des Hommes Illzistres d e France of N .
Castres d'Auvigny, and issued several minor historical works
of merit. His eyesight having failed him he was through the
good officaa of Laverdy, the Contr8leur-GBnBral des Finances,
accorded a pension of 1,200 livree. Soon after an operation
for cataracts rare thing in those days-pr~ved sucoessful,
and he was able to resume his literary work. H e became Prior
of the Sorbonne and died in Paris, 31 March, 1767. H e edited
many works of famcus authors, e . g . , Hecquet's Medzcine des
Pnuvres, Collected Works of Rabelais, Boileau, de Bossuet, de
Saint-%al, Gerpain Brice, Marigny, de Feuquikres, &c. H e
also wrote himself Lettres a u Sujet d e M . le lNnrqfcis d e
Tavannes (1743), Le Secret des Francs-M@ons (1742), Recuril
A.B.C. (1745); L'klGtel Royal des Invalides (1765), folio,
with engravings by Cochin, Vie d e Jerome Bignom (1757), the

precocious child genius and friend of Grotius.
The Abbe
PBrau's remarkable Mnsonic work Le Secret des Francs-Mqona,
which appeared in 1742, is the earliest of the so-called French
' exposures ' of Freemasonry, and it claims to be written in
the interest of the Craft with the hope of promoting a reformation within it. It is dedicated to the Trks-Venerable F r b e
Procope. This eminent personage was Couteau Procope the
only son of a man of noble family a native of Palermo named
Franqois or Francesco Procope who migrating to Paris was
the first to establish them a Literary Cafe or Club-House for
writers, dramatists and such like. Le C'afC Procope became
famous and long continued to be a favourite meeting place
for the most celebrated wits and literary men.
A t Paris, in 1684, was 'born the son Couteau Prompe,
better known under his nom-de-guewe of Michel Coltelli. H e
was educated for the Church, and i t is recorded that a t the
age of nine years he delivered in the ancient Church of
the Cordeliers a kind of lay sermon or discourse in Greek of
his own composition. But he forsook the Church for medicine
and after a brilliant career as a student he took the Degree
of a Doctor in 1708 and speedily became a fashionable and
successful practitioner. Slightly deformed and by no means
good looking he seems to have posswsed very considerable
charm of manner and to have been an especial favourite with
the fair sex. H e was vivacious and witty and of imperturbable
good humour, and a great part of his time seems to have been
occupied in frequenting literary gatherings, theatrical displays
and convivial or social societies. H e married twice, his second
wife being an English lady of very considerable fortune which
enabled the Doctor to relinquish much of his medical practice
and devote himself to a r t and literature. He ended his days
a t Chaillot towards the close of 1753 in reduced circumstances
but with unimpaired happiness of disposition. H e was a poet
His dramatic works are: (1)
and author of some reputeArlequin Baiourd, a comedy played in London in 1719; (2)
L'AsaemblC des Cfomtdie?zs, comedy, 1724; (3) Les Pies,
comedy, 1736; (4) Pyymalion, comedy, 1741; (5) La Gageure,
1741, (part author with Lagrange) ; (6) Les Deux Basiles,
1743, (part author with de Merville).
His medical works
are: (1) A d y s e d u Systbme la Triti~ration, 1712; (2) La
Maladie du Roi, 1744 ; (3) Les Yedecins et Ghirwrgi~ns,1746,
(in a humorous vein); (4) L'Art de faire des Garqons, 1748,
(another humorous production which a brother medico took
to be serious). Dr. Procope was the subject of a comic.poem
by Claude Marie Giraud entitled La Procopiade, ou I'A pothiose
du Docteur Procope, published in 1754.
Addressing Dr.
Procope #in Le Secret des Francs-Ma~ons the Abbe PQrau
says : - l ' The keen interest you take in everything concerning
" t h e illustrious Order of Free-Masons has decided me to
" present to you this little work,"
and the Doctor is described
as " one of the Venerables of the twenty-two Lodges established
" a t Paris."
This is, of course, copied in L'Ordre des FrancsMqons traG et Le Secret des Mopses rtvClt of 1745 and in
the edition of 1778. There is no doubt that h e was a very
active and prominent Nason, and M. Simonet, who, in his
MS. of 1744, L'Zdie justc de. la SociCtt des Freys-Mqons,
refers to him as ' fameux P& de la SociBtk,' handles him
with some severity in consequence. A Masonic Poem by him
L'Ordre de la Ftlicitt.
95
entitled Apologie des Francs-Maqons appears ill all the early

collections of Chansons des Francs-Maqons and is given a
prominent place in De la Tierce's Histoire Obligations et
Statzcts d e la tr&s Vtntrable Confraternitt des Francs-Maqons
(1742).
Bro. de la Tierce concludes his ' Discours Preliminaire ' thus :We are of opinion t h a t we cannot better finish this
Discourse than by giving an Apology for Freemasons
composed a few years sinoe by the learned and worthy
Bro. Procope, Doctor of Medicine a t Paris, for i t contains the true character necessary for a genuine Brother
and Fellow (Prkre et Compagwn). It is true that i t
has already appearcd in print in various works. But
it will be agreed that it was not pobsible to omit from
this one a Piece which contains so noble and so natural
a representation of the worshipful Brotherhood.
The following lines :Le but 06 tendent nos desseins
Est de faire revivre AstrBe
E t de remettre les humains
Comme ils Btoient du tems de RhBe
may be compared with the IVO Mystery of the Ordre de la
Ptlicitt and suggest that perhaps Dr. Procope besides being a
Freemason was also a Chevalier de I'Ordre de la FBliciG.
A very interesting series of Plates illustrating Ceremonial
contained in Gabanon's (i.e., Travenol's) Catechisme of 1740
invites and will repay careful study.]
Letter
to the Author of the Catechism
of the Free Masons.
P 6
The debt we owe to you, my dear Gabanon, for a sight of the

Light reserved for Freemasons, the gift you have made to us of their
Catechism, the learned and cle+r Commentary upon the obscure parts
of the Text, all this imposes upon us the duty of making some return.
A t some little cost I discharge myself of this duty. Our Sex with all
its prerogatives affords no excuse for Pride or Ingratitude. We must
not remain beholden t o anyone, provided that we do not carry ia
extremes our readiness and - our acknowledgements.
But between a
man of learning and a lady similarly endowed i t is permissible to overstep a little those limits which restrain the baser sort, and the Public
which is only too scrupulous in taking notice of the goings-on of women,
relaxes a good deal of its rigour in favour of those who are styled
BEAUX ESPRITS. To such i t gives permission to risk a thousand
incongruities which would result in grave consequences for others.
(Such as) to rush into print in collaboration with some Famous Author,
to share his renown, to glory in his success, to hold him up for the
applause of the pit (and gallery), t o act as his A.D.C. a t his recitals
and readings of his Poems, t o possess the Household Gods in common
with him, &C. &C.
[Note.-Beyond a doubt here the allusion is to the famous liaison
between Voltaire and Gabrielle Emilie de Breteuil Marquise
de Chastelet. Voltaire's Lettres Philosophiques and certain
other of his writings gave such offence by reason of their prots
~ c t u a l l yissued f o r , his arrest.
faneness that w a ~ ~ a n were
He found i t expedient to disappear from Paris and retired to
Transactions of the Quattlor Coronati Lodge.
P. 8
Cirey on the borders of Champagne and Lorraine in company

witti the Marquise de Chasbelet.
This liaison was in full
swing in 1743.1
But I will not avenge you a t our expense for the severity which
has been meted out to you by certain coquettes whom you have used ill
in your writings. For ! what do you give them ? Verses ! Opinions !
Serenades ! This sort of cash does not circulate with them and in these
days will with difficulty pass muster out of mere curiosity even with
certain rich old widows.
I n unveiling for you the profound Secrets of Felicity, I violate
no Obligation. A Stranger t o the Order of the Anchor, even as you
are to t h a t of the Trowel, why should t h e zealous members of the one
and the other reproach us with the violation of a fidelity
[,V0 t e .-The Trowel played an important part in early French
Freemasonry and E'Ordre de la TruClle is often found employed
as an alternative name.
I n the RClation Apologetique e t
Historique the W.M. presents the Trowel to the Initiate
bidding him to erect with i t ' b Temple de votre F6licit6.' I n
Italy in its earliest days Freemasonry used the title ' Company
of the Trowel,' possibly intending thereby a reference to a
sixteent.h centilry Societd della Caccinra which is said to have
existed a t Florence.]
from which they dispense themselves. It is from them that one learns
to mock a t their Mysteries, the ridiculous pains they are a t t o cover
them up lays then1 bare. Those who are accused contradict themselves
continually, and i t calls for no great skill to be able t o expose them.
Perchance they will cry out against me as they have done against
you. Their folly will weigh them down. They want to overwhelm me
with it, but i t is all of no account. W e save the Public from all the
drudgery imposed upon Candidates.
I n undeceiving them we are
serving t h e State. Yes! dear Citizens, you (can) all of you now
assume the rank of Commodore, take i t straight off without (passing
through) the grades of Cabin-Boy, Seaman, Captain. Excused from
the intervening steps, I dispense you from the Noviciate, I cut short
the Tests.
' grade de Matelot.' This i? the only indication of
[Note.-The
a ' Degree ' of Matelot (Sailor). Matelots is Felicity for gens
sans pitie' (men without pity or mercy) .]
Wear the Anchor in vour Button-hole. t o make i t secure attach to i t
as many Cables as you please. Finally confer upon yourselves whichever of the Titles vou mav fancv.
You see, dear Gabanon, t h a t She whom you have created a
Maqonne without Apprenticeship, now makes an equally generous
return both to you and to the Public. A t an early date I hope
similiarly t o penetrat,e the Secret of the Order of the Fendeurs
[Note.-The
Order of Fendeurs (see -4.Q.C. xxii., p. 52). This
reference in a work of 1745 is of considerable interest for i t is
generally supposed t h a t the Order of Fendeurs was founded in
Paris by a certain Chev. de Beauchaine in about the year
1763. Ragon gives the date as 1747. This de Beauchaine is
described by Savalette de Langes as ' scraping a living out of
' the bounty of certain noble Masons ' (see A.Q.C. XXX.,
p. 164).]
and from one discovery t o another we shall a t last attain t o the
Philosopher's Stone.
[Note.-Is this an indication that even in 1745 Hermetic Studies
were (in popular opinion) associated with Freemasonry ?l
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 ,
Trnnsactio~nsof the Quatuor Coronati Lodge.

The initial letters of the names of these ten Timbers form the Word of
a Cabin-Boy. H e has two Signs. The First is made by holding the
tip of his right ear with his right hand. The Second by holding his
right arm stretched out down his thigh. B u t only one or the other
(not both) of these (Signs) must be made, i.e., when a Brother to make
himself known makes use of t h e first t h e reply must be given by the
second and not by the same one.
[Note.-According to Ragon these double Signs in the Degrees of
C a b i n I ~ o ~Captain,
,
and Commodore are ' Question and
Answer ' without any option as t o the order in which they
are used.
CHALOM L E K A . Hebrew=Peace be with you. This is
t h e ' Shalom Alechem ' referred to by Bro. Woodford. Were!
these the ' paroles consacrhes ' ?
Ragon gives L E K A H and
translates CHALOM as Sommeil or Sonye which is correct
(see Genesis xx., 3). H e translates L E K A H as Arnbzrlans
which I cannot ,trace.
Kermks (of Persian origin) means :-(l)
A kind of Cochineal
which infests a certain species of Green-Oak which is therefore
called the KermBs-Oak or Scarlet Oak; (2) a preparation of
Antimony and ? Sodium Carbonate called 'poudre des
Chartreux' and used as an expectorant.
p. 13
The Mystery of the (Degree of) Captain. 11'.

Q . How many Flowers have you in your Garden?
A. Nine.
Q. What is the first?
A. qenouil
- =Fennel
second
mlegantine
=Sweet Briar
=Lily
,,
third
tris
=Jonquil
,,
fourth
konquille
fifth
a ~tronelle =Southern Wood
=Jasmine
,>
sixth
hasmin
~ubereuse
= Tuberose
,*
seventh
+maranthe
=Amaranthe
eighth
m auge
=Sage
,,
ninth
[Il'ote.-The
following variations from the above occur in (1)
~ a ~ and
o n (2) Thory :-(l) Eglantier (Dog Rose), Coquelic~t
(Corn Poppy), and Souci (Marigold). (2) Eglantier, Iasmin,
Citronelle or Cinamomum (Cinnamon), Iacintli or Ionquille,
Anemone or Amaranth, Souci.]
1
The h i t i a l letters of the names of these nine Plants form the Word of
a Captain. H e also has two Signs. The first is made by stroking the
right eyebrow with t h e index finger of the right hand. The second is
made by stroking t h e under-part of t h e nose with t h e same finger.
These two Signs are used like those of the Cabin-Boy. When anyone
makes use of the first one to you, you must respond with the second.
,F
p,
p. 14
p. 15
The Mystery of the (Degree of) Salted-Captain. 111'.

Q . How many Flowers have you in your Garden?
A . Six.
=Fennel
Q. What is the first?
A. renouil
,,
second
Oranqe
=Orange
,
third
-4 iolette
=Violet
fourth
Eam.asine
= Damson-Plum
,
fifth
enonculs
=Ranunculus
7
sixth
Mpinevinette = Barberry
I
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.
The Mystery of t h e (Degree of) Commodore

IV. and Final Degree.
How many Gods have you in your Squadron?
Five.
Who are t h e y ?
[Note.-According
to Ragon:Ears
i . e . , Mars
has for Attribute A Javelin
>
A Quiver
Cupid
mour
Saturn
71
A Scythe
at,urne
lZEolus
)l
A Cloud or Mist
Mole
Lares
>,
A Hearth].
F ares
How many Goddesses have you?
Seven.
Who are they?
rigo one i.e., Erigone
9he6
Rhea
orithie
Orithyia
aranie
Urania
g str6e
Astma
Q alliope
Calliope
eb6
Hebe
W h a t Attributes do you give to these Goddesses?
To t h e first
A Bunch of Grapes
second
A Globe Terrestrial
third
Boreas [Note.-=a Favouring Breeze (Ragon).]
fourth
A (Star
fifth *
A P a i r of Scales
A Trumpet [No~P.-A Trumpet or Lyre (Regon)
sixth
seventh A Goblet
A Lyre (Thory). ]
9
Q.
A.
Q.
4.
Q.
A.
100
Transactions of the Quut uor qoranati Loclge.

The initial letters of t h e names of these Divinities form the Word
of a Commodore. Behold, then, all which makes u p the! Secrets of the
Order of Felicity.
[Note.-Ragon
makes MASEL EROUACH the Word of the ViceAmiral and he states t h a t thei-e is no Sign of a Vice-Amiral
b u t a Grip as follows:-' Take each other mutually by the
' right hadd and rub lightly on t h e interior with t h e index
' finger. '
MASEL or MASCHAL = parabole, proverb0 (Ragon).
ROUACH = Souffle, esprit ,(Ragon).
If these words are
Hebrew and MASAL be read for MASEL t h e translations are
correct.
A reference to t h e Cabala may, be inbended, the
words standing for MEZLA RUACH.]
Pages 18 and 19.
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
1" HALO^^ LEKAH
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.]
1 volume. 12'. pp. 70.

Les Moyens de monter au plus h a u t grade de la Marine sans servir
sur Mer. Ou: Les Secrets des Chevaliers de l'Ordre de la FQliciM.
Dedies au Trhs-galant & trhs-veridique Frhre Profane Leonard Gabanon,
Auteur du Cat6chislne des Francs-mqons. P a r Madame Pirate. A
Fond de Cale, Chez Marin Bor6e,,& 1'Ancre d'Or. E t chez la Veuve
Matelotte aux Dieux Lares. Avec Approbation & Permission d7Eole.
[Paris. 1745.1
1 volume. 12'. pp. 20.
Apologie, do la FBlici6. Paris. 1746.
1 volume. 12'. pp. 26.
L'Antropophile, ou le secret et les inystiires de l'Ordre de la F6licit6,
devoiles pour le bonheur de tout l'Univers, par P. Moet, Nectopolis,
1746. [Paris.]
1 volume. 12'. pp. 20.
L'Ordre Hermaphrodite, ou les Secrets de la Sublime FBlicit6, avec un
discours par le chevalier H * * * , orateur au jardin d'Eden, ches
Nicolas Martin [ ? Marin], au Grand MLt, 1748. [Paris.]
1 volume. 12'.
Les Motifs de la Cr6ation de l'Ordre des Chevaliers e t Chevalieres de
l' Anchre. Paris. [1748.]
1 volume.
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.
/
Transactions of tfie Qtiatzior Coronati Lodge.
.l02
p. 21
,
Naviguer= faire son chcmin

(make headway).
On ne doit naviguer jamais

Sur des Mers Btranghres,
DBs que l'on peut troubler la paix
Do@ jouissent les FrBres;
Voguons soumis B 1'Amouy
$ur les flots de CythBm;
'Mais vogons sans detour
L e calme doit nous engager
A des courses 16geres;
&fais gardons-nous de Voyager
Quand les vents sont cantraires,
N e risquons point en anlour
U n trajet t6m6raire
s a n s espoir de retour.
Vogzcer= (to sail or be wafted)
trajet = (passage, journey .)
Courrons en imitant Jason ;

Tous les tendres Emispheres
Pour conqu6rir une Toison
Soyons un peu Corsaires,
L'embarqueaent est charmant
Quand le Mousse est prudent.
p. 22
Fuyons les languers du repos

Que l'on voib sur la Terre,
E t tenons de joyeuse propos,
E n fendant I'Onde amere
Voguons au gr6 des ZBphirs
Sur les flots d s CythGre
Guides p a r les plaisirs.
S u r la tranquillit6 des cceurs
L'Ordre est sur tout &&re,
I1 q a i t unir toutes les Sceurs,
N'est-ce pas beaucoup faire?
C'est un commerce bien doux
Que c e h i de Cythere,
Quand il est sans jaloux.
Soyons unis, soyons constants
Pour chaque Chevaliere,
Dans nos festins ,les plus charmants
Liberti: toute entiere;
E t que Bacehus & l'Amour,
Nous menent tour-%-tour.
p. 23
Pour la manceuvre des Vaisseaux Vaisscau=Homme (Man).

L'Amour est nBcessaire,
Venus qui naquit dans les eaux
E n fera son affaire,
Abondonnons n8tre fort
A ce Dieu Tutelaire,
Port = C a u r (Heart).
Nous verrons l'heureux Port.
L'Ordre de la PClicite'.
p. 24
Chanson pour la FBliciG.

Sur 1'Air: dw, Hranle de Dunkcrqzte
LE CHEF-D'ESCADRE
103
The Branle de Dunkerque was

s celebrated Folk-Dance accornpanied by vocal music. The
meaning of Branle is ' Swing '
or ' See-Saw ' which affords a
clue to t h e movement indicated
in t h e dance.
Mon cher Fils, il mle faut,

Sans tomber en dgfaut,
Faire un de'tail bien clair
Des vertus qu'il faut sur Mer.
Regards, gestes, paroles,

Rien n'est indiffgrent,
I1 faut dans les Boussolles
Corisu!ter le vent,
On y doit remarquer,
Si l'on peut. s'embarquer.
B o ? t . ~ ~ o(Mariner's
ll~
compass)=
Les Pews (the Eyes)
S'embarquer (to embark, go on
, board) =n'ouer wne intrzgzte

(get up an intrigue).
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.
Courage, man enfant,

Dites, quel bBtiment
Voudriez-vous choisir
Pour voguer avec plaisir ?
Que de peines & prendre

Pour en trouver de bons!
J e fuis une Belande,
E t la laisse au Ponton,
Quiconque a de l'aimant
Vogue fivec agre'ment.
7jdtiment (building or ship)=Le

Corps (the Body)
I'oguer=(to sail or be wafted).
Belaride (a bleater)=Gne folle

(a mad girl).
Ponton (pontoon, hulk, or
ferry-boat) =Sot (fool).
Aimant (loadstone, magnet) =
L ' E s p i t (wit).
I1 a bien r6pondu &c.
L a Fregatte souvent
Resiste & se d6fend;
Pour la bien remorguer
Comment faut-il s'intriguer ?
Fregntte (Frigate) = Petite Femnze

(young Lady).
Remorguer (to get in tow) = tirer
qwel qu'un ci soi (attract anyone to one's self).
Transactions of the &vatuor Coronatz Lodge.

LE FRERE.
' E n lui faisant falotte,
On doit toujours caler
Pour devenir Pilote
I1 faut dissimuler,
E n allant B l'abord,
On bouline le Port.
. falotte (grip)=agacerie (allure)

Culer (to lower s a i l s ~ a l l e rdoucement (go gently).
Pilotes (pilots) = gens a bonne
fortune (lucky fellows).
A border (to board) = s'approcher
de quelqu'qcn (approach anyone)
Bouliner l e Port (to haul to
windward of the - harbour) =
Voler le Cmur .(steal away
Lhe Heart).
!
S
LE CHCEUR.
,
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.
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?
N'8tre point en Carsme,
Ne point quitter son bord,

Avoir bonnes antennes,
E t bien servir son Port;
Attendre avec l'aimant
Le retour du bon vent.
I1 a
LE CH(EUR.
bien r6pondu &c.
Carguer (to i-eef or brail up) =

Penchdr de c6t6 .(tb incline +o
one side).
s'ernbarqaer, a s before.
Garcle-illarines= Celm q ~ r doii~en

i
t
servir sur mer (those y41o
have to serve a t sea).
Naviguer (to navigate) = faire
sou chemin (make headway).
Aller ci la bo~rline(to sail close
t o the wind)=Cacher son jeu
(to conceal your tactics)
C a r p e r , as before.
louvoyer (to tack about) = user
de ruses (lemploy stratagems).
lester une Pregatte (to ballast
a Frigate) = Fixer quelqu'zr n
(to secure someone).
bAtiment (building or ship) =le
corps (the body).
Surgir (to r,each t h e haven) =

Arriver (to arrive, to attain
one's end).
8tre en Carime ( ?Care'ne, to be
laid on keel, careened) = etre
mdade (to be ill).
Antennes (lateen-yards) = les .
epaules (the shoulders).
Port (port) = C e u r (Heart).
A'o'mant (lodestone, magnet =
L'fs-wit (wit).
Vent (win$.) = Fortune (success).
I1 est vrai que toujours

L'aimant est u n secours,
I1 spat en peu de mots
Faire de jolis balots.
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.
Gaillard (flat part of ship's deck,

ship's castle) = la table d e l a
gorge (the table of the neck,
throat or breast 1 )
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.
'
Une Fregatte, quoique neuve,

N'est pas souvent propre 'a voguer,
I1 n'est point sur de naviguer,
Si l'on ne l'a mise B 1'Bpreuve;
Vive, &c.
'
p. 31
Fregatte (Frigate) = Petite Femme

(Young Lady).
voguer=(to sail or be wafted).
naviguer (to navigate)=faire son
chemin (make headway).
Notre Serment n'a rien d'8trange,

On n'en doit pas 6tre effray0;
Quand par l'honneur on est, li6,
I1 n'est-point 'a craindre qu'on change;
Vive, &G.
Pour un Marin l'apprentissage,
E s t d'Bcouter docilement;
On ne sait bien le bstiment,
BLtiment (building, ship) = le
corps (the Body).
Qu'en connoissant des bois l'usage.
Allusion to the I0 (Cabin-Boy).
Bravons les rochers & l'orage;
I1 n'est qu-un terns pour tout risquer,
s'embarquer, as before.
E t le pius sur pour s'embarquer
F u t toujours celui du be1 Bge
Vive, &c, '
136
p. 32
Souvent du sein de la temp8te

On a vu naitre les ZQphirs;
I1 ,en est ainsi des dBsirs,
1;s croissent plus, on les arrGte;
Vive, &c.
Venez voler, Troupe immortelle,
Plaisirs, abandonnez les Cieux;
11s sont oiiis des Amans heureux;
Vous comblez l'ardeur mutuelle;
Vive, &c.
Des plus beaux dons que Flors Btale,
I c i mon oeil est enchantB,
E t mon odorat est flatt6

Des parfums que la Terre Bxaie,
Vive, &c.
p. 33
Quel doux mouvement nous $entrafne!

Unissons nos mains & nos cceurs
Avec des guirlandes de fleurs;
Les Graces forment notre chaine;
Vive, &c.
Temple adorable heureux azile
Des humains $ des immortels;
L a Constance, vers tes Autels
Rend enfin la route facile;
Vive, &c.
Five Gods. See IVO (Commodore).
De cinq Dieux le concours propice

Nous y fait gofiter un plaisir,
Dont la bouche par mil soupirs;
Au cceur exprime le dBlice;
Vive, &c.
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.
Sanctuaire. 2 A reference t o the

' Tabernacle.'
Pirates (pirates) = Ennemis de
' Ordre, enemies of the Order).
Que le reste soit lettre close;

Frhres & Sceurs, n'en dites rien,
C'est alGrer le prix d'un bien,
Que d'en trop dBcouvrir la cause;
Vive, &c.
Soit du repos, soit de la course,
Goiltons les plaisirs en secret,
Des Dieux, le bonheur n'est parfait
Qu'en ce qu'ils en cachent la source;
Vive, &c.
p. 35
Gods.
1 Comme eux satisfaits de nous-msmes,

Nous devons tous nous prBfQrer,
Laissons aux autres ignorer
Ce qul fait notre bien suprgme;
Vive, & que partout soit chantx5
L'Ordre de la FBliciG.
See IVO (Commodore)
The other book, Les Moyens,

entitled :-
&C.,
contains but one Song, which
: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.
HILLS said :Bro. GORDON
Amongst t.he Societie3 which Bro. Tuckett has referred t o in the

introductory portion of his paper is the Order of the Honey Bees, instituted by
the Duchesse de Maine in 1703. The Motto of this Order was " J e suis petite,
mais mes blessures sont profondes," and ih members took the following oath on
their admission :I. swear by the Bees of Mount Hymetta,
fidelity and obedience to the perpetual
Didatress of t h e Order, t o w'ear all my life
the medal of t h e Bee, and observe while I live
t h e statutes of the O ~ d e r ; and if I prove false
to my oath, may honey become gall to me,
wax t u r n into tallow, flowers into stinging nettles,
and may all the wasps and hornets pierce me
, with their stings:
The development of a language for the Omrder as in the case of the Order of Felicity
brings us in touch with a very widespread tendency. Children in their games so
often devise a special language, and a t the other extreme arts, sciences, and trades
lnust perforce do so. Thus we have not only languages of scientific terms, but a
slang use grows up amongst those who have t o use them, and of slang we have
examples in School, College and everyday life. Thus when an Order adopts such
a terminology i t is o?ly a very natural result of the association of its members.
W e still retain some traces of t h e old ritual and terminology which used to be
carried out a t the Masonic banquet. Bro. Oiiver, in his " Revelations of a Square,"
gives a description of the usages similar t o the elaborate procedure in t h e old
French Lodges of which I have some particulars in the handwriting of a family
connection. I n those cases the references seem particularly military, but in tonight's paper there is a very strong flavour of the sea.
Bro. GILBERTC. SHADWELL,

of Long Island, N.Y., writes :\
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
and Ladies of Perseverance. To quote: -"

The chief lady who assists the W.M.
is called Grande Maitresse; by the Wardens are placed the Sisters Inspectors,
and by each officer a sister who takes the name of his d c e . The lodge room is
elegantly decorated with emblems peculiar to each degree. Around are symbolically
represented the various Masonic qualities and virtues; and in the East are two
splendid thrones for the W.M. and Grande Maitresse. All the sisters are in white,
wear aprons and blue scarfs to which are fastened the jewels of their rank. Each
of the officers is distinguished by her jewel which is a golden Trowel.
The
brothers, in addition to the insignia of their rank, wear the jewel of adoptive
Masonry, a gold ladder with five steps or rounds."
It would appear to me that this has apparently no immediate connection
with L'Ordre de la Ftliciti, but I give the quotation due to the f a d that about
a century ago writers considered, apparently, t h a t there was a rather more intimate
connection between the Order in question and t h a t of Freemasonry as we understand it than would be considered to be the case to-day. Indeed, Bro. Tuckett
,
himself draws abtention t o the difference t o be made between L'0rd;re de Ea
Filieitt and a Lodge of Adoption.
Nevertheless t h e f a d that other similar
references occur is of interest t o us so far as thoughb was given to the matter a t
the time.
The most important point, however, is the very quaint and interesting
feature of the ritual which has been so ably presented.
Why, for instance, should i t have t o do with boats and other nautical
features? W.w the Order a pure and simple invention, or was i t a modification
of some legend handed down in the form of some kind of Folk Tale?
Such stories as " Jack in the Bean Stalk," " Jack the Giant Killer," and
a host of others are not a product solely of recent times-they
have a groundwork of mythology to base themselves upon.'
Moreover, although the purport
of the stories as we have them to-day is quite different from that which existed
primarily, yet there is sufficient left for us to recognise clearly the original.
So I consider it to be with L'Ordre de la FClicitt. It is not easy to say
if that Order had been handed down from ages past until we see i t in t h e form
in which i t is presented in the paper, or whether i t was t h e product of comparatively recent times based upon an ancient myth; but the ancient basis is
surely there.
That basis is found in the Ancient Mysteries, going all the way back to
those of Greece and then baok to the original of Egypt, even to the most remote
times-the Aektet Boat and the Atet or Malitet Boat, which travelled over the
sky ; the Four Radders of Heaven (chap. cxlviii., op. c i t . ) ; the Field of A a r ~ , ~
the Field of P e a ~ e ,are
~ a few only of the outstanding unmistakable features of
resemblanpe.
Indeed, the boat or bark is so important in the whole subject of Eschatology
(of which Freemasonry forms so large a part) t h a t i t is seen all through the
I3gyptian religious system and has been carried down through the ages of time
into our own."
The Brethren will take notice that the supplication which Bro. Tuckett
quotes is comparable to several parts of the Book of the Dead. For instance,
Admit me to live under thy rule
here is the version in the FBlicit4 work:-"
that . . . I may serve . . . and that of the Longed-for-Isle I may find
all the Harbours open."
Now let us take the translation of " A Hymn to R a " (chapter xv., Book
of the Dead, from the Papyrus of Ani, P.t. I . , lines 24-8) : -" h t there be
prepared for me a seat in the Boat of the Sun on the day whereon the god saileth :
Let me be received . . . in the Island of Trpth-speaking-the K a of &iris
Ani."
1 Ancjent Eg.ypt, The Light of .The World, by Gerald Massey, vol. i., p. 492, etc.
Also A. Lang, MgtA, R7tual and Relzgzon, vol. ii., pp. 302-320.
2 The Book of the Dead-Papyrus
of Ani-E.
A. Wallis Budge, M.A., Litt.D.
(Lea Warner, 1913).
3 Op. cit., p. 22, etc.
4 O p . cit., p. 76, etc.
5 Gerald Massey, A.E., pp. 361 ; 347; 395; 411 ; 554; 656; 737; 827-8; 829.
110
Why the reference to the Island, Isle, or L a n d ? The answer is t h a t the

Island referred to was t h a t on which Osiris lived (see o p . c i t . , chap. clxxv.). The
god who worked the ferry boat t o it would transport thither no one who was not
a speaker of the truth, and the Island itself repelled any untruthful person who
succeeded in getting near it (see Dr. E . A. W. Budge, P. of 3 ., p. 346). Like
him who was initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries, the Egyptian dead personage
went through opaque darkness and a t last reached fertile islands, brilliant with
light, the meadows of sweet cypress, where his master, Osiris, offered him a peaceful
asylum on condition of repeating the password.
Nor is the above the only point of interest, for the Pawnee mysteries contain a very similar a l l ~ s i o n ,and,
~
in fact, a whole chapter could be devoted to
other similar points of comparison with other mysteries throughout the worldall having their origin undoubtedly in Egypt.
It will be noted t h a t Bro. Dr. Albert Churchward givm an interesting
reference to the s ~ b j e c t . ~Indeed, several interesting conclusions may be arrived
a t which, it is trusted, time and' circumstances will provide the opportunity for
setting forth %ore completely.
If space permitted I would have been glad t o have gbne further into other
details, such as the simile of St. Nicliolas, which is uranographic and in which
there is a connection with the ancient Christmas day or the day of re-birth for
Osiris or Horus in the Moon; or, again, tlie mention of Boreas, which in
mythology is the personification of t h e North wind and the son (in later mythology)
of Astraeus and Aurora, and the interesting points involved, and which are set
forth in Gerald Massey's Ancient Egypt, p. 378.
I n fact, there is so much of interest in the subject t h a t several papers could
easily be devoted to it. Moreover, the writer hopes t h a t some of the Brethren
who have time will take i t UD where i t has been left and includs such details as
will give a connected story with the original. I n fact, I have given several
references which i trust will prove of interest to investigators.
When I say t h a t there is a real connection with t h e degree of most excellent
Master, the Royai Arch degree, with the degree of select Master, with t h a t of
Ark Mariner, and with tlie 7 O (Provost and Judge), as well as the 13" and 14O
(Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite), i t may cause interest sufficient t o make a
further investigation.
Although shorn of its original setting, and reduced to a rather ridiculous
form-a plaything for the frivolous-yet I am convinced of its ancient origin, the
whole field of which is full of the deepest interest t o Freemasons.
writes in reply :Bro. J. E. S. TUCKETT
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.
'
THURSDAY, 24th JUNE, 1920.
H E Lodge met a t Freemasons' Hall a t 5 p.m. Present:-Bros.

Gordon
P. G. Hills, I.P.M., as W.M. ; T~ionel Vibert, as S.W. ; Herbert
Bradley,, P.Dis.G.M., Madras, J.W. ; W. J. Songhurst, P.G.D.,
Secretary ; R. H. Baxter, I.G. ; Sir Alfred Robbins, Pres.B.G.P.,
Steward ; Edward Armitage, P.G.D., P.M. ; W. B. Hextall, P.G.D.,
P.M.; and J. H . McNaughton, Tyler.
Also the following members of the Correspondence Circle :Bros. Richard H. Holme, Arthur Heiron, P. H. ~ m a n u e l ,Fred. S. Terry, Robert Blake,
Joseph H . Stretton, James Scott, A. Gilchrist, Thos. L. Found, J. H. Hawley, F. de P.
Castells, A. Presland, W. Young Rucks, Walter Dewes, D. D. Webb, Robert Colsell,
P.A.G.D.C., C. F. Sykes, Geo. W. Sutton, Robert F. S. Colsell, P. H. Fox, G. C.
Parkhurst Baxter, James R. Potts, Fred. Armitage, H. W. Barnes, H. L. Gorringe, J.
Walter Berry, F. W. Golby, P.A.G.D.C., L. G. Wearing, W. J. Williams, A. J. Collier,
James Powell, P.A.G.R., Percy H. Horley, B. A. .Smith, John Lawrance, John B.
Nichols, C. Gough, H. M. Baker, L. Hemens, A. M. Stables, H. Mills, J. M. Bruce,
M. Simpkin, Seymour Bell, P.G.D., and E. B. H . Chappell.
Also the following Visitors:-Bros.
F. M. Walsh, P.M., Hiram Lodge No. 2416;
L. W. Saunders, Blagdon Lodge No. 659; Hugh L. McDougall, S.D., United Military
Lodge No. 1536; 'George Stainer, Lord Chas. Beresford Lodge No. 2404; J. E. Suter,
Panmure Lodge No. 715; Rev. Frederic B. Bruce, Three Grand Principles Lodge No. 441;
J. Burns, Secty., Victory Lodge No. 3986; and W. D. Oliver, P.M., Novocastrian Lodge
No. 3361.
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
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
curious 3lasonic rerord n h i r h may 1)e sun~marizedas follon-S:-
1865.
1st Nov.
Initiated in Zctland Lodge No. 608, English Constitution,

a t F o r t Be;~uford, Cape of Good Hone.
1866.
7th Feby.
1867.
16th Angt.
Raised in same Lodge.

Exalted in S t . Andrcn-'S Chapter (R.A.) No. 118, Scotch
Constitution, a t t h e Cape.
1869. 23rd Feby.
Visited Lodge de Goede Hoop, Dutch Constitution.
18G9.
Joined T,odc:e of St. John, No. 828, English Constitl~tion
5th July
Grnhamstolvn.
1PG9. 23rd J111y.
iidmitted to Rose Crois in Dutch Chapter a t t h e Cnpc.
illarcl~. Joined Pentangle Lodge No. 1174, Chath;~m, Kent.
1871.
1872. 14th March.
Visit,ld Royal Gloucester Lodge No. 130, Sol~thrnnpton.
1871.
Adniitted to menibership of Rose Crois 1:11(1cr English
4th July.
Constitution, in Lol1do11.
187 I-.
21qt Jnly.
Receivcd degrees of Royal Order of Scotl;tnd, in Edinburgh.
1875.
Feby.
5th 3farcli.
1875.
1375.
April.
1375.
Joined Clmrchill Lodgc No. 178, Oxford.

Joined University Lodge (Marlr) No. 65, Oxford.
Joined Grand 3letropolitan Chapter
London.
(Rose Croix), i n
Octol~er. Admitted t o 30 in London

Admitted K.T. mid K.M. in Cmur de Leo11 Preccptory,
Oxford.
1876. 27th Decr.
Tisittd Hannibal I,od<e Xo. 22-1, Irish Constitution, St.

