a basic model of western hermetic tradition

8/14/2019 A Basic Model of Western Hermetic Tradition

1/50

A BASIC HISTORICO-CHRONOLOGICAL MODEL

OF THE

WESTERN HERMETIC TRADITION

by

R. Wy. Frater Trevor Stewart,

VIII0, SRIA


2/50

INTRODUCTION

PART I

The topic which I have been assigned resolves into a question: What part, if any, does

speculative Freemasonry have within the western Hermetic tradition? There are two

contrasting ways of trying to answer that question:

that which uses a historico-chronological model which represents the presentprevailing orthodoxy in Masonic historiography and

that which uses a symbolic or thematic model.Viewed in a chronological sequence, according to Antoine Faivre, the main currents or

components in the western Mystery tradition are

1. neo-Alexandrian Hermeticism;2. Christian Kabbalah;3. Paracelsianism (or the observation of Nature as a Divinely authored text

permeated by decipherable signatures);

4. Philosophia occulta (the magical vision of the cosmos which unifies Natureand religion theurgically);

5. Alchemy;6. Rosicrucianism;7.

Bohemian theosophy;8. Martinism and

9. The Hermetic Order of the Golden DawnSince speculative Freemasonry, in the form which would be recognised most widely these

days, first became manifest in London in 1717, I suppose that the Masonic phenomenon could

be added into that chronological listing perhaps somewhere between, say, 7 and 8. However, I

want to reject that approach in the present context not because of anything faulty in its basic

rationalebut because it leads to the restrictions of a largely unspoken assumption: that there

must have been a definite, identifiable time (and perhaps even a precise location) prior to

which Freemasonry did not exist and after which it did. That underlying assumption has led

Masonic writers to conjure up some remarkable and diverse theories as to Freemasonry'sorigins. Amongst the more questionable of these (in alphabetical order only) have been:

the Culdees or Colidei or Keledei(the remote religious communities which existed in7

th 12

thcenturies in Ireland and Scotland;

the Comancine builders (located at Como in Lombardy); the Compagnonnage (the medieval French association of workmen); Oliver Cromwell; the Dionysian artificers (c. 1000 BC in Asia Minor); the Druids; the Essenes; the Gnostic teachers of 1stand 2ndcentury Alexandria; the Jesuits; the Noachidae (legendary descendants of Noah);


3/50

the Pythagoreans (at Crotona, southern Italy); the Rosicrucians; the Royal Society; the Socinians (a widespread late 16th century heretical sect from Vicenza, led by

Fausto Paolo Sozzini); the medieval operative stonemasons; the Royal House of Stuart and, of course the Knights Templar.

If any one of these were valid then the Masonic phenomenon might be fitted comfortably

within Faivres list. However, there are some major obstacles to using that historiographical

model.

The task of tracing ever earlier origins has been made almost impossible because not only are

there huge gaps in the sequences of evidence which mean that whole centuries cannot be

accounted for, all of the available earliest evidence is extremely fragmentary and scattered.Consequently, much has been made of very little indeed! The evidence, such as it is, hardly

presents a clear, complete or general picture. After more than 110 years of exhaustive

investigating Masonic writers are no nearer to finding the missing evidence that would help

them to prove clear origins for the Masonic phenomenon and so draw up a continuous

narrative. Many have been keen to establish reputations and to sell their books but they may

be mistaken in assuming that speculative Freemasonry had only one origin and, crucially,

they have tended to ignore its wholly syncretistic nature a nature which is shown clearly in

that published evidence(e.g., in Knoop, Jones and Hamers Early Masonic Catechisms and

their Early Masonic Pamphlets). More will be said about Freemasonrys characteristicsyncretistic borrowing later.

This deficiency in the evidence was identified by the indefatigable Rev. Dr. James Anderson

DD (1680?-1739) as early as 1723 when he was commissioned by the nascent Premier GrandLodge in London to compose a book of Constitutionsfor it. He was not a reliable historian,

even within the standards of mere antiquarianism of those credulous times, and he inventedmost of his Masonic history according to his whim. However, he recognised that there were

big gaps in his narrative and explained them by stating that zealous freemasons wanted toprotect their secrets. They had declined to surrender their precious MSS to his well-

intentioned inquiries and had burned them. He claimed that

many of the Fraternitys Records of this [i.e., Charles IIs] reign and former Reigns [myemphasis] were lost in the next [i.e., James IIs] and at the Revolution [1688]; and many of

em were too hastily burnt in our Time from a Fear of making Discoveries; so that we have

not so ample an account as would be wishd

Later in the same history, he expanded that claim thus:

This year [1720], at some privateLodges, several very valuable Manuscripts (for they had

nothing yet in Print) concerning the Fraternity, their Lodges, Regulations, Charges, Secrets,

and Usages were too hastily burnt by some scrupulous Brothers that those Papers mightnot fall into strange Hands.

One of the most important of these missing sources was a MS which had been compiled by

Nicholas Stone (1586-1647), the Kings Master Mason during the lifetime of Inigo Jones. He


4/50

had been a Master of the famous London Company of [Operative] Masons in 1633 but even

he, prestigious as he was among other architects, was not admitted into membership of the

more exclusive, hidden inner association, or Acceptioun within that Company until 1639.

Anderson knew of the existence of that MS which was generally esteemed. It had been of

some significance for speculative freemasons generally so its loss was therefore even more tobe regretted.

The second quotation from Anderson above would seem to imply that the earliest Lodges had

already got some corporate form (a collectivity) and some kind of organisation because it uses

the words Fraternity and Regulations. Clearly speculative Freemasonry did not spring into

being ex nihilo in June 1717. Only four London Lodges, which had existed from Time

Immemorial, bothered to meet then in order, inter alia, to revive the ancient custom of

Lodges meeting together in Quarterly Communication. The likelihood is the English

freemasons were reacting as Scots did later in Scotland in 1736 when a general invitation wassent out by a few enthusiastic Edinburgh freemasons to all of the 100+ Lodges known to exist

in various parts of Scotland then. The idea was for them to establish their own Grand Lodge(to match the London and Dublin ventures?). However, representatives of only 11 of the

Lodges bothered to attend so it can be said that the Grand Lodge of Scotland and the GrandLodge of England were founded by a minority of the Lodges then existing. In any case, by the

time the first Engraved List of Lodges was published by the Premier Grand Lodge in 1723,

there were no less than 51 Lodges meeting in London alone. By 1725, when the next suchList

was published, there were at least 13 more Lodges either near London or in the provinces.

The existence of a total of 64 Lodges is confirmed by the Minutes of the Premier Grand

Lodge. Only 16 of these did not bother to return lists of their members but, allowing for a few

dual memberships, it seems that 48 of the Lodges then had about 730 members between them.

The point is that there cannot have been a such a huge expansion of the numbers of Lodges or

of their members in only five years (1717-1723). The Masonic phenomenon must have pre-

existed 1717.

This deficiency in the range and number of the earliest primary sources did not deter

Anderson nor has it deterred others since. Whistling in the dark, some Masonic

historiographers claim that there must be hitherto untapped, hidden MSS which will provide

the missing vital evidence of much earlier Masonic activities and thereby help to establish

clear connection between the Masonic phenomenon as manifested in London in 1717 and

earlier generations, perhaps even with the famed medieval operative stonemasons (the

obvious originators in view of the rituals emphases on King Solomons Temple, construction

work and Working Tools) or even other, earlier originators. However, these writers tend toignore the real possibility that the field has been fully ploughed by now. They ignore, for

instance, the meticulous work done by two renowned Victorian historiographical projects that

are still on-going; employ armies of professional historians of various specialisms and are independent of any Masonic wishful-thinking and/or prejudices.

The Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts (HMC) was established in 1869 to enquire

and report on collections of MSS of value for the study of British history in private hands: i.e.,

its job was to locate and catalogue all British historical non-governmental records of all

subjects wherever situated and not in deposit in the Public Record Office. Since its inceptionit has published 239 volumes of its catalogue and created 41,000 unpublished catalogues as

well as 150,000 separate minor listings which together form the National Register of Archives.


5/50

It also maintains the Manorial Documents Register and ARCHON, the archives register for all

UK statutory depositories. The resulting enormous database is now available for on-line

searches. An enquiry on Freemasons was made by the present writer to reveal that there are

only 11 such deposits registered nationally apart from the annual returns required to be

made to the County Clerks of the Peace (under the Secret Societies Act of 1799 until 1967).All of these are small, none are earlier than 1794 and only one, the records of the short-lived

Scottish Lodge in Rome in the 1730's, remains in a private collection in Scotland.

