Note:  This material was scanned into text files for the sole purpose of convenient electronic research. This material is NOT intended as a reproduction of the original volumes. However close the material is to becoming a reproduced work, it should ONLY be regarded as a textual reference.  Scanned at Phoenixmasonry by Ralph W. Omholt, PM in May 2007.








CHARLES SCRIBNERS SONS                                          NEW YORK


















Past Grand Muter of Masons in Massachusetts, and M \ P\ Sovereign Grand Commander of the Supreme Council, 33 for the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction of the United States






Foreign Correspondent and Reviewer Grand Lodge, Grand Chapter, Grand Council, Grand Commandery of North Carolina and the Grand Encampment K. T. of the United States






GOULD was the Thucydides of Masonic history. The Masonic histories before his day belong on the shelves with books of mythology and fairy tales. Gould also inspired real historical research and study. Vast stores of information have been uncovered since his time which correct some errors made by Gould, and add tremendously to the real story of the past of Freemasonry. Moreover, much has transpired since then. All this requires the present revision.


Outside of its own membership, Freemasonry is to‑day little understood and much misunderstood. At the outset, let us get a clear idea of what Freemasonry is, of its purposes, and a few of its major accomplishments.


Freemasonry is a charitable, benevolent, educational, and religious secret society, adhering to its own peculiar Ancient Landmarks. Its methods of recognition and of symbolic instruction are secret and thereby a test of membership is provided, though a Brother be travelling in foreign countries and among those who would otherwise be strangers.


It is religious in that it teaches monotheism, the Volume of the Sacred Law is open upon its Altars whenever a Lodge is in Session, worship of God is ever a part of its ceremonial, and to its neophytes and Brethren alike are constantly addressed lessons of morality; yet it is not theological nor does it attempt to displace or rival the church. Masonry is not a religion; it is the handmaid of religion.


It is educational in that it teaches a perfect system of morality, based upon the Sacred Law, by a prescribed ceremonial; and it also provides libraries and opportunities for study therein.


It is benevolent in that it teaches relief of the poor and distressed as a duty and exemplifies that duty by relief of sick and distressed Brethren, by caring for the widows and orphans of the Brethren, by maintaining homes for aged and distressed Brethren and their dependents, and by many other altruistic endeavours.


It is charitable in that none of its income inures to the benefit of any individual, but all is devoted to the improvement and promotion of the happiness of mankind.


It is a social organisation only so far as it furnishes additional inducement that men may forgather in numbers, thereby providing more material for its primary work of training, of worship, and of charity.


The sole dogma (i.e., arbitrary dictum) of Freemasonry is the Landmark of Belief in God. No neophyte ever has been or ever will be permitted participation in the mysteries of legitimate and recognized Freemasonry until he has vii viii FOREWORD solemnly asserted his trust in God. Beyond that, we inquire and require nothing of sectarianism or religious belief.


Freemasonry's idea of God is universal. Each may interpret that idea in the terms of his own creed. The requirement is solely a belief in one Supreme Being whom we sometimes call the Great Architect of the Universe. Upon this, the enlightened religious of all ages have been able to agree. It is proclaimed not only in the New Testament of the Christian, but in the Pentateuch of the Hebrew, in the Koran of the Islamite, in the Avesta of the Magians of Persia, in the Book of Kings of the Chinese, in the Sutras of the Buddhist, and even in the Vedas of the Hindu.


 "Father of all! in every age, In every clime adored, By Saint, by Savage, and by Sage, Jehovah, Jove, or Lord!" Freemasonry has probably been the greatest single influence toward establishing the doctrine of liberty of conscience. In the midst of sectarian antagonism, our Fraternity's first Grand Lodge was organised in 1717, by four Lodges then existing within the "Bills of Mortality" of London, England. It almost immediately reached out, planting new Lodges and successfully establishing systematised Grand Lodge control over all Lodges, including those which had theretofore met "according to the old customs"; that is to say, without Charter or Warrant but by the authority inherent in members of the Craft who, finding themselves together in a locality, met and Worked.


In 1723, the Constitutions of this Mother Grand Lodge of the World were published. These declared "Concerning God and religion.. Though in ancient Times Masons were charg'd in every Country to be of the Religion of that Country or Nation, whatever it was, yet 'tis now thought more expedient only to oblige them to that Religion in which all Men agree, leaving their particular Opinions to themselves." These Constitutions further declared "No private Piques or Quarrels must be brought within the Door of the Lodge, far less any Quarrels about Religion, or Nations, or State Policy, we being only, as Masons, of the Catholick Religion above‑mention'd; we are also of all Nations, Tongues, Kindreds, and Languages, and are resolv'd against all Politicks, as what never yet conduc'd to the Welfare of the Lodge, nor ever will." Proselyting has its place in the world, but not in the halls of Masonry. Sectarian missionary spirit and its exercise have been of incalculable value to the human race. However much we should give it our support as individuals or as members of other societies, it has no place within this Fraternity. In our Lodge Rooms, upon the single bond of belief in Deity, we may thus "conciliate true friendship" among men of every country, sect and opinion.