George's. Bermuda.
T'ilited AitlanticPlin.nix Lodge No. 224, English Constitution, a t Bermuda.
pro. Rol)~;. H. B A ~ T Eread

R
t h e follo\x-ing Paper :-
Tmnsuctzons of the Q ~ l a t z ~ oCoronati

r
Lodge.
114
THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE OF KING SOLOMON'S

TEMPLE.
BY
BRO.
RODhT. H .
U A X T E R , P.Pr.C.IV.,
Bnst
Lancs
H E Temple of King Solomon plays so important a part in our

Ritual that no apology is required for introducing any
matter concerning it to a Lodge of Freemasons, and particularly
to such a Lodge as this, although some apology may, indeed, be
necessary for the fragmentary and incomplete character of my
Paper.
I am not a t all concerned, in t h e meantime, with the
date of the introduction of the Solomonic legend into eitlier
the lore or ritual of the Craft. I shall only remark that there is an indication
of i t in the CooX.e ~ l f S . of
, early fifteenth century transcription, which is generally
regarded as preserving the oldest text of all copies of the Old Ci~nrges.
We have previously had in our Tra7tsactions such useful Papers as that by Bro.
Prof. Swift P. Johnson, entitled Seventeenth C e n t z ~ r yDuscriptions of Solomon's
Temple,l Bro. W . H . Rylands' Schott's rllodel of Solornon's T e n ~ p l e ,and
~ an
allusion to another model in Bro. Dr. Chetwode Crawley's Iiabbi Jacob Jehztdah
L e ~ n . Bro.
~
Canon Horsley's Paper, Some N e w Light o n the Old Pillars which
,~
also to be mentioned.
stood i71. front of the Porch of Solomon's T e m ~ l e ought
There are two contributions to the legendary lore of the temple in Bro. Rev.
W. E . Windle's T h e Testament of Solomon5 and Legends concerning the First
T e r n ~ l e by
, ~ Bro. John Yarker.
Under bhe heading of Notes and Queries several paragraphs are to be found,
such as .The Masons' Hall at J e r u s ~ l e r n ,Network
~
o n J . &. H.,8 T h e Rrbtcilding of
J e r z ~ s a l e r n ,and
~ O ~ i g i nof Pillars to Solomon's Tenaple.lo A n interesting reference
to a Report of the Grand Lodge of Iowa, which contains an article on the Pillars of
the Temple, is also t o be found under the heading of Chronicle."
None of these papers and notes, however, helps us very much in forming an
idea of the general appearance and architectural style of the famous building, and
my purpose this evening is to lay before you some of the ideas of educated architects
and others on the subject.
I think tbat the most reliable account we have of' t h e Temple is t h a t contained
in the FIRSTBOOKOF KINGS. There are, of course, further descriptions in the
SECOND
BOOKOF CHRONICLES
and in other parts of the BIBLE,sucli as the BOOKS
OF EZRA,ESDRAS,and EZEKIEL,
b u t these last may, for the most part, be regarded
as referring to later buildings on the site of the original structure, for i t must be
remembered t h a t after the destruction of the original temple i t was rebuilt by
Zerubbabd and later again by Herod. The temple which Ezekiel Eaw in a vision
is generally regarded as being the Temple of Solomon, and some authorities, in
attempting problematical restorations, have relied almost entirely on the writings
of that Prophet.
I t may not b3 unprofitable to epitomise the information, relating to the
buildin:, from the FIRSTBOOKOF KINGS. From this account we find t h a t the
" Hous? " was 60 cubits lonq. 20 wide, and 30 high, with windows of narrow lights;
ths " Porch " 20 cubits long (the length in this case being the breadth of the house),
and 10 wide. the heiqht not being stat.ed; round about the walls of the house, both
of the temple and the oracle, were grouped chambers, 5 cubits in height, of which
*A
(S.C. xii.. 135.

x i v . . 172.
"b.. xvi.. 2i7.
77).
Tb. xiii.. 24.

' h . x x i . . 261
' 0 l h . . x x i . . 279.
l b . xii., 150.
7 h . i i . . 122.
1 1 l b . xvii.. 177
7
Zb. xxi., 6.
Zb. viii., 160.
T h e d rchz'tectrcml S t y l e of Xinq Solomon's T e m p l e .
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
l'rtr~i.sctctioii.s of t h e (Jcccrtlror C o r o l ~ a t i Lodge.
this arrangement of cllambers, for i t inust be remembered t h a t tlle Tabernacle was

the forerunner of the Tenlple and served as its model. T h a t again is an argulnelit
against such all unlikely feature a!: a porch 120 cubits high. Not only so, but i t is
quite evident t h e account was not written by an expert. W e know, only too well,
~ulfortunately,how, even a t t h e present day, a r c l i i t e c t ~ ~ r descriptions
al
of inodern
buildings, in tlle daily Press, absolutely fail to convey ally intelligible meaning to
t h e professional architect, altllougli, in all fairness, i t must be conceded they tolltribute t o his amusement. By t h e way, how a r e t h e statements to be reconciled
t h a t no sound of llalnlller or axe or any tool of iron was to be heard in t h e house
wl~ilsti t was building, and t h a t t h e nails weighed fifty shekels of gold ? Could
they possibly have been driven witll some tool n o t made of i r o n ? I hardly like to
suggest t h a t they might have been screws.
A11 exhaustive study of architectural monunlents contemporary with the
temple is necessary t o arrive a t any idea of its appearance. F o r the sake of the uainstructed in these matters I Illay say t h a t i t is possible with reasonable accuracy
to determine t h e date of t h e erection of any building, for architecture, down t o the
co~nmencenientof what has been called t h e battle of t h e styles, was a living a r t
developing along well defined lines in different countries, according to t h e naturo
of t h e climate and tlle building materials available.
The Jews were, unfortunately, never a building people, and we have, therefore, t o rely upon tlle monuments of other Eastern tribes; civilisation in these
days, of course, not having extended t o tlle West. This is exactly where the biggest
difficulty faces us, for we have to remember t h a t there were several peoples, all
practising their own style of building, who might possibly exercise a leading
influence. Hence we have t o consider t h e contemporary architecture of Egypt,
Greece, Assyria and Pllcenicia, which last is probably t h e mostmlikely of all to have
b-en adopted, b u t of which, I regret t o say, only a few sillall fragineiits remain.
According t o t h e clzronology given in tlle autllorised version of t h e Bible
we sllould not be far off t h e mark if we were t o say t h a t t h e Arcllitect was slain
three thousand years after t h e creation of tlle world. This makes i t clear t h a t no
Roman model could have had any influence on t h e builders of Solon~on'sTenlple
as t h a t empire was only founded in the eighth century B.C., b u t tlle Etruscans or
predecessors of t h e Romans have left some remains of their arcllitectural activities,
wllidl should not altogether be left out of account.
As i t is by no means my intention t o attempt any restoration of my own I
think I may fairly now, after these preliminary observations, pass on to t h e compilation of a list of autllors in whose works may be found illustrations and descriptions of " t h a t stately edifice whose regal splendour and unparalleled lustre are
stated t o have surpassed all imagination," merely renewing my apology f o r the
iilcompleteness, and In many cas-s want of definiteness, of my references. Possibly
some of my professional confreres, of wllom there are so many in botli circles of
t h e Quat.uor Coronati Lodge, may be able t o add considerably to tlle information.
The earliest serious attempt I have been able t o trace of a restoration is by
tlle Brotlzers P r a d i or Villapandi in a three volume folio work, published a t Rorne,
1596-1604, entitled Explnrzcrtiones i n Ezelp!ie,ii.
I cannot speak from my own
knowIedge, not having seen t h e book, b u t Fergu,son, t h e great arcllitectural
historian, describes i t as t h e most artistic of t h e restorations; t h a t is, of course,
d o ~ v nt o the time of his writing in 1878.
Here, again, I cannot pass any criticisms. I only know t h a t a book De
tcr,brrnncrilo federis tle snncto civitate Jerusalem, &C., by tlie above autlior was
publislled a t P a r i s in 1720.
JAMESFERGUSSON.
This great a r c l l i k t u r a l authority has made no fewer than three attempts
a t restoration, firstly in his Zlistoricrrl Zny~rir?yillto t h e T ~ z t eP r i ~ l c i p l r so f h'ea~cty
i n A r t , 1849, secondly in T ? I P f f i c f o r y o f Architectl/re, 1865, and lastly in T h e
'
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
Tclrnyle of ,Solor non:
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:
From -1 R e v i c t n o f t h e vctriorrs throric.\* r e y w c t i n q t h e form rind s t y l r o f

A r c h i t e c t ? r r e of t h e T e m p l e o f Soc'onlon, by E . C . Robins, F.S.A. 1886.
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.
I am indebted t o a small b u t nicely illustrated pamphlet, A Review o f the

I'nrio~ls T J I P O Tr~~ ~ Y
p o ( . f i ttrhge P o r l ) ~ntrtl ,Sf!/lr o f Architectltre of the T e ~ n p l eof
Solomon. 1886. bv t h e late Mr. E . C. Robins, for knowledge of this and t h e two
preceding designs, and also for further noter; on many of tlie other restorations.
Speaking of Canina's de-ign, h e refers to i t as the most rational example of t h e
Egyptian theory, and in this I am in full agreement with him. The two great
pillars, although in a measure outside t h e Porch, are still supports f o r a n
entablature, and t h e more I examine this subject t h e more convinced I become
t h a t to treat them as detached obelisks is quite wrong.
The names themselves
are sufficient t o stamp them as having had some structural function to perform.
U
118
Transaction7 of the Qutrtzror Corontrti Loclge.
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
The Architectzcral Style of King Solomon's Temple.
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.
A book called Solo~nol-r'sTernyle by this author was published by the

Religious Tract Society in 1907, but I need not now say much about it as Canon
Horsley read a paper on it in this Lodge some time ag0.l
It contained t h e
principal views from the book illustrative of tlie author's ideas which I can hardly,
however, think even approached anything like the appearance of the structure
under consideration.
OTHER BOOKSAND ILLUSTRATIOKS.
I n addition to all these designs which I have enumerated, further information as to the probable architectural style of Solomon's Temple may be gleaned
from plates in illustrated editions of the BIBLE, the History of the Jews, by
Flavius Josephus, pictures of Biblical incidents, Professor Hosking's article in
the Encyclopr~dirrBrifo?~nica,the En,cyclop~diaBiblica, the Ilisfory of P h ~ l ~ i c i a ,
by George Rawlinson, Niw'on (Ie Phiclice, by Joseph Ernest Renan, and the
Recovery of J~ruualernby our own distinguished Past Master, Sir Charles Warren.
l
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
. . . .
Cllalnbers ancl (:allery
--
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
--
--
--
Figures in italics a r e by calculation or from other authorities,
.-
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
pilgrimage t o t h e colder spirit which belongs to research," and the possibility

arose of arriving a t leading facts as to the main features of the site, let alone
any details of the buildings t h a t might be unearthed. I n 1833 access was gained
t o the Temple area and a survey made, but t h e great impulse t o ~cientificresearch
really dates from the labours of D r . Robinson and his friend Dr. Eli Smith in
1838. The story of those before and since who have laboured on this task is a
most interesting page of history recording many names t o be held in high honour
There is,
and grateful memory, b u t I 'cannot even attempt to deal with it.
however, a particular connection in which this Lodge has a peculiar and intimate
interest, and t h a t is in the labours of t l ~ ePalestine Exploration F u n d , from which
i t surely is not too much t o say t h a t the most important and leading discoveries
on t h e subject have .resulted. This work was started and its early stages carried
o u t under the active leadership of our first Master, Bro. Sir Charles Warren,
many of whose achievements were recorded by t h e skilful pencil of another of
our chiefs so well know11 as ' Criinean ' Simpson, u~hilst our other P a s t Masters
Bros. S i r Walter Besant and W. IT. Rylands have borne tlleir parts in less
promille~ltcapacities in support of this F u n d and its work. It is indeed greatly
t o our loss this evening t h a t ill-health prevents Sir Charles Warren from taking
a n active p a r t in our proceedings. Yet another of our Past Masters, Professor
T . Hayter-Lewis, was a diligent student of this subject, which resulted in his
H o l y 2'laces of .Ierzr.~nlerr~.A great advance in our kno~vledgeof Eastern architecture resulted from t,he opening u p of Assyrian, Babylonian and Persian sources
of informat,ion from 1843 onwards, and more lately much.lig11t has been thrown
on IkTediterranean civilization by the discoveries of Cretan culture traced back a t
least t o 3500 B.C
F o r general readers, much of t l ~ einformation afforded has
been made available, b u t , thinking of this Lodge in particular, we may remember
t h a t our P a s t Master Bro. Rev. D r . C . J . Ball published what has been
acknowledged as " a great pioneering work" on t h e subject in his Light f r o m
t h e East.
The pamphlet by Mr. E. C. Robins (1836) wllicl~ Bro. Baxter refers t o
gives much valuable information, and is especially of interest in t h a t which i t
affords as t o Mr. Fergusson's views. As an architectural historian on facts, his
authority is of the higllest, but on theories he is not so safe a guide, as was
proved when his plans of t h e Temple area, like those of other students, such as
Williams, Porter and Lewin, came to the test of the facts revealed by Sir Charles
A most useful appendix is supplied by Professor
Warren and his successors.
Kerr's very able analysis of the Biblical account..
l , Mr. G . S. Aitken, as published
The paper on TA., Tenlple of E z ~ l ~ i e by
in t h e R . T . B . A . Jolo,nnl, evinces much study and ingenuity bestowed upon the
subject, reinforced by such authorities as D r . Hastings' Biblical Dictionary and
the Encyclopcurlin Ritlicci. Several very interesting points bearing upon King
Solomon's Temple are dealt with, but seeing t h a t the building described is a11
ideal Temple on a n ideal site, not the actual one, not intended t o be built, and
representing n ~ a n y features not incorporated in any of those actually built,
theories founded on the visionary building may be very far removed from facts.
A n attempt t o supply Bro. Baxter's omission of any definite reference to
t h e results of the work of t h e Palestine Explorat,ion F u n d , shows a weak point in
our Library-that
we have not a complete set of these valuable publications-a
want which 1 hope has only be b- mentioned to ensure t h a t this want shall be
supplied. I n 1874 t h e F u n d published a most useful llandbook Our TT'orl; in.
I'crl~stine, giving briefly the main results u p t o t h a t period, and T h e Latest Light
in Bible Lnncl.~, by Mr. F . S . P . Handcock, M . A . , Lecturer t o the F u n d
( S . P . C . K . , 2nd edit'ion, 1914), brings t h e information further u p to date
in similar form. A vast amount of research is concisely presented in the articles
in T h e I/~trrncrfior/(ilStnnrlnrcl BihIr E~ir?/clol~trdicr(1915) edited by Dr. James
Orr, bringing t h e latest discoveries into focus. Bro. Baxter, happily for us, has
confined his remarks very closely to t h e Temple itself, with very slight reference
t o its Courts and Enclosures. Thus we are saved the necessity of going into many
elaborate thearies about t h e site and its surroundings, nor are we launched into
t h e consideration of the symbolism of the building except quite incidentally.
It is with the -Ttro\ itself t h a t we are concerned, standing within t h e inner

Court of the Holy Site or Zf ~ e r . 0 1which
~
conlprellends the whole enclosure of tlie
precincts, now-as
extended froin time t o time--known by the Moslems as t h e
Harn//z p\Ji S h ~ r e ~orf ,IToble S ( O L C ~ I I C (The
~ Y . site of the Naos is now, we may say
filiully agreed to have been t o tlle West of t h e Dome of the Rock, the building
One
which covers the rocky base upon which t h e A l t a r was erected of old.
peculiarity is t h a t the inequalities of the site wiiicll surround this central building
have been overcome from the first by erecting series upon series of underground
arches. These added t o as the enclosure has been e n l a r ~ e d .with in addition 33
water tanks, nlany of large size, render t h e site practically honeycombed with
subterranean chambers.
The student who attempts the consideration of t h e descriptions given in
the Bible is a t once seriously handicapped unless he has a competent knowledge
of the language of the original and also some critical appreciation of the value
of the texts, and so I must apologise for my own shortcomings in.these qualifications. However, doing the be?t I can according to my opportunities, i t seems t o
me t h a t a cominentary and the comparison of t h e Revised Version of t h e Old
Testament afford some useful hints Lpon some of the points upon which Bro.
Baxter has commented.
The middle storey of t h e chambers which abutted on the Sanctuary and
Holy Place was approached by a door on the South sideThe door for t h e middle chamber was on t h e right side of the house:
and' they went u p with winding stairs into the-middle ch.umber, and
out of the middle into the third. (1. Kines vi.. 8.)
A t the beginning of the verse, for midtl7e a n alternative reading is loulest, which
describes where t h e door was: right side may read riglit .sJ~oltlder,which seems to
locate the stairs a t the encl of the Aisle near tlle Porch. Tlle principal doors a t t h e
entrance to t h e Tenlple seem to have been sub-divided by being-hinged in two
leaves for each of t h e two foldine
" doors. ' Windine
" ' stairs does nob necssarilv
ncessitate a circular form, b u t there is plenty of evidence t h a t t h e craftsmen of
those days understood t h e practical construction of ascents by steps. The word
Lizops means golrrcls alternating with t h e flowers in t h e decoration.
The description dozs not say t h a t the door-posts were a fifth or a fourth
art of the thickness of the wall: but t h e measurine when e x ~ l a i n e dis t h a t the
entrances,-i.e.,
the doors, door-posts, and side pilasters,-occupied
one-fifth or
0113-fourth of the wall space, being four or five cubits out of the 20 cubits of the
whole. The Hebrew word translated, '' l i / i t ~ l , " is of uncertain meaning as an
architectural term, but its corninon significance is " a ram," whence it has been
suggested th.tt i t refers to the horn-like form of volutes, a constant feature in
Assyrian ornament and later of tlie Greek Ionic Order.
Clearly there XI-as a partition to divide the Oracle from the rest of the
building, and t h e chains, festoons of knobs and open flowers were subsidiary
ornaments probably a t t h e head of the opening. W e read in 11. Chronicles iii., 16,
t h a t chains were made " as in the oracle " and put on t h e heads of t h e two pillars.
. Tlle three rows of paved stone and row of cedar beams are very generally
accepted as a fitting description of the enclosure of the inner court by a wall of
tliree courses high with tiniber construction as in vogue in t h e East. By solne
G11e mention of t h e timber is held t o imply a cloister with pillars and roof of
timber constructioi~.
I think Bro. Baxter's remark t h a t there is no difficulty in harmonising
the description of the two great pillars as having been both i n the porch and
before the Temple is much to the point. Wliatever may have been t h e synlbolism
of any details which were adopted from t h e architecture of other nations when
used elsewhere they were here introduced by the Israelite leaders i n " t h e spirit
of their own F a i t h and made t h e vehicle of great spiritual truths." It did not
n adopt such a device as two columns t o
require any great effort of i m a g i ~ ~ a t i oto
support a porcl~,and their nanies denoted their use, whilst their removal would
~ s t h e t i c a l l i~f , no^ practically, have involved t h e ruin of the feature they supported
as lnucll as when Salnson brought about t h e collapse of t h e Philistine Tenlple a t
Gaza. T h a t their names and signification allude t o t h e Deity is t h e reason t h a t
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
Transactions of the Qrtatltor Coro7zciti Lodge.
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
Transnction,.~of the Qttat~torCoronnti T,odge.

is found all around the Haram Area below ground, and in a few
places--especially a t the Jews'. Wailing Place-above.
I t has been
called t.he Jewish bevel, and may be seen a t Helmon, and at the Palace
of Hyrcanus (now Arak el Amir), in the foundation of the wall
encircli~~gthe Temple a t Hebron, and in many old buildings in
Jerusalem. It has been seen also on the tomb of Cyrus at Pasargadae.
It was on drafted masonry of this description a t the base of the South-Eastern
portion of the enclosing wall of the Sanctuary t h a t the Masons' marks were found
of which a full description has appeared in our Tran.cactions ( A .Q.C. ii., 124).
To conclude the description of the masonry :There are altogether five distinct kinds of masonry, denoting, perhnpv,
five distinct periods of workmanship in the Haram wall : 1. Marginal drafted masonry with a rough face, found chiefly
along t h e eastern wall .- . .
2. Marginal drafted masonry with a smootl~face, found chiefly
along t h e western wall.
3. Ashlar of large stones with smooth faces, -without marginal
drafts.
4. Ashlar of small stones, without marginal drafts.
3. Common rubble masonry.
The average height of the older stones is 3ft. 3in. t o 6ft. Their
length varies considerably. The longest stone is 38ft. gin. long.
, (Our TT'ork in Palestitze, pp. 36-8.).
I t seems t h a t these descriptions agree with those of the Biblical account when
i t tells us-"
And the King cominanded, and tliey brought. great stones, costly
stones, ancl hewe; stones, to lay the foundation of the house, and Solomon's
builders and Hiram's builders did hew them, and the stonesquarers" (I. Kings v.,
17, 18).
There is a marginal note to the word stonesquarers indicating that the
word in the origi;tal is " Giblites" or " men of Gebal," a town near Lebanon.
From Ezekiel we learn t h a t this town also provided craftsmen of special skill in
ship building. The force of the expression is that they were specially skilled, some
in t h a t respect anci some in masonry, so mucl1 so that a particular kind of work
was well known a t the time as their speciality, thus there is the possibility that
these large drafted stones were the craftsmanship of the stone squarers of Gebal.
It was only for thirty years t h a t the Temple stood in its pristine beauty
until i t was despoiled to buy off the Egyptian invader Shishak. Repaired and
despoiled, outraged and restored, the building passed through many vicissitudes
before its destruction in 586 B.C.; then, until the rebuilding of 536-515 B.C., i t
would seem there was no Jewish temple, but the discovery of papyri at Elephantine
in 1901 has given evidence that a Jewish settlement had their temple there before
525 B.C. Perhaps, this was for a little while the only Jewish one standing upon
this island in the v i l e a t Assouan on the Southern frontier of Egypt. This foreign
temple excited the animosity of the Egyptian Priests of Khnub, whose temple
adjoined it, and in 408 B.C. they burnt and pillaged the building, which is
described as having pillars of stone, five gateways of stone, bronze doors with
hinges, a roof of cedar, and basons of gold and silver.
Josephus tells us that when Onias fled to Egypt fram the persecutions of
Antiochus Epiphanes, about 154 B . C . , he obtained permission from Ptolemy and
Cleopatra to erect a temple after the pattern of that a t Jerusalem--only on a
small s c a l e f o r his CO-religionistsa t Leontopolis in the Delta. Dr. Flinders Petrie
claims to have identified anci has tlloroughly explored the renlains of this building,
and i t is interesting to know that he found architectural detail of a rude Corinthian
type suggestive of Babylonian influence, still as i t were carrying on the tradition
of the style of the original building we have been discussing.
I agree with Bro. Baxter in thinking t h a t Mr. Robins' Assyrian design

falls very far below the ideal one imagines for the Temple of King Solomon. I t
is an ingenious conception, but fails to carry conviction from an architectural
point of view, largely because one is well aware that i t is made up of so many
features borrowed from such different sources and of later dates; but, so far as the
general proportions go i t is a reasonable representation of the Biblical description.
I t is on these lines tliat we must picture i t t o ourselves-a
simple, dignified
~ t r u c t u r e ,not larger than a sinall English village church, and somewhat of its
outline, standing out very white on its eminence. Within it was profusely adorned
-almo-t lined with gold, a promise of wllich appeared on the f a ~ a d e ,with its
golden doors and gold lined porch flanked by the ornate twin pillars of brass, in
front of which stood the altar and its accessories of the same metal.
To attempt to make any definite restoration of the building is t o launch
out into a bewildering wliirlpool of theories. W h a t really is of consequence is
the great ideals for which i t stood, the faith which built it, and the condescension
of the G.A.O.T.U. Who accepted its dedication-these
are real concerns of a
speculative Freemason of to-day, and they are set forth in the simple but majestic
language of the V.S.L. so t h a t we wayfaring men, though unlearned, shall not
err therein.
Bro. W . B. HEXTALL
said :I have no comment t o make on Bro. Baxter's painstaking paper; but may
draw attention to an item which has apparently not been alluded to.
The
Frrrnzn.5on.s' Quctrterly Review for 1839, a t pages 261-2, gives an account of a
Manuscript described as having just then been completed after a labour of more
than twenty years, its subject being " t h a t most justly celebrated of all edifices"-the Temple of Jerusalem .
as built by Solomon, conside~ing even its
" most minute detail, the calculations being determined to parts so small as the
" sixth of an inch "; stating tliat all prior works had been examined, and t h a t
the MS. was a condensation of the labours of more than 300 authors.
The
enlployn~entof Rabbins as translators had imposed much cost on the un-named
con~piler,who estimated his total outlay a t no less than 10,000, and who was
then seeking a purchaser, or to publish by subscription; being willing t o accept
a inoderate sum because of " the necessity for his return t o Rome." An attempb
was made to trace this MS. in S o t e a n ~ i d Queries of August 6th, 1910, b u t
without result. If Bro. Baxter can get upon the track of it, or of its subsequent
~ublication,appreciable addition to the literature concerning Solomon's Temple
,
might result.
An article in Mackenzie's Roynl ;Ila.conic Gyclop~dia,page 694, under the
heading " Stone, Cubical," may be worth reference on the subject of the Temple.
Bro. C. F. SYKESwrites:I am not an architect, and, therefore, cannot approach this discussion with
any professional zuthority. Neither have I had the privilege of reading Canon
Horsley's paper on the Rev. W . Shaw Caldecott's book, S o l o ~ ~ z o ?T~r n' ~~ y l r .
Still, I think this author's suggested reconstruction has been too cursorily disposed
of by Bro. Baxter. The book is a sequel t o The Tnbernncle; ifs History and
,Cfrrrctctre, by the same author, and in these two volun~esMr. Caldecott certainly
appears to establish two points which touch materially the subject of Bro Baxter's
paper.
First, that the Hebrew ineasures of length were identical to those of
Babylonia, three cubits being used, viz. :P:llms.
1. The A r t work cubit . . . . .

2.
,, Building ,, ...
...
3
,, Surveying ,,
...
a palm being equal to
...
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
and of tlle upper chambers t l ~ e ~ e oand

f
of tile place of the inercy seat, and tlle
pattern of ( I / / thcrt ~ I P/I/I(I!)I/ tltt: x l i i r i t , of the Courts of tile house of tlle Lord,
and of all the chanrbers round about, of the treasuries of the house of God, and
of the treasuries of t.he dedicated things," and so forth.
This in substance t.ells us t h a t Ilavid l~imself not only prepared vast stores
of nlaterials, but, what is of more ilnport.ance fro111 a n architectural standpoint,
11e gave to Soloinon t h e equivalent of a coinplete set of working drawings for the
building on which he had set his heart, but which he was not permitted to erect.
Surely, in face of this, we have no need to go here and there to surmise froiii
what country the design came.
Why sllould not David have had tlie desigli
imparted to him direct from on High ? I s there anytl~ingantecedently iinprobable
in t h i s ? H e is one of t h e greatest poets t h e world has ever known if (as sotile of
us still believe) many of the Psalms were written by him; he was also a great
military and kingly genius, and in many ways has left a lasting iinpressioil on
tho history of his own ancient race, and of the world; and perhaps the subsequent
history of architecture owes more t o him and to t h e Temple lie projected than has
hitherto been conceded.
iVote.-It
may be interesting to add in reference to the possible conr~ectioii
of Thomas Fuller with Freemasonry that on looking further into Fuller's writings
I have discovered t h a t he refers to Elias Ashniole as " H i s worthv friend." The
facts are shortly these :Fuller was born 1608 and died 1661. Elias As111nole was born at Lichfield
1617 aiid died 1692. H e was initiated into Freemasonry in October 1646.
I
1
1 Fuller's Church History of Ui.itcrir2 ~ r i t t i lIGJ8 (published 1655) are two
engravings of Lichfield Cathedral. This is the only Cathedral so honoured. Each
of these plates has t h e Arms of Ashniole as a tribute to him for bearing t h e
expense of t h e engravings. Fuller also appends some curious Latin verses; in
one coluinn of whicll h e personatss the weeping prophet and i11 the other tile
smiling historian grateful to his brother antiquarian a t whose expense the drawing
h a d been finished and tlie plate engraved.
The Latin verses are:Sed qualis Olim floruit
Liclifieldensem Ecclesiaiil
U t innotescat wosteris.
E n , lector, pictam graphic5
Tam sacro cadaveri
Qua Sol in orbe Anglico
Hoc monumeutum, sumptibus
A s ~ e x i tnihil vellustius
E L I E A S H M O L E posituin :
A t cujus nuac, prolidolor !
Qui redivivum suscitat
Deformitate splendid=
P h e n i c e n ~e cineribus
Rt~inzevex superstites
Sic gratulatur
Sis deflevit.
T . F.
Thus i t appsars t h a t Ashnlole's interest in Masonry was not exclusively
speculative, b u t t h a t he was concerned in the work of our operative brethren, and
further t h a t h e aided Fuller iii one of his ~ ~ a b l i c a t i o n r . It almost necessarily
follows t h a t lie \vould have been acquainted u i t h his friend Fuller's accoullt of
S o l o n i o r ~ Temple.
'~
It is not a n extravagant inference t h a t he would have called
t h e attention of other menlbers of tile craft t o the writings of Fuller and their
bearing upon operative and traditiollal Freenlasonry with the result that certain
features found in Fuller's book have now a place in our ritual.
It may ba added, as a coiifirnlatory footnote, that in Fuller's Pisgcrl~
Sight of I'alertit~e there is a Map of Canaan in t h e time of Abraham, aiid t h e
scale of miles drawn on t h a t map is embellished with t h e Compasses and Square.
Several other niaps in t h e book exhibit tlie Compasses, but I think only this one
shows t h e suggestive combination.
Bro. HENRY
LOVEGROVE
writes :It is remar1,able t h a t really so little has been written about so famous a
building; Fergusson thinks t h a t a great deal of nonsense has been written. I n
such an excellent library as t h a t of the Royal I ~ i s t i t u t eof Britis11 Arcltitects there
are only two or three books on tlie subject, and they are in German.
Over the wliole building t h e idea of t h e Tabernacle prevails, all t h e

dimensions being doubled for t h e Temple. The use of the cube prevailed and most
authorities cl.iim that t h e space of the cube for t h e Hbly of Holies was free from
columns. I t has Leen stated t h a t there were four columns, and in t h e Holy Place,
which was double t h e length, there were eight columns.
The dimensions of t h e two great pillars must be wrong; let anybody draw
them of the sizes stated, and t h e impossibility of casting such a work would be
evident.
I am of opinion t h a t the colulnns stood clear of t h e building, as i t would
be impo2sible for the spherical termination according to tradition to 'have supported the upp-r portion of t h e building; t h e abacus must for t h a t purpose of
iiecesoity bs flat, and the pomegranates and lily work must have been betweell
t l ~ eastragal and tlle abacus where foliage is introduced into Gothic caps. The
porcli, which \+as not a porch, is stated in t h e 2nd Chronicles to be 120 cubits
11igl1, wliicli ~ n u s tbe wrong, as such a tower could not have stood 01: a subytructure only 20 cubits long and 10 wide; besides, i t would have dwarfed the
building proper.
From the little I know of Hebrew characters i t seems easy to make a
mistake in the alteration of a stroke. I can never believe t h a t Methusaleh lived
969 vears.
I n tlie same way I cannot believe t h a t so Inany thousands of men were
eii~ployed on a building about t h e size of one of Wren's chuches. I am inclined
to tliink that these inell were mostly Plltenicians wit11 soine of other nations,
and that very few Jews were employed. Slaves were not allowed to work in t h e
Temple b u t may Ixave performed soine duties as labourers outside t h e building.
Now as to style, I believe t h a t the exterior was very simple. There could
hare 1,een no arches, as t h e arch, etc., was practically unknown; bub a few were
found in the construction of t h e pyramids, and later both semi-circular and pointed
arches were found
I t is generally supposed t h a t the Egyptians were ignorant of t h e t r u e
principle of the arch, and only employed two stones meeting a t a certain angle.
I am convinced t h a t all arcliitecture came from Egypt and was developed in
different directions in the various countries into which t h e a r t spread.
Bro. RODK.H . BAXTERutrites in reply :Although niy paper did not meet with unqualified approval when read in
Lodge I am not without'hope t h a t when published in the Transactions and suitably
illustrated i t ixay prove to be of more than general interest, for illustrations in
a connection of tltis kind are far more expressive t h a n lengthy descriptions. 1
had to bear in m n ~ dtliat I was not address in^ a societv of architects b u t a bodv
of Freemasons, who however interested in t h e subject, could not possibly follow
a coiilplicity of technical details.
My thanks are certainly due to Bro. Gordon Hills for having cleared up
soille doubtful points. As Jaines Fergusson long ago explained, we cannot hope
to reach anything like a:1 adequate solutioii without the assistance of a trained
architect tliorougl~lywell versed in the language of t h e original text of t h e Bible,
and even then only if the original writers were qualified t o give a proper description. I t is gratifying to know tliat I have the support of Bro. Gordon Hills in
H i s own explanation of t h e height of the Porch is
niost of my conclusioiis.
ingenious, and carries conviction.
Bro. Herbert Bradley pointed out t h a t I had omitted from my list of
models tlie one exhibited by Bro. Josepli Young a t tlle Leicester Lodge of
Research in 1911
This was certainly very careless of me, for I have in my
collection a copy of t h e Leicester T m r t \ c i c t ~ o r zfor
~ t h a t year which includes photographic reproductions of the exterior and interior of t h e model. So capable ail
architect as the late Bro. S. P. Pick expressed his appreciation of t h e success of
:lie desizn, wliich had t l ~ epeculiarity of s y t r r r r u pillars in tlle Porch-a
solution
which I-do not think any other a u t i ~ o rhas attempted.
D
134
Tratc qnctio?zsof t h e Vuat iror Coronati Lodge.
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.
SUMMER OUTING, JULY
135
1920.
BRISTOL AND MALMESBURY.

HIS year's Outing, tlie first since t h e W a r , was i n more t h a n one
respect unique. It was made t,he occasion for the performance
of a programme of Masonic music, probably the most representative t h a t has ever been brought together; t l ~ evisitors witnessed
a n exemplification of Bristol working, which was for most of us
a novel experience; and a new departure was made i n t h a t t h e
last evening was devoted to a lantsrn lecture by a member of
the Lodge. By a particularly happy coincidence our W.M. is a
Bristol mason, and a mcmber of t h e Robert Thorne Lodge, under whose banner
we met on t h e Thursday evening; while Bro. Cecil Powell, t h e President of t h e
Eristol Masonic Society for t h e year, is a P . M . of Quatuor Coronati. The kindness of our welcome can never be exceeded, and w3 felt i t a particuIar distinction
and compliment t h a t t h e Deputy Provincial Grand Master, Wor. Bro. E. I-I. Cook,
not merely greeted us on t h e first evening, b u t was present a t every gathering
during the Outing.
THURSDAY, 1
5 JU
~ LY
~.
Ssventy-eight Brethren met a t t h e Grand Hotel, most of whom ha'd come

A number of local Brethren
down from London, and Iunched on t h e train.
belonging t o t h e Outer Circle joined our party on arrival, and throughout our
stay readily p u t their services a t o u r disposal as cicerones, t h u s enabling 11s all
t o pass easily from each point of interest in t h e City to t h e next.
LIST O F VISITING BRETHREN.
F. J . A~bury,of London, P.Pr.G.D.C., Garrer; H. \TT. Bnrnes, of Idondon, P.M.,
1637; A. J. Bevan, of I ~ n d o n ,1637; H. Rladon, of London, P.G.Ft.B.; F. Bonifoce,
of London, 2594; Herbert Bradlep, of Bournemouth, P.Dis.G.M., 3ladras, J.nT.,
2076;
W. H. Brown, of London, Past G r ~ u r lSteward; J. M. Bruce, of Kervcastle-upon-T-e,
P.Pr.G.TV., North'd.; Guy Campl,ell, of London, P.M., 3330; C . Coles, of Port
Elizabeth. P.JI., 2886; G. S. Collins, of London, P.A.G.D.C.; Robert Colsell, of
Chingford, P.A.G.D.C. ; R. F. J. Colsell, of Chingford. 12; 8 . J. Cross, of Dnlton-inFurness, P.Pr.G.D., TT. Lancs. ; E. H. Dring, of Sutton, P.G.D., P.BT., 2076;
C. D. Eaton, of Birmingham, P.G.St.R.; L. A. Engcl, of London, L . R . ; G. H.
Fonnell, of London. L.R.; S. J . Fenton, of Birmingham, 3232; Darid Flather, of
Rotherham. P.Pr.A.G .D.C., IT. Yorks; FJdward T. Forster, of Stoclcten. P.34.. 509;
Trn~tsnctionsof
136
fit^ ( S I I C ~ ~ ICoronciti
IO~
Lo~Ige.
G. H. Ganxon, of T.ondon, 3071; Alfred Gates, of Shcrbornc, P.Pr.G.D., Dorset; J . T.