The Victoria County Histories were started in 1899 and aimed at providing an encyclopaedic,

multi-volumed history of every English county and of their constituent cities, towns and

parishes. All of these volumes have been characterised by rigorous, original research. This

huge project enjoys, therefore, an international reputation as a standard work of reference for

English local history. So far 200+ volumes have been published. Each county set has

general volumes, that deal with administrative history, , local history and archaeology; topographical volumes, that deal with geography, geology and the detailed histories of

all of the settlements, churches, educational and charitable institutions.

No accumulated index is complied yet However, the present writer has checked each of the

county sets published to date and none of them have any references to pre-1717 Freemasonry

other than those well-known from elsewhere (e.g., Dr Robert Plots allusion in his Natural

History of Staffordshire, 1686).

Then there are the other distinguished associations, like the Camden, Dugdale and Surtees

Societies, which are dedicated to the authoritative transcription and publication of hitherto

unknown MSS of local historical value. Furthermore, almost very English county has at least

one society of enthusiastic scholars who publish their own local history transactions.

None of this remarkable, if slow, accumulation of original data has any trace of pre-1717

Freemasonry. If there are still any undetected MSS not in Masonic archives then they must be

very well hidden. It seems reasonable to say that it is unlikely that any family or county

archives in England will yield any more substantial traces of pre-1717 activities. If there had

been such MSS then they would have been revealed by now in these national trawls. Perhaps

it is time to draw a line under the historico-chronological approach to providing an answer

about ever earlier origins of speculative Freemasonry. Obviously, individual researchers will

continue to make genuine discoveries in the course of their work in archives, some of them

will be non-Masonic archives, but these will be of minor interest. It is probable now that nomajor archival findings relating generally to the nature of pre-1717 Freemasonry will be made.

Of course, one should never discount serendipity entirely but the chances of anything

substantial being discovered which would prove a direct, general connection between the

Masonic phenomenon and early Hermetic ventures of whatever nature seem to be slim indeed.

Consider the theory that speculative Freemasonry originated from the English medieval

stonemasons trade guilds. If that were so, then it would be crucial to support that proposition

by examining the nature of the earliest available evidence relating to those guilds activities.

The most relevant of this would be the so-called Old Charges, 113 of which have survived(though there are hints of 14 others that are now missing). Nearly two-thirds of them are pre-

1717; 55 are pre-1700; 4 dated from c. 1600; 1 is dated precisely Christmas Day 1583;another is dated c. 1400-140 and the earliest available comes from 1390. These MSS were

intended to regulate the operative stonemasons work and 25 of them are entitled


6/50

Constitution or Constitutions. Two others are bound in with the printed text of the 1723

book of Constitutions; four others were written out in Lodges Minute Books and another in a

Lodges register of members mason marks. Sometimes, as in the records of the Lodge at

Stirling, the Old Charges were hand written, mounted and then framed. There the Lodge

members believed that their meetings would not be legal unless the precious MS wasdisplayed in the room where they were meeting. Another MS, from Aberdeen, is entitled The

Mason Charter. In a Lodge in Bradford the members regarded their copy of the Old Charges

as the authority for them to confer the Degrees. Furthermore, as these MSS describe at least

some of the procedures that had to be followed when any man was made a mason and even

include small extracts of the prescribed ritual, it is clear that they were used in some way atLodges meetings as guides to the ceremonies. For example, one MS describes a meeting

which took place in Scarborough in 1705. Another, dated 1693 and from York, includes a listof the Lodge members. A third was written expressly on 16 October 1646 at Warrington for

the Initiation of the alchemist, antiquary, astrologer and Fellow of the Royal Society, EliasAshmole (1617-1692). Hence, it has been established fairly well that these very old MSS

provided the earliest freemasons with their ordinances and their Lodges with their authority,respectability and (partial) ritual).

One important feature of them all is the remarkable degree of their uniformity of content and

expression. They all say the same things in more or less the same ways. The only possible

explanation for this consistency is that they are all related and are descended from an ur-text

that is now lost but which was evidently edited and revised many times and recopied

hundreds of times in the period 1390-1717 all over England and Scotland. Those that have

survived represent only a small proportion of these copies

The MSS seem to be prima facie evidence of the descent of the speculative Freemasonry

(which began to emerge in the latter half of the 17thcentury in England) from the medievaloperative stonemasons trade guilds with their craft secrets, traditions and doctrines.

However, careful examination of their contents for possible Hermetic features has revealed nosuch characteristics. In summary form the running order of their content is as follows:

An invocation to the Holy Trinity; Announcements as to the purpose and the contents; A brief description of the Seven Liberal Sciences Geometry being regarded as

synonymous with Masonry;

A proof of the fundamental nature of Geometry;

An extended traditional history of Geometry, Masonry and Architecture based whollyon the Bible;

The method of taking the masons oath; An admonition to remain true to that oath; Some detailed regulations regarding the masons trade and personal conduct and A concluding obligation to remain true to the oath.

Remember, these are not public documents but were carefully kept from the eyes of non-

masons. The phenomenon exhibited in the Old Charges is patently quite different from that

which emerged in London in 1717. For one thing, there were no hermetic doctrines cherished

among medieval operative stonemasons. This is confirmed by the overwhelming body of

other documentary evidence that has been drawn from other sources by architecturalhistorians. Apart from the analyses of the massive amounts of material on the activities of

some 2000+ Gothic architects and stonemasons post-1200 AD (which includes their carefully


7/50

drafted building contracts), there are at least 400 medieval architectural compendia, or

treatises, on building techniques written by Master Masons. These began as small personal

notebooks. Some ended eventually as published booklets and others were annotated and

enlarged by later operative stonemasons. Many were reworked entirely by their authors in

order to formulate definitive statements of their working practices and the underlyingprinciples which they tried to apply in their daily work. Generally, these are infinitely more

personal, tentative and experimental. They are repositories of the then existing practices and

theorems and, since we can also detect architectural ideas and stylistic changes as they were

formulated, they are also intimate reflections of the actual creative process. As such they

served several related purposes:

to accumulate theoretical and practical data; to create a file of designs and techniques to educate younger stonemasons; to establish a base for discussion with peers and patrons; to function as a kind of licence testifying to their compilers knowledge an skill as

masons as well as attesting to their range of interests, breadth of travelling and theintensity of their aesthetic vision;

to prepare the accumulated wisdom for eventual publication and to systematise the data for use by their successors.

Perhaps the most comprehensive of these useful didactic MSS is that compiled by the famous

French Master Mason, Villard de Honnecourt (c.1175-1240) during the period c. 1215-1233.

Even though his notebook reveals that he lacked original and creative design talent and that he

was probably never given a major architectural commission, nevertheless it shows that his

was a lively, versatile mind, delighting in machinery and gadgets. He emerges as a MasterCraftsman, an intellectual with a keen sense of observation and a strong sense of his own role

in posterity. Yet nowhere in Villards famous notebook nor in any of the extant writings of hisEuropean contemporaries (e.g., Jean de Liege, Hugues Libergier and Pierre de Monteuil) is

there any Hermetic content. Much has been made, for instance, of the silver-point drawing ofan adult clothed male figure (in f. 37) asserting that Villard must have been pondering the

human form as a perfect harmonious piece of Gods handiwork a sort of Vitruvian Man

thereby revealing himself to have been entertaining some appreciation of Hermetic cosmology.

The truth is, however, more prosaic. His figural sketches (of which this was one) display a

considerable lack of manual skill in their execution. Thus was why, to assist his making of

these drawings, he used the technique of a mixture of solid and dotted lines to ensure that he

got the proportions correct. This is confirmed by his own note (in f. 36) which alludes to this

well-known and widely practised technique used by apprentice artists and employing thediscipline of geometry por legierement ovrer (= to facilitate the work). There are similar

geometric schemes imposed in his sketches of anila figures copied from a Bestiary (similar

to that in the Bodleian Library ref. Ashmole MS 1511) but even the pentagrams included in

his sketch of the heraldic eagle or the one used in his sketch of the two trumpeters seem

gratutitous. It is clear from Francois Buchers close analysis of the notebook that, though

Villard understood the tenents of Gothic architectural theory which were codified andgeneralised only after his death, the philosophical basis of the Gothic style of architecture

(e.g., the theory of light of Dionysis the Areopagite) did not interest him nor didnumerological details hold any fascination for him.