No authoritative spokesman of legitimate and recognised Freemasonry has FOREWORD ix ever engaged in a campaign against or antagonised any religion. (Distinguish, here, between religion and a church in politics.) Freemasonry never has been, is not now, and never will be a party to the reviling of any faith, creed, theology, or method of worship.


The Bull of Pope Clement XII in 1738, and other later Papal Bulls and Edicts, one as recent as 1884, have scathingly denounced Freemasons and Freemasonry. Of the reasons assigned, two are based on fact; one, that Freemasonry is tolerant of all religious creeds; the other, that oaths of secrecy are demanded. All other reasons given are incorrect; so wrong, indeed, that we of the Craft wonder how it was possible that any one could have been persuaded to proclaim or even believe them.


Many members of the Roman Catholic Church have held Masonic membership and office. Until they were ordered out of our Fraternity, one‑half of the Masons in Ireland were of that faith. A Papal Nuncio, as a Freemason, laid the corner‑stone of the great altar of the Parisian Church of St. Sulpice (1733). Some eminent Catholics have held the highest possible office in the gift of the Craft, that of Most Worshipful Grand Master (e.g. the Duke of Norfolk, 1730 31; Anthony Brown, Viscount Montacute, 1732‑33; Benedict Barnewall, Viscount Kingsland, Ireland 1733‑34; Robert Edward, Lord Petre, 1772‑77). If that Church sees fit to bar its members from belonging to our Fraternity, it has a perfect right to do so. It is the sole judge of the qualifications of its own members. Freemasonry, however, does not bar an applicant for its Degrees because he is a member of that or of any other church. Whether or not he can be true both to his Church and to the Fraternity is a question the applicant's conscience must determine. Belief in his sincerity and fitness will be determined by the ballot box.


No discussion of the creed of any Church is permitted within the tiled Lodge Room, and the attitude of Freemasonry toward any and all sects and denominations, toward any form of the honest worship of God, is not one of antagonism but of respect.


If within the power of Freemasons to prevent it, no sect, atheistic, agnostic or supremely religious, will be permitted to dominate, dictate or control civil government. Freemasonry has never attempted to do this, and would not if it had the power.


Our Fraternity asks no man to carry Freemasonry as an institution into his civic life, to vote as a Mason either in the ballot box or in legislative halls, to perform executive duties as a Mason, or to adjudicate as a Mason. Freemasonry has no fear of the practises, policies or acts of any man whose character is sound. Its ambition is to aid in implanting and nurturing ideals of equality, charity, justice, morality, liberty, and fraternity in the hearts and minds of men. It concerns itself with principles and not with policies. It builds character, not faction. Freemasonry will join hands not only with its friends but with its enemies‑though no God‑fearing, liberty‑loving man should be its enemy‑to establish and perpetuate in all nations where it has a foothold l FOREWORD the spirit of this ringing message of our Bro. George Washington, " I have often expressed my sentiments, that every man, conducting himself as a good citizen, and being accountable to God alone for his religious opinions, ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience. " When no Roman Catholic in England was allowed civil or military rights, or even to worship according to the ceremonies of his own religion, Freemasonry joined hands with the Catholic Committee in persuading England to grant them the rights of citizenship and to worship God according to the dictates of their consciences. One of the greatest leaders in this movement was the Seventh Lord Petre, Grand Master of Masons in England and the leading member of the Catholic Committee.


In Colonial America, Freemasonry was the most important inter‑colonial network‑indeed, almost the only thing which the Colonies had in common, save hatred, not of the British people but of the British Crown of that day. Freemasonry exercised a greater influence upon the establishment and development of the fundamental principles of this land of ours than any other single institution.


Neither general historians nor the members of our Fraternity have realised how much that civilisation of which we are a part owes to Freemasonry. Its intangible accomplishments can never be measured. The dollars which it has spent in charity are tangible, as is its numerical strength; but numbers and dollars are not the criteria by which to estimate the value or accomplishments of Freemasonry.


It is the inculcation in the hearts and minds of men of those basic and immutable principles of human conduct, upon which all social compacts rest and a departure from which inevitably brings chaos, that organised Masonry seeks accomplishment. Worship of God cannot be measured in volts, morality in gallons, friendship in pounds, love in dollars, or altruism in inches; yet these are vastly more essential to the peace and happiness of man than material things which have three dimensions, or than energy and motion capable of statistical tabulation. Indeed, the preservation of civilisation depends upon a true reflection of these qualities of mind and soul. No statistician can possibly measure the results of such endeavour. It is through these good works that Freemasonry desires to be known rather than by compilations and formulas.