Gaunt, of Eaglescliffe, P.Pr.G.Sup.\V., Durham; J. F. H . Gilbard, of London, 56;
F. W . Golby, of London, P.A.G.D.C. ; l\.'. B. Hammond, of Birl~lingharn, P.Pr.G.W.,
Worcester; A.rthur Heiron, of London, P.M., 18; Gordon P . G. Hills, of Cookhanl,
L.R., P.Pr.G.W., Berlis., P.M., 2i176; R. H. Holme, of Newcastle, P.Pr.G.lV.,
Northumberland ; ~ - o h nHolt, of Yarm, P.Pr.G.D., Durham ; P . H. Horlcy, of London,
L.R. ; R . J. Houltca, of London, P . M . , 733 ; Henry Hyde, of London, L.R. ; J. Inkster,
of London, 2634; Tllomas Jones, of \Voodford, L . R . ; H . C. Knowles, of I~ond911,
P.A.G.llcg.; F. It-. Le Tall; of London, P.&f.. 2913; H. ?rlcI,arhlan, of T1ondon,
of Brenchley, P.M.,
L.R.; J . R. McLaren, of London, P.M., 3156; H . T. Main~~-nring,
2660 ; W. L. Mildren, of Grange-over-Sands, P.Pr.G .Sup.TV., W. Lancs. ; G. D.
Mowbray, of Stockt,on, P.Pr.A.G.D.C., Durham ; C. A. Nekman, of -0undlc, 607 ; Dr.
George Norman, of Bath, P.Pr.G.W., Sotnerset ; Andrew Oliver, of London, 2416; James
Parsons, of L o n d o ~ ~P.M.,
,
2041; P e r c j Plowmnn, of London, P.31., 15; Henry Potter,
of London, L.R. ; Cecil Po~vell, of Weston-super-Mare, P.G.D., P.M., 2076 ; F. A.
Powell, of London,. P.G.St.B.; A. Presland, of Londoa, 1637; S. \V. Rodgers, of London,
'
. Sexton, of Norwich, P.Pr.G.Sup.W.,
P.M., 15 ; TV. H. Rushton, of Exmouth, 413; H . V
Norfolk; H . C. Shellard: of Dublin, Asst.G.Sec., Ireland; B. A . Smith, of New Malden,
1962; W. H . Sniith, of Ross, P.Pr.G.W., Hereford; W. J. Songhurst, of London,
P.G.D., Sec., 2076; F. IT'. Spalding, of Norwich? P.Pr.G.W., Norfolk; J. W. Stevens,
of London, A.G.Sup.W.; Major A. Sutherland, of London, P.Dis.G.\V., Egypt and
Soudan; F. G. Sn-inden, of Birmiugham, P.A.G.D.C.; R. C. ?([. Symns, of Budleip!~
Salterton, P.Dis.G.W., Burma; E. Tappenden, of Hitchin, P M . , 901; S. Tappenden,
of London, P.M., 901; W. C. T e r r ~ , - o f London, 1902; John Thompson, of London,
L.R. ; J . E. S. Tucliett, of Marlborough, P . P r . G.R., Wiltshire, \T.M., 2076; Percy
Turner, of London, P M . , 2765; TA. Vibert, of Bath, P.Dis.G.W., Madras, J.D., 2076;
J. P. Watson, of London, P.Pr.G.S.B., Cumberland & Westn~orland; W. Watson, of
Ross, P.Pr.G.Pt., Hereford; E. H . Watts, of Newport, Mon., 683; Dr. C. Wells, of
Maideahead, P.G.D. ; Corn. E. TVildy, of London, P.Dep.G.S.B. ; and G. C. \Tilliams,
of London, P.M., 25.
Also t h e following members of t h e C.C. resident i n Bristol:L. C. Barker, Prov.Asst.G.Bec. ; Col. T. M. Carter, P.Prov.G.St.B. ; J. A. Coles ;
Dr. X. H . Cook, Depy.Prov.G.M., P.G.D. ; Thomas Cox, P.Prov.G.D.C., Somerset ;
E. H. Desprez; W. N. Gilbert, P.Pr0v.S.G.D. ; Meyrick W. Heath, P.Prov.S.G.W.,
Prov.G.Sec. ; 3 u b e r t M'. H u n t , P.G.Organist ; G. Langford, P.Prov.G.Reg. ; Chapman J.
Middleton ; H. Ropers, P.Prov. J.G.D. ; S. V. Rolleston ; J. Scholar, P.Pror.G.Rcg. ;
W. S. Skinner, P.Prov.G.Sup.Wks. ; A. L. Stanton ; Lcwis Stone ; G. \V. H. Tanner ;
TV. K. Thomas, P.Prov.S.G.\fv. ; A. J. Tonkin, P.Prov.S.G.D., Somerset ; Dr. I .
11-allrcr Hall, P.Prov.G.U.; A. E. 11-clls, Prov.G.Snd.B. ; and J. C. \\Tiilg.
A f t e r a brief i n t e r v a l , o u r first visit was p a i d t o : T H E COUNCIL HOUSE.
T h e B r e t h r e n were received a t t h e Council H o u s e b y W o r . Bro. A . C . S .
P a u l , P . P r o v . S . G . W . , Bristol, who, o n behalf of B r o . t h e R t . H o n t h e L o r d
M a y o r , e x t e n d e d a h e a r t y welcome t o tlie a n c i e n t C i t y . B r o . P a u l explained t h a t
H i s L o r d s h i p was unavoidably absent, being engaged u p o n official business.
T h e first M a y o r of Bristol was A d a m le P a g e , who held office i n 1217.
T h e Council H o u s e was erected i n 1704, b u t t h e g r e a t e r p a r t was demolislied i n
1827 a n d t h e p r e s e n t building erected t o t a k e i t s place. T h e magnificent Civic
R e g a l i a h a d been laid o u t f o r o u r inspection i n t h e G r e a t Council C h a m b e r , a n d
a most int.eresting L e c t u r e describing t h e various objects was given b y B r o
A . C. S . P a u l , who is t h e D e p u t y C i t y T r e a s u r e r . The following i s a list of tlie
E x h i b i t s a n d a synopsis of t h e information given : Four Swords.
1. "Mourning
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.
Pearl Sword." Scabbard of Eliznbethan date.

grorer and ?trayor of Idondon in 1131.
Gift of Sir John d c Wells
About 1-150 (Henry TII.). On side of pommel is engraved:

" This sworde we did repaicr
Thomas Aldworth being Mayor. "
The ScaL1,ard decor:ltions are of date 1594. Thomas Aldworth was
&[ayor in 1582-3. H e was of t h e same fn~nilx as the hnsband of the
Hou. Mrs. i t l d n o r t l ~ ,the celel~ratcd Lady Frecnlason.
Lent Sword."
Eight Silver Maces.
1752 Bought for f188. 16. 3.
Bought in 1722.
City Treasurer's Aiace. Copper-gilt.
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.
Hought iu 142s to ~el)lucc:l11 older c,hail~,a t
Depot- \Tater Bailiff's Chain of Ofice. Silver.
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
Bnson and Elver, Hall-n~;\rkfor 1.393-6. n u ~ i n gtlrc Riots in Bristol in October,

1831, the rose n-atcr has011 w:is stolen b - J l ~ m e sIres, \v110 cnt i t up illto 167
pieces and offered them for sale to Mr. \\'illinms, a Bristol silrersmith. Ives
was arrested and senteliced to 14 years tr;lnsportation. All tl1t8 !)ieccs n-ere
recovered with the exception of two snlall I~its, and they wcrc rivt~tcdon t o a
silver plate. After comp!eting his sentence Ives returned and asliecl to be sho\vn
the bason, when he expressed great admiration for the s!ii!l wit11 ~vhich his
own ravages had been repaired !
Grace Cup and Corer,' date 1574. Silver-gilt, the gift of J~'illiam Ryrde. Belongs
t o the Charity kno~vuas "Queen Elizabeth's Hospital," founded by John Carr
in 1586.
Two great si1vc.r-gilt Tankard Flagons.
Amongst the finest specimens of theso
vessels in existence. Given by John Dodridge, Recorder of Bristol i n 1658.
A t t h e oonclusion of B r o . P a u l ' s lecture, t h e W.M. of t h e Q u a t u o r Coronati
L o d g e expressed t h e t h a n k s of t h e B r e t h r e n f o r t h e cordial welcome extended t o
them by the L o r d M a y o r , a n d t o B r o . P a u l f o r t h e a d m i r a b l e lecture t o which
t h e y h a d j u s t listened. T o t h i s B r o . P a u l replied, a n d t h e B r e t h r e n were the11
allowed the privilege of a closer inspection of t h e Swords a n d o t h e r e x h i b i t s a n d
also of t h e famous collection of P o r t r a i t s a n d a n c i e n t MS. C h a r t e r s a n d Records.
BRISTOL AND ITS ASSOCIATIONS.
H e who would see Bristol aright, should always have i n mind the wealth of romance
entwined in its long and varied history. Perhaps there is no spot .within its boundaries
where we may feel t h a t t h e past and present are meeting around us more clearly t h a n
the outside of the Cathedral. There, standing with our backs to the sacred edifice with
its Norman associations, we can observe the busy stream of modern traffic, which connects
the city with its beautiful suburb- of Clifton by the steep, but stately, approach of
Park Street.
The Cathedral was one of t h e six new ones constituted by Henry VIII. out of
the revenues of the dissolved Religious Houses, its Charter being dated 1542. Previously
Bristol had formed part of t h e large diocese of Worcester, but then gave its name to
the one newly established (which originally included Dorsetshire). Thus also i t became
a city. It had been made a county of itself by Edward 111. in 1373, on t h e petition of
the Mayor and Commonalty, who set forth " the great inconvenience which they
sustained by being forced to t r a w l to Gloucester and Ilchestt-r through deep and
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
Seyer's filrmoirs of Bristol.
by the Brlstol people, appears in a t least three of t h e churches in $he neighbourhood.

Robcrt Fitzharding was a n ancestor of t h e great family of Berkeley, and was
H e was entrusted by Robert, Earl of Gloucester,
granted the castle of t h a t name.
with the care of Henry 11. i11 his boyhood for four years, placing him under one Matthens,
This Earl of
a schoolmaster, " to be instructed and trained up in civil behaviour."
Gloucester, who was the illegitimate son of Henry I., was t h e most illustrious Englishman of his age, and the principal champion of Rlatilda i n her wars n7ith King Stephen.
Both he and the King having been taken prisoner by the opposing parties, a n exchange
of the one for the other was made. H e was one of t h e builders of Bristol Castle and
t h e founder of the Tienedictine Priory of St. James, as well a s t h e patron of t h e Knights
Templar in the town. Henry 11. thus lived for sonle time in Bristol, and afterwards
showed much consideration for t h e place, for on his return from his successful campaign
in Ireland, he presented Dublin t o t h e townsmen. According t o a n inscription carved
upon t h e beautiful old Norman Gateway standing a t t h e West of t h e Cathedral, t h e
King was jointly foclnder of the Monastery with Fitzharding; but this is i n a p a r t which
has evidently been added some two or three centuries after his time, and t h e t r u t h of
tho statement is dmbtful.
The extent of the buildings belonging t o the Monastery was large, b u t much of
them is in ruins or has disappeared. The portion of t h e Cathedral West of t h e Transepts
was built about fifty years ago. There had been a nave i n former days, and i t s foundations have been discovered, but for several centuries there had been none. A good deal
of restoration has been carried out in the Choir with excellent effect. The chief peculiarity
of t h e Cathedral is the uniformity of t h e height of t h e vaulting, both i n t h e centre and
side aisles, although there is considerable difference in the style of construction. The
East window is of striking design, t h e subject being t h e l' Stem of Jesse." P a r t of the
glass is ancient, but some modern pieces had to be used t o replace breakage. The Elder
Lady Chapel is of a beautiful character. The principal remains of Fitzharding's work
are the Chapter House with its notable Norman ornament and its vestibule, t h c great
gateway, and t h e entrance t o t h e Abbot's lodging in t h e Lower Green.
The Monastery of Bristol might, but for the timidity of those i n authority, have
become f a r richer and more important t h a n i t did. When Edward 11. had been foully
done t o death i n Berkeley Castle, t h e Abbot of Bristol, as well a s those of Malmesbury
and Kingswood, refused, through fear of Queen Isabella and her party, the request t o
give him sepulture within their ,churches. The Abbot of Gloucester, on t h e other hand,
received t h e remains with every honour, and his minster became a popular shrine for
pilgrims.
It may be remarked t h a t the members of the Beaufort Lodge, No. 103, celebrated
the 150th anniversaly of its foundation (in 1908) by attending a Masonic service i n t h e
Cathedral, and by defraying the cost of opening up t h e entrance from t h e North Transept
to the "Newton Chapel " there. I n July, 1919, t h e Brethren of t h e Province i n large
numbers assenlbled in t h e Cathedral for a most impressive Service of Thanksgiving for
Peace.
T H E MERCHANT VENTURERS.
The most gloiious page of Bristol's history is her share in building up our great
Empire. I n this there is a particular connection with the Cathedral, for it was through
the preaching wlthi:: its walls of Richard Hakluyt, (1552-1616), one of its Prebendaries,
(now called Canons Residentiary), t h a t t h e merchants of Bristol were moved t o despatch
oxpeditions of discovery. As one result of his exhortation, Martin Pring was sent out
with tho Speedwell, 50 tons, and t h e Discoveiy, 20 tons, to explore t h e coast of America,
north of Virginia.
H e discovered t h e shore of Massachusetts, and named one p a r t
" Whitson," in honour of the leading Bristolian of his day.
This, being the landing
place of the Pilgrim Fathers, was afterwards named l' New Plymouth."
Long before
Hakluyt's time, of course, Cabot, sailing from Bristol in t h e M a t t h e w , discovered t h e
continent of America in 1497. I n 1610, J o h n Guy, a Bristolian, was sent out with a
party t o coloni~eNewfoundland, now thc oldest p a r t of t h e Empire Overseas, as i t s first
Governor.
There had been a Guild of Merchants .in Bristol for a very long while, and in 1551
Edward VI. grantdd a charter t o them under the name of t h e Society of Merchant
Venturers. This. the only surviving Bristol Guild, is held in high appreciation i n t h e
city. For its origiii:ll 11-ork thcrc is now 110 nccd, but its inembers devote their energies
to helping c.ducatiori. especially tech~lical, and other good causes.
The old race of
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.
Bristol Catliedral from the South-East.
A. C. Powell.
Bristol Cathedral from College Green.

Shewing the Civic Cross.
A. C. Powell.
Entrance to the Abbot's Lodging.
Bristol Cathedral.
J. F. H. Gilbard.
The Cloisters.
Bristol Catlledral,
A. C. Powell.
Fireplace a t the Red Lodge.

I
Coates & Co.
The Freemasons' Hall, Park Street, Bristol.
A. C. Powell.
Temple (or Holy Cross) Church, Bristol.
A. C. Powell.
Iron Screen in Temple Church.
been erected, out of gratitude, by the burgesses t o collimemorate the granting by

Edward 111. of the charter collstituti~~g
Bristol a county. At one time i t was painted,
the colours bein? vermilion and blue picked out nith gold. 60 lavish was the adornment
that, according to the taste prevailing, i t was claimed no cross in the ccuntrg could
rival i t for beauty.
In l733 a silversmith, living in the half-timbered " Dutch House," (which is
stated by tradition to have been coiistructed in Holland and then brought t o Bristol in
1676 and set up in its present position), close by, complained that his life and dwelling
acre in danger with every high wind through the swaying of the cross, and it was
consequently taken down. Later on i t was erected in College Green, but in l768 it was
moved to Stourhead, in Wiltshire, where it still exists.
The present structure was first erected a t the river-end of the Green, the foundationstone being laid by the Mayor, with the assistance of the Brethren of the Province. In
1888 i t was, however, removed to its present position in the middle of the Green, t o
make way for the statue of Queen Victoria.
THE RED LODGE.
There was a Broder of Orderys Whyte,
Hee songe hys masses yn the nyghte;
Ave Maria, Jesu Maria.
The nounes a1 slepepnge yn the Dorture,
'Ihoughte hym of a1 syngeynge Freeres the Flowre,
Ave Maria, Jesu Maria.
Chatterton.
After leaving the Cathedral, the Brethren visited tlle Red Lodge, which
stands upon p a r t of tlle site of the extensive garden of t h e Carillelite F r i a r y
(founded in 1267). Climbing t h e soniewl~atsteep hill on a hot day, we can w?ll
imagine how excellently i t was placed, with its- Southern aspect, "for producing
gmdly crops of f r u i t and vegetables-and,
perchance, " precious-juic6d flowers."
Leland says, " the White Freres places ys very fair," their house being situated
where t h e Colston Hall (the principal place of meeting in t h e city) is now, t h a t
is t o say, rather below t h e Red Lodge. T h e site of the Convent was purchased a t
tlie Dissolution by t h e Corporation, b u t was afterwards acquired by Sir J o h n
J oung, a prominent Bristolian, who built t h e " Great House " where i t stood,
t n d also (in 1590, t h e Red Lodge-as,
i t is supposed, a summer residence. I n
t h e " Great Housd" h e entertained Queen Elizabeth in 1574.
I n 1854 t h e Red Lodge was bought by Lady Byron, t h e widow of t h e post,
for t h e purpose of a reformatory for girls. This was placed under t h e management of Miss Marv Carpenter. a notable Bristol ~ h i l a n t h r o ~ i s t .The work was
carried on there for more t h a n half a century, b u t was given u p in 1919. Hearing
through Mr. Pritchard t h a t the house was for sale, Bro. Alderman Fuller Eberle,
t o whom numberless good and kindly deeds are due, succeeded in engaging
sufficient interest for its purcliase and presentation t o t h e city of Bristol. I t s
care has been entrusted t o t h e " Bristol Savages," and in their hands everything
will be done to preserve i t in t h e best of order for t h e admiration and delight
of the citizens. The Brethren of No. 2076 were amongst t h e earliest visitors after
the completion of t h e necessary overhauling. T h e rooms of t h e Red Lodge are
splendid specimens of Elizabethan design.
T h e carving upon the walls, and
especially- upon
tlie
beautiful
entrance
t
o
t
h
e
principal apartment, and t h e fire&aces, are particularly fine
The Brethren were received most kindly by t h e President of t h e Savages,
M r . C. W. Thomas, who is, by the way, one of t h e most talented as well as most
popular of Bristol~ans, and a nephew of our genial Bro. W. K. T h o n ~ a s .
After t h e sumptuolls tea provided had been thoroughly enjoyed, t h e
President, wearing his chain of office, expressed his pleasure a t t h e visit of t h e
Brethren in :; delightfully humorous speech, and t h e reply was entrusted by the
W.M. t o Bro. E. H . Dring. Bro. Fuller Eberle and many other prominent
" Savages" were present, and also Mr. J . E . Pritchard, lately President of t h e
Bristol and Gloucestershire Arcliaological Society, t o whom we are indebted for
many valuable suggestions in framing t h e prograinme of t h e " Outing." These
gentlemen kindly acted as guides, and gave a most interesting account of t h e
beautiful old mansion and its contents.
T~.cl?~xuctio/l.~
of the (d~cccf/torC1oro,~aliLodge.
142
T H E WALLS OF AKCIENT BRISTOL.

On their return t o t h e Grand Hotel, in Broad Street, the Brethren passed down
the curious Christmas Steps 1 and through St. John's arch, formerly a gate of the city,
and t h e only one llow remaining. The line of the ancient walls can easily be observed
just inside. To the left there used to stand t h e Frome Gate, celebrated for its defence
against Prince Rupert in 1643 by women of Bristol.
At t h e end of High Street another church, ' S t . Nicholas,' was over another gatc
of t h e city, but it was rebuilt in t h e eighteenth century. Every night a t nine o'clock
can be heard from its steeple the bell telling the hour, t h e number of the day in the
month, of the month in t h e year, and the year i n the century. There is a story t h a t
money was left for this purpose Ion8 ag3 b i a man who had lost his \%-a.; in thc colintry
then dangerous for benighted trax-ellers.
Hearing t h e bell of St. Nicholas he was
able t o direct his course t o safety. This custom was said to have been never relaxed
until the late War. Even when, a few years ago, owing to repairs, the usual bell could
not be rung, some young men used to go up into the steeple each evening with hand bells.
T H E MASONIC PROVINCE O F BRISTOL.
The first country Lodges to be mentioned i n the Engraved Lists are six which
appear in t h a t of 1725. No. 29 met a t t h e Sug's B e a d , (in \Vine Street), Bristol; but
i t is probable i t was working for some time before it was recognized by the Grand Lodgeon March 27th, 1721, if t h a t date is intended t o refer to the Nag's Head Lodge, which
was erased in 1736. Other Lodges were formed later on, some to exist only a short time.
I n 1784, Brother Thomas Dunckerley was appointed Provincial Grand Master of both
Somerset and Gloucestershire (as well as other Provinces). At t h a t time the Six Lodges
comprising tile Prcrillce of Gloucestershire n e r e then all s:tuate in Brlstol.
Jn t h ~
following year he founded a Lodge a t Gloucester, and in 1786 Bristol was constituted
a Province of itself a t his request. The Royal Gloucester Lodge and the Provincial
G. Lodgc of Gloucestershire were then one and t h e same thing. The services to t h e
Order performed by Bro. Dunc~erlteywere invaluable, and highly appreciated. H e was
also Grand Superintendent of t h e Royal Arch, and a t the request of the Knights Templar
of the city he accepted t h e office of Graild SIastcr of t h a i Order of Masonry and thereupon
constituted and or;anized t h e Grand Conclare (predecessor of the Great Priory) i n
London.
After Bro. Dunckerley's death, in 1795, the Province passed through a difficult
period, but for the last hundred years its histoiy has been prosperous and happy.
Indeed, enjoying such favourable conditioils, i t nould be sad if its Brethren could not
dwell together i n unity. It has been particularly fortunate also in the succession of
wisc rulers, who have guided its course faithfully and it-ell.
FREEMASONS' HALL I N BRIDGE STREET.
The most important and beneficial change ever made in the Province was the
removal of its Lodges from various taverns to meet in a Hall of their own.
Freemasonry i n Bristol might vcry well be divided into two periods,
The history
namely, t h a t In which the Lodges met in taverns, and subsequently, when the Province
has possessed a Hall of its own.
Efforts were first made in 1812 t o procure a building for Masonic purpose, and a
house on the Broad Quay was fitted up accordingly. but after a very short time the lease
had unfortunately t o be g i ~ e aup. Preillises 11-ere then purchased in Bridge Street, aud
prepared and decorated under the direction of Bro. Henry Smith, the D.P.G.M., a n
amateur artist of great taste and sliill. An unusual, b u t convenient, custom, which
seems to have origi1;ated in t h e limited accommodation in Bridge Street, is still observed
i n t h e Province. A s there was no place in t h e building outside the Lodge-room largc
enough t o take t h e greater portion of the Brethren a t the installation of a Master, those
~ - h ohad attained t o t h a t position retired with him to the small '<Gothic " or " Templar "
Chapel ( t h e f u r n i t w e of which may be seen in the present " Chapel ").
On May l s t , 1818, the Hall ivas dedicated. " On the previous evening," wrote
Bro. Henry Smith, '' t h e Creation was performed by forty performers in t h e Great Hall
a t which t h e ( ' Provincial ') Grand Lodgc and Brethren appeared in full costume, and
attended by his worship the Mayor, the Sheriffs, and about Two Hundred Ladies and
Gentlemen of t h e first respectability."
2,f
1 They
probahly noticed the q ~ ~ : ~ inscription:

int
& finished September 1669."
' l
This Streetc was stcppered done
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
Illustrated a t the beginninn of this account of t b e Summer Outing.
144
Trnnsactions of the Qzrcctl~or Coronati Lodge
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
so good as to re-arrange their ordinary programme of ceremonies so as t o be able

to work this particular degree
on the present occasion, and t h e Visitors were duly
grateful to them.
A t the Banquet we once more felt how real and generous a welcome was
being extended to us. Nay more, as the canonical hour of ten approached an
announcement was made t h a t even the Licensing Authorities had appreciated the
special circumstances of the occasion, and were putting t h e clock back an hour
in our favour. Happy Province, where even the Law can be administered, or
may we say adjusted, with so truly fraternal a sympathy!
The Brethren of No. 2076 will be interested to learn that in commemoration of their visit Bro. George Langford, P.Prov.G.Reg., and P.M. and Secretary
of No. 3663, has presented t o the Province for use in the 111' a splendid deeptoned bell bearing the following inscription :NE PERIRET MEMORIA
SOCIETATIS ILLUSTRIS
CUI NOMEN FECERUNT
QUATUOR CORONATI
NOSTRAM APUD SOCIETATEM
ROBERTI THORNE
IDIBUS JULIIS MCMXX
FRATERNO ACCEPTAE HOSPITIO
DEDIT GEORGIUS LANGFORD
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.
~ ~
It was a very great pleasure to have with us during our expedit.ion to

Malmesbury Bros. F. S. Philpott, Pr.S.G.W., Meyrick Heath, Pr.G.Sec.,
A. Dodge, Pr.G Treas., W . K. Thomas, P.Pr.S.G.W., and W . N. Gilbert,
P.Pr.S.G.D. A commendably punctual start was made, and char-a-bancs took
us through the Southwolds to our destination, returning by Beverston. W e were
fortunate a t each stopping-place to have the benefit of expert local guidance, b u t
the Vicar of Sherston being unavoidably absent during our visit, we were supplied
with an excellent account of the Church and district prepared beforehand by
Bro. Vibert. To Bro. Vibert we are indebted for t h e following Notes:-
146
Trnnsoctdons of the Qucr.tuor Coronati Lodge.

BRISTOL TO MALMESBURY.
Our route took us through Chipping Sodbury, which is understood to be the

Chippinge of Stanley TITerman's novel, and a t Old Sodbury we climbed t h e steep
western cscarprnent of t h e Southwolds. The country from here t o Malmesbury has been
a battle-ground from the earliest times, the scene of conflicts between Briton and
Roman, Briton and Saxon, and Saxon and Dane; while Stephen, and a t a later d a t e the
Parliamentary forces, also fought over it. Of t h e details of t h e Roman conquest little
or nothing is known, b u t from the Roman camp a t Old Sodbury, which itself stands
inside a British earthwork, fifteen other camps a r e visible. Sherston stands within a
British earthwork, with a Saxon camp close by, and it has a tradition of a battle against
t h e Danes. Malmesbury was a British fortress before it was a n abbey. Beverston
Castle was besieged by Stephen, and attacked by t h e Parliamentarians.
The district was long defended against t h e advancing Saxons by the forest of
Selwood, which stretched from Cricklade and Malmesbury t o t h e sea coast of Dorset,
and here lay t h e ihree allied British kingdoms of Gloucester, Cirencester, and Bath.
B u t i n 577 t h e West Saxons turned the flank of this great natural barrier and defeated
the British a t Dyrham, a few miles South from Old Sodbury along t h e crest of the hills.
The three kingdoms fell, and t h e British of Somerset and Devon were now cut off from
their Welsh kinsmen by a heathen enemy.
But they seem notwithstailding t o have
retained as their own t h e immensely strong site of Malmesbury o n which there stoodaa
British fortress, and t h e men of Malmesbury very soon made a n alliance with the
Hwiccas, a s t h e Sason tribe t o t h e North of them came t o be called. T!lus the British
a t Malmesbury were for some time Christians between two heathen nations, the friendly
Hwiccas and t h e hostile West Saxons.
We are told by Bede t h a t Augustine arranged to meet the ecclesiastics of the
nearest province of t h e Britons, and t h a t the conference was held on the borders of the
Hwiccas and West Saxons. I n his book on St. Aldhelm, Bishop Browne brings forward
strong arguments for believing t h a t this conference took place near Cricklade, ten miles
East of Mnlmebbury, which would appear to be t h e one place which satisfies all the conditions.
If this is indeed t h e case, then Malmesbury has a special connection with a central
incident of t h e conversion of Saxon England. B u t however this may be, i t does seem
as though it has preserved a continuous history as a Christian settlement all through
Saxon times.
It lies just off t h e Fosse Way, t h e great Roman road that, starting from Totnes,
runs through Bath and Cirencester to reach Lincoln eventually, and it was thus always
connected with t h e lower Avon and t h e Bristol Channel. And in 637 Maildubh, an
Irish ecclesiastic d r ~ v e nfrom his home by internal dissensions, came t o Malmesbury as
to a place where he could practise his religion i n peace, and there he founded a
monastery. The Britons of Somerset and Devon were now gradually driven back by
the West Saxons, who broke through t h e forest of Selwood in 652, but Malmesbury,
isolated though it became, was left untouched. The West Saxons were by this time
themselves Christians, and Aldhelm, a scion of the royal house of Wessex, was sent to
hlalmesbury t o be educated. I n 672 he succeeded Maildubh as the master of the school,
and with him begills t h e period of Malmesbury's greatness.
It now became a n abbey
with Aldhelm as its first ablmt, and he built three churches there, as also subordinate
monasteries a t Frome and Bradford-on-Avon. H e died in 709.
It was Athelstan, however, who was t h e great benefactor of both abbey and town.
At t h e battle of Brunanburgh, in 937, . a t a critical moment, h e called on his kinsman
St. Aldhelm t o assist him, and a sword was miraculously p u t into his hand. This may
also have been t h e battle in which he was greatly assisted by t h e men of Malmesbury,
and from which he brought t h e bodies of his two cousins who had been slain in the fight
t o St. Aldhelm's chilrch for burial. A t all events, he now gave the abbey l' many farms,
many hangings, a cross of gold. filacteries of gold, and t h e piece of t h e t r i ~ ecross which
Hugh, King of t h e Franks, had sent t o him. When he died a t Gloucester, i n 940, his
body was brouqht iu Malmesbury and buried there, under t h e altar of St. Mary, i n t h e
tower " (op. c z t . , p. 220). P a r t of his gift was a considerable estate, and a charter t h a t
is still in force. The conditions a r e t h a t the commoners shall live within t h e walls of
t h e town, and t h a t a man can only become a commoner i n right of being t h e son of a
commoner, or in r ~ g h tof marriage with a commoner's daughter. The commoners still
" dine with King Athelstan " every year. An old commoner who was bedridden was
advised by the Vicar t h a t he would be much better cared for i n t h e "House."
The
receipt of poor's money terminates the common right. The old man painfully raised
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.
St. Mary Redcliff Church from the North-East.

(The Vicarage appears on the left of the Picture.)
" T h r pryde of Bristowe nncl the T V p s f e r n e Londe."--C~ATTERTON.
A. C. P o w e l l .
St. Mary Redcliff Church from the Welsh Back.
A. C. P o w e l l .
The Hermitage, Redcliff.
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
T r a ~ ~ s a c t i o nofs the Quatuor Coro7mti Lodge.
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).
/ God S a r e the King."

KING .%XD CR.~FT I ' L H a i l &lasoilry
Dirille ! ''
l-A
SHORTMasoxrc CSSTATA. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
BTO. iZf02drt
Solo Voices, C'ho~,i~s,

O r c h o ~ t ma n d Organ.
Solos by Bros. Cniinin&on cnci Eaber.
Bros. \Yestcott, Maby and 'rhomar i n t h e Trio
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was born a t Salzburg i n 1766, and from t h e earliest
yenrs his great gifts mere apparent. H e travelled on t h e Contiilent and t o England a s
a musical prodigy; after many such wanderings from Salzburg with his father a n d
sister, and later alone, hc took up his abode in Vienna in 1781. H e was initiated i n
t h e "Charity " Lodga i n 1784; he also became a n~cmber of the " True Harmony "
Lodge, of which t h e composer Hag& m-as a member.
(8ce note to No. 8 i n this
progmmme).
O n the compulsor~ reduction of Lodges i n 1783, t h e " Crowned Hope," with its
daughtsr Lodge, the '*Charity," and others, bemnic merged i n t h e " New Crowned
Hope " Lodge. For this Lodge nfozart probably wrott~his Opening and Closing Scngs
(see A.Q.C. xxvi., 241 :.
i n the early summer of 1791 Mozart was a t work on his opera, " The 3Iagic Flute,"
the Masonic significance of t h i c h has been fully tleated by Bro. Bradley i n t h e
Transactions. I n the autumn t h e composer's health Legal1 t o fail, and there came t h e
m y s t e r i ~ u scommission t 1 1 compose a Requiem. I n November a new Rlasonic Temple was
to be dedicated, and Mozart turned from t h e soleinn subject of t h e Reqlcem t o t h e
jofful one of composing a Cantata for his brethren to perform a t the cercmonr, for which
lie also wrote a Closing Song. The words of both describe their purpose, a i d the final
words of the Cantata connect i t with the " Kern Crowned Hope " Lodge.
The intense depression from nhich the composer was suffering is never reflected in
this work. H e conducted the pcrformance, and t h e joy his friends showed on seeing
him again amongst them greatly revived his spirits. On reaching home lie exclaimed to
his wife: " How madly they have gonc on about my Cantata. If I did not know t h a t 1
had written better things, I shou!d have thonght t h a t my best composition."
Ho.rvever, this was his last appearance in puhlic; h e was shortly afterwards on
his last bed, ever anxiously a t work on t h e Requiem. H e died on Decembcr 5th, leaving
t h e Requiem unfinished, so t h a t this Cantata is t h e last finished coniposition of t h e master,
and the ceremony a t 1%-hiclii t was performed was probably t h e last flicker of Austrian
Freemasonry before the estinctioii of all Lodges in 1794.
The work was published in 1002 with English words by Bro. Dusart, illustrating
the three degrees; i t r a s performed a t Lincoln in 1903, with words of general Masonic
tendency by Bro. Vernon Holrard; and i t n-as intended t o have it sung a t a Conversazione which niarked the tenth anniversary of No. 2076, with words by Bro. Speth
appropriate t o t h e event, h u t t h e project was not carried out.
The translations of this and t h e other rc-orlis by Mozart and Pleyel in this programme have been made n-ith a view t o reproducing as exactly as possible t h e sentiment
and character of the original without altering the musical phrase, consequently there
has been no attempt a t versification.
...
..
Bro. dfozart
2-CLOSING HYMN, Let us n-ith onr hallds fast holding "
Duet (Bros. Westeott aiid Tho~nas), Chorus ancl Pianoforte.
This is published as a n appendix t o t h e preceding Cantata, and nrould be sung a t
tho end of the ereniiig's fanction. The reference t o t h e chain of hands in both works
is, no doubt, to a custon~sinlilar to t h a t formerly observecl by the Frencli Brethren just
before Lodge was closed a t the banquet.
SONG
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bro. Birkhead
Q-THE ESTERRDAPPRENTICE'S
Xolo (Bro. 1-crers), Chorus ant1 Pianoforte.
4-C~osrsc HYJIYof t h e Orphcus Lodge, No. 1706, London
Bto Il(tt re!! 7,0111
T70cct7 Qttrrrtet (nrcs. Horsell. Longtord, naber and Parkman).

"
Sow t h e evening's shado~vsclosing,

TVarn from toil t o peaccf ul rest."
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
"
La Reinc de Snba "
., .
...
...
...
Solo T-olces (Bros. Cunnington, Parkruan. Thonlas and JleGnEc), Orchestrca
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.
"
Adieu ! a heart-]! arm, tond a d ~ e u' "
Bra. J . E. Shum T u r k e t t
The Farenell to the Brethren of St. Janics' Lodge. Tar1)olton.
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
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Happy a r c we illet "
.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
Solo T7vice (Bro. \IA.

. Stear). C h o ~ t r . ~O, ~ , c h e s t r na n d O r g a n .
Thlq Cantata n a s composed on April 20t11, 1785, for a meeting of t h e " Truo
Harmony " Lodge 011 thx 24th of t h e same month, held to honour Ignaz von Born, and
to celebrate hi5 discovery of the mrthod of norking ores by amalgamation.
The words, aided l)y t h c music, graphically describe t h e occasion. They cornmence with a reference to t h e discovery, '' the &!ason " being Von Born himself. Then
tho flow of the Aria is suddenl- stopped at-" See! how Wisdom and Virtue . . .
baying." At this point me can. nitllout any great stretch of imagination, see a deputation advancing t o the seat of hoilour, the leader c.:~rrxing a laurel wreath-"
Take,
beloved, this cro\r-n." At the words. " from Joseph's liand," t h e music is suddenly
quicliened, a i d thc wreath placed on Ton Born's head,-" Then sing and rejoice now,
ye 1)rethrcn."
Von nor11 was the lcading ;~utllorityon mining and metallurgy of his time. I n
1780 or l i 8 1 he fouuded the, l ' True Harmony " Lodge, n-hich included t h e most eminent
men of Vienna. I t was a sort of learned society in which, during t h e winter months,
original papers of interrst n-ere rend, and published in a Masonic Journal (see Bro.
Brough's .In .41t.sft~rcitt.I'rc~riit~.soro f flte Q.C. Lotlge, xiii., 72).
The Joseph referred to is Joseph 11. of Austria. H e was not a Mason, b u t strongly
favoured hlasonry. His father. Frnncis I., was initiated a t t h e Hague by English Masons,
and was raised ill England.
At thn gathering on April 21th, Jlozart's father and Haydn were present. Laopold
Mozart had been staging wit11 his son for niile or ten \\-eelis, and during t h a t time Haydn
had m:ldc his celebrated avo~valof Mozart's genius. It rras through his son t h a t Leopold
Aloznrt had become a Mason; his stay was probably prolonged in order to attend this
special m e r t i ~ ~ for
g , he returned to Salzburg the next day.
It may bc asked, are there any Masonic allusions in the music of these specially
composed ~ o r l i s ,as in " The Magic F l u t e ? " The ansn-er is, in both these Cantatas a
phrase or figure is often found repeated three tim?s, where ordinarily one ~vouldexpect
to fincl it c~tllertwice or four t ~ m e s . There inay o? may not have been a thought behind
this fact.
~-CI~ORISGHBJIS of t h e St. Vincent Lodge, No. 1404, Bristol
...
C. B u c k n a l l
TT'orcls by Bro. B. ,4. Bevan-Petman, a P.91.of t h e Lodge.
T'ocol Qrlnrfet (Bros. H u n t , Longford, Baber and Parkman).

10-JIasos~o DIRGE
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
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
I'uice (13ro. Taylor) ctntl Plaitofurte.

Amongst tiio 81SS. i n tho I3ritish Rluseunl is a volume (Additional 32598) containing a collection of 66 E'rceinasons' songs ill Gcrman, with piansforte accompaniment.
An allusion to the Einpcror Joscph in the last song i n t h e book fixes t h e date before
1790, t h e year of his death. The songs are by t ~ r e n t ydifferent composers, Mozart's name
being attachecl t o four. These are (51) " To a visiting brother," (55) " Charity," (65)
Contentment " and (66) l' My wishes." The last two only have been published among
Mozart's works.
The volume was purchased from C. Zoeller in 1885.
12-GLEE,
' l
Hail t o t h e Craft "
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Bro. J . Parry
Cnnccoml~nnied Choir, Solo pcrrts b y Cro- Pike, Lmgford and J u p p .

From " Tllc London Coliectioii of Glces, Ducts and Catches, calculated for Public
or Private pcrfurniailce," published ill tlie early p a r t of t h e nineteenth century. Words
and music are by the I':ditor of the booli, J. Parry The particular copy for this, from
which our copies n-ere transcribed, belonged to 13ro. J. TV. Hobbs, the once famous singer,
who was G.Org. in 1846.
~ ~ - C L O S I S GSOSG, " Let a song t o Gocl bc souiided" . . . . . . . . .
I. J . Plel~el
Unisor~ Song, uitA Pzanofortc.
Ignaz Joseph Pleyel was a favourite pupil of Bro. J. Haydn. H e was invited t o
Lolldoll in 1791 t o conduct n series of coilcerts which, X\-ithouthis lcnowledge, were iiitendcd
to oust those conducted by Haydn. The blow nlissed its aim, the conductors being fast
friends. Three syinphonics, by Haydn, Ifozart and Pleyel were performed a t t h e first
concert, and Haydii 11-as gresent. It 1%-illbe noted t h a t P-hile these two were in London .
Mozart died in 17ieiina.
This song is No. 3 in the JIS. booli illeiitioned above.
14-" NASOSIC
ODE "
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
... Bro. George Percivall
" Dedicated to the Royal Susses Lodge of Hospitality, 90.314, Bristol,"
and performed a t tlie Dedication of Freemasons' Hall, Bridge Street, Bristol,
on Jlay l s t , 1813.
9010 Voices (Bros. Loiiglord and Hill ~t.it11Bros. Pike and Jlaby i n Quartet), ChOTUS,
0rche.sti~cicincl Orgcin.
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.
Malmesbury Abbey from the South.
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 .
.-
Elizabetlla~l House East of t h e Abbey.
b ~ ~ r g The
.
3larlret Cross.
J. F. H. Gilbard.
Malmesbury.
Group a t Market Cross.
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.
A ' 3Iealber of t l ~ eL o d g e ' writes : To thosc
had t h e happiness to bc prebcnt F r ~ d a yevening carno a s a r e z e l a t ~ o n .
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~ .
ST. PETER'S HOSPITAL.