What is important, of course, is that Villard was the norm for his profession. A series ofacademic studies, dating from the late 19

th century to the present day, has shown that the

socially prominent and wealthy Master Masons were well-educated, powerful men in their


8/50


9/50

AN ALTERNATIVE THEMATIC MODEL OF THE WESTERN HERMETIC TRADITION

PART II

Viewed thematically, as an alternative, the western Hermetic tradition, or philosophia

perennis, can be conceptualised alternatively in a useful thematic model with seven

fundamental components.

CorrespondencesEquivalences are assumed to exist and to operate among all of the constituent parts of

the universe. This is manifested in the notions of the macrocosm (above) and the

microcosm (below) and the associated ideas of

a. universal inter-dependenceb. inner and outer realms of the cosmos as a Divine ensemble of hieroglyphs andc. Mans mission to decipher them.

Phenomenalism and MagiaNature is conceived as a living entity which can be read as a text that is permeated

throughout by an interior, hidden and circulating fire, or magia, which (in turn) is

comprised of

1. the overt activities by which we are informed of that knowledge.2. a knowledge of the subtle network of sympathies and antipathies that unifies it and

humanity and

Imagination and MediationsThese are inter-connected and complementary concepts. The former, one of Mans

range of capabilities, allows him free access to various levels of reality. The latter

include rituals, symbols. Images, numbers and mandalas etc., which develop

1. our knowledge of Natures hieroglyphs and2. our understanding of the inter-active relationship between God, the cosmos and

humanity.

TransmutationA sort of alchemical process, this is the modification of Mans being so that an

individual, enlightened by gnosis, is changed qualitatively, or given a second birth,moving inexorably towards Mans Divinely ordained fulfilment and thereby

ameliorating the destruction engendered by his primeval Fall.

ConcordanceThis is manifested by two syncretistic assumptions or tendencies:

1. that there are discernible common denominators between the different religio-philosophical traditions and

(b) that there is an underlying primordial tradition that permeates all of those traditions.

TransmissionIn order to be valid, gnosis must be transmitted from one individual to another in

initiatory affiliations that have unimpeachable authenticity or regularity,


10/50

enlightenment being seen as something that is bestowed, inherited or handed on in a

legitimate and legitimising sequence.

Secrecy and OpacityAccess to gnosis is seen as something too precious to be disseminated widely, for to

do so would debase its potentiality and its potency. Hence, gnosis is restricted to self-selecting, numerically small elites and hidden carefully by contrived obsfucation.

If this model is used to determine whether and how far speculative Freemasonry synchronises

into the western Hermetic tradition, we have to begin by examining the content of the current

basic Masonic rituals that have been inherited from previous generations. There isprima facieevidence therein that Freemasonry does mesh in quite neatly. As far as the Correspondence

component is concerned then there are close parallels drawn between the nature, formation

and operation of the Lodge (qua microcosm) and the universe (qua macrocosm). With regard

to the second component, Phenomalism and Magia, in the Second Degree, for instance, thebasic task for the freemason is to decipher the hidden mysteries of nature and science. The

whole of the rituals themselves - and more particularly the repeated emphases therein on thesymbolic use to be made of Working Tools by the freemason would seem to be the

Mediation element mentioned in the model. As far as the Transmutation component isconcerned then there is a potent image in the Lodge rooms that of the spiritual development

of the freemason symbolised by the progress from the Rough Ashlar to the Smooth Ashlar.

Speculative Freemasonry does not espouse any particular creed but is founded on that

religion on which all men do agree and so it parallels the Concordance element of the

model. As far as the Transmission component is concerned, then of course Freemasonry is

initiatory with the secrets being confided by a Master to newcomers. More details of this will

be given later. Finally, the Secrecy and Opacity features are to be found in plentiful supply

in Freemasonry. For instance, great stress is placed on the former in the Obligations which all

members are required to take at various stages and which they are expected not to violate by

betraying secrets to non-members. More will be said about the intentional Opacity of

Masonic imagery later.

However, Freemasonrys claim to have a legitimate place within the western Hermetic

tradition requires much more careful analysis. This paper concentrates first on the English

tradition with which the present writer has been acquainted for the past 25 years and then it

will refer to other European traditions with he is also familiar.


11/50

MASONIC INITIATION IN THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING WORLD

PART III

If you were to ask English-speaking freemasons what they think is meant by MasonicInitiation most of them would reply without much hesitation: Oh, thats the First Degree!

However, I want to disabuse you of that mistaken view. It is too limited and too limiting. I

want to establish my own position immediately by claiming that Masonic Initiation within the

English-speaking tradition, when fully conceptualised as a lived-through experience one

that may be Hermetic - is much more than merely going through the First Degree ceremony

and I would like to make three basic points which I think are important to grasp before going

any further. These points are inter-related and help to set out the claim that speculative

Freemasonry does have some Hermetic features. They may not be very obvious, even to the

experienced freemasons, for they are hidden quite discretely. On their basis, however, even

though they are largely neglected now in the English-speaking Lodges, it may be possible to

say that speculative Freemasonry does have a place in the western Hermetic tradition. Mythree initial points are as follows.

Masonic Initiation involves all of the participants (including the Candidates) in ceremonial,ritualistic, highly stylised behaviour that can hardly be called normal by the standards

everyday life and that requires them to perform certain movements, enunciate certain words,perform and listen to long speeches that are couched in language which must seem poetic

and/or heightened and even curiously dated all of which is hardly the behaviour that theymeet and use in the world outside of the Lodge rooms.

Masonic Initiation is designed to have a quickening, vitalising and regenerative effect oninitiates.

Perhaps more importantly that either of these points, Masonic Initiation is a process, one thatis prolonged and possibly unending; a lived-through evolution towards eventualenlightenment that requires sustained effort and commitment on the part of all of its members.

The significance of these three basic points become clearer if we consider one of the crucial

responses which a newly-made freemason has to give in response to his Masters question asa test before he can be passed to the Second Degree. Interestingly and significantly, it was one

of the first pieces of Craft ritual that freemasons are required to commit to memory. Yet it isone that most Brethren do not take the trouble to understand fully because no one takes the

trouble to explain it when they make their first moves into speculative Freemasonry. It is

packed with meaning and I want to deconstruct some of that meaning now.

The Master enquires of the Candidate for the Second Degree: What is Freemasonry? and

the reply he is expected to give is: A peculiar system of morality, veiled in allegory and

illustrated by symbols. Each of the component words was intended to have important

resonances but what are we to make of them?

Peculiar

This word immediately gives a potent clue that Freemasonry is something special and,

therefore, not of this world. The Candidate is being exposed in the ceremony to somethinghitherto unknown to him in his ordinary life in the profane world outside of the Lodge room;

something which, if he practises it fully and faithfully, will help to separate him (at leastpartly) from that life, making him peculiar by taking him beyond ordinary concerns and

beginning something entirely new for him.


12/50

Morality

This word should focus attention immediately on the grand intent of Freemasonry theinculcation of ethical principles. I suspect that the original founders in the latter part of the

17thcentury and the early part of the 18

thwere aiming at a general reformation of humanity by

beginning with the moral reformation/regeneration of individuals who became voluntarily

members of the Order. This is why there are scattered throughout the basic Craft rituals agood deal of utopian optimism, universal harmony being seen as something attainable though

consistent square conduct, strict morals and upright intentions of individuals.

Freemasons are taught that in order for a man to be received into membership of a MasonicLodge, he must be a fit and proper person to be even considered for reception.

They are taught also that in order for be a fit and proper person, a man must be of matureage, sound judgement and strict morals.

Therefore, since a Candidate for admission must have manifested a high ethical standard

already, it follows that the further instruction which he receives at our hands within ourLodges after his admission must be something above and beyond mere ordinary ethical

standard which he had acquired already in the profane world.

Veiled

This word hints at another important idea. The truths contained within speculativeFreemasonry are not obvious. It may be that they are obscured deliberately and that

Candidates must make strenuous and continuous effort to try to come to a level ofunderstanding that satisfies them. They become involved in a metaphorical pilgrimage

through such obscurities in a struggle that educates and, therefore, improves them spiritually.