0
1
1 tlle S a t u r d a y nloriiing t h e p a r t y visited St. P e t e r ' s H o s p i t a l , wliere tliey
were received by M r . J. J. Simpson, t h e genial Clerk t o th? G u a r d i a n s . Before
leaving, tlie B r e t h r e n h e a r t i l y t h a n k e d h i m a n d also Bros. A . Dodge a n d Coles,
f o r t h e i r g r e a t kindness.
The building formed the mansion of a family r.amed Norton i n t h e fifteenth century.
One of these is believed to be t h a t Thonlas Norto~lof Bristol, who was reputed t h e most
skilful alchemist of his timc; but he is said t o have impoverished both himself and those
friends who had entrusted him mith money to assist his researches. I n 1580 it was
sold, and in 1607 came into t h e hands of Robert Aldq-orth, a rich merchant, who carried
out extensive alterations in t h e structure. Later on i t was used as a sugar-house, and
from 1693 to 1697 as a mint, i11 wl~ich, i t is stated, C40,000,000 were coined.
The
The
building n-as then purchascrl b - the " Incorporation of t h e Poor " for 800.
beautiful sitting-room of Robcrt Aldn-orth, mith its blacli oak panelling, its beautiful
ceiling, fire-place and carved door, became t h e Court-room of tho Guardians, until lack
of sufficient accommodntion caused them t,o provide a larger one in 1901. The quaint
scriptural designs on tllr river entrance, as well as t h e fine barge boards and heavy
brackets, are also attribntccl t o Ald~vorth. The handsome chair, dated 1F,96, bearing a
Tra~lstrctiot~s
of t h e Q U C I ~ LCIoOr o~t ~ ~ fLodge.
ti
158
carved representation of a bee-hive, is much tllo~lghtof, and ~ l a sbeen used by royal

visitors t o t h e city.
Bristol was t h e first place in Ellgland to obtain legislatlrc :tuthority for the
election of a Board of Guardians for t h e Poor (in 1696). Up to the serenteenth century
the relief of t h e necessitous had beell left t o the charitable, and latcr in t h a t century it,
was provided by parochial poor rates. The Vestries used all possible means of ridding
their parishes of everyone chargeable or even likely t o be so; but, shortly after the
Act of Parliament mentioned was passed, St. Peter's Hospital became the first 13-orkhouse,
supported by a r a t e levied upon a group of parishes. I t s destitute inmates v e r e long
ago removed to other buildings.
P a r t of t h e old mansion is now used as the Bristol Registry of births, deaths aiid
marriages, Bro. Albert Dodge, t h e Provincial G. Treasurer, being the Superintendent.
Tho Governinent used a s a inilitary hospital during the lITar the infirmary which
the Guardians had just erected but had not used.
TEMPLE CHURCH.
T h e B r e t h r e n t h e n paid a visit t o T e m p l e (or H o l y Cross) C h u r c h u n d e r
t h e k i n d l y guidance of t h e Vicar, B r o . t h e R e v . C a n o n W e l c l l n ~ a n ,a member of
the R o y a l Sussex L o d g e of H o s p i t a l i t y , N o . 187. T h e i r g r a t e f u l t h a n k s were
expressed b y t h e W . M . f o r t h e facilities afforded t h e m f o r seeing t h e i n a n y points
of interest, a n d f o r t h e a d m i r a b l e descriptions given b y B r o . W e l c h m a n .
I n 1145 Robert, Earl of Gloucester, granted land from his Manor of Bedmiiister to
t h e Knights Templar, and this wa.s called t h e ' l Temple Fee." A church was then built,
oval i n form, 43 feet long bv 23 feet wide, t h e foundations of which were discovered in
the course of certain restoratio~lsabout fifty years ago.
A t t h e time of t.he suppression of t h e Knights Templar. cwrlp in the fourteenth
century, their possessioiis in this country were handed over to the Order of St. John of
Jerusalem or Knights Hospitaller. These held t h e property until it 11-as confiscated by
Henry V I I I . by n special Act of P a r l i a ~ n e n tin 15.10,-just four liundrcd years after the
gift had been made bp the Earl of Gloucester.
The men of t h e Temple Fee refused to ackno~-ledgotlii, authority of the Mayor of
Bristol, they enjoyed the privilege of sanctuary, and allowed those n.110 were not burgesses
to trade v-itliiii their district. The condition of things had 1)cconlo so troublesoine t h a t
in 1534 the matter was brought into the Law Courts, where the citizens were successful.
The dispute had been of long standing. For instance, in 19 Edmard 11. (1325-6) according
t o the Rolls of Pa?~linment,vol. i., p. 434, translated froill Ir'ormmi French by Sever,' t h e
following complaint was nlade :" To our lord t h e King and his Council the Meire and Coimnonalty of Bristuyt
s h e ~ r :t h a t whereas the aforesaid tol\-n ancl t h e suburb of the same is within the couilty
of Gloucester, and is obedient ( e n f e n t l m r n t ) t o the Sheriff of the saillc county, except a
parcel of a street called Temple-street, which is within t h e walls, and t h e (inhabitants) of
the said street burgesses of the same town of Bristuit; which street is obedient
(entendaunt) to the Sheriff of Somerset: therefore \\-hen our lord t h e King coinrnands
t h e Sheriff of Gloucestershire t o make his executions, t h e people of the town of Bristuit
cause their goods and chattels to he reinored to the said Tc.~nplt,-street,n l ~ i r l iis ill thc
county of Somerset: so t h a t neither the Sheriff of Glouc' nor the bailiffs of t h e same
town are ablo t o nlalie execution of t h e mandates of our lord the King; t o t h e great
damage of t h e King and of all t h e Commonalty."
The present church is, of course, of later date than the original edifice. I t is a
dignified building, partly of the decorated ~ n dpartly of the perpendicular style, and
was once richly ornamented with frescoes, and possessed much .~ncient stained glass in
i t s windows until Cromwell's time. I t s most notable feature is the leaning tower, the
lower p a r t of which (up t o t h e trefoil band, two thirds froill the bottom), is said t o havo
been erected in 1397. William of \I1orcester states t h a t the whole of i t was built anew
i n 1460, but i t was probably onlr the upper portion, (nhich i3 practically upright).
Templc was made a vicarage
Tho tower is about four feet out of t h e perpendicular
by Ralph, Bishop of Bath aiid T17ells, in 1312.
At the end of t h e north aisle is the Wearers' Chapel, which according to Jo1111
Taylor 2 was granted to t h a t fraternity by Edn-ard I . , but. a t any rate, as built i n his
1
Aiemoirs of Bristol, vol. ii.. 1). 13.7.

Book nborit BI-istol, p. 231.
211
those early, unel~lightencddays b r o ~ ~ g hint a Itandsome revenue from t h e credulous piety

of the populace; but, \\-hen i t became Iino~vnt h a t there were three other reputed heads
of St. Petcr on the. Continent, the rercnue decreased very considerably.
The ]lest Church erected on t h e foundations, and embodying portions of the older
one, n-as built by t l ~ eelder Tl'illiain Canynge and his son, and completed a t the end of
the fourteenth century or beginning of the fil'teenth. It appears to ha^-e esisted but a
short time only, as it is in the City records t h a t a dreadful and devastating storm
occurred in tile gear 1:-15. when t h e upper portion of the spire mns blow11 down. I t is
probable t h a t i t was :L \\-ode11 construction, for the base of the tolt-er had to be
strel~gthenedto support the present spire, n-hich \\-as declared complete in 1872, and-to
t h e accompanin~entof another riolent thunder storm-opened by Mrs. Proctor Baker in
t h a t year.
-4 grandson of the first TVilliam Canynge undertook to re-build the destroyed portions
of t h e Church. H e employed a clever builder nanled John Norton, and was assisted and
advised by John Carpenter, Provost of Oriel College, Oxford, a J\-ell known church builder
of t h a t time. Tl12 result of their designs, and Canynge's munificence, is the Church as
\vc see i t nort-; but, of course, nlanp years elapsed bcfore the plans of these m e d i ~ v a l
I~uilderswere realized as a t present.
Over the North Porch is the AIuninlent Room, where Chatterton claimed t o have
found the manuscripts of the poetry which he attributed t o Ro~vley. The Lord Mayor
became Head inaster of the Pile Street Free Scliool in 1865, and thus was a successor of
Thoinas Ci~atterton,the father of the poet. For three years Bro. Francombe lived alone
in the house in 1vhic11 t h a t ill-fated genius, a posthumous child, was born in 1752, three
m o n t h after t h e death of his father. While still under tell years of age, Chatterton
was a d n ~ i t t e dto Colstoil School, then on S t . Augustine's Back, and the Vsher, one
Phillips, offering a prize for the best poetry, he won it with " The Churchwarden and
t h e Apparition," describing how a certain Church~varden threm down the Cross in the
Churchyard. (A similar Cross is about to be erected as a IVar Memorial.) I n September,
1768, the New Bristol Bridge was opened IT-ith public ceremony, and Chatterton seized
l
he declared was a n original
t h e occasion t o supply t o Felix Farley's Bristol J o ~ t r n c ~what
contemporary account of t h e opening of the Old Bristol Bridge in t h e writing of one
Ronrley, a priest, which he professed t o h a r e discovered \\-it11 other docun~entsin the
&Iunimcnt Room. Some tiine after he went to London and was introduced to Beckford,
Chntterton wrote glotving accounts home, and
t h e Lord Mayor-himself
a a poet.
promises of silli dresses for his mother and sister, when, in fact, he was writing plays,
etc., for the public gardens, and receiving a t most 301s. a month for his work. Beckford
died, and, destitute and starving, in a fit of despair, Chatterton tore up his manuscripts,
left his curse t o his native city, and poisoned hiinself in the year 1770.
The edifice was seriously damaged during the Commonwealth, and, after standing
neglected for two centuries, was a t length restored during t h e last century.
The
remnants of t h e glass left after Cromn-ell's visit, \\-hen his soldiers were quartered and
their horses stabled in the Church, a r e in the Xorth Tower, and t h e colouring of the
old glass is greatly admired. St. Mary Rcdcliff abounds in objects of interest both old
and new, including the Canynge Tombs and t h e modern stained glass in t h e Cabot,
Colston, and Handel windolr-s and in the restored Lady Chapel. The great discoverer
of Newfoundland and the n~ainlandof t h e C o n t i n e ~ ~oft America is shown with a picture
of his good ship T h e Xntthetc. The beautiful window to coinmeinorate the \vorlis of
Bristol's greatest philanthropist, Edtvard Colston, contains a representation of the eight
acts of mercy: feeding t h e hungry; giving drink t o the thirsty; clothing t h e naked;
teaching the ignorant; visitiilg t h e prisoner ; tending t h e dying ; helping the lame ;
visiting t h e sick and t h e beautiful Parable of t h e Good Samaritan. Colston's motto is
also displayed, " Go thou and do liken-ise."
The Lady Chapel was restored inside and out by t'he generostiy of t h e Freemasons,
and their clerice in mosaic of two thousand pieces nlay be seen in the floor. Also many
signs b ~ s tknon.11 to >lark Masons can be recogilised in the beautifully grained and
embossed ceiling.
No less thau 1,200 gilded bosses decorate the stone ceiling of t h e Church, and
above a t a distance of six feet is a n outer roof. I n t,he ton-er is shown t h e so-called
Dun Cow's rib; said t o be the rib of a cow t h n t gave milli t o t h e parish when there was
a dearth of n-nter. The legend goes on to say t h a t the poor cow, givillg out so much milk,
went mad, and Guy Earl of Warn-ick n-as sent for to fight t h e Dua G;{--.
H e Billed the
noisome beast and placed one rib in \Varn-iclr Castle and one in Rcdcliff Church. The
Lord 3fayor said t h a t n-hen he n-as a boy he a n d his companions believed this tale; but
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
:"rcrt1.snctio12.sof the Q ~ t c ~ t l ~C'oronnti

or
Lodge.
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)
was a favourite pupil of Mozart froin 1783 to 1787. Orgallist

of St. Paul's Cathedral from 1796.
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.
DE. C. H. Lr.ouo (1849-1019)
was born a t Thornhury, near Bristol.

Organist in 1917 a t the Bi-Centenary Festival.
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:"
111 clear remembrance of n son

His father cut and et this stone.
S o chisel nlarli the marble hears;
Its surface yielded t o his tears.
Lie on him lightly, stone, and he
Will knolv his father's masonrg." 1
The preacher t l ~ e nwent on t o invite t h e visitors, in conlmon with the rest

of t h e congregation, to support t h e charity for which he was making a special
appeal t h a t morning, t h e Bristol Diocesan Clergy Society, and, with another
raference t o t h e importance in life of influence and example, brought t o a close an
address which will not easily be forgotten by those who were privileged t o hear it.
As we passed out of t h e Cathedral we had one more opportunity of admiring
t h e cloister, and we were also shewn a n old archway, now forming p a r t of t h e
school buildings, the unusual appearance of which is apparently due t o its having
been c u t down during soine period of re-building. W e came out on t o tlie College
Green through tlie great Norman Gate.
Bristol has its own ideas about transport facilities on Sundays, ideas which
are not such as would appeal t o most people who were dealing with t h e problem
of transferring seventy-seven brethren and their baggage t o Temple Meads Station.
1311t i t takes a great deal t o defeat our Secretary, and he got us on t o the platform
i n good order and in pienty of time for the 1.40, with our ilnpedimenta all present
and correct. W i t h a hearty send off from tlie brethren on t h e platform, a quick
r u n brought 11s to Paddington, lunch being served on board, and our party
dispersed after many lnutual congratulations on t h e complete success of th~e
Outing of 1920.
1
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
Prunsactiotts of t h e Quntuor Coronati Lodge.
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
I n Chapter vii., which is headed " Uninterrupted Existence for a Century,"

table is given of the various meeting places of the Lodge with dates of the first
and last meetings of each annual session from 1820 to 1918-the minute-book
prior to the earliest date not being now a v a i l a b l e b u t , fortunately, other evidence
is supplied that the Lodge was in existence in 1817, so that we may be satisfied
the title of t h e chapter is no misnomer.
Valuable appendices of lists of members, arranged alphabetically, with dates,
of joining and of Lodges from which they joined, together with a useful index,
bring the painstaking-but
no doubt congenial-labours of an author who has
been inspired with a love of his task, to a successful close.
No Masonic student, who is interested in the question of the descent of our
Ritual, can afford to be without this book, and a perusal of its pages will supply
him with examples of cogent reasoning and carefully set out facts sufficient to
repay him for a more than usually patient study of the volume.
May, 1921.
RODK.H. BAXTER.
-a
A N C I E N T F R E E V d S O - V R Y A X D T H E O L D D U N D E E LODGE, Ro. 18,

1722-23 to 1920.
By Arthur H e i r o n , L.R.,
No. 18, W.M. 1901 a n d , 1917.
London, Kenning & Son, 1921.
It should be understood a t the outset that this volume is not a mere

transcript of Lodge Minutes; on the contrary, the author has intelligently, and
in the main with success, endeavoured to interweave much of general Masonic
history belonging to the long period of which he treats, with the particular doings
of his Lodge, for which it is easy to see he entertains a special affection, and now
presents us with a book to which almost unqualified praise and welcome can be
offered.
Bro. Heiron's labours have. occupied him for no less than four years. As
he states in his Introduction, he deals but shortly with matters occurring after
1834, when, after some years of decadence, the prosperity of "The Dundee
Lodge" (as i t was up t o that time) revived, under the energetic lead of Bro.
It
Dr. G . R. Rowe, and with its name altered to " T h e Old Dundee Lodge."
is enough, for this later period, t o say t h a t the Lodge still flourishes; and there
may be desired for i t as honourable and interesting a career as i t possessed in its
first century of life.
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
<:
See A.Q.G. xxiv., 31.

See A.Q.C. xxx., 235, for copy of this letter.
A full account of F. C. Daniel, by the late Bro. E. L. Hamkins, is in The
Freemason of Mav 22nd and 29th, 1009.

4 Lzje of Samuel Johnson, by Col. F , Grant. 1887,
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
Augustine Birrell's &sap> .Johnson.
The G e o r g i a n Era, 1834.
'
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.
Published by W i l l i a m Rider & Son, L t d .
1921.
The general idea underlying this compilation is indicated hy Bro. Waite in

his preface :
I have undertaken this work . . . not because I am drawn

naturally into archaeological paths but because they offer an opportunity
to put forward what I am very certain is the true view of Freemasonry.
Were i t merely-as so many believe--an ethical and benevolent society,
the only issue concerning it would be whether i t fulfils that r61e in the
living present: origin and past history could be matters of no moment,
or a t least none which-from
my, pcint of view-would
warrant such
a book as this. But Masonry, in mv own understanding, is part of a
Divine Quest; it communicates knl~wledgeof t,hat Quest and 'its term
insymbolism . . . (p. vi.).
The impression left on my mind after reading the work is t h a t Bro. Waite has
merely linked together a series of Essays embodying personal opinions, by means
of lists and tabulations for which he has very little respect. This is how some of
these lists are introduced:-"
Can be seen in any Masonic Calendar, but presumably must be given here for the sake of completeness" (I., 337). " Had I
trusted to my own guidance I should have omitted some names, but in a book of
reference i t is very difficult to make distinctions" ( I I . , 120). " Included for
the sake of~completeness,not because I am disposed to think that they are of any
consequence to the great majority of readers " (II., 139). " I do it rather for
the sake of completeness than on any ground of urgency" ( I 1 , 183). " A s i t
is usual to burden a work of Masonic reference with particulars of this kind, I
prooeed to give under protest . . . on pages which should be reserved for
better things " ( I I . , 205).
I am not a t the resent time concerned with Bro. Waite's views on abstract
questions which he may consider are connected with, or perhaps essential to,
Masonry. Nor do I seek to deny to him the right of holding and even expressing
his personal opinions. I can conceive the possibility t h a t they may be of interest
to some Masonic readers. I f , however, they are of such interest, I suggest t h a t
it would have been more convenient if thev had not been buried in this
Encyclopaedia with scarcely any mark to identify their place of intern~ent.
One does not want to be obliged to wade through the whole of an Encyclopzdia
in order to find out what information i t contxins on a particular subject.
It is surely unusual to find an Index in a ~ i c t i o n a ror
~ ~nc~clopzdia,
such works being generally arranged strictly GII alphabetical lines, so rendering
unnecessary an adjunct which otherwise is almost indispensable in every well edited
book not devoted entirely t o fiction. That an Index was needed for Bro. W a i t e ' ~
Encyclopaedia seems to shew t h a t a faulty arrangement of the matter has been
recognized.
True, i t is planned on an alphabetical basis, with articles under
every letter from A to Z, but to find any particular subject one has to resort to
a system of guess work, the Index affording scarcely any help. For example,
Apron, Baptism, Chronology, Charities, Jurisprudence, Rites of Adoption,
Symbols, all appear under the letter M (Masonic); particulars of Colonial and
Indian Masonry are under N (Notes), while Canada is under D (Dominion):
Elus Cohens, Mizraim, Black Eagle, Philalethes, Strict Observance, Zinnendorf,
Mithra, are under R (Rites), while Memphis is under 0 (Oriental) ; and not one
of these references is to be found in the Index. The MS. Constitutions are under
Corrstst7ctions rtnd C h l o ' g ~ sas well as Old Chor!,~.s,but the Index gives neither.
On the other harld, the Index does give a referdnce to the Gormogons, who would
otherwise be lost under S (Society).
170
Transnctions of the Qucctuor Coronati Lodge.
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.)
rf ever the conlpilation of an exhaustive Masonic Encyclopedia is seriously

contemplated, i t is verh certain t h a t the work must be entrusted, not to any one
man, but to a carefully selected band of students, each of them an acknowledged
authority upon the special department or departments which he will represent.
The study of Freemasonry, and all that is therein involved, is too vast to permit
any single student the hope of being accept9d as an expert in all of t h e many
branches into which thc subject naturally divides. No one individual can expect
to be aware of all that the latest research has accomplished in every direction,
still less to be able to appreciate the true relative value of each detail. Matter
which, by reason of his own particular studies, will appear to A to be possessed
of great interest and importance, will to B seen1 to be more or less superfluous.
What must be and what mcz?y be included? What ntay be and what must be
excluded?-are
questions upon which, in all probability, no two investigators
working alone would hold identical opinions.
I f , then, the New Encyclopcedin of Freen~nsonry, ,4rs ii/ngna Latomorurn,
by Bro. A . E. Waitembefound to be something of a disappointment, the industrious
compiler must not be blamed for a failure which was well nigh inevitable. We
ought to admire the courage which led him
address himself to the task singlehanded, even if we make mental reservations as to his wisdom.
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 :\
appears under 0 for O ~ d e r

Order of Christ
Order of the Temple
,
, 0 ,,
Priestly Order, or White Mason ,,
. P ,, Priestly
Holy Order of the Royal Arch
,,
,, R ,, Royal
Modern Order of Martinism
,,
, M ,, Modern (?zot Martinism)
Masonic Order of Malta
,
, M ,, Masonic (not Malta)
Most Ancient Order of
Gormogons
,,
,, S ,, Society
The Rite of Mizraim
),
,, R , , Rite
The Oriental Rite of Memphis
,, 0 ,, Oriental
,
, S ,, Swedish
The Swedish Rite
,
,, F ,, Freemasonry ( n o t Prance)
Freemasonry in Franco
Germanic Masonry .
,,
,, G ,, Germanic
Notes on Colonial & Indian Masonry ,,
,
PT ,, N O ~ S
The
The
The
The
The
The
The
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
Trci~tmctionsof the Q~tntzrorCoronatz Lodge.
176
whereabouts of ' Lodge No. 494.'

B u t as the facts are all well known (see
S . Q . C . xv., -116-124) the student naturally expects to find them in the A'ew
Bncyclopcedia.
Pages xiii.-xxiv. of Vol. I . contain 'Technology of Rites an$ Gradw' of
doubtful utility. Why is the student helped t o the knowledge t h a t the ' Square
and Compasses' and ' Plumb-Line and Plumb-Rule' are Working Tools with
emblematic reflections and moralisations, and left in painful uncertainty about
the ' Level ' ? If ' B.K.T.' and ' H.A.B.' are made to reveal themselves, why
should ' S.K.I.' be permitted to lurk in obscurity ? Does ' R.A.M.' necessarily
mean ' Royal Ark Mariner ' ?
There is no clue to t h e method of seiection for the honour of ,inclusion
amongst the ' Lesser Masonic Personalities ' (II., 13-31) or ' Minor Masonic
Literati' ( I I . , 120-138) except tlie perhaps wise precaution t h a t none but the
departed are eligible for the latter. * I n the absence of lists of ' Greater Masonic
Personalities ' and ' Major Masonic Literati ' we must look for such in the separate
articles or main body of the work. Bro. I-Iughan, who is presented as a ' Minor,'
a t least fares better than Bros. Gould, Speth, Chetwode Crawley and others who
are ' not placed ' or, a t any rate, have no special articles devoted to them.
The compiler himself rather sets the reader against ' Convivial Societies'
( I . , 149-152) .and ' Minor Rites in Masonry ' (11.' 138-157), for he says:" I do not know why such things have been commemorated
. . .,,
(I., 149).
. . . these gleanings do not represent marked original research . . .
. . . I am not disposed t o think that they are of any consequence
,
t o the great majority of readers . . ." (II., 139).
Yet the Chapter of Clermont, the Primitive Rite of Narbonne, and Starck's
Clerici Ordinis Templarii, and others in the latter list, are by no means devoid
of importance to the serious student, to whom the S e w Encyclopedia might
reasonably be expected t o appeal.
Bro. Waite took ' reasonable care, as well in the work of consultation as in
t h a t of checking ' the ' Masonic Chronology ' (II., 40-89) ; but there remain, for
all that, not a few serious flaws. F o r example:1691. Plot's Natural History of Wilt~hire.
1724. Death of Thomas Dunckerley.
[N.B. The Chronology under 1795 does not mention him,
but a t I . , 203, we are told t h a t his Charge was published in
1737.1
1739. . . . discontent which assumed ultimately the magnitude of a
serious schism in English Masonry.
1751. The so-called Schi.smatic Grand Lodge of England . . .
1740. A and Master of Scotland, named Deucher, . . .
1742. Abbe Pcran published Les Secrets Des Francs-Maqons.
1745. Abbe Peran.
. (Is he really credited with L J 0 r d r e Trcrhi?)
1740. The Minutes of the Royal Order of Scotland begin in this year.
1763. The Minutes of the Royal O'rder of Scotland b&in in this year.
1805. Lechangenzc . . . created . . . Rite of Mizraim . . .
1810. Leclmngenz~ granted a patent.
But a t I I . , 24, the same information is given concerning
Lechangeur.
On the question of t h e introduction of Craft Masonry into France there is,
both in the Chronological Table and also in Vol. I . , pp. 290-3, a tone of complaint
as t o ' confusion ' introduced by previous writers who have dealt with the subject.
Bro. Waite, by a complete mixing u p of t h e Denventwaters, has contrived to
intensify this confusiol to a quite remarkable degree ( I I . , 18, 22, 50, 53, 55, 58).
L
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
Tran.snctions of the Quattior Coronnti Lodge.
W h a t is the meaning of ' Napolienne ' ? (II., 194). Napoleonienne is a

presentable word and conveys something, but ' Napolienne' looks as if an error
of judgment on the part of the proof-reader of Bro. Woodford's Kenning's
Gyclopcedia (1878), p. 505, has somehow intruded itself into the New E n c y c l o p d i a
of 1921.
' Masonry and Chivalry ' is a section In a lengthy Article on the Order of
the Temple (II., 217-240). A t p. 218 :" We have seen t h a t the Chevalier Ramsay was the first t o put forward
a hypothesic of the chivalric origin of Masonry, and that in doing so
he made nc reference to the Templars. . . . t h e first definite
attempt t o derive Speculative Masonry from the Knights Templar was
made by the Rite of the Strict Observance which-as
we have seen
otherwise-was inaugurated in or about the year 1754 . . . ,
But what of the Letter from The Grand Mistress of 1727-9? And there certainly
were rumours of ' Templar ' succession or connection long before 1754.
In
reference to the Charter of Larmenius and Fabre-Palaprat and the Strict
observance Bro. Waite says :" My point . . . is simply to indicate the very eloquent fact-which
no one seems to have noticed-that
we are confronted by two independent and mutually exclusive lines of alleged perpetuation and transmission . . ." ( I I . , 220).
" Templar Grand Masters. The Roll of (Strict Observance) Templar
Grand Masters--which no one has seen in England- ( I I . , 356).
If the compiler will but turn t o A.Q.C., volume xxvi. (published as long
ago as 1913); he will find a series of Papers on T h e Te?riplar Legends in Freemasonry by Dr. Chetwode Crawley. And a t p. 65 Dr. Crawley says:" The
catalogue of Gra,nd Masters according to the rite of Strict
Observance is appended, mainly for the purpose of compari'son with
the competing list of the French, Rite (Palaprat's Ordre dlc TernpIe).
The list will be found mutually destructive."
Further on in Bro. Waite's Article on the ' Order of the Temple' we read :" Chetwode Crawle;
says t h a t the carliest record of Knights Templar is
.
t h a t of St. John's Day in the Summer of 1774 " (II., 226).
''hDecember 20, 1780, a certain Charter of Compact executed by the
Templars of Bristol is evidence t h a t there was a body in existen-at
t h a t time and in t h a t place-under
the title of Supreme Grand and
Royal Encampment of the O'rder of Knights Templar, S t . John of
Jerusalem, Knights Hospitallers, Knights of Malta, etc. The document is not in existence, but certain iules arising therefrom or attached
thereto have reference to subordinate Encampments, among other
subjects " ( I I . , 226-7).
Bro. Waite is evidently unaware of the 1772 January 25th ' Intelligence Extraordinary' (see Freemasonry in Bristo7, p. 779) and t h a t t h e 1780 Charter of
Compact is preserved a t the F.M. Hall, Park Street, Bristol. More important
still he does not quote the title correctly, for there is no comma between the word
Templar (which should be Temp7ar.v) and the following words S t . John, but instead
of the comma there is the all-important word o f , thus:-"
The Supreme Grand
and Royal Encampment of the Order of Knights Templars of St. John of
Jerusalem, Knights Hospitallers, and Knights of Malta, &C., &C., To all the
Knight Companions of t h a t Noble Order Health-Peace-Goodwill
. . .,>
I n t h e opinion of those who drew up the Charter of Compact the ' Noble Order '
was a Masonic Order of St. John of Jerusalem, not a Templar Order, although
t h e members were called ' Templars of S t . John of Jerusalem.'
Again Bro.
Waite says:" I n 1790 and 1791 Thomas Dunckerley projected the centralisation of
the scattered English groups. On July 24, 1791, he informed a York
P
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 .
By Wor. Bro. Lionel Vibert
. . .
Spencer & Co., London.
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
Trunsacdions of the Quutuor Cvorormti Lodge.
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).
It is true t h a t Bro. Vibert is speaking of London only, and that my concern is

rather with the state of t h e Society as a whole, but the fact is t h a t we k m w
practically nothing, and are r e d u d to conjecture based upon such indications
as are available. These indications are admirably summed up in the paragraph
from p. 42 quoted, an(! the testimony of Ashmole, Plot, Holme, Aubrey, Steele,
and the social standing of the non-operative members of whom we have definite
knowledge (to which list the name of the first Duke of R.ichmond may in fairness
be added), present t o my mind an impression which does not tally with Bro.
Vibert's picture of the London Craft just after 1717. What grounds are there
for saying:-' i t would not seem even to have been as yet an intellectual movement ' ? From J u n e of 1717 t.o J u n e of 1721 is but a short period, yet the newspapers of the latter date tell us of a m e t i n g a t Stationers Hall of from two to
three hundred members. including ' several Noblemen and Gentlemen,' when the
Duke of M o n t a ~ u ewas chosen Master, Dr. Beale ' Sub-Master,' and Dr. Desaguliero
The same year-1721-saw
the Initiation of Dr.
made a 'suitable' Speech.
Wm. Stukeley, who expected to find ' remains of the mysterys of the antients,' and
who tells us of the Masonic activities of Lords Herbert, Stanhope, Dunbarton,
Reviews.
183
Hinchinbroke, Dalkeith, the Duke of Queensbarough, Sir Andrew Fountain, and

so forth. As Bro. Viljert says :But by now the Craft had leapt into prominence and popularity.
Antiquaries, scientists, and men of rank sought admission . . .,,
( P 49).
A reasonable view is that after a period of depression just before 1717 there came
a ' revival ' and the Society ngain attracted men of intellect and high social standing and for the same reason, the ' subject matter' being there all the time
waiting to be developed into the form in which we know i t now.
The gradual extension of the authority of the G.L. over Lodges in all parts
of the country, the continued existence 'of Lodges which would not recognize t h a t
authority, the Masonic History of York, Alnwick, Swalwell, and other matters of
interest being disposed of, Bro. Vibert, in chapter viii., gives an excellent abstract
of Craft development; in Scotland and Ireland, and the way is now clear for
' The Eighteenth Century and the Union ' (chapter ix.) which includes a lucid
account of the rise of the ' Antients' and the struggle between them and t h e
' Moderns.' One of the best features of the book is chapter X., ' Ceremonies and
Degrees,' an admirable Essay which does not suffer by comparison with t h e famous
' Digression on Degrees' by Bro. R. F. Gould in his Concise History published in
1903. ' The Craft To-Day ' and some hints to the beginner upon ' W h a t to Read '
follow, and so the book ends.
Withoat any doubt T h e Story of t h e Crnff is a most notable and welcome
addition to Masonic Literature, for i t cupplies a long felt and severely felt want,
namely, a concise account of the evolution of our Order, wherein the essentials ares
not lost in the proce>- of compression, and the characteristic of brevity is not
abandoned in the effort to be comprehensive.
Bro. Vibert dmerves our hearty
congratulations and thanks.
J. E. S. TUCXETT.
July, 1921.
' l
Transactions of t h e Q~rc~trror
C o r o r ~ a t iLoclge.
NOTES AND QUERIES.
HE CROWN IN PARKER'S LANE.-At
of Charity.
this house is said to

have met t h e second of the ' Four Old Lodges ' which, according
t o Anderson, formed the Grand Lodge in 1716 or 1717.
By
!72? i t had moved to the Queen's Head, Turnstile, close b y ; '
an4 after sttveral other remc~valsto houses in the same locality,
v e Cnci i t in 1730 a t the Bull and Gate, Furnival's I n n , Holborn.
From this house it sent representatives to Grand Lodge on 29th
May, 1733, with a contribution of one guinea towards the fund
No further entry appears, and in 1736 the Lodge was dropped from
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.
True F r i e n d s h i p Lodge No. 160, Rochford, Essex.-In

his inaugural
address to t h e Lodge in 1914 Bro. Hextall suggested t h a t sundry unconnected
memoranda might be gathered, preserved, and rendered accessible in a sort of
clearing house to whicb application could be made by those requiring information
or data. With this in mind the following matter is submitted as possibly being
worthy of permanent record, having only been obtained by means scarcely likely
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 :-
1574 For iiiior dayes of a man for ye church ...

...
...
(Many entries of men working a t church)
To ye Free mason
...
...
...
...
...
...
To michell ye mason for his workmanshippe in the house
%ii viiid
viliXiid
xxxvS
W.B.H.
Capt. Marryat's " Newton Forster,"

Freemasonry in Fiction. -In
chapter xii., is an account of an escape by Enqlish Mariners from a French Prison.
One of the party had given certain signs and they were responded b and escape
resulted.
It would almost seem t h a t Marryat must have been a Mason, for there a r e
indications in the narrative of an enlightened reticence.
I n the same Novel, a t the heading of chapter i., is the following quotation
from Sterne, which is not without a kind of hovering interest t o MasonsAnd what of this new book the whole world makes such a rout about?
Oh ! tis out of all plumb my lord-quite
an irregular thing; not one
I had my rule and
of the angles a t the corner was a right angle.
compasses &c. my lord in my pocket. Excellent critic!
Grant me patience just heaven ! Of all the cants which are canted in
this cantinq world-though
.the cant of hypocrites may be t h e worst,
the cant of criticism is the most tormenting.
(See Tristrnm Shandy, Vol. III., chapter xii.)
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
Trai~sactions~f the Quatuor C'oronati Lodge.
186
all the warrant workmen and labourers to attend them, dressed in

white gloves and aprons, the usual badges of the order of free-masonry.
N o mention of the occurrence is made in Anderson's Co?~titutiom,1723, where
the Tower of London is only named as built by William t h e Conqueror; whilst
William 111. is styled " that glorious Prince (who by most is reckon'd a FreeXason)."
Our only other source of information, X u l t a Paucis (chca 1763) is
more explicit with assertions t h a t William I. " appointed Roger Montgomery,
Earl of Arundel, Dundulph, Bishop of Rocheeter, with other good Architects, a t
the Head of the Fellow-Crafts, to build the Tower of London [etc.] ;" and that
King \Tilliam 111. "was soon after [his accession] made a Free-Mason in a
private Lodge; and as Royal Grand Master, greatly approved of the Choice of
Grand Master Wren " , but has nothing as to the Tower Armory celebration : and
i t may be a little remarkable t h a t the incident, in which ostensibly Masonic
emblems played a conspicuous part, should have been unknown to, or unrecorded
by, the two early chroniclers of the Craft.
Some Masonic symbols a t the Tower of London, of apparently later date,
were noticed in .I.iiscellnnea Latonrorum, Vol. I I . , 95.
W.B.H.
Freemasons at Canterbury in 1732.-In
the List of Masonic MSS. pre~erved
:rl the Rawlinson collection in the Bodleian Library, compiled by Bro. Chetwode
Crawley and printed in A . Q . C . xi. (1898), No. 37-a

copy of the 17ni7*~rstrl
Spectator for 20th May,, 1732,-is described as " Containing a Letter and verses
i n ridicule of the Mayor of Canterbury on t h e occasion of a Meeting of FreeMasons a t the Red Lion in t h a t City." Bro. the Rev. Herbert Poole has very
kindly made a transcript of t h e letter and verses, which appear to refer to a
Lodge that had been constituted on 3rd April, 1730, and was removed from the
List in 1745.
[Rawl. MS. c. 136.1
[fol. 1471
The Cniz.ersal Spectator, 1 and I Weekly Journal. I No. c~xxxrx.
By Henry Stonecastle of AVorthumberland, Esq;
Saturday, May 20, 1732.
. . . . . . . . .
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
Notes and Queries.
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.
0 ! Can.terhrrry is a fine Town,

And a gallant City;
It's govern'd by the Scarlet Gown,
Come listen to my Ditty.
The Mayor by his Cryer maketh Proclamation,
And thua he begins his Worship's Declaration :
' Whereas a Rumour round this City runs,
' A n d Country too, that certain mighty Dons,
' Were sent down here, in Coach and Six from London,
' By whose Arrival we nlay all be undone.
Q ! Carcterbttry, &c.
' They say the've come Free Masons ta create,
' I wish i t prove no Plot against our State:

' Their Meeting is within a certain Tavern,
' The Room too is darkned, darker than any Cavern
0 ! Canferbrtry, &c.
' Now, I having a t Heart a super Veneration,
' For this our rich and antient Corporation,
' Resolv'd, like Old Forrsight, our Ruin to prevent,
' And thus to bring them all to condign Punishment.
O ! Ganterhltry, &c.
' First, I'll my Mirmidons, my Constables assemble,

' A t Sight of them this varlet Crew shall Tremble:
' F o r who knows what Plagues their Desiqns are to bring
' On us a t least----If
not our Lord the King.
0 ! Can ferblrry, &c.
' Their Magic Arts may prove of sad Effect,
' May blow up Church and Town, b u t no new ones erect:
' I'll thank and reward who can tell me aright.
' Row all those Dark-Lanthorns may be brought to Light*.
0 ! Canterbziry, &c.
Yransactions of t h e Quatztor Goronati Lodge.
OBITUARY.
T is with regret we have to {record the death of the followi~~g
Brethren :-
Arthur Elvey Austen, a t Johannesburg, in March, 1920.

Bro. Austen was P.Dep.Dis.G.M. of the Eastern Division' of
South Africa, and was a Past Grand Deacon of England. He
joined our Correspondence Circle in May, 1887, being No. 69.
on our List.
Thomas Dixon Buglass, of Lowestoft, on the 27th June, 1920. H e was a
member of Lodge and Chapter No. 71, and joined our Correspondence Circle in
October, 1910.
William John Brooks Coombe, of Long Ashton, near Bristol, on the
5th April, 1920. Bro. Coombe attained the rank of Pr.G.W. (Glos.) and was
Sc.N. in Chapter No. 68. H e became a member of our Correspondence Circle in
May, 1916.
Lieut.-Col. Henry Wilson Iles, D.S.O.,of Sidmouth, S. Devon, on the

28th April, 1920. H e had held the office of Dep.Dis.G.M., Hong Kong and South
China, and Burma. H e was also P.Z. of Chapter No. 1268. Bro. Iles joined
our Correspondence Circle in June, 1905.
Bro
Capt. William Jardine, of Liverpool, on the 20th June, 1920
Jardine was a member of Lodge No. 2459. H e joined our Correspondence Circle
in October, 1911.
William David Kemp, of Inverness, on the 14th April, 1920. H e was a
member of Lodge No. 339 and Chapter No. 115. Bro. Kemp had been a member
of our Correspondence Circle since May, 1894.
dames Millar, of Ketchikan, Alaska. Our Brother was a P.M. of Lodge
No. 155 (Canada). H e joined our Correspondence Circle in May, 1909
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.
!
Charles William Sutton, M.A., Chief Librarian of Manchester, on the

24th April, 1920. A Past Pr.G.D. of East Lancashire, and a Past President of'
the Manchester Association for Masonic Research.
George Edward Turner, of Blandford, on the 9th April, 1920. Bro.
Turner attained the rank of Pr.G.W. (Dorset), and in 1918 was appointed
Pr.G.Sec. I n t h e Provincial Grand Chapter he had held office as Pr.G.Sc.N.
H e had been a member of our Correspondence Circle since 1892.
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.
'IE Lodge met a t Freemasons' Hall a t 5 p.m. Present :-Bros. .T. E.