This theme of veiling is brought home dramatically, of course, during the Excellent MastersDegree, the so-called Passing of the Veils. This ceremony is known under various names:

Excellent Master (as now in Scotland, Ireland, Bristol, throughout the USA, parts of Canadaand in parts of Australia);

Super Excellent Master and High Excellent Master Mason.

In spite of its strong emphasis on the interpretation of Old Testament readings, the ritual was

probably of Christian origins and formed an integral part of the Royal Arch Masonic

ceremonies from the late 18th century onwards throughout England. After 1817, with the

founding of the present Supreme Grand Chapter, the subsequent de-Christianization of thatritual and a drastic revision of it in 1835, this quaint ceremony disappeared. Finally, the Veils

ceremony became extinct in England by the end of the 19thcentury. Even in Bristol, where it

is still practised, it is as a recent revival rather than as an idiosyncratic survival.

A Lodge of Excellent Masters represents a body of the old stonemasons assembled at Babylon

who were the descendants of the exiled Israelites. The rite is referred to throughout as theDegree of Cryus in allusion to the King of Babylon who relented and allowed the captives to

return to their native country to rebuild the destroyed Temple of king Solomon. The Lodge is

presided over by three principal officers and by three Captains of the Veils. The room is

divided into separate compartments by four coloured veils suspended across the rooms

breadth and ranged in the following sequence from the west: blue, purple, scarlet and white.The ritual informs the Candidate later that the blue veil is emblematic of friendship; the purple

one represents union and the scarlet one is the emblem of fervency and zeal. The white veil,


13/50

nearest to the eastern end of the room, is emblematic of purity and it conceals the Grand

Sanhedrin, who are seated there in silence. Those qualities (friendship, union, fervency and

purity) are presumably all qualities which are to be desired by freemasons. There is a

parallelism (unspoken) between those colours of the veils and those of the robes worn by the

three presiding officers.

In some of the early versions of this ceremony (mostly English ones) there were only three

veils but in at least one ancient Jewish source (Josephus Antiquities), the veil of the Temple

was composed of four colours: fine white linen (to signify the earth, from which grew the

flax that produced it); purple (to signify waterbecause that precious colour was derived from

the blood of a rare shellfish); blue (which signified air) and scarlet (which signified fire). The

ritual of the Excellent Master Degree, however, gives other interpretations to the Candidate at

a later stage.

Rather than pursue any such alchemical interpretations, over which a considerable amount of

time has been expended by Masonic scholars in the past, I can offer a series of collectiveinterpretations. Viewed together, as an integrated part of the whole ceremony, the passage of

the Candidate through the veils can be taken to represent his own gradual enlightenment as he

progresses through Freemasonry. Some many even see these veils as metaphors for the veil in

the Temple that was torn asunder at the moment of Christs death itself the supreme

moment of Mans enlightenment. Others can see the veils as an emblem of Christ Himself as

He hung of the Altar of the Cross. Whichever interpretation is preferred, the crucial thing

about the veils in this Masonic ceremony is that they are intended to have a profound spiritual

meaning for the Candidate as he progresses forward to the sanctuary of enlightenment.

Each of the first three veils is guarded by a Captain who carried a standard that is coloured

like his veil. Symbolically, these Captains prevent any unqualified person from passing

through towards the final white veil and what it conceals. The Captains each reveal a different

Sign, Grip or Token and Word in succession. These are entrustings and are preceded byappropriate readings from the Old Testament. After each Scripture reading the respective

Captain provides his explanatory gloss which educates the Candidate with the significanceof the Sign, Grip and Word of his veil. The Candidate has to remember each set of

instructions for when he comes to the next veil, he has to prove himself to that Captain in thecompetence and knowledge that he has achieved so far. So there are nine items to be

remembered in the correct sequence before he can be entrusted by the presiding officer with

the final Sign, Grip or Token and Word that will enable him to gain admission into the final

part of the ceremony. In a short Lecture that follows he is informed of the followinginterpretations:

the veils allude to those veils in the Mosaic Tabernacle erected in the desert; his passage through them is emblematic of the Israelites wanderings towards their Promised

Land;

his passage through the veils is also meant to represent the pilgrimage of a captive Hebrewwho eagerly avails himself of the opportunity presented by Cyrus to return to his ancestral

homeland in order to complete a sacred task of reconstruction.

Anyway, it is without question that one of the basic features of all Hermetic traditions is this

theme of veiling; that secrets are carefully hidden hidden from those who are not initiates

and even from those who are members but who, as yet, are not properly qualified to share inthem. All Hermetic traditions that I know of are multi-gradal in this sense with their occult

insights being revealed slowly to zealous initiates as they progress upwards through a series


14/50

of structured ceremonies towards full enlightenment. This theme of veiling is mirrored also

in the blindfolding of initiates which occurs, of course, in Freemasonry too though then it may

also refer to the Candidates own ignorance being subject to darkness (i.e., absence of light)

and the removal of the blindfold is meant to represent to him the emergence into the light of

membership, of belonging.

Allegories

Most people today have not been educated to think allegorically. In the late 17th

century and

through the 18thcentury, when the foundations of the ritual that we have inherited were being

laid down, young people were schooled then to make them familiar with many of theconventional classical myths and with the imagery, of various levels of complexity, contained

therein. The subtleties of this conceptual framework are seen most easily and

comprehensively in the visual arts of the period. In the early 18th century the following

examples were still in common currency:

the image of a laurel bush would be have been interpreted readily as a reference to the godApollo or Helios;

vines leaves would have been seen as an allusion to the god Bacchus or Dionysius; a lion skin would have meant Hercules or Heracles; the image of a caduceus would have been taken as a reference to the god Mercury or Hermes; porcelain figurines carrying a bunch of flowers, a sheaf of corn, a bunch of grapes or a flaming

brazier would have been seen as references to the four seasons respectively Spring, Summer,

Autumn and Winter.

Now the chief allegory with which speculative Freemasonry is concerned is that of temple-

building and, although many images of actual building operations are borrowed in the rituals,speculative freemasons are really concerned with a life-long task of erecting a spiritual temple

not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. Moreover, from an individual members point

of view, each is involved and committed to the careful preparation of just one stone for its

particular place in that temple and that stone is his personality. Thus the unperfected

personality of the new member (when he first enters our Lodge rooms) is represented by the

Rough Ashlar taken unworked from the quarry. It has all of the obvious qualities of a rough

stone: durability, dependability, permanence, strength etc., but is of little use to be fitted

together with the other stones destined for the temple. The individual craftsman has to work,

during his Masonic career, in polishing that Rough stone by knocking off the superfluities,

very much as an apprentice stonemason would knock off the roughnesses of the ashlars using

his primitive working tools on the building site. The resulting smooth ashlar is the same stone,but without all of the obvious defects that would have prevented it being placed exactly

against or along side the other stones thus to form the temple wall. From something with merepotential he has become rendered by his own efforts into something that is actually useful.

Thus, the initiate is not really a passive recipient of mysteries but is an active agent who isrequired to interact with the principles and to make something else from them in the secret

recesses of his own heart.

Symbols

Symbols were attractive to the ritual compilers of the early 18th

century because of their sheer

carrying power. Furthermore, they can operate simultaneously at many levels and are capableof multiple interpretations. This may be a quasi-ambiguity and, if so, certainly is one that

would accord with Hermetic traditions where inherent ambiguity smacks of deliberate


15/50

obfuscation for, traditionally, Truth must remain hidden to all who are, as yet, not insightful.

The universality of symbols must have proved very attractive to the founding fathers of

speculative Freemasonry because of the then prevailing aim at pan-humanity amelioration and

ethical improvement. It was manifested for them then also in the wide-ranging popular

schemes for universal languages at that time. Moreover, there were plenty of symbols whichwere readily available and which provided them with a ready-made framework of reference.

They had no need to re-invent the wheel. Besides, symbols also encrypt meanings and this

would certainly have appealed to the prevailing fashion for codes and secrecy which was one

of the literary bi-products of the political and religious turmoil of the Carolingian era.

Certainly the founders of speculative Freemasonry developed a whole range of symbols and

did not hesitate to extrapolate on their possible practical applications in ethics. Most of these

symbols have pre-eminently practical applications and that fact is significant in view of the

prevailing pragmatism and experimentation of the age. There are several groups of suchsymbols which they found ideally suited to of their purposes.

They made a great deal of use of mathematical symbols (e.g., circles and numbers)which are, of course, universal and hence present no barriers linguistically. They deal

with concepts of quantification, exactitude and measurement, which were then

conceived as being applicable to ethics. They hint at a kind of mathematical

harmony in the universe and hence to the myth of a Pythagorean origin for

speculative Freemasonry. They are also very much in accord with the then prevailing

Newtonianism.

One interesting side-light on this structural importance accorded to numbers, with their

Kaballistic meanings, is the re-structuring of the Lectures associated with each of the basic

Degrees which took place after 1813 under the 30-year rule of HRH The Duke of Sussex

(1773-1843) as Grand Master. Sussex was known to have a sustained interest in the Kaballah

and owned several books on the subject. Prior to this revision the Lectures had been printedwithout any subdivisions. It may be significant that in the new versions the Lecture on the

First Degree was to have seven sections; that for the Second Degree was to have five and thatfor the Third Degree had to have three sections. But such refinements pale into insignificance

when the general character of English Freemasonry during Sussexs rule becameprogressively anti-intellectualist and even anti-Hermetic. This was not due wholly to Sussexs

influence because there were demographic factors that militated against any development or

even continuation of any initial Heremetic tendencies. One of these demographic factors was,

of course, that the members came almost totally from the expanding middle and professionalclasses with their inherent bourgeois mentality and a suspicion of anything that smacked of a

philosophical approach to life and particularly to spare time activities.

In connection with the use which they made of mathematical symbols it is worthwhilementioning the adoption of one geometrical symbol in particular the so-called

Pythagoras Theorem which was incorporated into the design of the English PMs

jewel. The background to its inclusion is rather involved. The frontispieces in the 1723

and the 1738 editions of the Constitutions both depict a classical arcade. In the

foreground stand two noble Grand Masters each accompanied with servants. On the

ground between the two principle figures is shown a diagram of the 47 thproposition

with the Greek word Eureka. Anderson thought at the time that this was aexclamation by Pythagoras when he discovered the Proposition and declared it to be

the Foundation of all Masonry, sacred, civil and military. Actually, of course,


16/50

Anderson was wrong on two counts. The Proposition is more correctly Euclids and

Eureka was Archimedes exclamation in connection with quite a different scientific

discovery. Nevertheless, he reinforced the claim about this Proposition by adding the

following passage in the greatly augmented 1738 edition:

Pythagoras became not only the Head of a new religion of Patch Work but likewise of an

Academy or Lodge of good Geoemetricians to whom he communicated a secret, viz. That

amazing Proposition which is the Foundation of all Masonry, of whatever Materials or

Dimensions, called by Masons his HEUREKA; because They think it was his own Invention.

This was an assumption which he was to propose quite explicitly in his Defence of Masonry(1730) when he wrote:

I am fully convinced that Freemasonry is very nearly allied to the old Pythagorean Discipline

from whence, I am persuaded, it may in some circumstances very justly claim a descent.

It is difficult to establish now where Anderson got this curious idea from because, apart froma single reference to Pythagoras in the Cooke MS (one of the oldest surviving Old Charges

dating from c. 1490), there are no other references to him in any of the other Old Charges.

One can only assume that because ancient Greece was the home of geometry and geometry

was obviously the basis of all architecture and freemasons were traditionally assumed then to

be the inheritors of the skills and traditions of the medieval operative stonemasons, that

speculative Freemasonry was taken to be based on teachings derived from classical

mathematicians such as Pythagoras. This was not a very widely held assumption, however.

For example, Dr Francis Drake MD, FRS (1695-1770), in his speech to the Grand Lodge of

York (1726) only refers to Pythagoras in connection with Euclid and Archimedes as great

proficients in geometry and not as a founder of Freemasonry. Martin Clare (d. 1751) does not

even mention Pythagoras name in his lecture The Advantages Enjoyed by the Fraternity

(1735). TheDiscourse Upon Masonry (1742) contains no such reference either. Rev. Charles

Brockwell published hisLecture on the Connection between Freemasonry and Religion (1747)

and that makes no such reference.

It was only in the early 1750's that references to Pythagoras as a major figure in the history of

Freemasonry began to appear in the various MS editions of the Lectures associated with the

three Degrees. The idea of him being a founder gained significance with the publication of the

now infamous forgery, the Locke-Lelande MS, in the Gentlemans Magazine in 1753. That

spurious medieval document claimed that

Peter Gower [i.e., Pythagoras] a Grecian journeyedde ffor kunnynge yn Egypt and in Syria

and in everyche Londe wherat the Venetians [i.e., Phoenicians] hadde planntedde Maconrye

and wynnynge Entraunce yn al Lodges of Maconnes, he lerned muche, and retournedde and

woned [i.e., lived] yn Grecia Magna wachsynge [i.e., growing] and becommyne a myghtye

wyseacre [i.e., philosopher] and gratelyche renouned and he framed a grate Lodge at Groton

[i.e., Crotona in southern Italy] and maked many Maconnes, some whereoffe dyd journeye yn

Fraunce, and maked manye Maconnes wherefromme, yn processe of Tyme, the Arte passed

yn Englelonde.

The story was accepted unquestioningly by most major Masonic writers thereafter but hassince been shown to be an 18thcentury forgery, the purpose of which may have been to lend

some historical respectability (via Pythagoras) and academic respectability (via the John


17/50

Locke association) to the Masonic phenomenon. Such general acceptance of the Pythagoras

connection within Lodges working practices is shown, for example, by the inclusion of the

47thProposition design within some of the early 19

th century Tracing Boards. It was also a

measure of its general acceptance that it was incorporated into the design of the title pages of

semi-official publications like Smiths Pocket Companion (from 1735 onwards) and theanonymousMulta Paucis for Lovers of Secrets (c. 1764).

As far as Past Masters jewels in the 18thcentury were concerned, there was no official rule

for the design. Indeed, the English exposures of the 1760's specify other designs. Moreover,

there are many portraits of famous freemasons then who were Past Masters of Lodges which

show them wearing jewels of quite different designs although they did not have any official

approval by the Premier Grand Lodge. Even within the newly created UGLE there does not

appear to have been any opinion in favour of the use of the symbol. For instance, the Minutes

of the Quarterly Communication held on 2 May 1814 laid down

that the following Masonic clothing and insignia be worn by the Craft and that no other bepermitted in the Grand Lodge or any subordinate Lodge Jewels Past Masters The

Square within a Quadrant.

And yet within 19 months, on the publication of the 1815 edition of theBook of Constitutions

(the first to be issued by the UGLE) things had changed: the Square and Quadrant design

had been abandoned and the present 47th

Proposition design had been adopted. No reasons

were given and Masonic historians have been unable to find any. It is possible, however, that

when the Square and Quadrant design became part of the new jewel for the Grand Master

and Past Grand Masters (a distinction which has since been extended to other high officers)

then something else had to be found to distinguish less important Brethren.

Yet why was this geometric Pythagorean symbol adopted by the UGLE for the Past

Masters jewel rather than any other? Possibly Andersons assumption was by then almost

100 years old and had acquired sufficient respectability as not to be questioned. But if the old

operative stonemasons had used it they did so no more than purely as a pragmatic solutionformulated over generations by similar craftsmen who need some quick method of checking

the existing angles of their stone buildings rather than as a practical method of setting outright angles on the sites to start the construction of those buildings. There was probably

nothing esoteric in their use of the 47thProposition on the building sites.

Builders tools squares, levels, plumb-rules, compasses were also adopted by thefounders of speculative Freemasonry. All of these hint at the other potent myth of the

possible origin of Freemasonry in the medieval operative stonemasons yards and

hence, for 18thcentury minds, at its probable antiquity and hence at its respectability.

Moreover, the builders tools allude to the manipulation of matter (a traditional

alchemical process surely) and, by extension, to ethics - to the structuring of moralityon a grand scale.

Two kinds of perambulatory symbols were incorporated subtly and the 18 thcenturyprogressed and the Lodges acquired their own rooms. There are circular movements

and movements forward in straight lines.

The movements around the chambers were devised to represent the peregrination motif, or thequest. These circular movements are usually, but not always, made in a clockwise direction.

They betoken a Candidates wandering in search of enlightenment. Some of the obvious


18/50

examples of these circular movements would be those taken in

1. the Royal Arch Exaltation;2. the final pilgrimage alone carrying the skull and lighted candle during the Knights

Templar Installation;3. the August Order of Light ceremonies;4. the opening part of the Admission into Royal Order of Scotland (done, interestingly,

widdershins = anti-clockwise) and

5. the Royal Master Degree around the symbolic Ark of the Covenant in the cave belowthe Temple.