Shum Tuclictt, I?.Pr.G.R., Vilts., JV.AI. ; (:ordon P. G. Hills,
P.Pr.G.\V., Berks., I.P.11. ; T'io~lel Vil~ert, P.Dis.G.\Y., ?tlndras, as
S.W. ; I-Icrbert Bradley, P.Dis.Cr.&I., lladras, J.\\'. ; C;rnou Horsley,
P.G.Ch., Chaplam; K. J. Soiiyl~urst, P.G.D., Secret:l~y; \V. U.
Hextall, P.G.D., P.M.; J. P. Simp~on,P.A.G.R., P . J I . ; E. H Dring,
P.G.D., P.M.: and J. H. 31c?;nugliton, Tyler.
Also the follo~vii~g

members of the Correspondenrc Circle :Artfliir l\-. Chaprnnn, Fred. Amnlit.a.ge, W. A. E. P;>ilthorpe, Alfred Gatcs, Capt. C. C.
-Icl;lr~ls, il. S. Prcslnnd, \Valter Delves, Arthur Hell-on, G. It. D. Rust. John Amcs,
G. C. Parkhurst Bnstcr, F. C. Cickell. C. F. Z ~ l i c s ,'1. E. Biggs, 117111.C. Terry, Leslie
Htain~ns,TIT. J. \I-illiams, J. \ITalter Hobbs, P. H. Fos, F. \Ir. Le Tall, 11. C . Wearing,
Dr. d. E. ITynter, T. S. 3fills, llT.F. Stauffer, B. A. Smith, A. J . Smith, A. Gilchrist,
El. Arthur Weeks, C. F. Gifford, F. Stanley Henwood, Geo. Jl-. Bullanorr, J. H . Ganson,
F. Howard Hn~nphris,Johp Lamrance, lI-. L. R i d , Robt. Blnltr. L. Gougli, J. S. M.
Ward, H . Johnson, E. H . Fennel], Herbert P. 3layi.11, George Ingleiield, S. \V. Rodgers,
J. Procter 11-atson: and C. CoIes.
Also t h e follo~v.ing Visitors:-Bros.
Gcoffrcy lITa!sh, I . P . J I . , of the ?IIon~bnsa
Lodrqo KO. .3645; and H . D. S r x l r s \\-ood. S.W.. of t h Mid-Snrrcy
~
Iiodge P;o 3109.
Lettc.rs of apology for non-nttendance were reported from nros E d ~ v a r dConder,

L.R. ; Sir Alfred Rohbins, Pres. B.G.P. ; \V. H . R ~ l a n d s ,P.A.G.D.C. ; IV111. \Vatson,
P.A.G.D.C. ; R . H . Baxter ; J. T. Thorp. P.G.D. ; S. T. Filein, L.R. ; Cccil Pan-c.11,
P.G.D. ; Ed~varclAnnitage, P.G.D. ; and F. J. JV. C r o ~ c ,P.A.G.11.C.
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 .
Three Lodges and fifty Brethren a c r e :;dinitted

t o the i:le~i~bershipof the
190
Trro~anctionsof t h e Qltnfzlor C'orounti L o ( 7 q ~ .

The SECRETARY
called attention to the following
EXHIBIT.
By Dro. C. Goncn, on behalf of Bro. C. l E c c r , ~ s ~ o sthe

, owner.
A circular S S ~ F FI ~ O S~iia(leof Olive U-ood, lined papier-machh with tortoiseshell
rims. The lid has inserted in it, under a protecting glass, a plate of thin gold on n-hirh
are embossed enlblenls of r:~rioiisdegrees of t h c A. & A.R.
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
lnicl ortf b y nrcieitects----1crte
ilz-dote.
Tlc e I~oliticnl history raco~rs frtrcted-Toz~r cle IJrcr?ece-Orlerc~c,s-I'i/y/ritnccges.

Lcgc tecls-C?eccrle.s
.l[ [rrtel-----Solonlo~~-Snrrl
rts G'recct.~- Jrrcqrles
----Soethise-other
leyencls.
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.
HE Colilpagnonnage is t h e ilanle given t o t h a t association of

French journeymen-originally
restricted t o t h e four building
trades of t h e stonemasons, carpenters, joiners and locksn~iths,
b u t expanding until it included almost every craft of importance
in t h e country-which
regulated everything connected with t h e
journeyman's travels along a prescribed itinerary known as t h e
" Tour d e France,"
and came in later times t o exercise an
absolute control over labour.
The very existence of this association was ignored by the outside world,
until t h e publicatloll in 1840 of t h e Lzzvre d~ Cfompccg7zo~~nnyeby Agricol
Perdiguier, himself a journeyman joiner. It was then for t h e first time t h a t t h e
general public learnt of t h e extraordinary complexity of t h e system, its divisions
illto SOII>ct Solomon, Sons of Jacques, and Sons of Soubise, its fantastic legends
ant1 ceremonies, its picturesque customs. Unfortunately, t h e Compagnonnage had
by this time come t o be completely disorganised, owing t o a n evil t h a t had been
increasing for a very long time, and t h a t i t was Perdiguier's hope t o remove by
his writings, tlie existence, namely, of a series of feuds among tlie trades, feuds
t h a t constantly resulted in fatal quarrels and fights.
Rival associations had also come into existence prepared t o confer t h e
benefits of t h e system without perpetuating custo~nsand ceremonies which were
beginning t o be looked on as absurd anacl~ronisms; b u t unfortunately these bodies
also became involved in t h e feuds, and tlie consequent disorders upset tlie
whole labour community tllroughout Central and Southern France.
I n course of time the feuds died down, and to-day tlie present representative
of t h e original Compagnonnage is but one of illany associations of workinen whose
functions are tliose of a benefit society, while t h e institution it originally came
into existence t o control, tlie Tour cle-France, has wllolly passed away. B u t its
lerends. its ceremonies and its customs have a verv special interest for t h e C r a f t ;
and its real liistory has, even to-day, still t o be elucidated.
After t h e appearance of Perdiguier's work a n increasing literature of the
subject sprang u p : b u t not until M. Martin Saint-L6on publislied his l,(
C O ~ I I ~ ~ I ~ / 1~11O1901,
U I I ~can
~ ~~t
/ Pbe said t h a t anyone, except our owii Gould and
Rylands, liad tried t o treat i t historically. Gould dealt with tlie subject in the
History, vol. i., chap. 5, and tlie legends were discussed i n detail by Bro. Rylands
in d .&.Cf i. and ii.
N o useful purpose would be served by again going over the ground so fully
covered by tliese two students; but in the present paper I have attempted, fro111
t h e facts available. t o reconstruct the uolitical liistorv of the svstem. and on that
foundation t o group, and, as f a r as may be, t o date its customs, legends ancl
cerelllonies. Not t ~ l tl h a t is done 321all we be in a position t o appreciate tlie true
significance of the nualerous analogies and similarities t h e syste~n presents to
correspoi~dii~g
features of our owii Craft; similarities of which Gould has collected
a list of no less t h a n forty-one.
It should be clearly understood t h a t t h e Compagaonuage is wholly distinct
from Freemasonry; i t is orgallically different iiotwithstanding these sinlilarities.
There is nothing corresponding t o t h e Lodge,--I d o n o t inean the room, but the
association. Some of t h e ceremonies have features in common; and t h e legends
nave, i n some cases, a similarity aillounting to identity with legends t h a t have
been possessed by us in t h e past, and how this lzas come about I hope t o be able
t o demonstrate. But, first of all, i t is necessary t o give a brief sketch of t h e
whole position of t h e journeynia~iin the Niddle Ages, and his relations with his
masters in England and Germany; and we can then proceed to review in inore
detail t h e history of the journeymen's associations in France itself.
d
It is in t h e twelfth oentury,l-in England, t h e reign of H e n r y I.,-that the

C r a f t Gilds first appear, and their organization and objects are alike both in
England and on t h e Continent. A t first, each Gild includes t h e artisans of only
a single trade, and they are only concerned with the affairs of t h a t trade, which
1
Gross i., 114, 286.
is tlieir iilonopoly in t h a t particular locality. Tliey regulate prices, and t h e hours

of labour; supervise tlle processes of manufacture; and make their own ordinances
T h e trade recognises three
as t o t h e admission of members, and apprentices.
grades, the apprentice, tlie fellow, and t h e master; t h e apprentice o u t of his
indentures usually becomes a fellow and freeman, and it is only persons so
qualified wlio can become masters.
B u t t h e number of masters is always restricted, as the masters tlieinselves
are never anxious t o increase tlieir aunlber; and tlie Gild i n its own interests
invariably makes restrictions as t o the adnlissioii of apprentices; i t liinits t h e
number any master Inay have a t one time, or i t liinits t h e nunlber t o be admitted
in t h e year; i t may even restrict the very privilege of taking apprentices t o senior
nlasters.
A t first in all crafts t h e master and his apprentices, u i t h the help of one
or more apprentices out of their time. or freemen who have not yet. set u p for
themselves, are sufficient for all there is t o do; and in t h e nlercllant crafts, the
crafts wliose principal business is selling, this state of affairs continues for a long
time. B u t in the artisan crafts there verv soon cdmes into existence a class of
servants and unslrilled workmen. These like the working freemen are paid by the
day, and all alike are accordingly called journeynle~l,'-the word ineans just t h a t .
B u t tlie inferior class liave not., as a 'ule, served as apprentices, and a r e not
eligible to become masters, and altliol~gllthey in some cases d o become ineinbers
of t11e Gild, paying
.
- contributions t o its funds,' there is always a distinction between
the sliillsd journeynian, who has been an apprentice and may become a niast.er,
and the inere workman. On tlie Continent in nlanv cases the servinp of a term
of years as a journeyillan was required as a qualification for t h e position of master ;"
and in France originally the only persons adnlissible as jouriieynien and Gild
n?embers were those who had begun as apprentices.
As trade develops, t h e n6mber of-journeymen increases, and ill 0111~t ~ v o
poil~tscan their interests and those of tlie nlasters coincide.
It is of t h e first
iluportance t o both t h a t they sllould be able to coninluriicate their requireilients
to one anotlier rapidly; that tlie master who liav work to give o u t should be able
t o find journeymen, and t h a t t h e journeyman out of einploylllent should kllow
where lie will find work. It is also to tlle interest of botli t h a t tlie journeylliail
should be a skilled workman.
B u t differences are bound t o develop, especially
in reference t o rates of wages; and tlie coiistai~ttendency is for the jourlleyineii
t o organise t,llenlselves in their defence against rapacious, unjust, or cruel masters;
and such organisations are certain t o be viewed by the masters with disfavour.
The history of tlie relations between masters and journeymen lias beell
different in each country; arid tlie legislation 011 t h e subject has also followed a
different course. I11 one group of crafts, namely, the building trades, t.here nlust
fro111 the very outset have always been a large body of unskilled labour. F o r t h e
construction of a catl~edralthere was necessary, besides tlle skilled designers and
n~astersand t h e skilled workers in stone, a great body of mere labourers, receiving
smaller wages. I n t,llese trades, tlien, there must have been journeymen long
before we meet with tliem else~vllere, as, e.!l., among t h e cloth workers of Bruges
ill 1 2 8 0 , l or the tailors in Silesia it1 1361; or, to take E n g l i s l ~examples, tile
London cordwainers ill 1343, and the wllittawers in 1346.
(Whittawem are
workers in white leather, and especially saddlers.)
Now, although i t is t h e fact t h a t there is no record of C r a f t Gilds of
Masons in England, earlier tllan 1350 a t Yorli,%nd ritmc 1380 a t Chester, alien
we find thenl referred t o in connection with tlie miracle plays, yet the X~g1'71.y
I'oettl, and tlie /look o t ( ' / I / V ( / P S are clear evidence of a society already organised.
if it did liot call itself a gild. 31ereditl1, in his Gco~lotttic1fistot.y o f Etrylcr,,J,"
writes: " It is clear t h a t tlle masons craft (bricks came into use a t a later dat-e)
must have been alllong t h e earliest specialised employments, and i t is almost
inconceivable t h a t i t remained ~ v i t h o u torganisation. B u t probably in consequence
of tlle migratory character of the craft,, i t does not seem t o have ever occupied
0
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.
Roman predecessors, b u t wit.11 t h a t we are not now concerned.

W e have a n
accouilt of thenl as they existed in Paris i11 tlle latter half of t h e thirteenth
century.l
111 this we read t h a t aillong the inasoils ancl plasterers t h e inaster
llligllt have as many assisiai~tsand servants as h e pleased, provided he iastructed
then1 in no p a r t of t h e mystery. W e fincl a s i ~ n i l a rprovision in England among
the Bladesinitl~sin 1408."A~2id
t h a t no one of the said trade shall teach his
journeyman t h e secret of his trade as h e would his apprentice, oil the pain aforesaid.'' Tt is obvious t.11at such workillell have no prospect 01- hope of ever becoming
masters. It is t r u e t h a t t h e apprentice ill France has in certain cases t o Rerve a
specified period as a journeyman before he is allowed t o becon~ea master. B I I ~ .
he is excused t h e compulsory travellii~g; and his positioil is always privileged,
I n t h e early tinles a ~vorlrinan could proceed master if he could produce the
~i?asterpiecerequired by t h e Gild; b u t this practice ill course of time became
obsolete, and even the tradition of i t was loet in Perdiguier's day. The sons of
i~?asters\?.ere also exempt from this t e s t . V l ~ ejournep~nan, as early as the reign
of Louis S I V . , ]lad becollle a class apart, outside tlle narrow oligarchy of masters
and 111,ai;ters'kin, and with no hope of ever rising to independence in the craft,'
ancl his uosition in this resuect was not imurored till after the Rerolution. His
W e read in 1655:
relations \\,itll t h e privileged apprentices were alway5 .trailled
" They forin everywhere a n offensive league against t l ~ eal>prentices of their trade
who are not of t h e ~ rcabal, beating them, and i l l a l t r e a t i ~ ~them,
g
and soliciting
them to enter their society " j
Tllo whole system of apprenticeship was swept away with t h e gilds at t h e
Revolntion; and this brought about a new state of affairs, for tlle entire c o ~ ~ t r o l
of labour now passed into t h e hands of t h e co~npagnous, as t h e journeyinell had
styled tllenlselves since a t least as early as 1506," and became their lnonopoly
B u t long before this the journeynlen had established distinctioils of their own,
and recognised their novices under various designations; and a t a very early date
t h e four crafts of stone-cutter, locksnlith, joiner and carpenter had formed the
Con~pagnonnage, and developed in detail t h e system t h a t is kno~vnas t h e Tour d e
France.
The Coillpagnonnage was a n association of journey~nenexclusively. and, as
time went on, calne t o include t h e great majority of tlle artisan trades. These
llad each their own officers, and headqcarters in every important town; and the
criterion of nlembersllip was their right t o make t h e Tour de France, a circuit comprising most of t h e important towns south of Paris, and Paris was also included
in i t . Only t h e workmen of trades recognized as beiollging t o t h e association were
permitted t o make this circuit, and anjr attempt on tlle p a r t of unautllorised
trades, or of .unauthorised individuals, t o associate theinselves with i t was liable to
be resisted with actual violence. There were no regular apprentices; the position
of the privileged apprentice in pre-Revolution days has already been alluded to;
a t a later date, a lad picked u p t h e rudiments where he could with his father or
his father's f r i e ~ i d s and
, ~ when he elected t o associate himself with t h e compagnons,
as a novice, his instructiozi was taken in hand by t l ~ e m ; and
~ as soon as h e had
acquired a sufficient degree of slrill, he might present liiinself i n a town where
there were persons qualified t o perforin t h e ceremony, t o be admitted as a compagnon.
H e x i g h t , and often actually did, commence t h e Tour as a n o ~ i c e , ~
when he was liable t o experience a good deal of harsh treatment a t the handy of
t h e oompagnons of his trade;1 and h e was not adll~itteduntil he had proved his
skill in t h a t trade, and paid t h e prescribed fees.
" T h e advantages t o which a member was entitled were inanifold 11 Upon
his arrival in a city, lie was directed where t o find enlployn~ent. If destitute of
funds, he obtained credit a t his ' mother's.'
If important matters called him
away, and he had no money, t h e society would help him from town to town until
he arrived a t his destination. I n t h e event of sickness, each member would take
it i n t u r n t o visit h;m, and t o provide for hi? ~-,,ants. I11 some societies, h e is
1
5
8
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
granted a suin of 10 sous per diem during t h e time h e is i n hospital, which

amount is presented ill a lump sum on his loaving. If he should be cast into prison
for any offence not entailing disgrace, he is assisted in every possible way, and if
lle dies, t h e society pays for liis funeral, and honours his memory by a special
I n t h e nineteenth oentury, a n increasing number of
service a year afterwards."
benefit societies provided these advantages, or nlost of them; b u t the attraction
of t h e Compagnonnage, a p a r t from its ribbons and canes, and public ceremonies,
was t h a t a very real prestige attached to the Conlpagnon who had made t h e Tour,
and originally tlle crafts themselves felt t h a t they were lioiloured by being
associated wit11 it.
Wlleil the Coinpagnon had coil~pletedthe Toar, lie usually retired froln active
memb~rsl1ip oi" t h e society.
" Wheil liis Tour d e France is completed," says
Chovin,' " he sets u p on his own account if he llas tlle means, and becomes a
worthy master, full of practical knowledge, or else h e t u r n s overseer, and controls
the workshops of someone else who will as often as not know less than he about t h e
trade; in such a case, one llas t h e money, and the other t h e knowledge; b u t such
a busiiless prospers, and tlle overseer's reputation spreads."
There were also
masters and elnployers who had not been coalpagnoiis. Tlle colnpagilon might
take as long as l10 chose over t h e Tour; Perdiguier took four and a half years
to complete t h e circuit.
The organisation of t h e Compagnonnage, like its ceremonies, had reference
solely to t h e Tour and its incidents. I n every town each craft had its inn, which
was its headauarters. where tlle cerernoilies of admission took ulace if the t o w ~ lwas
one whic11 was authorised to perforill them; where tlle business of engaging workmen was carried on, and where all tlle accounts of t h e departing compagnon with
the society, or w~ithliis host, were settled; i t was t h e actual place of residence
or lodging for the younger and less well t o do anlong the fraternity. The landlady
was t h e n12re, and the landlord t h e 11Ere. The officers were t h e prenripr-en-ville,
usually a senior compagrlon whose duties corresponded t o those of a Master in
and the Eoztlero., o r agent, in whose hands was all
our Lodge, tlie s~co?~tl-elz-ville
tlle business of enlployment, and who combined as well t h e duties of our Secretary
and Director of Ceremonies. The seconcl-rn-ville was his assistant, who might
deputise for hiin or t h e prrnlier.
Altl~ouglit h e crafts nlay be said t o be organised as a whole there is no
trace either for any one craft, or for t h e whole Compagnonnage, of any general
superior authority, corresponding to what existed i11 t h e Steinnletz system, or t o
our own Grand Lodge of a later date; b u t t h e coinpagnons of a town acted as a
body and corresponded in a very formal way wit11 other towns when there was
any occasion for i t ; and we read of general asseinblies of the whole Tour being
summoned on special occasions by t h e crafts in some particular town,2 when each
town on the Tour elected a deputy for t h e purpose.
I
1
1 t h e oaths t h e compagnon took a t his admissioll he usually was warned
t h a t death was the penalty if h e proved faithless t o his obligations; b u t t h e
Conlpagiionnage also had very effective disciplinary nlethods for those who brought
discredit on it. A compagnon convicted by his fellows of any disgraceful offence,
such as theft from t h e ~ndre,was liable to be publicly expelled, with a ceremony
known as the Coudltite clr Grelioble (vitle Appendix); his name was notified
to every town on t h e Tour, and h e had no further prospect of employment as a
compagnon.
Tlle coinpagnon could not leave a town until tlle roztlettr was satisfied t h a t
h e owed nothing, either to t h e mdre, or his employer; and workmen who levanted
without settling were knouc.11 as br2ileurs, their names being circulated; and until
they had set matters right, the society would refuse them all assistance.
For smaller offences workmen were fined, or suspended from their privileges
as compagnons for a certain time; and the compagnon on arriving in a town had
to satisfy the rorrlerrr that he was in good standing, and show him the " clearance
certificate," to use our phrase, from his last t o ~ v nbefore he could receive any
recognition as a compagnon.
1
Chovin, 61.
P. Histoire d'un Scission, 11.
'
198
Y ' r a n . s ~ ~ c t i oof~ ~t.h~e
Qrrntllor C ' o r o ~ t a i i T , o ( l g ~ .
I n Perdiguier's time he was given a document very similar to a Gralld

Lodge Certificate, with extra pages to carry tlie r o z t l r t r ~ ~ sendorsements,
'
and this he
had to produce in every town lie came to; ~t is not possible t o say llow lolig this
had been in vogue, but credeiitials of soiile sort there must have beell from a very
ezrly period.
A s has been already stated, tile Tour d e France and the Conipagnoilnage
were originally restricted to four building trades, and we may suppose t h a t i11
France, as in Gerillaiiy and England, these crafts were the earliest t o be organised
A n d , in fact, we find ail instance of a gild of inaster inasoris as early as 1375;
wliile there is a still earlier reference to masons as taking part,= apparently as ail
organised body, in t h e illunicipal elections a t Anliens in 1348; and as early as
1394 there is evidence of a local gild of journeymen. B u t i t is not possible to
ascertain with any precision from external sources when the journeymen begail t o
organise as one body all over France, to develop t h e elaborate classification that
we find them possessed of In Perdiguier, and to plan out t h e Tour de France;
and t h e stateinents made by Perdiguier and tlie other writers of liis day are
repetitions of traditions of little historical value.
Although tlie statutes of Montpelier in 1586 recognise a practice of a compagnon proceeding master (item 3)," lie must first have served as ail apprentice,
and this excludes the class from which the great bulk of the C ~ i n p a g n o i l n a ~were
e
recruited; this class is referred t o in clauses 15 r t v q , wlzich relate to ' servants
and fellows.' As early as tlie fifteenth century the illasters had already put
every obstacle in the way of even the apprentice who wished to become a master,
and who was not master's kin, and Saint-L6011 says: " The workman still obeys
his master and respects him, b u t he has no longer the old confidence in him and
veneration for him. . . . Societies of worlrmen come into existence, to be in
t h e future a menice to t h e stability of t h e gild." I n t h e succeding centuries the
abuses thus foreshadowed develop until tlie whole system comes t o grief.
Saint-LBon suggests t h e fifteenth or perhaps even the fourteenth century as
t h e period a t which French journeymen first began to organise themselves into
societies with a definite bias of llostility towards t h e masters.
A t all events,
conspiracies of tanners' workmen are referred to in t h e fourteelit11 century a t
Amiens. I n 1498 t h e confrhries are all prohibited, and this is re-enacted in 1501.
B u t these laws do not deal in terms with journeymen's associations. ' Saint-LBon
quotes, however, a decree of 1506 ' wliich expressly prohibits a society of tailors'
journeymen wllo styled themselves compagnons, and even presumed t o elect a
' roi des compagnons ' This must needs be called a compagnonnage. The edict
of 1539 quoted by Gould ' speaks of .congregations and asseniblies of masters,
together with, their jourrieynlen and apprentices, and prohibits all fraternities of
Tlie event t h a t had provoked this legislation was a
craftsmen and artisans.
formidable strike of printers, t h a t was declared simuItaneously a t Paris and Lyons,
indicating correspondence and co-ordination between t h e ~vorkmenof the two towns.
A f u r t h e r regulation directed to this particular trade refers to their refusing to
work with the apprentices, whom they ill-treat, and haviilg a fraternity of their
own; and this is prohibited, together viith its oaths, officers, banners and asseinblies, weapons and places ok resort.
(Note.-A
particular incident of t h e strike a t Lyons was t h a t t h e jouraeymen resented t h e masters having entertzined a needlessly large number
of apprentices They refused to work wit11 them, and struck in consequence.
For an exactly similar grievance in the same trade in
England, 7qitlr B. clxi., 11. 2.)
Edict followed edict, now a t Paris, now a t Orleans (1560), Moulins (1566),
or Blois (1579), now directed against masters' gilds, now against associations of
botll masters and workmen; b u t while the edicts were powerless to stamp out t h e
societies, they had a very definite effect on tllem. The masters' gilds tended more
and more t o identify themselves with the religious and charitable societies with
which they had always beell closely associated. The workmen, on the other hand,
'
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
Il'ransactiol~s of t J ~ eQuatuor Coronrcti L o d g e .
had developed i n t h e society.

Thus there were fights between sections of one
trade belonging t o different divisions of t h e Compagaonnage, r . g . , stone cutters
sons of Solomon,' and stone cutters sons of Jacques; there were fights betweell
sons of Jacques and sons of Soubise, or sons of Jacques and sons of Solomon
irrespective of their trade; and there were fights a t sight betweell crafts whose
membership of t h e Tour was of long standing, and new corners whose admission was
resented o r r e ~ u d i a t e d .
I n one passage Perdiguier speaks of this state of affairs as having been in
existence for five centuries. H e has i n his mind a disruption of the society t h a t
is supposed t o have taken place i n 1401.
Actually, however, t h e first record of these fights is tliat of one organised
a t Crau, near Arles, in Provence, in 1730;' tlie sons of Solonlon engaged in a
pitched battle with those of Jacques and Soubise on a date fixed beforehand as
though i t were a football match, and detachments were drafted in from neigllbouring cities for t h e occasion.
There were many casualties, b u t t h e result was
indecisive. From this date until as late as 1855 fights were of continual occurrence all over Southern France. I n t h e opinion of Moreau,' before the Revolution they were between members of t l ~ e
divisions as such. It was not, he
says, till after t h e equality of all men was proclaimed t h a t all sorts of trades set
themselves to join t h e Compagnonnage, for t h e glory of i t , and with disastrous
results. However this may be, it is certain t h a t from 1803 onwards the position
was further complicated by the forn~ationof several scliismatic bodies,' rivals of
t h e ~ o m p a ~ i l o ~ l i ' aof~ et h e Tour, some of which were originated by discontented
novices. These all joined i n t h e fray, and the state of affairs when Perdiguier
first began t o write, in 1836, was son~ethingapproaching anarchy, and i t continued to be so until after the Revolution of 1848. B u t with this portion of the
history we are not now concerned, and i t will be unnecessary to deal with i t in
detail.
As already stated, tlie distinguishing feature of tlie Colnpagnoriiiage is tlie
systenl known as t h e Tour de France.
I11 England we have journeymen's associations, but they are local and disoonnected, and there is no organised travelling in searcli of work. I n Germany
such travelling is compulsory, but t h e organisation is in tlie lial~dsof the masters,
and t h e journeymen's associations t h a t we read of a r e local. I n France the whole
thing is i n tlie hands of t h e journeymen, and the travelling is not a mere desultory
wandering, b u t i t is a circuit wit11 a specified itinerary of about 2,400 kilometres,
say 1,500 miles; t h e journey~nanis expected to conlplete t h e circuit, and lle wlio
has done so receives special lionours from tlie society.
A t tlie same time Perdiguier tells us tliat t h e details were not tlie same for
every trade;j sollie trades included towns that others omitted, and, according
t o Arnaud, in 1859 worknien had taken to shortening the circuit by soine hundreds
of miles by cutting across tlie centre of France. The railway was naturally fatal
to t h e perpetuation of t h e system.
The slloe~nakk~s
who ceased to belong t o tlie society after the incidents of
1651 nevertheless travelled about France on tlieir own account; as we read in
Guillaumou I, H e says: " Tlie shoemakers, colnpagnons of long itauding, a e r s
compelled by t h e orders of their superiors t o renounce t h e society, wllicli was then
being harassed by t h e autliorities. From 1651 t o 1808 these workmen, travellers
by instinct, went all over France w i t l ~ o u tany organisation, and following no
systematic route "-and
did their best to outwit t h e innkeepers and still live on
t h e best of everything
A n d not only did individual crafts make their own deviations from the
circuit, b u t changes in i t within each craft were constantly occurring ' as towns
rose or fell in importance, either generally or from tlie point of view of a particular
industry; and there are several reasons why we may be quite certain t h a t t h e
I' 3, I . . 74.
Ri~iioii.45.
3 JIorenu. Reforme dcs Al)lls. 1). 41.
Rimon, 45, ~t s e q . P 3, i., 73. S.L., 270.
5 P.X. ii., 115.
7 cf. P.M. ii., 115, ~t seq.
6 Guillamou, Memoires, 41.
1
SWlrrrlrLAmo
MEOITERRAN EAN
Tour as i t stood in t h e time of A r n a u d in 1859 does iiot rewreseiit t h e itinerarv

of t h e original architect communities. F o r t h e accompanying map I all1 indebted
to the courtesy aiid artistic skill of Bro. Wrigllt., tlle curator of tlie A r t Gallery
h t Bath, and a reference to i t will sliow what I mean.
I n t h e first place, the Tour
wholly onlits Bourges, a nlost important town t o any craft concerned with architecture in m e d i ~ v a ldays; and i t goes o u t of its way t o avoid Vezelay, now a
place of little importance, b u t in its day one of the great shrines of France.
O t l ~ e rtowns of architectural importance t h a t are ignored are Pontigny, Poictiers,
4nd Clermont, which last, like Vezelay, could have been included witliout any
~ e r i o u sdeviation from t h e line. The Tour as i t stands, then, h* been laid out
by worlrmen who had no special concern with architecture, but were interested
n?ainly in ma~iufacturingcehtres.
Again, t h e Tour must be later t h a n 1453, u p t o wllicli date Guienne and
Gr..,ronv were not inerelv not French b u t were t h e territorv of the llereditarv
enemy ' ~ n ~ l a n daiid
; we"can go still further aiid say t h a t no iystematic t r a v e l l i n ~
of this sort was possible for more t h a n a century later.
During tlle sixteenth
centary t h e whole country was torn by dissensions, by proceedings against
" All
Prance was a battle-fieldHuguenots by invrts~ons, by salt t a x riots.'
fighting, robbery, waylaying, were t h e occupations of high and low. A man's
house was his castle, iiot in t h e figurative sense t h a t we use the word, b u t by
dint of bridge and iron gate. A gentleman witli a loaded iilusket sat 011 t h e flat
roof of his mansion, and observed t h e visitor who might be conling u p the avenue.
As lie came near he either gave orders t o open tlie door, or shot him without
further notjcc."
And Moiitaigne, a t t h e coinineiicenlei~t of his essav " Of
coi,scie~~ce,"No. 48, gives 1,s a-siinilar, aiid conteiiiporary, picture.
Nor was
there any great ilnproveinent until t h e reign of H e n r y of Navarre, and the Edict
of Naiites in 1598. Not till t.llen did a period of peace aiid toleration commence,
in which i t might be possible t o evolve i h e elaborate systein whicll required t'lle
coi~pagnon t o traverse, on foot Fave where a river xras available, :ix hundred
leagues of the domains of the &I.ost Cllristian King."
l'erdiguier gives us a clironological table sllowing the date a t \~-l-lliclieacll
craft is supposed t o liave joined t h e Compagnonnage. According t o tliis, by 1609
the following had been adniitted: T h e stone cutters, timber workers, joiners, locksmiths, tanners, dyers, ropeinakers, basket-makers, hatters, tanners of fine skins,
ore smelters, piiiinakers, aiid blacksmit.11~. H i s dates are of no historical value,
but his list represents what was t h e establislled tradition, aiid also represents in
all likelihood ail actual order of seniority, as such a distinction would be always
remembered, aiid rigidly maintained.
As we have seen, the printers had ill 1559 ail 01-ganisation wliicl~we must
call a compagnoiinrtge, extending t o tlte provinces, and in 1655, a t t h e Sorbonne
revelations,' the trades in Paris t h a t are treated n i belonging t o t h e system, ill
.,ddition t o t h e shoemakers, whose position has already been referred to, are t h e
saddlers, tailors, cutlers, hatters, and charcoal-burners
Of these, Perdiguier makes no mention a t all of tlle printers, and he gives
;he dates of adnlission of tlie saddlers a5 1502, and the cutlers as 1703. The
hatters are among the oldest crafts ~nentioned in his list, as is stated above,
but to tlie charcoal-burners, as also the tailors, he makes no allusion.
This apparent di~crepancyis explained by Perdiguier liinlself.~ I-Ie ig11or-s
all ct a f t s or journeyn~eii's associatioiis until they have enrolled theniselves in one
of the three great divisions, t h e sons of Soloinon, Jacques, or Soubise, who alone,
before the s c ~ i s i n sof the nineteenth century, participated in tlle Tour d e France.
The dates ', he gives may be accepted fro111 the eighteeiitli ceiitury onri~ards,thoi~gli
riot before, and he has a big gap between 1609, when t h e blaclrsmiths were
admitted, and 1700, when a number of crafts caiiie in in rapid succession
Accordingly there were, as Perdiguier liiniself admits, a t all times journeymen's
organisations witli oaths, officers, and so on, wha were independent of the Tour ;
Ile calk tlielll surreptitious. W e liave tanners in 1498 (vide c i n t e ) , and tailors in
1
4
JVliito, History of l<'r;lnce, 237.

S
Thory, Annnles, 331.
c f . A~.naucl,Y B L .
P 2. ii.: 196.
G cf. Simon, 119.
2, ii., 194.
202
Transuctiorls of the Quatzlor C'oronuti Lodge.
1506. Tlie printers were, as we should expect, among t h e earliest t o be organised,

a t sonle time before 1539. W e know t h a t the slioenlakers had a n association in
1601; and they travelled as they pleased, b u t recognised Angoul8me as their
headquarters.' F o r other crafts Vend8me and Dijon are important, although tlle
foriller is not visited by tlie joiners, and the latter is only on a n alternative route,
and neither is on the itinerary as given by Arnaud. By t h e bakers, who were
admitted t o tlie Devoir in t h e ninetee~itlicentury, after much opposition, Grenoble
was visited as late as 1841,2 although iio longer on the Tour in 1859.
Tlie disclosures which drew down the censure of tlie Sorbonne in 1655 were
a ~ a i n l y directed to t h e compagnoris' ceremonies of admission; and t h e descriptioiis ~ i v e nsl~owt h a t the details of these varied with each trade. This was still
the case as late as 1864, and Gujllaumou3 suggests that each craft had its own
forms of greeting and passwords; t h e bakers and slioe~nakers certainly had them.
E u t the practice of a formal adnlission ceremony is one t h a t was conlnloil to
gilds and fraternities of all kinds, and can be traced anlong them froin the earliest
times.
F o r apprentices in all three countries, while t h e proceediiigs were very
formal, they seem usually to have consisted of nothing more t h a n a n oat11 and a
charge, coupled with t h e public enrolling in t h e gild or city register^.^ Perdiguierdescribes his own admission as a novice, t h e corresponding ceremoily in the Compagnonnage,%nd i t is quite simple, and entails no communication of any secrets
(tide Annendix).
I
Medizval civilisation was also aware of the religious initiation cereino~~ies
of t l \ e Benedictines and other monastic orders, and the Te~nplarsand other orders
of knighthood, if i t was not fanliliar witli their details. Tlle masters' gilds were
always of a strongly religious cast, and associated closely with t h e church .and
its ceren~oniesthrough their fraternities and confrkries. I n these the gild undertook the illaintena~iceof worsl~ipi n a chapel, usually t h a t of their patron saint ;'
and i t was a comnlon practice a m o ~ l gt h e gilds for new members to be received
only on t h e day of t h e periodical assembly, and their reception was thus associated
with t h e attendance a t Mass of tlie whole fraternity. (For instances ride Toulmin
Smith, Nos. 2, 3, 29, among several.)
Tlle annual assen~bly was also celebrated by a feast; and a feast was a
usual conconlita~itof tlle receptioii of new members. B u t there is reason t o supPOX t h a t this was not all t h a t t.ook place.
Gould nlentions the custo~npreserved
anlong t h e bakers of Paris, of t h e newly accepted gild m e ~ n b e rpresenting llilnself
to t h e master-baker witli certain cere~noniest h a t suggest a survival of a feudal
tenure. B u t he also gives us an instance of a gild where the new ilieinber had
' apparently t o undergo some sort of secret ceremo~iy
."
' A bbaqueting hall wa:;
prepared, and above t h a t a loft whither, whilst tlle wasters were partaking of
good clleer below, tlie youngest accepted nlast,er. with a broonlstick stuck into his
Shortly after there issued
belt instead of a sword, conduct.ed the candidate.
tllerefrol~icries which never ceased, as t~houglilie were being cudgelled t o deat,h."
This was what took place among tlie nlillstone makers, a craft wlio in 1260 were
associated with t h e building trades, and had a code in common. I do not. thinlr
there can be any doubt t h a t this was a burlesque; b u t a burlesque of w h a t ? I n
any case, we find t h a t i a one craft, and t h a t a craft associated with the stonecutters and masons, there was a distinct initiation ceremony practised.
There are
B u t tlie real initiation ceremony was t h a t of the freeman.
several reasons for this. ' I n the first place, the candidate is now a ~ n a nand out
of liis pupilage, and becomes for the first time a full ~nenlberof the gild ; in tlie
second, he is t o receive his mark; ancl in the third, lie is going on his travels,
and, arising o u t of this, t o enable llinl t o prove 11inl5elf in every town lie visits,
h e is now t o have conlmunicated t o liim the secret rnodes of recognition, whether
tliey take t h e for111 of salutations, grips, pass-words, set dialogues, or ~netl~ocls
of
I
1
5
$'.M. ii.. 11.7.