The other movements, or steps forward in straight lines in various guises, were adopted to

indicate direct or undeviating progress towards of enlightenment. Some of the obvious

examples of these are:

1. the steps the steps taken forward towards the Altar by the Candidate in each of thethree basic

Craft Degrees (as he is taught how to approach the east = source of enlightenment)

immediately before taking his Obligations;

2. the steps taken in the Zelator Grade of the Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia up the lineof Ancients who are seated in a straight line facing east and each represents one of

the four primary elements - earth, water, air and fire - (the Candidate ascendingtherefore symbolically through from the basic (earth) to the highest (fire).

One clearly Hermetic symbol is associated with the circular perambulations in theEnglish Royal Arch ceremony which began to feature in the early decades of the 18

th

century in England. That is the zodiac, an image of remarkable potency. Of course, the

zodiac still forms a key component in the Scottish Royal Arch ceremonial (forexample around the architraves of the subterranean vaults of which there are at least

12 full-sized ones in use even today; in the design of the two Great Crimson andGreen Banners and in the design of the members jewels. Zodiacs are also used in in

the ceiling designs in at least 13 English masonic halls. This is very much in

accordance with the well-documented European tradition of ceiling decoration in large

public and private buildings dating from classical times. Perhaps its widespread use in

masonic premises indicates a continuing pre-occupation with the concept of a well-established, harmonious cosmic order and the cyclic movement of time. There was

also a tendency in the decoration of large public buildings from the Renaissance

onwards towards systematic illustration of a compendious order manifested between a

persistent inter-relationship between ceilings and floor decorations. Thus, there are

many 19th century examples of the zodiacs projected on to the floors of Masonic

temples using the design in specially woven carpets.

We can see this transfer from ceiling to floor in the spectacular decoration of the Grand Lodge

Hall itself. The first hall was opened in 1776 roughly near the present site in Great Queen

Street in London. A contemporary freemason, Capt. George Smith, described it in the

following enthusiastic terms:

The roof of this magnificent Hall is in all probability the highest finished piece of


19/50

workmanship in Europe, having gained universal applause from all beholders, and has raised

the character of the architect (Richard Cox) beyond expression. In the center (sic) of this roof

a most splendid sun is represented in burnished gold, surrounded by the twelve signs of the

Zodiac with their respective characters The emblematic meaning of the sun is well known

to the enlightened and inquisitive Freemason the scientific free-mason only knows thereason why the sun is thus placed in the center of this beautiful Hall.

The second Hall was designed in 1869 and the zodiacal ceiling was replaced a huge black and

white squared carpet with a central circular design depicting the Square and Compasses

symbol surrounded by the zodiacal sigils in roundels. The third and present Hall was

furbished in the late 1930s and once again the zodiac sigils were placed around the ceiling.

This transfer of the zodiacs from ceilings to floors may have been done not just because it was

somewhat less expensive. The incorporation of the zodiacs into the carpet design may have

helped intentionally to lend essential significance to the Royal Arch ceremony. The Altars are

located centrally in that rite and therefore within the circular zodiacal design where thoseparticular carpets are in use. The Candidates are led around the Altars several times

throughout the ceremony thus tracing a circular route around the zodiac. If they are engaged

symbolically on their quest towards enlightenment then their actual movements could be

interpreted as their voyaging across the universe (represented by the zodiacal sigils) towards

that light. Certainly, it was this that the mid-19 thcentury devisers of the rituals of the obscure

August Order of Light had in mind for the Candidates circular perambulations which form a

distinctive part of those ceremonies.

The earliest English reference to the zodiacal sigils in relation to Freemasonry is to be found

in the Minutes of the Quarterly Communication of the Premier Grand Lodge held on 26

November 1728. On that occasion the Grand Master pro tem proposed the revival of the

custom of having Stewards to organise the Annual Festivals. The record states:

The Health of the twelve stewards was proposed and drunk with twelve alluding to the twelve

Signes of the Zodiack as well to their Number

While there is very little English evidence that the zodiacal signs were included specifically in

masonic ceremonies, several widely-used publications, dating from the later half of the 18th

century do contain direct references to them and the zodiac signs were used in De Lintots

Rite of Seven Degrees (by the short-lived Lodge of Perfect Observance under William

Prestons schismatic Grand Lodge South of the River Trent in the late 1770's). The finalDegree of that series - the Scottish Heredom - used the sigils in a circular configuration.

In some of the oldest Lodges in North Carolina take their origins from the Premier Grand

Lodge. The zodiacal symbols still appear in their Third Degree ritual which has been

preserved since the 1770's. At a certain point in the ceremony a long, broad strip of white

canvas cloth is laid on the floor along the north, west and south sides of the room. These strips

have the 12 signs painted on them and 12 volunteer Brethren stand on them, one at each of

the signs. Each makes learned responses in rotation in answer to catechismical questions

addressed by the Master. If the 12 signs collectively represent the universe and each Brotherresponding to the interrogation represents his zodiacal sign and the Master represents King

Solomon, then this ritual could be interpreted as enacting the universe answering Solomonsquest for wisdom.


20/50

A parallel tradition was preserved within the Wooler ritual which was worked in parts of

Northumberland even as late as the 1820's. It contains an extended Zodiacal Lecture in which

each sigil is associated with a corresponding legend in classical mythology. Its continued use

until the third decade of the 19thcentury suggests at least a residue of a former pre-occupation

with the zodiac signs among northern speculative Freemasons.

In France, however, the signs of the zodiac were used in ritual preserved in a MS that forms

part of a collection of 81 Degrees of Hermetic Masonry amassed by Jean Eustache Peuvert

(d. 1800), a member of the Grand Orient de France. Among the MSS contained in these six

quarto volumes are the texts of 12 zodiacal Degrees that had been worked by the Metropolitan

Chapter of France in Paris during the latter half of the 18thcentury before the Revolution.

The founding fathers of speculative Freemasonry used the geometry of Lodge roomsin several symbolic ways. Originally Masonic Lodges met in the upper rooms of

taverns and coffee houses. Even the Premier Grand Lodge itself did not own any

permanent premises until 1767. It was only when the Lodges began to acquire theirown premises in the latter part of the 18thcentury that they were able to set out their

furniture and equipment more or less permanently. These private premises certainly

helped to reinforce a key aspect of the Hermetic tradition: separatedness and

exclusivity. Furthermore, the rooms became defining spaces in which the members

were able to enact their espoused utopianism. In that sense they functioned as working

laboratories in which the very architectural layout became a constant symbol.

The rooms were nearly always constructed in the dramatically simple form of a double cube

in allusion to the altars that were in the Tabernacle and Temple. The principal officers, Master,

Senior and Junior Wardens, were to be seated (as they are now) in the east, west and south

respectively. If a straight line were to be drawn from the Master, to the Junior Warden and

then extended to the Senior Warden, an exact right angle would be constructed. That figure

represented conveniently a stonemasons square, a working implement that was alluderepeatedly in the ritual to the ethical dimensions of a freemasons daily conduct (the emphasis

being on his practising square conduct in all of his dealings with other folk). The fact that itis the three principal officers of any Lodge which could construct this basic ethical

geometrical figure by their actual locations in respect to each other within the Lodge roomsshould not be without significance to the ordinary members while watching the performances

of the ceremonies. If a line were to be drawn to represent the route of the Candidates circular

perambulations around the rooms is added to the square and triangle figures, then the result is

surely the traditional Vitruvian figure. Hence, the square Lodge room, the triangular locationof the principal officers and the Candidates circular perambulations together compose that

wonderful Vitruvian glyph which represents so much of what Renaissance men conceived

as Mans place in the universe.

But most of this remains hidden to most English speculative freemasons because symbols and

emblems are problematic for most modern minds. Most native English-speaking people tend

now not to think or be educated in symbolic and emblematic thinking so most initiates find

the requirement to conceptualise using abstract symbols somewhat daunting. But that was not

the case when the foundations of speculative Freemasonry were being laid in the early years

of the 18th century in London. Education people were used to thinking emblematically and

symbolically. For instance, it was assumed that by beginning of the 18th

century theRenaissance tradition of printing emblem books had begun to decline generally but more

recent research has shown that the printing of them did not die out post-1700. There were


21/50

about 150-250 editions and re-issues of emblem books with English texts printed from 1680

to 1750 and there were at least 20 different titles in the first two decades of the 18 thcentury.