U. CXXIX.
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
drinking t o another craftsman. These signs are of even more import.ance to t h e

journeymail than they are t o tlie freemail, a privileged person who is in illally
cases stationary.
The S t e i ~ i ~ n e t z ehad
~ l s a l u t a t i o ~ l s ,and
~ possibly a grip. The Scotcll inas0113
had a word. Tlle Compagnor1:iage had pass-words, and probably special methods of
drinking. Tliey had a forlnal salutatioli, which called for a n answer in a parlicular form, and used set dialogues as a test of me~i~bersllip,
aud all their practices
weix closely copied by tile rival organisations of the ni~leteentllcentury.
Now wliat tlie freenlail origilially did \v8 cantlot say.
B u t ~vllen tlle
jo~~rneyillan
began t o forill distinct organisations, i t is easy to understand llow
initation ceremoilies would in his hands lend tlleiilselves to developilleiit.
I t is
probable t h a t even freenlen adapted t o their own purposes the religious ceretnonies
of the gilds; still they may have done so in a perfectly unobjectionable manner.
W e find the Gerlllail jouriieynlen have a burlesque c e r e n ~ o n y ,b~u t 110 one cail
talre any objection t o it.
g u t if any practices sucli as those of t h e nlillstoiie malrers were a t all general
among the c r a f t gilds we may be perfectly certain that. t h e journeymen would
develop t h e h i n t ; and when we remember t h a t in the sixteenth century tlie Frencll
journeyman was already a person of advanced views, anti-papist, anti-clerical as
one would say i11 France to-day, and definitely liostile t o the masters, i t is easy
t o understand how his ceremonies would tend to become skits on their proceedings,
!;Bits therefore 011 the Mass, and blasphemous accordingly. I t is not necessary t o
assume ,that tliis was always t h e case; and i t is possible to read t h e revelations,
as set out by Gould, and to hold t h a t the cereinonies were done in perfect good
faith; but t h a t they inight lend tliemselves t o levity and irreverence can hardly
be denied. S t . L6011 says (p. 41) : " These cerelliorlies are queer enough b u t w e
cannot definitely decide whether the allegories introduced into tlie proceedings of
the compagnons were, in their origin, pious observances more or less distorted,
and then nlodified by the introduction of popular superstitions, or whether we
sllould see in theln a deliberate burlesque of tlle mysteries of the F a i t h ; in my
opinion the former is by far the more likely hypothesis."
Thory also describes Clless ceren~oniesas inlitations of t h e mysteries of t h e
Passion, or profanations of church ceremonies, and he goes on to say (lie is writing
The
in 1812), " Are the observances t h e same t o - d a y ? W e do not know."
Sorbonne, in 1655, have no lleeitation in declaring t h e cerelnonies t o be intenThey go f ~ ~ r t l l eand
r
spealr of schools of
tionally impious and sacrilegious.
immodesty; and L e Brun specifies one instance where there does seem t o be
something of the kind. H e tells us t h a t the tailors relate t o their novices t h e
story of the first three compagnons which is full of impurity. Tllory adds t h a t
they have in their banqueting hall a picture of the aicorous adventures of three
compaguon tailors,' not the first three, as Gould cites liinl a t p. 239, b u t three;
and t h a t a descript;on of i t is given t o t h e novice:; \vllicll is full of improprieties.
Again, Saint-L6on himself suggests t!lat as late as 1830" tlie cerenlonies were
occa::~.onally indecelit in their details. R u t I believe this is a n elenlent tllet is
entirely foreign to the t r u e spirit of tlle Compagnonnage, however horrifying
their attitude towards the Church and its cerenlonies and towards heretics might
be in the eyes of the Doctors of the Sorbonnc. and its occasional appearance map
fairly be ascribed t o individual perversities.
The account of t h e various cerellloilies t h a t was furnished t o tlle Sorboilile
is given a t lengtll by Gould, and we find certain features are conllnon t o all
There is an oath, and a mock baptism, with a symbolical explanation of various
articles which differ according t o t h e trade, and niucli besides t h a t we need not
go into in detail. Tllory says, in reference t o the charcoal-burners: the password
is comn~unicatedafter certain mystifications.
The cutlers have a cereniony out in tlie fields ~ ~ ~ l i imap
c l l be sometlling
similar t o t h e peculiar embrace, known as t h e gnilbrette, t o \ v l ~ i c l I~ ~ v i l lrefer
later on; and they also have a dialogue.
1
4
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
Hcc.ket21orn Secret Societies ii., 70. G. i., 239.
?-l.Q.C. ssl-i.. -1.
working translated. I n this case, as usually happens in these rituals, t h e G. is still

explained as standing for God, t h e English word, and we also find t h e phrase
' la houpe dentelge,' which is a niistrailslation of a n English technical phrase, as
was pointed out by Bro. Dring'in -1.Q.C'. xxix., 260.
As early as 1803 a degree was iniported into the Compagnonnage, which
appears to have been t h e degree known in French masonry as ' maitre ecossois,'
and the illnovation was the cause of serious dissensions; t h e practice of adapting
craft usages t.hen begun, if not earlier, has golie on ever since.
B u t however t h e d i a l o ~ u e sand the ritual mav have been modernised. there

are still prese;ved three prazices which date back CO t h e very earliest days'of t h e
Tour d e France, although they have no doubt undergone modifications, and these
t , howling a t a funeral.
are t h e Topclqe, the G'uilbrette, and t h e R ~ t r l e r n f / ~or
originally
w h e t h e r the Topage involved any ritual o r use of
cannot be stated. A t ~ r e s e n ttlie cane mav be held in various wavs t o indicate
war or peace from the outset,%nd there is a set form for the greeting,:' although
the peaceable or timorous can always evade a n actual conflict. The dialogue is
given by Gould,l and somewliat differently by Saint-LBon, while a correspondent
of Perdiguier gives yet a third account of i t . j B u t they all agree as t o t h e
general tenour of the dialogue, which is as follows :A.
A.
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 ?
A . Stone cutter; then follows t h e question as t o t h e particular Devoir,

unless t h e very nlentioii of t h e trade has itself proved a cnszts belli. The peaceable
could avoid trouble by ignoring the Tope; b u t once the question Compagnon? was
asked, tlie issue was one of peace or war, although t h e parties niight content themselves with abuse instead of actual fighting.
Perdiguier "l~entiolls that the locksmitlis and joiners of Soloinon have their
own inethod of greeting, and a t a later date, we learn from Saint-LQon, t h e
proceedings were very elaborate, the greeting was preceded by a particular way
of removing t h e hat, and t h e embrace, i f there was one, resembled the g~tilbrette.
The g/tilbrrttr was gone through a t t h e public farewell ceremony, and is
described by Gonldi (vicle Appendix). The details of t h e co,zd/tite itself vary.
That of t h e hatters is described in t h e Sorbonne revelations. Another is ~ i v e ni n
the MS. Rituals in the Lodge Library, and t h e proceedings a r e made t o represent
t h e Journey to Calvary. Perdiguier describes one he witnessed among t h e farriers.
That of t h e cordwainers, according to t h e disclosures of 1858, is elaborate, and
reminds one of t h e Sorbonne ~ e r ~ m o n i e sas, a ceremonial feast is partaken of.
We learn from Arnaud t h a t t h e bakers have a long dialogue, and a dance. B u t
in all there seems to be a gzcilbrette, and t h e words whispered may include t h e
p a ~ s w o r d s . ~The ! / l t i l h ~ r t t itself
~
seems to be recognised as a practice common t o
all crafts belonging t o t h e Tour, and no crafts a r e mentioned as not practising it.
It is also gone t h r o u g l ~a t funerals, when t h e words t h a t are whispered may be
the passwords, b u t a r e more likely t o be those of tlie n p p d compngnonigrte, which
also are used when howling. One colnpagnon says, " Honneur aux bons compagnons, s'il y en a." The other replies, " Assurement il y e n a." Saint-LBon
seems to suggest t h a t the word Guilbrette is going out of use and is being replaced, in all b u t a few crafts, bv t h e qimpler word " accolade," g without,
however, any variation being made in the cerpnioay itself. W e have to assume,
apparently, t h a t the custom is as old as t h e Tour.
D
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.
A.Q.C. i., 155.
l'ra~~sactiolls
of t h e Q r r c c t r~orCorol~ccti Lodge.
208
t h e whole svstem in its inoderil form is t h e result of changes

introduced into t h e
c
2
Compagnonnage a t a time when t h e three divisions were already well defined,
whatever may be their relative antiqgity.
W i t h regard t o the Topagr, t h e distinction t h a t exists cannot be due to
any reform unless there was one after feuds had begun t o develop. To greet
strangers in passing is a widespread custom, aiid in France is probably older t h a n
t h e Tour. W i t h its institution t h e greeting could be utilised to Indicate one's
membership of t h e society, and i t is natural t o suppose t h a t this was t h e case.
After t h e period of feuds had begun, such a practice would, and in fact did,
result in constailt fights, and to abolish ~t would be a great reform. B u t in the
Compagnonnage t h e present position is tliat there are only two crafts in one
division tllat do not follow tlie practice.
W i t h ' t u ' and ' vous ' we are on surer ground. This is certainly a cliange
inade a t sonle time or other with t h e intentioii of adopting the usages of people
i n a higher social position. To-day i n France t h e peasantry aiid working classes
as a rule say ' t u , ' and i t is noted as a n exception t o this rule t h a t tlie CoinA s late as the twelfth
pagnonnage use the more dignified form of address.
century ' t u ' and ' vous ' were still used indifferently as we see from the dialogues
I
whicb is dated between 1150 and 1200. B u t certa~iily
in A Z I C C I SnPt ~ IdiTicolcfe,
by t h e seventeenth century t h e use of ' vous ' was established as t h a t of tlle polite
classes, ' t u ' being the language of a peasant o r artisan. To-day i11 France in the
upper classes, tlle ' t u ' is only used between great personal friends, aiid when
speaking t o children or inferiors. The craftsmen who replaced ' t u ' by ' vous '
did so, we must suppose,
t o distinguish themselves from tlle rank Arid file of tlie
- labouring classes.
So also with t h e distinctive treat,ment of novices. No einployer is going t o
treat tlleiii the same as full coinpagiions i n early days, while lle has a voice in the
m a t t e r ; b u t - a s tlle journeynlel; &et more power illto their hands, and are more
and nlore able t o dictate t o their e m ~ l o v e r s . such a distinction lnipllt well be
abolished, and tlie rule t h a t we find in force aillong tlie Soils of Solonio~lintroduced.
Next, let us take tlie fact t h a t the e ~ ~ f c oCZIL
~ tD
s P L I O(le
L ~LiOrrfi admitted
Huguenots,-a
great point is made of this in 1655. This niust ina~lifestlyhave
n other wav about,
been a n innovation a t some time. To ~ u t ht e ~ r o ~ o s i t i othe
and say t h a t originally there were no distinctions made on religious grounds, and
t h a t tlie Sons of Jacques introduced them by prohibiting the admission of
Huguenots, is, 1 think, inadmissible. Their adinission is consistent with, and,
indeed, explains, the title ' de Libert6,' which is a phrase added t o the original
title of ' Compagiloils d u Ilevoir. '
I inay here notice what appears to be a discrepancy. Tlie saddlers in 1655
admitted Huguenots. B u t they joined t h e Sons of Jacques in 1702, according t o
Perdiguier, and whenever they did join they presuillably corifornled t o their practices.
Tlle revocation of the Edict of Nantes which left no Huguenots in France was in
1685, and if, without accepting Perdiguier's d a t e absolutely, we agree t h a t the
craft came into the Compagnoniiage a t all events a t sollie date subsequent t o that
enactment, t h e difficulty, I think, disappears.
T h e system of nicknames, a l ~ i c l lis another point in which t h e divisions
differ, also gives indications of changes of system purposely introduced. A nickname was a necessity a t a time urllen membership of a journeymen's association
was a criininal matter, b u t , of course, a t a inuch earlier d a t e a inan of the
working class had no name other tllan what we should to-day call a nickname; he
was J o h n Miller, o r Tom o' Bolton.
The nicknaiiies of tlie Coiilpagnoiiiiage are thus arranged : .
I
(i.)
A joiner o r locksnlitli of Jacques; Hyppolyte le Nantais, equivalent

t o a n English " J o h n o' Bristol." The exact and literal equivalent
of Hippolyte le Nantais would, of course, be J o h n the Bristolian.
B u t , whereas French readily uses these adjectival forms, they are
l
G . i., 222. P 2, i., 37, 56. P 3, i., 60.
foreign to our English idiom; and an Englishman, to convey t h e

same idea, would p u t i t in the form I give, ' J o h n o' Bristol.' I
give it, therefore, with t h a t understandillg.
(ii.)
A stonen~asonof Jacques (to-day), or of Solomon; L a Rose de Bordeaux,

English equivalent, The Rose of Bristol.
(iii.)
A joiner or locks~llitll of Solomon, and all others, iilcludi~lg t h e

carpenters, Sons of Soubise, b u t excluding (iv.); Languedoc la
Prudence, or Bordelais la Rose; Englisl~ equivalent, Lancasl~ire
Honesty, or Bristol Rose; if the place nanie is t h a t of a district it
stands, b u t if i t is t h a t of a town i t takes an adjectival form.1 As
before t h e literal equivalent of Bordelais la Rose is Bristolian, the
Rose; the man called L a Rose who comes from Bristol. I give
Bristol Rose as representing the idea in a n Ellglib11 idioln better
tllarl a literal rendering can do.
v.)
Four crafts of Jacques, the hatters, cobblers, ropemakers, and weavers;

L a R o ~ e le Bordelais; English equivalent, The Rose, t h e
r i t o l i a This last form is almost as awkward in French as i t
is in English.
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
T r a ~ ~ s n c t i o nofs the Q t ~ a t u o rCoronutl Lodge.
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.
Out of all these apparently coaflictiiig distinctions and cross-classifications

i t is possible, I believe, t o frame a scheme, to p u t forward a tentative reconstruction of the development of the system which will account satisfactorily for all of
them. It is as follows:I n the fourteenth century, the following organisations among the building
trades : STONEMASONS. Compagnons Btrangers du Devoir. Sons of Solon~on,
' loups,' call each other ' coterie,' tope, do not howl, type of nickname: L a Rose de
Bordeaux.
JOINERS & LOCKSMITHS. Compagnons passants du Devoir. Sons of
Jacques, ' chiens,' call each other ' pays,' do not tope, do not howl, type of niokname: H y p p o l ~ t ele Nantais.
CARPENTERS. Compagnons passants du Devoir. Sons of PBre Soubise,
' boils drilles,' call each otlier ' pays,' tope and howl, type of nickname: Bordelais
la Rose, or Languedoc la Prudence.
1
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
B . Q . C . ii.. 62, and morlru t h y e cited.

,Fameson, S. & L, Xrt. ii., 169 n.
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,
P 1. 186. P 3. i., 61.
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
2 P 1, 161 " 011 fait courir s l c ~rux."

G . i.. 200.
Cooke 11 643 e t seq.
A.Q.C. ii., 58,
V 2 ii.. 80; and P 3 ii., 7.7.
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 ) .
'4.0.6'. ii., 60.
916
Transuctiot~>of the Quutuor Coronntl Lodge.
try to murder Maitre Jacques. This would seem to be an iilcideiit purposely

introduced after differences had arisen. A t what date they did arise I caliilot say.
A t the same time, there are other instances in wllicil elaborate legends wei.e
fabricated in quiie recent times.
The legend Perdiguier l gives is only oile of
several, for, as lie says, each craft has made up its own, all more or less unconvincing. I n t h e MS. in the Lodge Library is yet another legend of Jacques
which makes him the son of a mason a t Kilwinning, and links hini with tlie
Templars and Jacques Molay. It is manifestly the merest compilation, and late
a t that. The organisatiori of the Iildependents, which only came into existence
in 1823, produced a legend of Willianl Tell; while tlie carpenters who seceded
from Soubise found fault with Perdiguier3 because he refused to take seriously
tlie founder they had provided themselves with,-the
PBre Iiidien, who was at
K.S.T. with Maitre Jacques and Soubise.
I have no intention here of again goillg over ground t h a t has been already
so tlioroughly explored by Bros. Gould and Rylands. Whetlier t h e orthodox
legend of Maitre Jacques be late or early, it, in fact, offers no features of
similarity with anything in our Craft. B u t there is this in cornmon, that just
as we have a ritual (with dialogues), and a wholly distinct legendary history,
which is, indeed, to-day well-nigh forgotten, the Compagnonnage has the same
system, a series of ceremonies, and a legend to wliicll they contain no allusion,
although they do appear to have kept up to a much later date than we did the
practice of reading the legend to the candidate. Who Maitre Jacques was, or,
rather, how or why the name Jacques came to be selected for the hero of the
story, remains unexplained; I, a t all events, can offer no solution of the question.
Soubise is introduced into the Jacques legend, no doubt, a t a late date,
but lie appears to have no distinct legend of his oWa; and tlie Sons of Soubise
naturally do not accept the story of their founder and his disciples told by tlie
Sons of Jacques. Is it possible t h a t the original legend was t h a t Solomon the
King gave the four crafts their U c t ~ o i r ,that Jacques the Master brought tlleln
to France, and that Soubise the ecclesiastic organised them, like our St. Alball?
It would not be difEcult, in early times, for the carpenters to develop the share
allotted to their founder, and to niake hill1 be also present in the Temple. The
Sons of Jacques would no doubt resent such emendations, b u t tlie suggestion
offers an explanation of the enmity between tlie Sons of Jacques and those of
P e r d i g ~ i e r ,in
~
Soubise, for wliicl~ there is otlierwise no very apparent reason
his second edition, says he can find out iiothiiig about him. 111 the third,' all
lle can say is that he has read a life of hiill wliic11 was inerely a nioral romance,
he will not now devote more time to it.
t h a t did the author much credit,-and
The phrase is solnewhat contemptuous. Later o n 5 Ile hazards a conjecture that
tlle PBre Soubise was a monk who obtained a charter for the carpenters and
united them to the Compagnoiinage. It would certainly seein as though the Sons
Soubise is a siiiall village near
of Soubise had originally no detailed legend.
Rochefort, but not on the Tour, and there actually was a PBre Soubise in history,
tlie Cardinal de E01iaii.~ The explanation illay after all be that the Sons of
Soubise were carpenters who went t h e Western Tour, down the valley of the Loire,
and received some protection froni the pov~erfullanded proprietors of the district;
but, if i t was so, tliey have forgotten all about it. It is hardly necessary t o say
t h a t PBre Soubise as a title is Christian, and the name Soubise is wholly French.
There is a saint who niiglit be the original of the PBre, were i t not for tlie
difficulty of explaining how, being a saint, he should come to be spoken of by tlle
less honourable title, and that is Saint Sulpice. (The well-known church in Paris is
120t his.) H e was an actual illdividual, the biographer of St. Martin of Tours;
who in his old age retired to a monastery a t Marseilles. Thus he is connected
H e had some fame as a
with both the Western arid Soutlierii traffic routes.
church-builder; I do not find, however, t h a t lle has any special interest for
carpenters, or journeymen. But tlie name, were i t not for the title PBre, would
be a tempting one on which to found a theory. It is, a t all events, probable
1
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.
that originally Phre Soubise was an independent personage, who canie t o be

linked up with the Jacques legend after the development of the Tour; and his
first connection with it was in all likelihood amiable and honourable; the details
t h a t make his followers take a discreditable part in the narrative are additions
due to the later tiines of feuds and ill-feeling.
Tlle Compagnonnage, then, is in its origin a grouping of associatioiis of

journeymen, in connection with a systeiil of organised assistance for them as they
travel througil Soutlleril France; and this has reference to a practice t h a t never
developed in England, and t h a t was, on the contrary, made illegal a t an early
date. The building crafts no doubt had their own organisations in both countries
at a very early date; but in practice the traces of them in England are few and
uncertain, and in France the Tour was developed independently of these trades,
and without reference to their particular requirements and predilections.
In
both countries there are hints of early legends of a great simplicity, connecting'
them, in the one case witli Egypt and Euclid, and Athelstan as a reformer and
benefactor; in the other with Palestine and Solomon, and with Charlemagne, or
Charles Martel.
Tlie compilers of our later and inore elaborate histories would seem to
have been familiar with the French stories.
I n England a quasi-historical
account of the Craft is deliberately coinpiled, and as tinie goes on is materially
modified. I n France we have instead a Life of one individual on the model of
tlie Lives of tlie Saints, but this also is much altered a t a later date.
niis
legend is the conitnon property of all the trades belonging to the great division
of Soils of Jacques; whereas the English narrative is tlle special property of
illasoris alone.
Other crafts probably possessed a t one time similar legends
specially coiistructed to suit their reijuirements; but sucli accounts of them as
we have indicate t h a t they also usually took the forill of a life of a patron saint.
I n England in the early years of Grand Lodge there is in existence a legend connected witli the Temple, and it is closely bound up with certain ritual
observances. It appears in France as a legend solely, b u t its appearance is late,
and the conclusion is unavoidable t h a t i t has been deliberately taken over from
the English original. A t an early date in the Compagnonnage elaborate initia~ based on, and in some cases becollie travesties of,
tions are in use; d l ~ i c lare
churcll cerenionies.
Of this in England there is no trace.
But we find in
England in the early days of Grand Lodge a ritual in dialogue form, a type
hiiown to the French operatives in t h e previous century. When, however, a t a
n:uch later date, we are able to exanline a French dialogue ritual, i t is once more
ii;anifestly derived from an eighteenth century lecture i n an English Lodge
The Frencli working has clearly been revised a t various times in the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries, arid we have actual evidence of sucli revisions after 1858.
With the rest of the ceremonies of the Compagnonnage, as disclosed in the
nineteenth century, our Craft workiilg has no general similarity; the Frencli passwords are seen t o be derived from the Old Testament, but i t is uncertain whether
they are still the actual passwords of previous centuries.
As time goes on, the Conlpagnonnage as a system breaks down. I n tlie
first place its functions as a benefit society are now performed by a number of
other organisations managed on modern lines; in t h e second, the railway
automatically does away with all t h a t was peculiar to tlie Tour de France; in
the third, there is a very definite reaction against ceremonies and legends which
are felt to be anachronistic and absurd, if not actually objectionable.
But the ultimate cause of its decline is the hopeless anarchy illto whicli
i t has fallen through intestinal feuds, arising out of disputes about relative
seniority, disputes with new crafts that have gained adnlittance t o the society
against the wishes of others belonging t o it, and disputes based on t h e very
absurdities of t h e legends themselves.
With all this, happily, our Craft to-day has notliiilg to do; we have never
since the decline of Operative Masonry attempted to concern ourselves with the
practical affairs of the trade, and i t is t o this circumstances we owe it that we

are still a living force in our own restricted sphere, and not a mere survival, of
only arch~ologicalinterest except where deliberately modernised, which is tlie
preseat condition of the COMPAGNONNAGE DU TOUR D E FRANCE.
APPENDICES.
(a)
SUMMARY O F T H E IMPIOUS, SACRILEGIOUS, AND S U P E R STITIOUS PRACTICES W H I C I I T A K E PLACE AMONG T H E

COMPAGNONS. (The Sorbonne disclosures of 1655.)
Tlle Devoir of a Colnpagnon is alleged to consist of the three precepts: to

l ~ s n o u rGod, to probect the master's interests, and to support the Compagnons.
But in fact the Compagnons do just the reverse; they greatly dishonour God,
by profaning all the nlysteries of our religion; they ruin their masters, by
emptying their workrooins of labour whenever one of their faction complains of
having been insulted; and they ruin themselves by t h e fines which they levy on
one another for breaches of the Devoir, to be spent in drink. BeAdes which the
Compagnonnage does not ih any way help towards attaining the mastership.
They have a system of government of their own, and elect officers, a president,
a deputy, a secretary, and a bailiff, and the various towns have an organised system
by which they keep in touch. They have a password by which they recognise one
another, and which they keep secret. They form everywhere an offensive league
against the apprentices of their trade who are not of their party, beating them
aiid ill-treating then1 and soliciting thein t o join the society. Tlle impieties and
sacrileges which they commit wl~enadinitting thein as nleinbers vary according to
the different trades They have nevertlleless illucll in common; in the first place,
they make those wlionl they adinit swear on the Gospels not to reveal, to father
or mother, wife or child, or confessor, what they are now t o do or see done.
For these ceremonies they meet a t their tavern, wl~icli they call ' the mother,'
because i t is there t h a t they usually assemble as if a t a common mother's, in
which they choose two rooms conveniently placed for going from one t o the other,
one serving for their abominations, and the other for the feast.
They, close
carefully the doors and windows to avoid all chance of being seen or surprised.
Secondly, they elect spoilsors for the candidate, give him a new name, such as
may be decided on, go through a mock baptism, and perform the rest of the
accursed ceremonies of admission according to the particular usages of each craft,
and their hellish traditions.
(The above is in Gould, with a few verbal nlodifications. H e also gives in
full tlle accounts of the cerenlonies peculiar t o certain crafts, to which allusion is
made in the text, the resolutions of the Doctors, and tlleir observations. I n the
presidenb, deputy, aiid ' sergent,' wliich for want of a better word I have
translated ' baiIiff,' we recognise the prenzier-on-?~illr,sr,corl(l-rn-zeille, nnrl roztlectr.
It sl~ouldbe added that St. LBon explains this last as equivalent to ' rSleur,' the
official in charge of rolls or lists of masters who can give employment.)
(h)
T H E L E G E N D O F 31AITRE JACQUES.
(This is given in full, froin Perdiguier, by Bro. Rylaiids, in &l

.Q.C. i.,
158 e t s r g . But as this vol. is probably not accessible to niany readers, I give
here an abbreviated account of it. This is practically St. LBon's account, and
he also refers to another account which makes Jacques identical with Jacques de
Molay. I n the text I refer to yet a third story which makes him the son of a
Scotcli mason who is present a t Molay's execution. These a t all events are late
and the original legend bears clear indications of having beell revised. But as
suggested in tlie text, I believe that n story of a mysierious personage who brought
the craft from Palestine to France is very old indeed, and while the French
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.
[I have not thought i t necessary t o exhibit t h e ceremonies in full. I n the first

place they differ not only between one trade and another, b u t in the
same trade, at different times. They were all, however, closely similar
within their respective Devoirs, or so, a t least, we are led to understand
from the exposure of 1858. Accordingly, what follows must be understood as no more than a concise account of the state of affairs in the
n~iddleof tlle nineteenth century. The authorities are Perdiguierspeaking always with first-hand knowledge; tlie exposure of 1858,
which is probably as reliable as such things usually are; and Saint
LBon, who, writing in 1901, tells us he has used this very expot;ure
and also had access t o two similar publications of a later date, and
to independent m a n ~ s c r i p t s . ~ There are also notices, especially of
the Conduite and Guilbrette, in Arnaud and Guillaumou.]
The general assembly of the colnpagnons in the town being convened, as
usual, for a Sunday morning, the rouleur introduces t h e novice, knocking in a
particular manner a t the door to gain admission. H e presents him to the premieren-ville, saying-Here is a young man who wishes t o join the Society. The premier
asks him a series of questions, with the object of bringing out quite clearly t h a t
he wishes to join t h a t particular society, and not any other of t h e Devoir
(societies not kelonging t o one of the three divisions are presumably ignored).
They a r e : t h a t
The rules to whicl~all must submit are then read out.
each must take his share of the expenses; he must be courteous;
. not give nickamong joiners of Solomon \
/ be respectful t o t h e m&re, and all a t the society's
names :
inn; be always properly dressed, clean, and orderly.
1 S.L.,
209.
2 P.M.
i., 98,
220
Trcrnsnction.~of t h e Q~rntzrorC'oro~irrti Loclqe.
The novice is told he may withdraw if he is not prepared to submit

these regulations. B u t having aru~onnced his snbmission, the ceremony is
an end.
[Note that the analogy is not with our apprentice cereillony to-day, but with
actual apprentice admission of t h e middle ages. No blindfolding,
elaborate oaths, no secrets of recognition.]
to
at
an
no
( d ) T H E P R E L I M I N A R Y TEST FOR A CANI1111ATE COMPAGNON

(Not referred to by Perdiguier; whose society do not require masterpieces from
their candidates.l But is in use among tanners and shoemakers.)
The masterpieces of t h e candidates are placed on a table in the assembly
room; and all prevent inspect them; if a t this stage three compagnons consider
that the candidate should not be received, he is p u t back accordingly; but otherwise he is summoned and a compagnon then points out all the defects in the work;
he is also asked if lie can pay the necessary fees; and if he can satisfy them on
this point is allowed to retire, and the compagrions then vote as to his admission.
(c)
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'
Perdiguier avoids any description; Guillauinou h i v e s i t very fully ; and

there are .several in the Serref for different societies. Saint Lkon gives a much
later form. The differences are such that i t is-doubtful what was the form in,
say 1803, or a t a period previous to the introduction of inasonic influences. But
the outline that follows probably gives all that was in the original ceremony.
Here the candidate is
The room is arranged to represent the Temple.
introduced, blindfolded, after he has divested himself of all money and metals;
and he is taken all round the room, backwards and forwards, as though lie were
making some difficult journey, now stooping, now stepping high.
After a
Le secret, 1C.
2 Secret, 19.
cf. Gnillaun~ou..56.
"uillaumou,
34. Secret, 20. S.L., 211.
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.
The details seem to vary in different trades.

Perdiguier describes a
conduite of farriers; Guillaumou one of his own society of shoemakers; t h e
,Yrcref gives another account, and Saint LBon yet another, b u t he adds t h a t the
practice is now all but extinct. After illitiatioii the coinpagnon has to learn the
dialogue of the conduite, and t h e dialogue of the ceremony next described, the
entree de chambre, because he himself will be taking part in both as soon as he
leaves the town of his initiation to proceed on his Tour.
l P 2 i., 64.
P.M. ii., 8. Guillaumou, 57, Secret, 29. S.L., 255. cf. also
P.M. ii., 52.
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
It is remarkable how little attention the Compagnonnage has received in

the course of the 3 i volumes of our Transactions and indeed a t the 11znds of
English Masonic students generally. This neglect of an ilnportant subject might
be regarded as unfortunate, but there is, a t any rate, this compensation, namely,
that the subject has been left to drop like a ripe plum into tha capabla hands of
our Brc. Vibart, the Brother we should all oi us probably have selected as
particularly well qualified to do i t justice. Ili?herto those who mere not prepared
to consult the French originals had to rest content with the Chapter in Bro. Gould's
History and the two Papers in vols. i. and ii. oi J.Q.C., by Bro. Rylands. Bro.
Vibert, besides adding considerably to the ?tack of available information, has
rendered valuable service by his careful examination of t h e various problenls which
arise out of the evidence taken as a whole. Of these problems, the two which
stand out as of particular interest and importance t o students of Freemasonry
are :(1) The ex'knt t o which Freemasonry slid t h e Compagnonnage borrowed
Legends, Ritual, or Customs from each other, and t l ~ edate or period
when such transference (if any) toolr place.
(2) Did the Compagnonnage possess a n y Hiramic Legend before the Grand
Lodga period in Freemasonry?
As regards the first the evidence is clear that the Compagnonnage borrowed very
freely from Fremssonry during the nineteenth century and perhaps a little earlier.
Also t h a t the tribute was levied very freely uFon t h a t portion of t h e Masonic
store which appertains t o what we call ' High ' or ' Additional ' Degrees, and this
is a point t o which I wish t o direct specie1 attcfition.
As regards t h e second problem, Bro. Vibert dismisses with an air of
emphatic finality the theory of any knowledge of the (any) Story of Hiram by
the Compagnons before they annexed the rrery much elaborated ITiram narrative
with the details concerning Hoben, Sterkin, 2nd Oterfut much as it appears in
the pages of Les Plus S e c r ~ t sV y s t e r e s des 11aut.s Grades de l a Maqonnerie, by
Berage, 1767.
Bro. Vibert may be right, but the evidence does not seem to
justify any very decided opinion. From Perliguier may be deduced a meaning
quite different from t h a t which has commendecl itself to Bro. Vibert, who seems
to rely upon the following passages :(1)
(2)
(3)
. . . people put about an old tzle which refers t o Hiram, as some

say, but others say Adonhiram; $here are crimes and punishments in
i t ; but I leave this fable for what it is worth (L. d u C., 1840, p. 161).
. . . we know no more about the murder of 3fi.ilsEtre Jacques by
PBre Soubise, than of the murder of Hiram by the Compagnons
Btrangers. . . . he (Perdiguier) believes as little in the story of
the murder of Jacques as he does in t h a t of Hiram ( L . du C., 1841,
pp. 40 and 80).
. . . As for this history of Hiram I only regard it as a sufficiently
ingeniouq fable . . . The Bible, the only book wit11 real authority
as t o the builders of the Temple of Solomon, says nothing of the
murder of Hiram, and for my part I do not believe it. The Compagnons 6trangers and those of la Libert6 have no authentic detail of
this fable, quite new for them, and I think t h e C o ~ p a g n o n sof t h e
other Societies are in no better position: I look upon it as an invention enlii-cly inasonic and introduced by those men initiated into the
two Socret Societies (L. du C., 1857, ii., p. 75):
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
1 Tlie L Hiyli ' Ilegrec Hir:lmic Lcgcncl c o ~ ~ t a i n

~ ldog,
s
but t11;lt sagacious alli~ilal
employed t o track the murderer, not the murdered.
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
(seventeenth century) also bretteler= to indent, to hatch,

to draw with broasting chiss;. Hence bretture=tootli on a
broasting chisel. Also hrettzrre=rough drawing of stone.
Ziretter, v.=j(w'er=to c h a t k r , to blab secrets or scandal. This is said
to be derived from the fact t h a t the fair Bretonnes who are
called Hrettes are not as a r ~ l emuettes.
Ero. Vibert gives i t as his opinion t h a t t h e worc: ~/~tzlbrette
seems to suggest a
Celtic or Teutonic origin, and he notices also that. the Iturlernent (liowling) is a
Celtic and B r c t ~ ncustom, whiclz, by the way, survives even ta this day. May not
guil be derived from the Old Celtic word kil 9r cil (keel) wnich means ' back ' in
the sonss of part of the human body. Combine this Celtic origin for gzcil with
the Celtic bretter=to blab secrets, and we seam t o arrive a t an explanation for
gzrilbrette differing from Bro. Spet.h7s but equally suggestive from a Masvnic point
of view. I s i t certain t h a t the guilbrette is oldcr than the eighteenth century?
This evening's paper is certainly a notable contribution, and its author is
to be congratulated upon his able treatment of his interesting subject.
21.
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,
H E Lodge Inet a t Freemasons' Hall a t 5 p.m.

Present:-Bros.
J. E. Shum Tuckett, P.Pr.G.R., IVilts., W.hl.; Gordon P. G. Hills,
P.Pr.G.JIr., Berks., 1.P.M.; WT. B. Hextall, P.G.D., P.M., as S.W. ;
Herbert Bradley, P.Dis.G.?il., Madras, J.W. ; W. J . Songhurst, P.G.D.,
Secretary ; Lionel Vibert, P.Dis.G.\V., Madras, J.D. ; R. H. Baxter,
P.Pr.G.W., East Lancs., I.G. ; E d a a r d Armitage, P.G.D., P.M. ;
J. P. Simpson, P.A.G.R., P.11.; E. H. Dring, P.G.D., P.M.; and
IT'. JVonnacott, P.A.G.Sup.W., P.M.
Also the folios-ing members of the Correspondellce Circle :-L.
A. EngeI, Arthur
Heiron, IValter Dewes, S. J . Owers, G . E. Boltoa, W. J. Williams, A. Presland, F.
Ilforrish, Chas. S. Ayling, H . H . Harding, B. Barnes, TT'. C. Ullman, G. Derrick, Chas. H .
Bestow, L. G. Wearing, Ahdul Rahman, T. H. Thatcher, Jas. Powell, P.A.G.R., Geo. W.
Sutton, F. S. Henwood, John Ames, R. Rheatley, W. Mason Bradbear, H . Hyde, H . A.
Simpson, Geo. TV. Bullamore, Chas. J. Watts, Leslie Hemens, F. W. Le Tall, W. B.
Pailthorpe, Sydney Rleymott, C. H. Blatchly, H . A. Badman, P.A.G.S.B., H . S.
Goodyear, B. A. Smith, Gordon Clippingdale, A. J. Smith, J. E. Suter, Joseph H .
Stretton, W. Wyld, \V. F. Stauffer, J. Lawmnce, W. H . Rowlands, J. Procter \Vatson,
H. A. Matheson, lITnlter H. Brown, P.G.Stu-d., G. H . Fennell, A. J. Collier, and
\Villinm AIIiston.
Also the follo~r-ing Visitors:-Bros.
\V. Bodger, P.M., Lodge Johore Royal
Lamb Lodge No. 192; F. P. Reyrlolds,
No. 3946; E. A. rllman, J.D., Lion
Chatsn~orth Ifidgo No. 3430; H. Green, Sanctuarr Lodge No. 3051; H. P. Stessiger,
P.Pr. A.G.D.C., Sussex ; J. A I . Wesley May, P.M., United Northern Counties Lodge
S o . 2128; George Spencer and J. H. Neal, Hardware Lodge No. 3365; and W.
Riitcher and J. \V. V. Mason, St. Smbrose Lodge No. 1891.
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
Transactions of the Quatz~orGoronati Lodge.

One Lodge and thirty-five Brethren
were admitted to membership of
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.
The W.M. proposed, and it was duly seconded and carried:-That
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.
A very hearty vote of congratulation m u passed t o the fo:lolr-ing members of the

Lodge :l
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.
read t h e following paper:The SECRETARY
Transactions of the Q ~ c a t z ~ oOoronati

r
Lodge.
FIFTY
23 1
YEARS OF MASONIC LIFE IN BELGIUM.