The fact that there were only 30 or so original titles published in England in the previous 50

years would seem to suggest that there was a sustained public appetite for emblems and

symbols and for the imaginative interpretation of them.

Modern minds may cope very adequately with hosts of symbols very day in the profane world

(e.g., when travelling along a road, either as a driver, a passenger or a pedestrian) but in the

present Masonic ceremonies there are many visual and verbal symbols which the Candidate

will have to understand. He is given some brief instruction during the actual ceremony and

since that instruction is quite properly withheld from those who are not members of the Lodge

(i.e., from those who might be called the profane), then it might be called esoteric.

However, interpretation of symbols is not so much a matter of intellectual study as a matter of

life and applied experience. It is quite possible, therefore, that in any Lodge meeting duringthe enactment of one of the Craft ceremonies, one member has acquired such experience of

life that has given him a better understanding of the particular symbols, while another sittingnext to him lacks both that depth or intensity of experience and the resultant level of

understanding. The former has acquired knowledge that is truly esoteric not that it iswithheld from the latter but because it is, as yet, beyond his grasp until he has had comparable

experience of life that will eventually bring a similar enlightenment to him. When an initiate

is informed that there are several Degrees in Freemasonry, with peculiar secrets restricted to

each, this is itself a symbol of a hidden truth: that even among Brethren who have acquired

the same Degree, there may be some who have insightful knowledge while others lack it not

because it has been withheld from them but simply because it is as yet beyond their present

potential to grasp and understand. They have not yet had those life experiences that are

necessary to quicken their potential capacity and make it actual.

System

This word was chosen very carefully by the compilers of the ritual. It hints at the late 17 th

century origins of speculative Freemasonry, an era when the cultural and intellectual life ofthe nation was dominated by the all-pervading legacy of Newton.

Much has been made of Newtonism, in particular of the possible contribution which the

Royal Society in London may have made to the emergence of the Masonic phenomenon. Forexample, attention has been drawn from time to time to the fact that at any one time during

the first half of the 18

th

century at least 25% of the Fellows of the Royal Society werefreemasons. According to the 1723 masonic membership List, 40 Fellows (i.e., 25% of the

total membership of the Royal Society) belonged to London Lodges. Of these, 23 were

Fellows before their Initiations and 16 were elected to their Fellowships after their Initiations.

Of the former sub-group, 13 had been elected before the re-founding of the Grand Lodge in

June 1717. Examination of the 1723List shows that 32 of these 40 Fellows still retained their

membership of their Lodges and it also shows that a further 27 had been initiated before them.

Of this latter intake, 16 had been elected to their Fellowships before their Initiations and 11

were elected after that. By 1725, 59 Fellows (i.e., still 25% of the Societys total membership!)

were freemasons. Examination of the Lists for 1723, 1725 and 1730 shows that nine Fellows

continued their membership of their various Lodges throughout the decade. It has also been

noted that these Fellows were members of at least 29 different Lodges that worked mostly inor around the central London area. Therefore, it has been assumed that this elite membership

was not concentrated in just a few Lodges; nor were they simply responding to the novelty of


22/50

belonging to a new institution; nor to the social cachet of belonging (when it may have been

perceived that some important noblemen had accepted the titular leadership of it in successive

years). The assumption is that there must have been something more than the mere re-

enactment of medieval builders ceremonies which attracted these distinguished men who

contributed to the scientific literature of the nation.

However, before too much weight is placed on this remarkable incidence of Fellows of the

Royal Society as freemasons, the morphology of Royal Society membership itself. For

instance, it is by no means certain what kind of sample the membership of the Society

provides. While it may be accepted that the Society did form some kind of English elite in the

field of scientific investigation, it remains unclear even to this date what precise relationship

its membership bore to the contemporary English scientific community generally and no one

has yet been able to answer the following crucial and related questions:

What prompted some scientific enthusiasts to join the Society while others did notaccept membership?

To what extent could membership be due to motives that had nothing to do with aninterest/skill in science?

It is beginning to emerge that less formal and even accidental factors limited recruitment to

the Society and these produced thereby both positive and negative distortions in the

membership. These distortions are important factors in assessing the relationship between the

Societys membership and the general phenomenon of scientific enthusiasm in late Stuart

England. It is now clear that in its early days the Royal Society was never central to the

scientific activities of those many investigators who were based elsewhere in the provinces.

Furthermore, judging from the elaborate genealogical links delineated in the data collected

assiduously by William Bullock in the late 1820s, there are many instances when the only

apparent reason for someone joining the Royal Society seems to have been the candidates

social and/or family connections with those who were already members. Many of itsaristocratic recruits were valued as much for the social eminence as for their enthusiasm and

the inclusion of those names in the published membership lists gave much-needed testimonyto the Societys espousal of the new science as well as lending a certain social eclat. Indeed,

there is every reason now to suspect that these printed sheets were used deliberately asproselytising propaganda by the Society and that there may well have been considerable truth

in the common contemporary and repeated complaint that the Fellows came to the meetings

only as to a play to amuse themselves for an hour or so. While analysis of the Societys

membership cannot illustrate fully the social, political or religious affiliations of science,nevertheless it may provide a partial illustration of the social, political or religious affiliations

of the supporters of the Royal Society in London which is something quite different.

Moreover, the same sort of caveat can be made about not attributing too much significance to

the involvement of 25% of the Fellows in Freemasonry. If a quarter of the Societys members

became freemasons because they judged that there was something worthwhile pursing in the

Lodges activities, what does that say about the remaining 75% who did not become

freemasons?

That said, the Royal Society did have a sustained interest in Hermeticism in its early decades.

Prominent members then were as much exercised by the underlying mystical principles and

harmonies of the perceived universe as they were about furthering practical experimentation.In 1667, for example, the Society issued several alchemical and Hermetic questionnaires to

foreign correspondents to solicit their views and accumulate records of their experiences.


23/50

Lynn Thorndikes analysis of the first 20 volumes of the Societys Philosophical

Transactionsrevealed that there was a persistent preoccupation in Hermeticism over several

generations in common with members of other such Societies in Europe and Keith

Hutchinson has shown that there were continuing underlying Hermetic qualities in the

Scientific Revolution. In the Societys library there are meticulous MSS copies of geometricdrawings taken directly from Perspectiva Corporum Regulatium, a book published in 1568 by

Wenzel Jamnitzer. He was a distinguished member of a secretive circle of scholars, the

Rosenkreizern, which flourished in Nurnberg in the early decades of the 17th century. The

same clandestine association had no less a personage than Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716), one

of the most original scientific thinkers of the age, as its secretary. Another of its prominentmembers, Johann Wulfer, emigrated to London in the latter part of the same century and

became a close associate of four Fellows of the Royal Society: Boyle, Pell, Oldenberg andHaak. Another Rosicrucian group, called Aufrichtige Geselleschaft von der Tanne, flourished

in Strasbourg from 1633. One of its leading proponents, Georg Rudolph Weckherlin (1584-1653), also came to live in London and after 1642 was employed in several key Chancery

posts. He became a close friend of Hartlib and Pell. A third such group, the CollegiumPhilosophicum (or Societas Ereunetica) was founded in Rostock in 1619 by Joachim Junge

(1587-1657). He was also a close associate of Hartlib. Likewise, Comenius, who was

connected closely with Zesen, the founder of the Drei Rosen group in Hamburg, came to

reside is London in 1641 at the express invitation of Hartlib and his Oxford circle. There were

several other such sustained connections among English scientific revolutionaries with

Continental Rosicrucianism at that time particularly among those various English groups

that were not centred on Oxford and London and therefore, those Hermetic doctrines

espoused by the Continental sources may have percolated into early speculative Freemasonry

via the Royal Society.


24/50

SOME EVIDENCE OF EARLY MASONIC INVOLVEMENT IN HERMETICISM

PART IV

Something has been said already that there may be Hermetic traces in the masonic rituals but it is

when we look for any trace of Hermetic involvement in the earliest days of English speculative

Freemasonry that we encounter a familiar difficulty. The Lodges records from the early decades

of the 18th century are scrappy to say the least. Their secretaries were not always diligent in

keeping the records and even in making the required Annual Returns of their members to the

Premier Grand Lodge. There was a sustained, widespread resentment of such interference from

London. Generally, those Minute Books that do survive only provide dates, places and rough

indications who attended the meetings and what office (if any) hey took during the ceremonies.