(1870
1920).
BY BBO. C O G X T COULET D'iZLT;IELL=I.
ORN in Brussels on the 10th of August, 1S46, I joined in 1870

a11 old Lodge, which, opened in 1798, had undergone many
vicissitudes, but was then again strong and active. If someone
would ask what were my main reasons for becoming a F r e e Mason,
I should feel now more or less e ~ ~ b a r r a s s e cnl ,o t t h a t I had none,
buL perliaps because I had too many. F o r instance, there was
$lie elemeat of mystery which always surrounds t h e Lodges and
exerts a certain amount of aitraction on inlhginative minds.
There was alro the pl~ilanthropicwork of t h e Craft which had found ample sway
in orgailisiizg auriizg t h e Franco-Prussian W a r of 1870 ambulances and otlier forms
of assistance witlicut distinction between the belligerents. I had also a vague idea
t h a t h d g e s were safe asylums for young men, like myself, who felt inclined t o
givo vent t o their speculations on all kinds of subjects, without t h e inconvenience
of prematura publicity. I must add t h a t accession t o t h e Crafh stood, so t o speak,
amongst my fenlily traditions, as I knew t h a t my f a t h e r and my maternal grandfather had occupied there high positions.
Being aware t h a t Masons' sons were
then adinissible from the age of eighteen, I even asked my f a t h ~
one day whether
lle would not introduce ixe t o his Lodge, the 11 mis Philrrnthroyes, wlzere h e occupied
the Cllair.
snziled and aizswered t h a t i t pleased him t c ses me in such disposition, b u l t!iat 1 had better wait until I had com.pleted my studies for t h e law a t
the Ulliv-rsity of Brussels. I had the ~nisfortunet o lose hinl t h e next year. B u t
I respected his wish, and waited four years before becoining a candidate througlz
oil8 of his Masoilic friends.
A few words are needed t o explain t h e state of Belgicn Masonry a t t h a t
time. Fremasonry had spread from England t o Belgium in t h e first half of t h e
eighteenth century with all t h e characteristics of t h e Mother Count rp. , It abstained
carefully from meddling wit11 political and religious strifes, professing t o be loyal
t o the King and cvcn faithful t o the Church, although strongly denounczd by t h e
POPES. I n spite of these anathemas frequently
Catl~olics remained
rlL.mcrous in its ranlrs, including priests, monks and Churc!i dignitaries; for
instance, Delbruck, Prince-Ev&quo of Liggo, wlzo conducted c Lodge in his own
palace. Strango t o say, this lasted for mora t h a n a century during t h e successive
rule of the Austrians, t h e French and t h e Dutch, down T O L110 first y e z ~ sof our
national independcnce. B u t , soon after 1830, the vitupe~ationsof Gregory V I I .
a ~ l da f t e r him of Pio I X . brought such pressure on their flocks tlzat. one by one all
the Roman Catholics dropped from the Lodges. I n t h e fifties, this flight was
about complet>, while the clerical crusade against Freemasons rose t o its highest
pitch.
British Masons, v ~ h oquietly attend their Lodges, equalIy a t peace with
C1zurch and Stzte, can hardly realize t h e position of their Continental Brethren,
who, as soorl as they are spotted, find tllemselves deno~lncedfrom t h e pulpits,
slandered in tlle newspapers, undermined in their business, harassed in their
domestic life, shunned like lepers wherever t h e clerqy has full hold over t h e population. Those wllo have known Belgium a t t h e end of the last century understand
t h a t there is nothing exaggerated in these statements. T o tell t h e t r u t h , these
P ~ ~ c u t s i ohave
n s more or less abated for the moment, thanks t o t h e patriotic feeling
since tllo Grcat W a r has brought together all Belgians iil a common hatred
B u t I do not know how long this reprieve will last, and
of their invaders.
meanwEi13 thero is not a single Roman Catholic who avows any feeling b u t contenlpt for 0:- dtstrust of t h e Craft.
132
?ransactions of t h e Quatuor Coronati Lodge.
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
t*'zfty T e a r s of ilf usonic L i f e in Celgazcn~.
933
c,,-rl~ficntesissu-d by regular Lodges under tlie Grand Orient of Belgium. During

my s t ~ yin Londoil 1 was admitted t o witness t h e solemn in~t:~ll:~tion
of t h e new
Grand Master a t a gathering of about ten thousand Masons, sssembled, on t h e
28th of April, 1875, in the Albert Hall. This imposing ceremony left upon me a
deep in~pression,which I did not fail to express in my Report to the Grand Orient
2nd also in t h e N a y number of Erntce d e Belgiylcr, a periodical of whicll I was
then tho Editor.
A few n ~ c n t h zlater I obtained tlle periliis~iorlto follow EIi, R.oyal Higllness
as special corrcspondenL of tlle Zvadtyendance B e l y e , in his menlcrable jo1:rney to
I ~ d l a . I llacl i,1icr2 occasion t o visit some Anglo-Indian Lodges and to be present
a t the grand reception given t o t h e Prince by the Freemasons of Bombay and
surrounding districts. W h a t especially struck me was the sight cf Mabomedans,
Parsces, perllaps a few Eliudoos and Buddhists, wearlng llle Md?onic badge over
their nativg garb, closa t o Christians and Jews in European drcss. I learned also
that, in the initiations of tlie natives, a t least amongst <ome Lodges, when t h e
candidate has to take his oath, there are placed on t h e Altar, according t o his
faith, the Koran, t h e Tri-Pitaka, t h e Avesta or t h e Shastras, etc., and t h a t there
are even special officers chosen t o carry these sacred Books in the Masonic processions. All this was to me a touching synibol of Masonic Unity and Toleration.
Amongst my fellow-correspondents of tlle English Press, who were very
limited in number, there was a distinguished artist end lesrnad a ~ ~ t i q u a r i a nwho,
,
some years aftzrwards occupied t h e Chair of tlie Qltutctor C'oroi~alt,Bro. William
Simpson, of the Z1lttstrtr:ecl L o r c d o ~S~e l f i s . I found i n hi111 a nlcst pleasant companion. As v;2 often shared t h e same tent, I remember how ofter we conversed
late in tlie night, whlle h e was colnmenting on t h e magnificent ruins of local
temples, narrating his former experiences ill Tibet or throwing light on t h e
symbols of Brahmanism, Jainism, Buddhism and their mysterlcus connections.
When the journey was over, H i s Royal Highness honoured ine wit11 t h e medal
struck in comlnemoration of this wonderful trip. How few are now left of thosa
who were entitlsd t o wear i t !
On my return to Belgium I found t h e Grand Orient engbged in revising
~ suppressing,
its Rituals of t h e three symbolic degrees. There was a q u e s t i o ~of
I fought hard
if not tlie I-Iiramic Legend, a t least its actual representation.
against this curtailing of one of t h e most respected traditions of t h e Craft, and,
having been entrusted by a special Committee with t h e forming of a new Ritual,
succeeded not only in preserving b u t even in enlarging thc g r a ~ t ,dramatic performance of tlie third degree.
Meanwhile I was gradually passing through the regular round of Lodge
Omces: Deputy Orator in 1872, Second Warden in 1873, Orat.or in 1876, Worshipf u l Master in 1879. When I took t h e Chair, t h e d m i s Philccwthropes had just
removed from a cold and inappropriate building (called t.112 Grand Concert from
its former use as a music hall) to a newly-built and spacious T e r ~ p l e ,ornanlented
with all the appliances of Masonic a r t , and this transfer gave a n i a ~ p e t u sto both a
stricter obsarvation of tlie Rituals and inora elaborate symbolism. A t the end of
my triennal term, t h e dnlis I ' h i l o / 7 t h r o l ) e ~ had reached the zenith of their
prosperity. I t s list of members exceeded 500, recruited from all ranks and professions, including many artists, literary and public nlen of note. I t s ordinary
meetings were held once a week. Concerts and other festivities frequently opened
the Temple to the families of t h e Brethren. One of my first cares had been t o
organize tlie Instruction for Apprentices and Fellowcraft. I renewed the custom
t h a t no Apprentice could be promoted above t h e first degrez unless he had sent a
written Essay o r a t least answered a certain number of questions connected with
a course of Lectures I used to give on t h e History of the Craft, and which I did
not cease delivering during thirty years, wit11 a short interruption which will be
explained later.
No need to say t h a t in this period of active services my historical views
underwent strong modifications, and, I lnay add, improvement, as I had t o be
so f a r satisfied with Oliver, Ragon, Clavel, Thory, Findel, until came my first
234
rransnctions of the Quatuor Coronntk Lodge.
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
Pifty Pears of Masonic Life i n Belgizcm.

men have since joined the Lodges, where they have shown themselves true and
devoted Masons.
When, three years later, my term was a t its end, I ttddressed to the Grand
Orient, from the Island of Corsica, where I was then travelling, a message of
f a ~ e ~ e linl , which I went back to my favourite subject and uttered once more this
sincere warning: " Do not forget t h a t i t is the idea of universal toleration and
brotherhood, in opposition with ideas of caste, party and sect, which has made
Freemasonry and will continue t o form its essential charactsr. Woe to t h e
institutions which, even under the .pressure of circumstances, ~ e s e r ttheir ideal
and thus lose the reason of their existence. One has, of course, the right to
dream its t~ansformationin an instrument of propaganda, a t the service of any
political or religious scheme.
B u t i t would cease to be hhe Freemasonry as
understood by our founders and practised by all the people of the earth."
This warning was not out of season, a t least for certain Lodges. Towards
1890, the Lodge of Likge, La Parfaite Intelligence et Z'Etoile rbunies, was in
danger of being torn asunder by political quarrels.
After long squabbles
on subjects which did not concern the Craft, the members agreed to insert in
their Statutes, with the authorization of the Grand Orient, the following rule:" The Lodge resolves that i t will not take part either by itself, or by delegates,
in any political, moral, religious or social question."
By this simple return to
the true principles of Freemasonry, peace and prosperity were a t once restored,
and the Lodge became again one of t h e pillars of the Belgian Craft. As a
counterpart, events which befell about the same time to my own unfortunate Lodge
showed-still more plainly the necessity of some safeguard of the same sort. 1n
the late eighties.
the Amis Philonthroves had also fallen. on account of diEerences
"
in political opinions, a prey to internal dissentions which soon drove away from
its meetings all Brethren who objocted to disturbances and struggles. I n 1892,
the remaining members appealed to me, from both sides, as to the only Brother,
they said, who might still hold things together. I had more or less ceased to
attend regularly, but I could not but accept the Chair, in spite of my misgivings.
An armed peace ensued for two years. But towards 1894 fresh disputes arose on
accouu; of some cluestions connected with the University of Brussels, and T
re~igneci.
There was no attempt to elect a new Mast.er, and, six nlonths later, a proposal
was made to divide the Lodge into two, with a fair partition of the property.
I agreed to ,draw the following scheme, which, after a hot debate, was carried
on November 8th, 1894, by a large majority :-" There $1 be in the present
building two Zodges. One, b2aring the title les Anzis Yhilnntltro~~es
-1'0. 1, sll;tll
include all the members not having sent, before a date to be fixed by the Grand
Committee of the Grand Orient, a written adherence to another Lodge; the other,
~ 2, all the members who have expressed up to
called the ttlis P h i l n n t h r o p ~ .A170.
the sams date their desire to join it." The roll of the Lodge had then fallen to
420 membars. By a strange coincidence, just the half, 210, asked to join the
No. 2, the other half remaining with the No. 1. So ended the old Lodge Les
Amia Philontltropes, after nearly a century of existence. B u t we were not yet out
of difficulties. The two groups had hardly elected separately their Officers, when
the No. 1 took advantape of the terms of the above resolution t o assert itself as
the real and only continuation of the former Lodge, claimed the whole property,
and dropped the No. 1, while t.he matter was pending before the Grand Orient.
I n sanctioning finally, the partition, after three years of legal proceedings, which
cost me a great deal of time and trouble on behalf of the Lodge No. 2, the
Supreme Authority did not go so far as to oblige the No. 1 to keep its number
against its will, but it decided t h a t t h e two Lodges had an equal right to give
'themselves as a continuation of the ancient Lodge and assigned to them respectively
the numbers 5 and 6 on its list.
It was not without deep heartrending t h a t I witnessed and even helped this
divorce by mutual consent. But i t was the only way of securing the future of
both parties, as the quarrel had gone so f a r that even t h e acceptance of the
Li6ge solution could not have quenched personal animosities and restored fraternal
Q
236
Tmizsacfioizs o f t h e Quatuor Corcnnti Lodge.
feelings. There 'is a French saying: " It is better to p a r t than to e r r together."

To-day, not only t h e two new Lodges, taken together, count more members t h a n
t h e old A m i s I'hilnnthroprx a t its best, b u t they live together under t h e same
roof in perfect harmony, using t h e Temple in t u r n , with only their offices apart.
I n 1897 they met together t o commemorate the hundredth year's Jubilee of their
original Mother-Lodge.
The .Imis Plrilcrnthro~~es
S o . 3, having adopted t h e Libge rule, chose me
as its Master, and, when my term expired in 1897, presented me with a fine
medallion in bronze by one of t h e best Belgian sculptors, Bro. Charles Samuel.
Finding myself again in synipatlletic surroundings, I soon returned to my former
Masonic life, taking p a r t in most of t h e proceedings of t h e Lodg* and
delivering there occasionally lectures on Masonic subjects o r other matters
connected with public or scientific interests.
Many of these lectures
treat of t h e llistory of Religions, a branch of study I have been teaching
I may add t h a t
for more t h a n thirty years a t the University of Brussels.
perhaps one of t h e reasons why history of Religions has become m y
science of predilection is because its final conclusions harmonize with
the disnosition of mind I have learned to nractise aud t o cherish in the
Lodges: toleration, not only negative toleration, which consists in letting others
think and speak according to their lights, b u t active toleration, which encourages
t o seek underneath what divides nlen and what unites them. I always remember
t h e fine saying of a Roman Catholic Prelate, Archbishop Feehan, a t tlle
Parliament of Religions of Chicago: " No matter how we may differ in faith and
religion, there is one tlzing t h a t is common to us all, and t h a t is a common
humanity." My Essays, related t o Masonic subjects, have appeared in different
Masonic periodicals, amongst which I am proud to range tlie Proceedings of the
Q u a t r ~ o rCoronnti. On two occasions I received from a jury chosen by t h e Grand
Ocrient t h e Quinauennial Baertsoen Prize. instituted to reward the best book
written by a Mason either on Masonic or profane subjects. The first time was
for my book Contempornry Ezlolzctio~r of R e l i g i o ~ cThoccght
~
i n England, America
a n d I n d i a , published i n 1885; t h e second time for two other of my works: The
A1figration of S y m b o l s (1890) and my Hibbert Lectures of 1891 on the Evolution
of t h e Zclrn o f God nr ill7lstrnted by S n t h r o p o l o g y nnd flictory (1894). I n 1919
t h e prize was awarded a t my urgent request to Bro. Lartigue for his Translation
of Robert F. Gould's Concise flistory of Frrenlcc.sonry, published in Brussels.
I had joined early t h e Chapter of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite
attached t o t h e Lodge Les 87ni.s I'hilnizfhropes. Having risen to the 18th degree
in 1876, I entered the Supreme Council as a n active meniber in 1884, and was
elected Grand Commander in 1900. The Supreme Council had also passed, like
t h e Grand O'rient, through a crisis after t h e reform of Pierre Theodore Verhaegen,
in 1854. Several Lodges under t h e Grand Orient objected to open their meetings
to political and religious discussion; they had left, therefore, t h e Grand Orient
and placed themselves under t h e jurisdiction of tlie Supreme Council, but, when
n1ore moderate views prevailed on both sides, t h e seceders gradually came back,
and in 1880 there was concluded between the two Belgian Authorities a treaty of
peace and alliance whicll is still in vigour.
According t o its provisions, t h e
Grand Orient governs only t h e three first degrees, and tlle Supreme Council t h e
degrees from t h e 4th t o t h e 33rd. This places all tlie Belgian Blue Lodges under
tlie jurisdiction of t h e Grand Orient, save t h a t five of them can still work under
the rules of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite.
A t t h a t time, t h e Supreme Council did not cut a very brilliant figure.
The most active members of tlie Craft refrained from seeking its higher degrees.
To tell t h e t r u t h , its ceremonies were rather poor and meaningless, its rituals
old-fashioned, and, worse still, carried out without punctuality or correctness.
The small band of earnest men and learned scholars to which I have alluded above,
Bro.
understood t h a t their work ought not to be confined t o t h e Blue Lodges.
Tempels introduced gradually in t h e Chapters t h e fine rituals of Bro. Albert Pike,
and having obtained, with some of. his fdlowers, access to the Supreme Council,
contributed to start there a new life which soon bore fruit,
L
Fifty Tears of -1fccsonic Lifr in Belgium.
237
I remember, as a n interesting event, t h e I n t e r n a t i o ~ a lConference held by

representatives cf the Chapters of t!le 18th degree from different parts of the world,
who met a t Brussels in 1886 to exchange their views on the r81e of Rosicrucianism
and on the general history of Freemasonry. Amongst t h e contributors I recollect
a remarkable E v a y by Bro. Speth, where our learned Brother insisted upon t h e
i?ecessity of seriously studying the history of Freemasonry and where he gave a
vivid account of the movement froin u~hichthe Qzirctzror Coronnfi bad just sprung
a short time before. I t is his clever and conclusive paper which induced several
of his hearers, myself included, to join afterwards your Correspondence Circle.
I do not know whether this Memoir, elltitled Q1te1.s sont les moyens ci employer
~ I I I I V urnrnrr l e s Frnncs J f q o i ~ abp/!,p?; (2 cchorcler l'ttutlc: de l'histoirr rnaqonnique?
has ever been translated into English or printed apart. It goes f a r beyond t h e
limits of the Conference, and throws some light on t h e beginnings of t h e Qziatt~or
C'oronnti.
There had been a t Lausanne, in 1575, another Conference, more important,
bztween the Delegates of t h e principal Supreme Councils of the World, in order t o
organize a general Confederation of t h e Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite.
Amongst the Brethren who were present were official delegates from the Supreme
Councils of England, Scotland, Ireland, Italy, France and Belgium.
They
adopted unanimously a Declaration of Principles which began t h u s : " L a FrancMaponnerie proclame, comine elle l'a proclam6 d8s son origine, l'existence d'un
principle createur sous le nom de Grand Arcllitscte de 1'Univers. Elle n'assigne
aucune limite k la recherche libre d e la vdrit6 e t c'est pour garantir B tous cette
libert6 qu'elle exige de tous la tol6rance."
Then they voted a few amendments
to the Grand Constitutions of 1786, and sanctioned a new tuileur which was to be
cornwon to all the Confederates. But part of this was not ratified by the Supreme
Councils themselves, which, for different reasons, dropped out one by one. Y e t
everyone felt t h a t something had to be done on these lines, a t least in order to
opp& spurious bodies of the 33rd degree, wllich were trying all the time to creep
in amongst the regular and authorized organizations. Therefore, as soon as I was
p1ac.d a t the head of the Supreme Council of Belgium, I took u p the matter, with
the encouragement of Bro. Raymond, Grand Commander of France, and of Bro.
Richardson, who held t h e same post in t h e ' ~ o u t h e r nJurisdiction of t h e United
States. After six years of intermittent negotiations, which implied a t r i p to
Washington, I succeeded in bringing to Brussels, on t h e invitation of our Supreme
Council, the representatives of twenty-one similar bodies (amongst them the Grand
Commanders of the United States, Canada, France, Switzerland, Italy, etc.) fpr
the purpose of taking over again the work of the Conference of Lausanne.
Unfortunately, the three Supreme Councils of t h e British Isles, although showing
us perfect goodwill, declined this time t o join, as they did not believe t h a t this
Conference might lead to practical results.
Y e t i t was a success, so far as i t
brought out results which placed on a safe foundation t h e territorial jurisdiction
and reciprocal relations of all the regular Supreme Councils. The Confederacy
thus establislled met again a t Washington in 1912, and was to meet a t Lausanne
in 1917, but had to be postponed to 1922 on account of t h e W a r .
M e a n ~ l ~ ithe
l e three British Supreme Councils, and some others, have chosen
me as their Grand Representative near the Supreme Council of Belgium. I may
also mention t h a t I have been made Honorary Member of some distinguished
English and Scotch Lodges: Canongnfr Kilwinning, of Edinburgh; G'ordon, of
Bognor ; Jentsnlrnr , of Bristol ; a military Lodge a t Aldershot ; finally, t h e
Qrtof7,or Coronnti, where I had t h e great honour of being received as one of its
active members in 1909.
Tlze Grand Orient and t h e Supreme Council had met a t LiBge, in October,
1905, in t h e Lodge Ln Pnrfnitr Zntelli~rncr pt I'Etoilr rtunies, $0 celebrate t h e
twenty-fifth anniversary of their Alliance. This meeting was very successful and'
impressive. Remembering t h e service rendered by this Lodge to the t r u e spirit of
Masonic work, I reverted to my favourite theme: " Our Masonic ideals," I said,
" stand above all ciifferences in politics as well as in religion.
They are grand
enough to satisfy us. T h a t is why, I, Liberal, exclusively Liberal in politics,
238
Trunsuctions of the Qzcatuor Coronuti Lodge.
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
d u Royaume d e U e l y ~ q u e ,the Bt~11etin.qclu 811preine Consril
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)
~ r a n s u c t i o n s01 the (J~tcctzrorC ( O I . O ) L U ~ LLodge.
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.
NOTES AND QUERIES.
FCORDS of Operative Masons in connection with Trinity

-College, Dublin, during the Seventeenth Century.-Thi:
interest :-
I'clrticcilar UooL o f li'ritrity College, Urrbliti, is a manuscript

collection of accounts, records of proceedings of the Board,
panisliinents, graces, etc., dating from the foundation of tlie
College in 1591. A facsi,~tileof the original was published by
Fisher Unwin in 1904 with the late Dr. J . P. Mahaffy as
editor.
I n this book the following entries have a Masonic
,
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
Freemasons at Canterbury in 1732.-When

I quoted, in vol. xxx., 226,
this excerpt iroln the BotIIrlnrl l<nrc-ltnsorz JISS., I had no hesitation in following
that most careful n-riter, the late Bro. Dr. Chetwode Crawley, who had included
the item in his C'nl~t~rinr,
vol. xi., 16-36, and who, on page 33, gave the title thus:
" The Universal Spectator . . . [containing a Letter and verses in ridicul? of
tlre nr.tir,n o f t h e 3:ayor of Canterbury on the occasion of a Keeting of Free-Maso2s
a t the Red Lion in t h a t city.] "
It will be seen that the three words italicised
are missing from the title as given a t page 186 r,nfr; and as they distinctly add
to the personal sarcasm directed against His Worsllip, and the references given
may not be nnwelcome to readers, I vei~tureupon this Note.
W. B. HEXTALL.
'244
T f v n v ~ c t i o nof
. ~ t h e Qlintuor 'Goronati Lodge.
OBITUARY.
T
1s ~.vithnlucll regret that we have to record ihe drat11 of the

following Ere!liren :-
Col. Alexander S. Bacon, of Brooklyn, New York,

Bro. Bacon was a ~neinber of Lodge No. 656, and
joined our Corresponderlce Circle in May, 1897.
U.S.A.
Williarn Henry Bass, of West Bridgford, Nottingham.

Our Brother had held the offices of Pr.G.W. in Craft and that
of Pr.G.Sc.N. in Royal Arch for Derbyshire. H e becalm a
member of our Corresponclence Circle in January, 1906.
Frederick H. Buckmaster, of Wandsworth, London, on the 2nd Novembsr, 1920. Bro. Buckmaster was a member of the Royal Athelstan Lodge No. 19.
H e joined our Correspondence Circle in January, 1917.
J. Dixon Butler, of East Molesey, Surrey, on the 27th October, 1920.
Ero. Butler held the offices of Assistant Grand superintendent of Works in
Grancl Lodge and that of Grancl Standard Bearer in Grand Chapter. He had
been a member of our Correspondence Circle since June, 1904.
Alfred Davie, of S. Croydon, Surrey, on the 26th September, 192C

P.11. Kingsland Lodge No. 1693 and P.Z. in Chapter.
H e joined 011
Correspondence Circle in May, 1903.
Sholto Henry Hare, F.R.C.I., F.R.G.S., etc., of Weston-super-Mare, on
the 3rd September, 1920. Bro. Hare had held the offic-s of Pr.G.D. in the Craft
He Ilad been a membpr of our
, ~ n dPr.G.S.R. in lloyal Arcli for Cornn.al1.
Correspondence Circle since January, 1892.
Merbert Manning Knight, of Rlelbourne, Victoria, on the 1st October,
1920. Bro. Knight hacl held the ofices of Deputy Grand Master and Grand H.
Iis joined our Correspondence Circle in June, 1892, and had acted as our Local
Cscretary in the State of Victoria for the past twelve years.
Williarn Edward Soltaw, of Wliitehall Court, London, on the 25th
October, 1920. Bro. .Soltau was a P.M. and P . Z . of Lodge and Chapter No. 257.
He became a membnr of our Corresponde~lceCircle in May, 1903.
L:.-Col. Francis Jeseph Stowe, of W e 4 Hampstead, London, on the
18th November, 1920. Ero. Stoxi,e had held the office of Deputy Grand Sword
Bearer in Grand Lodge. IIe joined our Correspondence Circle in ,Tune, 1903.
JOHS,
13~11BARONELPHISSTOSE.
District Grand Master of Sladras, 1840.
Quafuor Coronaft Bobge, @o. 2078,
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 n view of tile present high cost of printing, and the

consequent need for strict economy, it has been decided,
as a teinporary measure, to onlit the long list of
Correspondence Circle members, and to print only the
nanles of those wlio have been elected during the year,
and of those who have been removed by death.
Subject, therefore, to these alterations, and to resignations, etc., tlle full list published under date of
27th December, 1918, renlains in force.
N tiiis St. J o l i ~ l ' s I>ay
ill W i n t e r 1920 it is nly privilege as

V.'orshipful
JjIaster or" Lodge Q u a t u o r Coronati, oil behalf of t h e
Officers a n d myself, t o send tlie nlost liearty greetings t o tlie
Neilibers of t h e Idodge a n d Correspondence Circle, a n d I ask
you all t o reciprocate m y good wislies.
F o r without your
arsistaiice a n d kindly feelings lily efforts for t h e Lodge will be
of little avail, aiid witli tlienl I a13 certain t o be able t o loolc
back liereafter upon a llappy a n d fruitful year of office.
Tlle kjndneis wliicll I received fronl a n u m b e r of t h e Bretlireii a t t h e time

of nly i a s t a l l a t i o ~ ~t h, e circullistances of wliicli were so~newliat~,iiusual,gives ille
every co~ificle~lce.
Tlle Lodge c-oiltj~~ues
t o lil.oFpel. ill every \\.ay esct.l)t ill t!~e l ) e c t ~ ~ i i asense,
~,y
a n d ils progress seeills likely t o go oil uilcllecked.
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
b e doubly valuable ill these c l a y . I t is, therefore, specially incunlbeiit upon us

t o endeavollr t o increase i n streilgtli aiid nuinbars tlie ties which link us t o o u r
B r e t h r e n throngilout t h e world. Of tliese o u r Lodge is not t h e leart importalit,
a n d if every meillber of t h e Lodge a n d t h e Correspotidence Circle were t o set
h.ii~i.s?lft o obtain recruits we slionld soon b" aitllo.ut exception tlic ~ r o s tin,?uer_tial
body of Freemasons u n d e r t h e Englisl? Constitutioil.
T h e outstaildji~gf e a t n r e of our last year's wor1ri:ig lias been t h e revival of
o u r S a n i , ~ i ~ Outiiig,
er
a gatliering ~11ici1no ni?: nlei~tbers l ~ o u l dn:iss j f his private
affairs enable liinl t o a t t e n d it.
\\'it11
every good wisll for your colitiiiued well being,
I greet you well.

T o u r s faithfully a n d fraternally,
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.
H e was appojnted District Grand Master of Madras in 1840.

His portrait here given, by permission, is froin a painting i n t h e possessjo~l
7lottrhn!/ nncl 7 T r e . ~ t ~Jt~di(l
~n
by James Douglas.
of the family, reproduced in
MEMBERS OF THE LODGE.

IN T H E ORDER O F THEIR SENIORITY.
la
Warren, J~ieut.-GcilerulSir Charles, G.C..II.(;..
Ii.C.B., I+'.R.S., T h e Oalis, lVestberc,

Cnrtteibui.!~. 278, 1417, 1832, P.31. Past Grand Deacon, Past District Grand
Founder.
First
Master, Eastern Archipelago ; Past Crxnd Sojourner.
Xaster.
I b Rylands, \Villinm Harry, lf7.S.d. 27 (;'~.c,trtQueen S t r e e t , Lurrtlurt, TT..C.,'. 2, P.31.;
2 , P.Z.
Past Assistant Grand Director of Ceremonies; Past Deputy
Grand Director of Ceremonies (It.,%.).
Founder.
First Selrior TTardell.
':>L ..,.l-t::.
lle;:si:~..!..
I c Rylands, J o h n I'aul, Barrister-at-I,alr-, F.S.A. 96 Uitlstun liucctl, U i ~ ~ k e n l r ~ t r c148,
l.
1354. Fotinder.
4 Westcott, William \I-yrun, X.R., (Lond.), J.P. 39 R a p s o n Rocctl, l l u ~ b ( ~Satctl.
n,
814,
P.N.,P.Pr.G.D.C., Somerset. Past Grand Deacon; Past Grand Standard
Bearer ( R . S . )
Past Master. Joined 2nd December, 1886.
5 Goldney, F'redc?lcli Hnstil~xs, J . P . Beecltfieltl, Corshum, IT'ilts.
259, 335, 626,
P . X . , Pr.G.Treas., P.Pr.G.W., \Tilts. Past Grand Deacon; Past Assistant
Grand Sojourner. Pnst Aiaster. Director of Ceremonies. Joined 4th May
A
.<<.
6
Klein, Syclney Turner, F . L . S . , F.1l.d.S.

Lni~cctster Lodge, I<e~c G'tr~tlerls,KCLL.,
S u r l ' e ! ~ . 404, L.R. ; 21. P a s t Master. Joined 8th No\-ember 1889.
Ninnis, Ueigr:t~-c, X.U., Inspector Gel~el.al, 12.S., C!.Ti.O.,
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
Assistant Grand Secretary for German Correspondence, Past Assistant Grand

Directnr of Ceremonies (Craft $ R . A . ) . P a s t Master. (Joined C.C. January
11
12
1888.) Joined 24th J u n e 189G.

Horsley, Itex-. C'.tu~oll J o h n l\7illian~,J1..4., Oxon, Clerlr in Holy Orders. liirtysc l ~ ~ ri . ,~ ~Tl'ctliitr,~~,
~,
Kent.
1973.
Past Grand Chaplain.
Past Master.
C1l:tl:lai~l. (Joiuecl C.C. Jlmc 1891.) .Toillcc1 24th J ~ l n e 1806.
Shackles, (;eorgc La\\-re!lce. Elirr~Loclyr, IIo~.r~sc,cr,
E . l-vr,l<.s. 57, 1511. 2494. P.31. ;
1311; P.Z.? P.Pr.G.\JT. ; P.Pr.G.R. (1L.A.): K.
E . Yorks. Past Master.
IJoCnlSecretary for t h e A-ortli n r ~ dEast Ridinys of Yorlishire. (Joined C.C.

AIay,1887.) Joined 7th &Say 189i.
13 Armitage, Ed~r-ard,X.1. T h e G'reer~ IIills. Tilfortl, E'ct~~ithurn,S t t r ~ e y . 16, 859,
1071, 1402, 2851, P . M . ; 859, 1075, 1 (S.C.), P.Z.
Past Grand Deacon;
Past Grand Sojourner. Past Master. (Joined C.C. October 1888.) Joined
7th October 1898.
Fredericli Joseph JVilliam, F . R . A . S . , P.R.1list.S.
S t . I'e,ter7s Ilouse,
Chichester. 328, P.JI., 1726, P . M . ; 110, P.Z., P . P r . G . R . ; P.Pr.G.Sc.N.,
Itep.G.L. Hullgary. Past Assistant Grand Director of Ceremonies;
Past Grand Standard Bearer ( R . A . ) . Pnst Master. (Joined C.C. November
1888.) Joined 8th November 1898.
c s . s Lcicesfer.
Thorp,
Jollll
Thornas. F . R . B l s t . S . , E'.R.S'.L., E'.l?.S.d.l. 54 ~ 1 ~ ~ 1 l c ltocct!,
15
523, 2429, p.11. ; I;:)? P.Z., P.Pr.G.\V. ; P.Pr.G.J., Leicester i\-, Rutland.
14
Crowe,
Past Grand Deacon; Past Assistant Grand Sojourner. Past Grand Warden,
Iowa. past Ilaster. (Joined C.C. January 1895.) Joined 8th November
1900.
21 TT-lnsfon Gorclens, H e a i l i n g l e ~ ~Leetls.

,
61, P.11.. P.Pr.G.\\-. ;
P.Pr.G.So., \L7. Yorks. Past Assistant Grand Director of Ceremonies; Past
(Joinecl C.C. February 1887.)
Grand Standard Bearer. I n n e r Guard.
Joined 3rd 31arch 1905.
16
Watson, \Villiam.
17
Songhurst, \Villiam John, F.C.I.X.
27 Grent ( D I I P P ~S t r r e f , Lorcrloir, TT7.Cf.,?. 227.

P.M., Treas.. 30-10, U.C., 3743, D.C. ;.7 >P.Z.. 2.:, P.Z. Past Grand Deacon ;
Past Assistant Grand Sojourner. Secret:lr-. (Joined C.C. J:l~iunry 1894.)
Joined 2nd Jlarrli 1906.
18 Simpson,
16 IIotc(~11fonS f r e e f , dltl~c!jch, L O I I I ~ O TT7.C.?.

II,
Past Assistant Grand Registrar ; Past Assistant
Grand Director of Ceremonies (1L.A.). P a s t >[aster. (Joined C.(!. Jnnnarr
1905.) Joined 25th J u n e 19(16.
John Perry, 1l.A.

1 . 1; l , P
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
Hextall, \Villiani Brown.
21
Goblet d'Alviella, le Comte Eughne FC.licie11 Albert, Jlembre dc llAcademic Itogale.

C'lcAteau de Cou'vt 8 f . E t i e n n e , R r r r l ~ o n f ,Belgium.
Past Grand Master,
Joined 5th &larch 1909.
Belgium. (Joined C.C. February 1890.)
22
Wonnacott, Erjlest T17illiam Malpas, : I . R . Z . l ~ . . ~ . , Y . S . Z . Frccn~nsons' lirrll, (:r.crrt

< ) L I C O I I S t r r e f , Lontlon, TT-.('. ?.
2116, 2936, Sec.. 3171. P.31.. 33%. P.Pr.G.I)..
H e r t s ; 2.1, P.Z.. 2416, P . Z . , ?!F.{, P.Z.. .?!).if;.
Past Assistant Grand Supt.
of Works; Past Grand Standard Bearer ( R . A . ) . Past J l n s t c ~ , . (Joi~~c,tl
P a s t Master.
(Joined C.C. J a n u a r y 1899.)
Joined 25th June 1906.
27 ( ( : w t r f Qttrt'n S ' t r ~ c fLorirlon,

,
TT-.('..?. 1085. 2128, P.11.,
P.Pr.G.W., Derbyshire. Past Grand Deacon. P a s t &lastcr. (Joined C.C.
January 190.1.) .Toilled 5th March 1909.
C.C. SIarch 1904.)
Joined 3rd Jlnrch 1911.
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
Westropp, Thomas Johnson,
24
Powell, Arthur Cecil. T h e H e r m ifir ye, T T 7 ~ ~ s f o n - . s ~ c l ~ ~ ~ ~187:

- l I t ~P.?II.,
re.
P.Pr.G.\IT.:
Bristol; 187, P.Z., P.Pr.G.J., Bristol.
Past Grand Deacon; Past
(Joined C.C. Sovember 1902.)
Assistant Grand Sojourner. P a s t 31astcr.
Joined 24th June 1912.
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
Tuckett, Major James Edn-ard Shnnl. :11..1. (Crr/ilt~b.).F./I.,Y.. T.1). 12 U e 1 ~ c t l ~ r . e

ltoatl, Redionrl, B r ~ s f o l . lS:3S, P.M., P.Pr.G.11. ; l ;.l.{, P.Z., P.Pr.G .So.
2'7
Bradley, Herbert, C!.,Y.I. c10 3I~s.st~s.

(;iinrll(cy C'o.. .51 I'tr~.?ictr!icnt,'.ti,~,cf,L ~ n r l o n ,
S . n 7 . 1 . Past District Grand Master; Past Grand Superintendent, Madras.
P x t Jlastn.
(Joined C.(!.
\\'orslli:~iul 3Iaster.
(Joined C.C. October 1893.) Joined 5th January 1917.
28
Vibert, Arthur Lionel, I.C.S.
29
Baxter, ltodericli Hildegnr.
30
Robbins, Sir Alfred.
Xorcb~ubcr 1910.) Joined 2nd 0ctol)er 1914.
itfarline, Ltrnsclotcn, Bccth. P.Dis.G.I17. ; P.Dis.C.J.,

31;tdras.
1,ocal Secretary for So11iersi.t. Senior \T7ardcn. (Joii~ccl C.C.
January 1895.) Joined 5th J a n n a r y 1917.
97 Illilit,.otr I:occtl, Z:r~r.lt:,rlr,Lctitcctslti~r~. P.Pr.G.TV. ;
P.Pr.A.C.So.. E. Lancs.
1,ocnl Srcrctar\- for E a s t J,ancashire. Junior
\ITnrdr~l. (Joi~ircl C.C. Ortobcr 1BOi.) Joinixtl 5th J n ~ ? u n r y1917.
32 FitzGeorge S v ~ n t c p ,Btru,ons C'olc~t, L o r ~ ~ l o iTT7.1.1.
~.
1928,
P.JI.> 2;:2, P.31.; I!r.?R. P.Z. President, Board of Gencral Purposes; Past
Grand Scribe N. Junior 1)cncon.
( J o i n r d C.C. Jaliu:lry 1899.) Joined
21-th Juiitx 1919.
HONORARY MEMBER.
31
H . R . H . The Duke of Connaught and Strathearn, T<.G., k c .

Grand
Grand Z. Honorary Member. Joiucd 9th Norenlbrr 1908.
Master;
MEMBERS OF THE CORRESPONDENCE CIRCLE

ELECTED 1N
X
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
t o Lodges, a n d those i n I t a l i c s t o R.A. Chapters.
GOVERNING
Grand Lodge of Texas
BODIES.
Waco, Texas
.IOlh El).
March 1920
LODGES UNDER THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTION.

No.
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.
LODGES UNDER OTHER CONSTITUTIONS.

Lodge Frederic Royal
Lodge St. Swithun
Garfield Lodge No. 569
Island Lodge No. 54 (S.A.C.)
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.
Postbolis 12, Fi~etlrilisstcctl, Sorci.ay. St. 3rng11ns.

?J.TY. N o r r ~ i ~ l ~192:).
er
Bcrry, Waiter. 66 T-rbi.itl!~rRocrtl, TT7cst Ecrlin~g, Lontlon, Tr.13. 1278. May 1920.
Bevan, Arthnr Jo!in. 24 Elolltrntl Rontl, ~l.illes;len, Lontlon, S.TT'.lO. 1637 ; 2698.
May 1920.
Binns, Arthur. C o n s t i t ~ r t i o n n lClnl), 7 P r i o r y R o w , C o v e n f r y . 1570. Bfay 1920.
Blackburn, Charles Janles.
S e v i l l e I I o ~ t s e , I I n m p t l e n I'trrk, E a s t b o u r n e .
2676.
May 1920.
Blatchly, C. H. 8 . 76 Blyfhslcood Rontl, B e v c n K i n g s , E s s e r . 715, W.34. Nor. 1920.
Bridge, Jonathan. 2 1-ic.trrtr<lr Rocctl, C t ~ s f l e t o n s Tinncs.
,
- 2320. P.l\r. ; .?3.S. J a n . 1920.
Bristow, Eclnnrd Alexander. ;Ivoictltele, 86 C'oo~nbr:R o a d , S e c c J f u l t l e n , S ~ c r r e y . 2875,
P.M. ; 18:il, P.Z. May 1920.
Brown, Albert. F t r b ~ i c otlr l t i o Hlrtnro, Ilio Blnnco, T7ern c : ~ , ~ rJzi,c z i c o . 35. Nor. 1920.
Brown, Edn-srcl L;lmsdrn. 6 ck R .So~rtli ('lrrk ,Yti.eet, E t l i n b ~ t r y k . 1074, P . 3 1 . ; 148,
P,%. June 1920..
Browne, Kenelm. S r i ~ ~ ~ i ~ l ~
J-cqri
t t i r , S ~ i i ~ l i i l t e nI1'.Jl.S.
,
3369. October 1920.
Bullamore, Gtwrge n'illin~n. J I o n t l ~ ~ l i G
r ~i ~, u n t t ~ l t e sJIeadoccs,
te~
Cn?nbridge. 441 ; 441.
October 1920.
Burns, Alfred E:.l~est. i 2 l ? s ~ f r , rNti.rrf. ,Tnltb~irn-b!l-,pt~n,Y r ~ r l ; s . 3474 ; l?.$.$.
November 1920.
Burton, \\'illiam S r n ~ ~ n c ~ l20
. Et/!/htt.~tOll11'otrt/, Jioseley, B i r n l i n y l r a m . 3643; 3643.
Jnne 1920.
Bush, H. J .
R o s ( , l t l ~ ~ t lG. n ~ t n t S t r c e f , St~rr.nlclr.krt. Brisbcrne, Q~teet~sEnntl. 2902.
March 1920.
Bush-King, Rev. C'hxrlcs J .
S t . J f r c t f l ~ e ~ cIiitildings,
s
I I o p e I'lnce, Dlrntltlin, S e r c
Z ~ n l n n t l . ,.Janilary 1DYO.
Butcher, JVilliali~. 23 I1111.sttrootlRonrl, C:oltlrrls Cr.een, Lontlon, S.TT'..'I. 1891, J . W .
November 1020.
Calvert, Jam?; R o ~ c . P . O . Box 200, ~ l o c m f o n t t ~S io ~z t~f h. d f r i c . , ~ . 1022. P.M. Nov. 1921.

Calvert, Josc!,h E'lctcller.
2 Etrst 2 3 1 ~ 1S t t ~ ~ t ' St ,e e r Yo,1.1;, X.T., C.-.S..4. 618; 263.
l r ~ r c h1920.
' E1 d!lreiln,' [Ilintrlitltrtr, T7~l.irC T I I I J, i e l r i ~ o .
Carreno, I),.. F . (';cc. JJr.ricrincr ( ! P I'c~t~i~o!co
19. 3Isy 1920.
Carter, 7,irret.-('01. Tllonlas 1lorariml. [Ii.D., 0.11.1$. F t t i ~ ~ i , ~ o c t nOt ,l t o n , B i r m i n y h a m .
P . P r . G . S t . B . (T3ristol). May 1920.
Chadwick, d .
X S t . J o h n ' s St.rer,t, B l o e n ~ f o n t e i n , 8ottf11 .4fricu.
912 (S.C.), J . l V .
October 1920.
Chamberlain, John Alfred.
-11 B n r ~ i n g t o n RorctE, Lontlon, S.TF.9.
1036; 103G.
November 1920.
Chandler, R . I,. , S v ~ c t k ~ r Pn i n v s , Soi,tlt C t ~ r o l i n a ,Z;.S..4. 484; GI. January 1920.
Chippingdale, Gorclon. 44 Itoss Ilocctl, TT7trllinqtnn, S I ~ I . V P $1962. October 1920.
Christison, Henry I>arid Alesander.
('tiff Cr/tttr!/e, TT7ntson's Btry, S y d n e y , S.,S'.IP.
Grand Director of Ceremonies. October 1920.
Clarke, 9. A . JI.
Clenvcilcn T.E., Ij;cel~!~r!.tc13.0., Sorith ; S ~ l l ~ e t I, n d i a .
2726.
Jlarch 1521.
Cleland, ( ' n p t . J o h ~ iRobert. n r n m c l o g , Crrtc1,er nc, 9 Y o m ~ ~ s 837;
~ t . 8.37. March 1920.
Cohen, Cllfford E. 370 Crllotf R o o d , R t l g b u s f o n , Btrrnrngharn. 3850. J u n e 1920.
Coles, Jalnes A. S r d n c c ~ c c ,A h b o t s f o ~ t l Roird, Radlanil, B r i s t o l . 1388. May 1920.
Collier, ;Ufrrd J . 24 S t t r n l ~ o p r C t r ~ , t l ~ i l sIlfortl.
,
k'\srr
174. . T R I I I I R ~1920,
~
$0
71
72
'73
74
'75
76
Councell, Dr.. Richard Watson. 304 TT-ultrorth Roatl, Lontlon, S.K.1;.

3771; 1381.
October 1920.
COW^^, 11.r. c. G . l j O n ( l ~ ~ o t ' f il t, ' t ~ l i ~ i ~ o I'trrk,
t t l ( ~ Botcrnc~t,~otltlc. 2.539. P,>[. Jan. 1920.
Cox, Tholnas. il'lte (:rrhlrs, Coombc I ) i n g l p , nrco. 1jt.isfol. P.Pr.G.D.C. (Somerset),
P.Pr.G.lirg. (1T.A.) May 1920.
Crick, TV;iltcr. 1'18 . I l ~ i t ~ ! / f o.lac,~tlct,,
n
S o t ~ f l r t c ~ n ~ ~ t o2431.
tr.
,Januar- 19B.
Crowther, Llo!~crt H
JItrOeltlvr~l,. TT7ell~hLctne, Lrccls. 306, P.JI. J ~ n e1920.
C r u m p , 1Zcv. \\.. X.. Core:-. The T7ictr~t~tryc,
E"I.;~LI!IH ~ . i c l ! / TI.IsIIPc~I,
~,
Cnr1111s. Nov. 1920.
Cutlack, F r a n k \i'illictm.
l<erlir~tr,r7:, S o ~ r t l ~.4lcsf1.crlirt.
Past Grand Deacon; J.
October 1910.
Dart, 1:re. J . L. C'. S t . Thornccs' ('cctl~.ctlrctl,I l o n ~ b n y , Jt,.~liec. 549. JIarch 1920.
Davidson, Gcol.ge. 25 l?rrl)i.sltri:. 1)elb S o t , t h , . l l ~ ~ l ~ t l e ltCr,
e ~ ~ . P.M. J a ~ l n n r y1920.
Da.~ieS, Jolrn. 1; T7irtot.ia Pflt'li, ,Shil)l~,!l. 302, .J.\v. Jfay 1920.
" D a v y s , Lic.rrf.-('01. Gernrd I r r i n e .
I:'llsuill(~, I<\-nscc~tli,l'tct~j(tl),Intlitr.
Dis.G.D.C :
Dis.G.S.B. (J1.d.). J u n e 1920.
de Lange, l<:-I-iho. I)i,rfcfor o f t h e J I r t s ~ ~ r r Stnvrtnyer,
n.
Sorrr.cr!l. 5 . I)ep.$I. May 1920.
de Saram, S t a n l e - Frederick. c,!o Ilfessr.~.F. J .
L'. tle Strt~rrn.P.O. Box 212, Colombo.
Ceylon. 611 (S.C.). J.W. J u n e 1920.
Deighton, Harold, Jftrjot. 12..4.0.('. c l o ;Illinnre Bttnli o f Sinllec, Jleet.ut, U.P., Intlia.
October 1920.
Dent, Harold Martin. Ali(ti.t(rtlo 16, L a Il'tpfitlerin,IIIitintitlun, T7et.rt C Y I I Z A
, l e ~ i c o . 19
October 1920.
* D e w e y , Joseph 011-en. P n s t ~ l t rInstitlrte o f Intlitr, Iitrsn~ili,Pltnjtrh, I ~ ~ r l i n2832,
.
W.M.;
28.12, J. Norcnlber 1920.
Dewhirst, Ctrpf. Cllarlcs H.ee~-e. 105n Cheyne 11':a13, Cl~clsctr,L o n d o n , S.Jl7.10. 1597.
3lay 1923.
Donohue, C'ol. \V. E., C.U.E.
C r ~ i o nClub, S l e x a n d r i a , B!yypf. P.Dis.G.W. (Gib.).
J u n e 1920.
* D u n n , Charles Henry. 375 S m i t h S t r e e t , D u r b a n , Y u t a l , S . .4friccc. 3596; 1937.
,\larch 1920.
Dunn, TJTarren K . 14526 Orinoeo A v e n u e , Enst Clecelnnd, Ohio, U.S.A. 636; 203.
October 1920.
Dyke, Rolfe Henry. Hoynl Colonirrl I r l s t i t ~ r t c ,S o r t h ~ t r nb e r l a n ~ lA v e n ~ r London,
~,
TTT.C.2.
1740 ; 1553. J a n u a r y 1920.
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.
Evans, Alfred Dudley. E'ctir L e a , Crtsflr R r o m ~ c i ~ Birmingham.

h,
587; 887. Nov. 1920.
Lontlon, S.TT7.20.
Evans, Da:.icl Ro1)e;t Ponell. 3f.R.G.R. 75 L n m b t o n R o n d , TT7irnbl~tlon,
2853, P.31. : '58?. 3Iarc.h 1920.
100
Fenwick, A. F . 16 I v y Rocctl, H a n d s ~ c o r t h ,l j i r m i n g h a m . 739. .June 1920.
101
Fishor, R e v . J . L N ~ t f~t 1 r t ~Rl 1t c t o r y , H a r l o ~ c , Essex. 400. JIay 1920.
102
F l y m e n , Henry Van. 528 tl. 330 I<rngsluncl R o a d , L o n d o n , E.8. 2816; 1201. May 1920.
1 0 3 " F o r d , F r a n k Goclfrey Garland. 465 Cangnllo, Bueltos Aires, Argcnilntc. 3926; 1025.
J u n e 1920.
104
Forster, Edwin T. 14 R o k r r Terrace, Stockfon-on-Tees. P.Pr.A.G.D.C. June 1920.
105 9 Found, T h o n ~ a sL ~ d s t o n e . Shlelrls House, W e s t Barnes L a n e , S e w Afnltlcn, Surrey.
2697, P.M.; 889. >larch 1920.
106
Frederick, JfTalter Leonard 415 K e n t A v e n u e , Broolilyn, N.T. 436 (Pa.). Oct. 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.
c l o Clitl) tle R e s i t l r ~ r f e sE r t ~ c r r i j e t ~ o sB, m e . J I i f r e 476,

Uue7los Aises. 3379, I.G. ; ,$57l). J u n e 1920.
Gifford, Claudo Frederica.
8 S a i n t G e o ~ g e ' sIiorctl, L o ~ l c l o n , S.TT.1.
2 (I.C.), P.31.
October 1920.
Glenister, Ernest I'incent.
78 Cornl)fott Routl, Z'reston I'crrk, B r i g h t o n . 1734, P . M .
3larch 1020.
Godfray, Horace Salmon.
14 IIill S f r e e t , R t . Ilcliers, Je,t..sey, Cf.Z. Pr.A.G.D.C. ;
Pr.G.S.B. (H..A.). Noreniber 1920.
Goodacre, TVilliam Geoffrey. 47 Illtrrliet S t r e e t , M n n c h ~ s t e r . P.Pr.G.D., West Lancs.
l7d0, P.Z. October 1920.
Gorringe, H a r r y . 331 Icing S t r e r t , Ilccrnnlersmifh, Lontlon, 1r.G. 1373. May 1920.
Grant, I a n Pntrick. Icltoreel T.E., lItr111 P.O., C U C ~ L IUn d~ i,a . 2726, S.W. May 1920.
Gray, George J l u n n . P.O. Box 444, Lugos, S i y e r i a , 1l'est S f r i c a . 1166 (S.C.), P.M. ;
3065, P.Z. October 1920.
Green, Charles P r a t t . Uercsfortl I l o u s e , V a 1 c c t . n . P.Pr.G.S.B. BIay 1920.
c l o J f e s s r s . P c o r y (F. C o . , P.O. Box 12, Mcrtlras, Intlia. 2188, P . M .

Local Secretary for Bombay, IIadras, U.P., a n d Oudh. October 1920.
Hagley, Georgc. U u r l e y , 25 Clice P l n c ~ ,l J e n a r t h . , G l n m . 36; 36. March 1020.
Hallett, Henr:; H i r a n . B r i d g e I l o u s e , Tczunton, Some.rset. 261 ; 261. No\-elxber 1920.
Halliday, Leonard Hcnry Edmund.
62 Lontlori IT'nll, Lonrlon, E.C.,?. 3398; 317;i.
October 1020.
Hammond, TV. B. 72 JIoor ,S'f,rcet, B i t . l n i n y h n ~ n . P.Pr.G.11-., T170rcester. October 1920.
Harding, H a r r y Han-liins. L l a n r ~ c s t , Baliol B o n d , H i f c l t i . n , FIrrts. 2086, P.31. ; 44:1,
P.Z. Novelnber 1920.
Harrop, TVili'recl. S f C ' ( c f h ~ r i n ~ ' Onto,~.io,
s,
Canndtr. 206. P.31. ; 19. 3lay 1920.
Hawkins, George Albert Victor. 244 J I t o r e l t ~ s f el{otrtl,
~~
C u h i t t Toi1.11, T,ontlor~, E . 1 4 .
1623, P.M. ; 1613. March 1920.
Hawley, J. H. T h e Uto.rlnns, Scczrle 12oat1, T V r m b l ~ y ,Jlidtllesex. 3098, I.G.; 2005.
J u n e 1020.
Haybittel, S. liandall, J . P .
Dutlley T7illa, G r o t t o Zloctd, Hondeboselt, S'. S f r i c n . 334.
31arch 1920.
Haydon, Nathaniel TVilliam J o h n . 564 P a p e .Ive7tue, T o r o n t o , Cu~tcrrla. 194. Local
Secretary for Ontario. JIay 1920.
Hayward, Edn.ard J o h n . l.'t,oylr, T y G11.yt1 Rootl, Cct.rtliff. 36. March 1920.
Heasley, Illtrjor Hllgil J ~ I ~ I C T).R.O.
LS,
101 C1as.s~S t r e e t , Xor~t?,etrl,fJ.(L).,( ' O I I ( I C ~ ( 76
I.
(C:.R.Q.), \\'.>l. ; 5, 2nd P r . J u n e 1920.
Henesy, F r a n k Charles.
6 1 !'h ~ s11 tct
f Z f o n ~ i ,1T.t.st Sorrcootl, L o tttlolt, S.E.2;.
1672.
J u n e 1920.
Henwood, F r a n k Stanle:-.
76 Lnvin!jforr l(ont1, 11-est E n l i n g , Lontlon, 1T7.13. 227;
Y0'8. J a n u a r y 1920.
Hewson, George \I-i!lii~lll. G',i,asmere, Field Terroce, .Ja~,rou-on-2'!lnr. 3242, Sec. ; 1119.
October 1920.
urst llorrd, C l a p l t a n ~ con^ !non, L o n d o n , ,S'.TT'.11. 2469 ;
Hiehle, William 0. 153 Tl7aE~1r
,!?46. J a n u a r y 1920.
4 1lus.sin. C o ~ r r t ,X i l E S f r ~ e f L, o n d o n , E.C..?. 2523, W.M.
Hinton, Charles Stanley.
May 1920.
Holden, John Ernest.
7 S f r u t f o r r l :lvenue, R o c l ~ d t t l e , L a n c s .
298, P.31.; 298, H.
March 1920.
Hole, T. JlcGo\ran. Btrrt'!~,G l ( t m ~ ~ r ( l f l n36;
.
8ii. Jlarc.11 19'0.
*Homer, Charles Christopher, jun.
c.10 .Scconc7 x n t i o ~ ~ u lB u n k . H(tlfirrcorc, J f a r y l a n t l ,
T;.S.il. Grand Master; Grand High Priest. J a n u a r y 1920.
Horlock, Robert Hambidgc. 189 C t r ~ r ~ h c ~ ~ tG
c cr ol lv e , T,otr(lon. S.E..?. 1672. P . J I . ; 1 ; O D .
J u n e 1920.
Hubbard, \Villinm Austin.
116 Clcrt e m o n t l?oat(, FO~f'sf G f f f r , Lolltlon, E . 7 . 40.
J l a y 1920. '
Humphris, F. H . , Jl.1).
8 1 i T c s t c'lrrrl~rl Str.r'ef, J I r ~ y f t t i r ,L o i ~ c f o n ,T17.1. 48 (S.C.).
March 1920.
Hadow, H u b e r t .
143
144
Jackson, Georgca. 12 I<erlsirlyturl --icellcie, 1-icfuriu Pur,li, A ~ f r ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~P.Pr.A.G.Sup.JV.

t?.sft~~~.
;
935, P.Z. May 1920.
Jackson, Jabez.
.4tlns IIuuac', ,St. AIIic./~tiel's Routl, C ' o u e r i f ~ ~ . P.pr.C;.D.; 3659.
Noveniber 1920.
145
146
147
148
Jackson, L ~ e ~ i f . - C ' ultobert

l
E d n a r d . 39 To11, J I t r ~ ~ s r o t ~1'1
s ,~ n c rof Tl.ctlL~'ltoctrl, L o n d o n ,
S.Tr.11. 39 (JY.A.C ). J u n e 1920.
Jacobs, Anclrev Alcsalider
44 l ' o ~ t l u r t t l L(otcd, h'tlgl~ccsfr~tc.P.Pr.G.\T<. Jlarch 1020.
Jones, J o h n Tho:uai
31) S l l r f ( f l A S ~ I I ( ( ~~ P~ ,I S ~ L O J ) SL~o u~ t~l oCn,, E . 1 . October 1923.
Jones, JYillia~nT h o m ~ s . Sctrrtlutcn, Sfcctron l i o a d , S f r c l ~ f o r t l ,BLI-rrrtncfl~czrn. 1551, JV.Af. ;
739, Sc.N. J a n u a r y 1920.
K a h n , Isaac Jechiel
P.O. Box 120, Orrtltshoc~~r~~t,
( ' . l ' . , . Y o t ~ t l .lf~.ic.tc.
~,
2083, J . D . ;
834. Jlay 1920.
K e n s e t t , Percy F r a n k .
L'ots~coltl, Coftenhnrrt. 1'ctr.k l(ocrt1, I I ~ o s f Il.irrtl,l~:t/on,L u , ~ d o r t ,
S.TV.ZO. 1962, P.31. ; 1962, &.S. >Illay 1920.
K e r r i c k , R e v . E d ~ n o n d k'itz Gerald.
L i t t l e h a m l : ~ c . t u r , ! / , l ~ i r l ~ f o r r l . 189; $,?g.
3larch i920.
Kishere, IZarry.
1iccurc.l B u t t l i , ,4't. Juli.ii1s rYt~.ec.f,I ~ r r l f u r ~ r l .169, J.JV.; ,27c~8,A.So.

Jtunc 1920.
K i t t o w , JT-illiam: L.T).sY., E n q . 8 Setrpor,f Rotrtl, L'tr1,tlifi. 36, P.31. : dB, H. May 1929.
'
L a n g f o r d , n'illiam Francis. 34 l l r t l f o r r l J?outl, 11itc.lrir1, 1Ier.f.s. l.?;!); $40. Nov.

L a v e r i c k , J l a r t i n . 35 .4;trl1>tr Te~\rtrcc,,So~ttlr, S ~ t ~ t t l c ~ . l u ~l'~..G.T:.cas.
~cl.
Octobe,r
L a w f o r d , C. E. 9 J l n p c s b ~ i r ~Rocctl,
y
L u n t l o n , S.IT7.2. 3097. 11
l!)S;).
Lawrance, J o h n . 33 I'ccttisoir Xotrd, Lontlorl, X.TT7.2. 2696. P.J[. ; ;.j.i. Jnilunry
Lea, Erncst. 20 M o o r s i t l c Roctd, I I c n f o n J f o o r , , ~ t t ~ c E ~ ~ u293.5,
r t . P.31. ; .38:i3,
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.
Sawyerr, Salnuel vTohanncs.

P.O. Box 60, 16 Urotrrl Sf;.,ect, Lnyos, 11.t;st d f r i c ; ~ .
1171, S.\V.; 1171. October 1920.
Schofield, T o m . 59 Sl,r~it~!lfic~ltl,
I?rtrnnlioftorri, L t t r ~ ~ c t s l t i , ~1631,
. ~ . P.JT. Oc.tol,ey 1920.
Scholefield, H a r r y H ouc.llr~l. 1 1 Lorc!lh ho ro' I:ontl, Lt'icr.sfP).. 1391, 1V.Jl. Xor. 1920.
" S h a r p , E'recl Ber11ar:l. l Xitltlle Paverncnt, S u t t i n y l ~ c i t n . 3498, P . J I . ; 411. Jan. 1920.
S h a w , E. R., Z.C.S. H u c l a k n n d i , P.O. C a c h a ~ ,I n d i a . J u n e 1920.

S h a w - F l e t c h e r , Erilelt T\7~11~an~.Lltrrebudirin, Brtfreltl, Lonclon, S .
1791, lV.31.
October 1320.
Shields, J o h n ITilIiam.
570 Alloseley Z?ocetl, Uit~ininylcttnc. 3643, W . M . ; 3643, &.E.
J u n e 1923.
* S h o w a l t e r , H a r r y Gregg. (,)~ceens,L o n g Isltlntl, S.17.,T*.A..-l.
63; ,302. October 1920.
S i m p s o n , H e r l ~ e r tLouis. 7 C i n f r e v i l l e ltoarl, Tlttlrin~lcty,TJontlon, 3 . 4 . 3500. 3lay 1920.
Sinclair, Johil. JZttltrrctc (Jenet,trl ,Sto,res, J f t r l t ~ c c u , S t i . ~ r i t sS c t f l e n c e n t s . 3557, TY.31.
Nor-c.:!~ber I920
S m a l l , d r t h a r Pole. Itoss, IIet~t,fot.tlshi:.e. 338, P.M. ; 120, P.Z. 3Ia1ch lli20.
S m a l l e y - B a k c r , Charles Eriiest. 9 l i i n y ' s Uenelb TT-trlk, Tlto Tencllle, L o n t l o n , E.C!.J.
3.57. J u n e 1929.
S m a r t , J o i ~ i lLail~ont. 3 2 TTctlOr.uok, L o n t l o n , E.C.4. May 1920.
S m i t h , Arthur Jarlie;. 58 l~rctltcntl 2'ccl.k JItt risions, TT-illesdett (:r ccJn, Lo~rclotr, S.TT..?.
1962. Octobe; 1920.
S m i t h , Basil Arthur.
30 Penritlr l t o u t l , S e c c JIalderz, Sut.r,ey.
1962; 1062, B . S o .
J u n e 1920.
S m i t h , Cornn-allis 1"ol:ritayne Heilry. 42 Rlythccootl I<uectl, Cro1rc.11 I l i l l , L o t ~ t l o n , S , . l
1928, P.31. ; I ! ~ C S P.Z.
,
October 1920.
S m i t h , Lioilel K c q i l l . 58 H i c l l ~ S t l , c e t , Ht~itllin!lton. 734; ;.:4. J u n e lT20.
S m i t h , Ralph Jenilrenaud. c / o JI~s.st.s.C'ox tl. C'o., P.O. Box 48. l j o n ~ l j t t y ,111tiitr. 2136.
March 1920.
S t a b l e s , Alfrecl Xnttlien-.
25 (-'ofs~i~oltl(,'trt~clerrs, Bttst U t t n i , Z,ortt(on~ E.6.
141.
IvIay 1020.
S t e n n e t t , Gcorge. 1 Susotr S t r ~ t ' f ,I)ovr,t.. 3131. November 1920.
S t o c k e r , Jo1111 N. Clordon. Btttltlerl~oce T e u Cu., Tit(!., Iltrtlrrt~l~wrC l ~ t r t l'.O., ,\'!lllrri,
Intlitr. 2/26, IT.-.31. J a n u a r y 1020.
S t o d d a r d , \l-alter l-lcnrj-. 30 ( ' h c r r y S t ~ , e e t ,l ~ i t ~ t n i n y h r e ~ 17112,
r ~ . l'.Jl. Ortober 102:)
S t o n e , I ~ \ \ . i s . 11 1:uyctl 1-0t.k C r r s c e n i , ( ' l i f t o t ~ B
, r i s t o l . 925. . J I , I I ~
1920.
S t r e t t o n , J o s ! ) h Ffoi~e. 11 , ~ r r ~ j r ~ t r7rrt1.
~ t i s ~.ont/orr, h'.6'.$. TOY. 3a111iary 1930.
S u m m c r f i e l d , lVillia11l 31 I<~rtltrot.. Y t t o r f , Lrj~ttlotr,S.l:'. 1 7 . 2680. .Jul~t.1920.
S u t e r , Jean Etieilne. 3 0 ( : l r n ~ l t l o t r llotetl, S f r . r t r t l ~ t r t t ~L,o n r l o ~ r , ,h'.IT7.1(i. 715; I.;O,;,
Norember 1920.
S w a l e , Jno. ( : t , i n f i / i i , Fctir,fieltl I<oorl, [l~itlerc~.s,
Ltrl~cx. :S89ti: ? S l ! l . Nove~nker 192;).
S y m e s , Col. Gustarus Phel!,s, _ l l . T 7 . 0 .
J I t ~ ~ i k s t l e n rT, l ' ~ ~ ! l ~ i ~ o1)ot.sat.
otl~.
170> P.31.;
P.Pr.G. l<. ; Pr.G.Sec. October 1'3'20.
T a n n e r , George TT;illiam H e ~ ~ r r194
.
Ltltc.rc,rrc.~I l i l l , 1l~~i.stol.3'26; (;S. J l a y 1920.
T a t e , Alexallder Jazi~es. T h e l c i r ~ y ' sS c h o o l , ( ~ t ~ t t r ~ t l r c t362
~ ~ c;. .it;! Jla5- 1920.
T a y l o r , James. (:r.ctstn ?,re, 641 O l t l h t t n ~ Ztotrcl, l<oc.hrltelr. 34. \V.JI. ; 54. 3Larch 1920.
T h o m a s , Artllur TTillialu.
L'ttt f v c f , 2 2 L C p l ~ c ' . t(.'t.orr,
'
S . Sui.rc.ootl, T,oretlur~, ,S.IS.l,i.
1139. March 1920.
T h o r p e , Jlo~ltajiuuJ t m e s . c / o Zlotcy I i o n ! ~ Shtrt~!llrctiIjttttk, (:c,oe.yc Toir.tt, I ' ~ t r c e r r ~ ~ ,
,Ste.ctifs S p t t l ~ m e t r t . s . 3015. October 1920.
le
C.'~ofton l'trrk, I,otrtlor~, S.IC.4. 315.3, P.31. ;
T i e t j e n , Artliilr Ernest. 11 l ) t c l r . ~ n ~ j )12oat1,
31.53, Z. 3ln>- 1920.
T i l l e y , Eclgar Ernest. Jfinrretluscc, Jftrnitobrr, Crtnotl~e. 1.5. Jlarcli 1920.
T i n d a l e , Charles. :I-) TIctllynrfh S t ? , e e f , U ~ t r h u n i . 1331> P.31. ; 124. >fay 1920.
T w e e d a l e , Sutcliffe. 311 Htc1.e ,Sfr.eet, l<oc.lrtltrlc, L t l r ~ c s . 1129. J.TV. ; 208. October 1920.
T y l e r , Georgc, TV. Jlrltorr, T r x t t s . Past Grand Master. 3larch 1020.
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.
33 IIcr~lrrrzr (:rr~ilrns, Trrsth~o.~y-on-Tt

!In!, 1:) ;\tor.
P.Pr.C*.S\\ .13.
J f a y 1920.
*Whishaw, L I P I I ~ . - ( ' ( 1 Ed\vnrcl
1.
Richaril. 7 1,'ttr n ~ t f t o s1'trsl:n (:11rrlr, B ~ l r o ~ , o l i sCtrito.
,
2877, P.31.; 2954, Z. June 1920.
White, Robcrt Fortescue M o r e s b .
Gtntttlrrrm.
Past Grand Standard Bearcr; Past
Deputy Grand Director of Ceremonies ( R . S . ) . J n n ~ i n r y 1920.
Whitefield, l I r i l l ~ a mGordon. 32 S f o n rr.r,ll Itorttl, I ' ~ ~ n n t ~ f 136.
1 . Jlarch 1920.
Whiteley, IZoberts Ogden.
17 A f h o l Rotrtl, .Ilttnninghnm, nrrrrlfo~tl. 107$, P . l f ;
P.Pr.G.Go. (Crtmb. & T e s t ) . J I n p 1920.
Williams, Frelce Ualgltcsh.
13-19 I'rrll _llttl/, l;ontlon, ,Y.TT.
3533, P . J I . ; $6, P.Z.
~ I R T -1920.
Wilshaw, Eclnard. F,'l~rtitc TTottsr, Finsblrrt~ Po?:rrnenf, Lontlorr, B.C.?. October 1923
Winder, IYllliam Ambros-.
T l ~ r n t l ~ ~ r nLo(lr/c.
~ r r S'f. John'n (:towe, J I o r r c o ~ ~ b p .410P,
P.31. ; 1071. November 1920.
Wintgens, Frederick n'ilharn. S l r n ~n l ~ r f i ~ l t Prr7~1r
?,
Rorrtl, S l r f t o n , 91rrrslj. 3617 ; l!??!).
J u n e 1920.
P,
Z'or k, L o n d o n , S . P.Pr.G I),,
Wood, .To1111n'1l1,nms. Shcrrcoorl, ET!lrn . I V P I I I I Alrsnnclrn
Norfolk. OchoEe~ 1921.
Wright, S. J. 31. 5 1 ) r n o n s h i ~Polonncrtlr,,
~
Btr.rfon, D ~ t h ~ ~ . s h i r1235.
e.
I f a y ln"0
Yates, n'illinm
( I ) : I P P ~ I ' I Ro(r(1, Eticshnm.
3308.
Jlnrch 19-00.
DECEASED.
Austen, Arthur Elvey
L a f r o f dohnnnesburq
March, 1920.
Bacon, Col. Alexander 6.
I l ~ o o k l y n ,L- X..4.
l=
Bass, William Hanry
,,
Sottlngham
Bcaman, Harris Samuel
,,
London, S.E.
31st, March, 1920.
Bodenham, John
,,
S e w p o r t , S(tlop
15th February, 1920.
Buckmaster, Fredericlr H .
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
Lontlon
2nd November, 1920.
Lolrestoft
27th June, 1920.
Buglass, Thomas Dixon

Butler, J. Dixon
Coombe, W~lliamJohn Broolis
Davey, Arnold E.
Davis, Alfred
Gove, Dr. Royal Amenzo
H ankin, Herbert Ingle
E ( t s f J[olr\r
l]
2ith October, 1920.
B~istol
5th April, 1920.
Adelaitle, S . .lltsftnltn
13th March, 1920.
C)oyclon, Stcirey
26th September, 1920.
Tucomn, TT'ash.
21st January, 1920.
S t . Ives, H u n t s .
19th hlarch, 1920.
Hare, Sholto Henry
,,
T I ~ ~ s f o n - s u ~ ) e r - J l a r e 3rd September, 1920.
lie<, ~ t . - & l . Henry IVilson
,,
Stdmoltfh
J ardine, Oapt. William
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
Peek, Rev. Richard
London, S.E.
18th July, 1920.
Chepstolc, Mon.
10th January, 1920.
Soltau, William Edward
,,
,
Lontlnn
25th October, 1920.
Starkey, John W.
T-c~lctfn
May, 1920.
Stowe, Lt.-Col. Francis Joseph
Zon(1on
18th November 1920.
Sutton, Charles William
,,
Jlc~nchester
21th April, 1920.
Tate, John
,,
,,
Belfast
March, 1920.
Turner, George Edmard
Blnndford
9th April, 1920.
Venables, Rowland George
Os~crstry
9th March, 1920.
Wright, Rev. Charles Ed~vard
..
FoIX psfonp
6th July, 1920.
~ e m p William
,
David
Keys, John Patterson
Knight, Herbert Manning
Macwatt,
Judge Daniel F.
Marty, Francis Charles
Price, Arthur
Leigh
28th April, 1920.

20th June, 1920.
14th April, 1920.
5th January, 1920.
1st October, 1920.
12th February, 1920.
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
23. S t . James's Street, Derby.

1.7, r n i o n Strcet.
97, JIilnro~vRoad, Rochclale.
13, Thornfielcl. Lancaster.
132, Lord Strect, Southport.
69, Billing Roarl, Northampton.
C'orn~ell Smith
.
E. Concler
Lioncl T7ibert
Franli Hughes
F. G. Sn-indcn
Rev. Hcrhrrt Poole
m-. S. Derey
GPO. L. Sliaclrles
57. >ranor Hcuse Road, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

The Conigree, Nerrent, Gloucestershire.
Rtarline. I,nnsdonn, Bath.
Hancls~~orth.
36, TVestfield Road, Edgbaston.
Sedbergh School, Sedbergh. Yorltshirr.
43. George Road, Erdington. Birminqham.
Elinl Loclge, Hornsea, near Hull.
John Robinson
J. Elston Cawthorn
5 . Rushcroft Terrace, Baildon.
Elmete. Esplnancle Arenue, Srarborougll,

Yorlts.
TT'histon Grange, Rotherham.
Darid Flather
EUROPE.
William Jfallir?g
J. C. G. GrasC
Denmarli
Holland
Hojbroplads 5 , Copenhagen, K.
Naarden.
ASIA.
India. Bengal
,, Ronlbav, Jfadras. Unikrl
H . Hadolv
c10 Thacker, Spink & Co., 5 Government

Place. Calcutta.
r / o Parry R Co.. P.O. Box l?, JIadras.
-4. R . Catto
John R. C. Lyons
Frederick Apps
Box 296. Yokohama.

Ministry of Justice, Bangkok.
26. Raffles Place.
C. F Hooper
Provinces & Oudh
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
311-314. -4 0 T.lV. Bt~ildii~g,

1,1ttl? ~{OC:;.
Uradeiitotvn.
341, J3road Street. Angusta.
29, IV. JVashlngton Street, Indianapolis.
Flem~rfgton.
8.5.Argyle Road, Brooklyn.
61, Laura Street, Providence.
Siou\ Falls.
T111011 I%at~lr
& Trust Co., Los Angeles, Cnl.
SOUTH
-1rgentina
C h t a Rica
JVilliam Co~vlisham
A . G . AI. G ~ l l o t t
New Sonth TVales

New Zealand, Auckland
.)
,
Cllristchurch
,,
Otago
>
JVanpanui
,
lJ7ellington
South Australia
Victoria
T. L. Rowbotham
C. H. Jenkins
S. C. Bingham
D. C. Cameron
P&er Letvis
G. Roberism
Fred. Jollns
-irtliut. Thcn-lis
AMERICA.
,i.5 , lleconqu~sta,Buenos Aires.

Box 353, S a n Jose.
7
AUSTRALASIA.
1,
Masonic Club, 218. P ~ t Street,

t
Sydney.
107, -4lbert Street.
T. C':~sl~t.lStrt,et. JV.
5, Heriot Street, Dunedin.
81, Iceit11 Street.
Jvellington.
Houghton Lodge, Rose Park. Adelaide.
l<)!. 1) 1 1 ~,ll.)n
d
Ro.~d. alrrnndnle.
STATED MEETINGS OF THE LODGE IN 1921.

Friday, 7th January.
Friday,
24th June.
Friday, 4th hf arch.
Friday,
7th
Friday, 6th May.
l'uesday, 8th November.
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.
Central. Ceremonies, Constitution.

Chaplain
Chapter.
Committee.
D.
D.C.
(D.C.).
D.11.
Dep.
Dep. Dis.
Dep. P r .
Deacon, Director, Dutch.

Director of Ceremonies.
D u t c h Constitution.
Director of Music.
Deputy, Depute (Scottish).
Deputy District.
Deputy P r o ~ i l ~ c i a l .
District.
District A s s i t a n t Grmld.
D i ~ t r i c tG r a n d .
Division.
Dis.Ci.
Div.
Past, Principal, Priest

(.41nevican & 1 1 . i s l ~1 1 . A . j .
P a s t Deputy.
P. Dep.
Dis.
P
a
s
t
Deputy
District.
P. Lkp.
P. DPP. Y r . P a s t L)eputy Pl'ori~lcial.
P. Dis.
P;I.;~
District.
P.Di5.G
Paht District Grand.
P.G.
Past G~,aild.
J'nst 1Ipggai.
P.11.
P a s t I11g11 P r i e s t
P.H.P.
(:i~izcrican d, Irislt R,.4 .l.
Past Joshu;~.
P.J.
P a s t K i n g (diitericrtn & I r i s l ~It A . ] .
P.K.
P a s t 3Laster.
P a s t Provincial.
Paqt I'rorincial G r a n d .
P1.orincial.
Pr.
I're..
P1,esident.
P ~ . o r i n c i n lG r a n d .
Pr.G.
P11 r s u i r a ~t.
l
Pt.
Past Zerut~l~ahel.
P.Z.
Ihlglish, F:xct=llent, Ezra.

K~rglishConstitution.
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.
Scottiqh. Srnior, Sword.

Sn-ord I<t=;~rn..
Scottish Col~.titution.
Scribe.
Scrille Rzra.
Sc~.il)eSelle:~liah.
Srnior Dracon.
Secr~tary.
Sojou1.11er.
Stpwarcl.
Standard.
S n h s t i t ~ ~ i.'i'rottish).
tr
Si~perintmdent.
S11pe1.int ~ n r l e n tof Wo1.1ts.
Senior W a r d e n .
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
SOCIAL, NAVAL, AND MILITARY.

A .D.C.
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.
&Iernber of t h e House of Assembly

(Neufoundland).
3lember of Legislative Council.
Member of Parliament.
Urder of t h e I j r i t ~ s lK~~ n p i r 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.
T.icelrtiati~ in Dental Snrgery.

I~nchelor.of Laws.
Doctor of
,,
Master of
,,
1,icentiate of JIiisic.
I,irnirc:~n Socicty.
Slaster of r l r t ~ .
Rachelor of l l ~ l i c i . l e .
Doctor of .\Iwlicine.
,, ~f J i ~ z i c

Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, Vol. 33 PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, Vol. 33 PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

QUATUOR CCIRONATI LODGE NO. 2076, LONDON.

THE IsABELLA MISSAL

W. S. PARRETT. LTD., PRINTERS. MARGATE.

NOTES AND QUERIES

Sutton, Charles Wil:ia~il

PAPERS AND ESSAYS.

Dr. Begemann and the alleged Templar Chapter at Edinburgh in 1745.

The. storj- of. Pritlco C11;1rlt>sICtlwa1.d Stuart and hi., 111~l1lberslli1)

E'einininc, ilrtcrest in Frc.culaio~ir?-ill :c,ge~~d;lr?tiines. 63; -%ncient

Early Alldrog>-nons Societies, 8 2 ; The Order of Felicity, erroneous

PAPERS AND ESSAYS-con tinued.

The Architectural Style of King Solomon's Temple.

Bristol ;uld 3ialmesbur:-

The Council House, Bristol, and t h e Civic Regx~lia, 136; The

Introduction, a ~ t d Authorities referred to, 1'31 ; l'erdiguier's

U . Couiit Goblet d'Alviella ...

-i C e ~ l t u r r of JIasollic Worliing, being a

-1 n e r Ellc?-c:opseclix of Frecmnso~lry (Ars

Thr Story of t h e Craft.

Crown in Parker's Laiu?

Jlalmesbury: Summer Outing ..

German>-) Trade organizations i n

Old Charges, see Constitutions,

Adams. Alfred 11'.

Persons referred to :Attwood. T .

Per*sons referred to :Gongh. Charles ...

184. 185. 186. 243

Roman Catholics. Antagonism of

Trade organizations i n England.

The Suspensioll Bridge

Mal~llesbury Abbey, T1:e Market

The Fisher-Hosedale JIS.

31, 76, 114, 165

37. 108, 129, 167, 184,

Ilobbins. ,Sir Alfred

Poole, I(cv. Herbert

Quatuor Coronati Lodge of A.F. G A.M., London,

FRIDAY, 2nd JANUARY,

H E Lodge met a t Freemasons' Hall a t 3 p.m. Present :-Bros. J . E.

Letters of apology for non-attendance were received from Bros. T. J. IVcstronp:

Transactions of the Quattior Coronati Lodge:

One Lodge, one Masonic Association and thirty-five ~ i e t h r e nwere admitted to

PERMANENT AND A U D I T COMMITTEE.

J. E. S. Tuckett in the Chair, with Bros. Dr. W. Wynn Westcott,

Gordon Hills, J. P. Simpson, Sir Alfred Rdbbins, L. Vibert, R. H . McLeod, Auditor,

THE PEAR 1919.

Transactions of the Quatuor Cororrati Lodge:

30th NOVEMBER, 1919.

To Life Members' Fund (258

Profit and Loss Account ..i 2421 2 0

PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT for the year ending

This Balaz~ceSlieclt does not inclnde the a l - ~ eof the ~ i b r a r ?rluseum,

3, Great Janles Street,

Bedford Ron-, 1V.C.

2211d December, 1919.

P.G.Ch., read the following paper:-

SOME FRESH MATERIAL FOR CLASSIFYING THE

' OLD CHARGES.'

MONGST tlle efforts which have been made t o ii~lpress German

I t is kno\rn now that Dr. Bcgema~lnhas produced n ncxv c.lnssi6cation inore in

Transactions of the Quatuor C'oronati Lodge.

craft & curious science

& that teacheth a man to