Even the Premier Grand Lodge itself does not seem to have bothered to keep Minutes of its own

proceedings until five years after its founding and although Scotland has splendid sets of Lodge

records (some of which date from the late 16thcentury!), they too very fragmentary in their detail.

Even so, much has been made of the experience of the ancient Lodges in Kilwinning, Aberdeenand Edinburgh which were attracting gentlemen as members even in the middle of the 17th

century. The point which David Stevenson and others have made recently is that something

extraordinary must have been occupying these Lodges to make these busy educated men want to

join and what is perhaps more important to retain their memberships over several decades and

to celebrate that membership - as does that notable alchemist, Latin scholar and artillery officer

Sir Robert Moray FRS for instance.

With this in mind perhaps something tentative might be said about what may have been Hermetic

features of the work by a few members of some of the earliest English Lodges. There were

possibly some esoteric characteristics but they were short-lived and fragmentary. Perhaps they

indicated the emergence of a broadly based Hermetic approach but, in the English cultural climatethat was severely pragmatic and sceptical in outlook, they did not survive for long. The general

nature of those early activities and, by implication, the underlying Hermetic principles seem to

have been lost somehow from English-speaking Freemasonry since those formative times.

As indicated above, we have to rely mostly on evidence that does not come from the Lodges

themselves. For example, theLetter of Verus Commodus (1725), an anti-masonic pamphlet, refers

scornfully to

the August Title of Kabalists a Knot of whimsical, delirious Wretches who are

caballing together, to extirpate all manner of Science, Reason and Religion.

One of the better-known pieces of evidence is part of an obscure 1715 publication entitled Long

Livers, an English translation of a French book by De Longeville Harcouet. The translator and

editor was one Eugenius Philalethes FRS (= the talented Robert Samber, a prolific translator and

author). It is his Dedicatory Letter to Long Livers that contains some pertinent references to

Hermetic activities that may have been occurring among some early groups of English freemasons.

Samber claims that Freemasonry belongs to an uninterrupted Tradition and that individual

freemasons are living stones built [into] a spiritual house, a chosen Generation, a royal

Priesthood as well as imprisoned exiled Children and Sons of Science who are

illuminated with the sublimest Mysteries and profoundest secrets . God is conceptualised as

the Centre of all Things, yet [HE] knows no Circumference. There were many hermetic books

published in a great variety in European languages in the early decades of the 18

th

century soSamber was probably well acquainted with at least the vocabulary. This is shown repeatedly, for

example, in his Treatise of the Plague (1721) which he also dedicated to the then Grand Master,

the Duke of Montague. What is also interesting to note in this Dedicatory Letter is that Samber


25/50

mentions that were several levels of masonic understanding and this was within a mere five years

of the founding of the Premier Grand Lodge. When he addresses his fellow freemasons, the

dedicatees, he draws a clear distinction between

those of you who are not far illuminated, who stand in the outward Place and are not yet

worthy to look behind the Veil

and those who have greater Light.

There is some evidence of Hermetic involvement in some of the Lodges inventories. English

Lodges owned very few books, of course, but one of those titles which features often in these lists

is The Voyages of Cyrus by the Chevalier Andrew Michael Ramsay (1686-1743). Ramsay had

probably been initiated in c. 1728 in the Old Horn Lodge (Westminster) shortly after his return to

England after a 20-year sojourn in various European cities. His career and his [in]famous Oration

(1737) have attracted plenty of attention. Apart from his education connections with the Royal

House of Stuart in exile, he was masonically and culturally the equal of many of the FRS who

joined that Lodge at about the same time. His first work, however, which dealt in a fictional form

with copious learned excursions into ancient theological and philosophical systems, was his verypopular Voyages de Cyrus (1727). In this and other writings, Ramsay shows himself to have been

the intellectual heir of the Cambridge Platonist, Ralph Cudworth (1616-1688), whose True

Intellectual System of the Universe (1stend.,1678) was hugely influential in the cultural life of the

nation then. It was after his Initiation that Ramsay had his Voyages de Cyrus translated into

English by Bro. Nathaniel Hooke (d. 1763) and he added a long Discourse upon the Theology

and Mythology of the Ancients in which he attempted to support his narrative with precise if

somewhat obscure references to classical literature, providing extensive quotations in the original

languages and including copies extracts from esoteric texts such as the Hermetica, the Oracula

Chaldaica and the Orphica. It was an extremely popular venture which went through 30 English

editions, and was even translated in German, Italian, Spanish and Greek. The fact that the masonic

Lodges purchased copies and loaned them out to members would seem to suggest a taste of suchHermetic exploration then amongst ordinary freemasons.

Then there are other clues in the following hitherto unexploited particular sources:

the records of the Old Kings Arms Lodge, now no. 28, which still meets in London; the mysterious collection of Kaballistic drawings known as the Byrom Collection and named

after their enigmatic former owner, John Byrom FRS (1691-1763), a Jacobite, inventor of a

primitive form of short-hand writing, freemason and spy; the ritual of the Order of Heredom which became transmuted eventually into the present day

Royal Order of Scotland and

the Royal Arch Ceremony.

The Old Kings Arms Lodge began its long history in 1725. When it began there were only 14members. The first extant Minute Book covers the years 1733-1756 after the Lodge had moved to theKings Arms Tavern in the Strand. By then there were 43 new members, none of whom had been

among the original founders. A tradition had been acquired somehow of being entertained bylectures on a whole variety of abstruse subjects at the regular meetings. Within just one decade (6

August 1733 to 4 January 1743) there were 36 lectures/demonstrations that can be described broadly

as Hermetic in the broadest sense. It is worthwhile recalling the subjects of these lectures:

TopicNo. of Lectures

(Human) Physiology, including practical dissections (!) 7

Scientific phenomena and techniques 7

Ethical concepts 6


26/50

Architecture 5

Industrial processes 3

Mechanical inventions and scientific apparatus 3

Art and aesthetics 2

History (classical) 1Masonic apparel 1

Mathematics 1

Even though it was only one of about 60 Lodges in and around London at that time, the frequency

of these meetings of the Old Kings Arms Lodge and the fact that they were continued over a

decade would seem to suggest at least something about the character and intellectual background

of the membership of this particular London Lodge. It hints at what they regarded a legitimate or

proper working of a masonic Lodge (i.e., that it was not merely a Degree factory or a convivial

foregathering in a tavern).

The variety of topics is revealing itself. It shows the London Enlightenment gentlemen freemasonat his leisure, interested in the practical application of sciences and in the philosophical bases of

ethical concepts, his vision rooted firmly in this world though hardly limited or inward-looking.

His Freemasonry has not yet become introverted, feeding only on itself. His was a clearly marked

fascination with measuring and quantification which not only suggests something of the English

Enlightenment mentalite in general but also goes some way to explaining in particular the

frequency of the references to geometry and practical measuring apparatus which came to

proliferate throughout the English masonic rituals.

Sadly, however, the Hermetic exploration by the members of this Lodge declined in the late

1740s. Even by the early years of that decade there is some indication in the Minute Book that the

original impetus for papers was abating. On 2 February 1743 there is a reference to fact that

frequent Disappointments had happened by Brethren not performing their Promises of giving

Lectures

and by the end of the year (7 December 1743) things had become even more desperate obviously

because the Minutes state

The Master called upon several Brethren to oblige the Lodge with a Lecture upon any useful

subject which not being compiled with, Sir Robert Lawley was so kind to offer a further

continuance of a lecture in Masonry either on the next or the succeeding Lodge night

In case it may be thought that this approach to Freemasonry was unique to only one London

Lodge in those days, it may be worthwhile recalling that the practice of having lectures delivered

regularly at Lodge meetings was wide-spread. According to Francis Drake of York in 1726

most Lodges in London, and several other Parts of this Kingdom, [my emphasis] a Lecture

on some Point of Geometry or Architecture is given at every Meeting

Bro. William Smith of Gateshead, in the Preface to his compilation The Book M (1736), wrote

that he recommended to his subscribing readers in their Lodges

the Studys (sic) of Geometry and Architecture and that there should never pass a Lodge

Night without some Discourse upon those Heads.

The anonymous author of the half-exposure/half-apology of Freemasonry, A Word to the Wise


27/50

(1795), reported that

from the Minute Books of various lodges in the earliest dates, it would appear that theMembers were not content with merely proceeding in the usual form of Masonry, but Lectures

were occasionally given by those who were qualified in the branches