Down through the years, not only here but in many other lands, Freemasonry has been instilling and cultivating ideals‑ideals of worship of God, of liberty of conscience, of truth, equality, charity, liberty, justice, morality, and fraternity, in the hearts and minds of men.


Based always upon the sure foundation of the worship of God, the greatest of these in its effects upon human contacts is fraternity ‑ call it brotherly love, the second great commandment or the Golden Rule, if you will.


Our charitable, benevolent, educational, and religious Fraternity has for its main purpose to‑day the propagation of this one and only cement or bond FOREWORD xi of human society which is local, national and international. Without it, the centrifugal forces of disorder, destruction, iconoclasm, hate, jealousy, and envy, ever active, would send our whirling civilisation flying into atoms.


Love, as the basis of national and international relations, has never yet been tried. Power, might, and authority, physical and financial and even ecclesiastical, have been tried and have failed. Here, then, is the great secret of Freemasonry‑a secret only because the world will not heed it. Striving onward, day by day, in the midst of what sometimes seems to threaten a return to chaos, our Fraternity persists in cultivating and disseminating these ideals, these landmarks of civilisation, and in reaching forward to that millennial day when love shall rule the world.


Then shall there be no more need of Declarations of Independence. Rather, shall there be Declarations of Dependence of man upon his fellowmen, of city upon its contacting communities, of State upon its neighbour States, of nation upon its sister nations. To preserve and broaden such ideals, Freemasonry at the end of centuries, confidently looks forward into the centuries which are to come. Our backs are to the past; our faces to the future. Ahead lies our duty ‑our opportunity.


These are the ideals and an indication of the accomplishments of the greatest Fraternity the world has ever known. Such a Fraternity should have its history recorded in order that its own members, as well as the profane, may know the part which it has played, is playing, and should play in a world which more than ever needs its wholesome influence. This is my purpose in sharing in the compilation of this history.
















































THE QUATUOR CORONATI 221 xlll 24 86 99 154 xiv




















George Washington as Master of Alexandria Lodge, No. 22 ‑ (Colour) Frontispiece PACING PAGE Seals and Tokens of Continental Guilds, I 68 Seals and Tokens of Continental Guilds, II 78 Arms of Masons, Carpenters, etc., I 86 (Compagnons.) A Procession of the Fellow Craft ioo A Series of Fifteen English and French Freemasonry Prints of 1745‑1757 1809‑1812‑ inserted between pages‑ 12‑o and 12.1 Masons' Marks, I 146 Masons' Marks, II 148 Masons' Marks, III 150 Arms of Masons, Carpenters, etc., II 2‑44 Frontispiece to Anderson's Book of Constitutions, 1723 2.62 A Masonic Sesqui‑centenary Celebrated by Loyal Lodge at Barnstaple, North Devon, September 24, 1933 310 An Interior View of the Guildhall, During the Masonic Sesqui‑centenary Celebration at Barnstaple, North Devon, September 24, 1933 32.0 Presidents of the United States, Members of the Masonic Fraternity George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, James K. Polk, James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, James A. Garfield, William McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, William H. Taft, Warren G. Harding, and Franklin D. Roosevelt At end of volume The Iron Worker and King Solomon 8 I 1 GOULD'S HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY THROUGHOUT THE WORLD VOLUME I i A HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY THROUGHOUT THE WORLD VOL. I







UP to a comparatively recent period, the History and Antiquities of Freemasonry were involved in a cloud of darkness and uncertainty. Treated as a rule with a thinly veiled contempt by men of letters, the subject was, in a great measure, abandoned to writers with whom enthusiasm supplied the place of learning, whose principal qualification for their task was membership of the Fraternity. On the other hand, however, it must fairly be stated that the few literati who wrote upon this uncongenial theme evinced an amount of credulity which, to say the least, was commensurate with their learning and, by laying their imaginations under contribution for the facts which were essential to the theories they advanced, confirmed the pre‑existing belief that all Masonic history is untrue. Thus Hallam, in his Middle Ages (18 5 6, vol. iii, p. 3 5 9), wrote: "The curious subject of Freemasonry has been treated of only by panegyrists or calumniators, both equally mendacious." The vagaries of this latter class have been pleasantly characterized as "the sprightly and vivacious accounts of the modern Masonic annalists, who display in their histories a haughty independence of facts, and make up for the scarcity of evidence by a surprising fecundity of invention. `Speculative Masonry,' as they call it, seems to have favoured them with a large portion of her airy materials and with ladders, scaffolding and bricks of air, they have run up their historical structures with wonderful ease." Thus wrote Dr. (afterwards Bishop) Armstrong, of Grahamstown, in The Christian Kemembrancer, July 1 847. The critical reader is indeed apt to lament that leaders of the creationist school have not followed the example of Aristotle, whose " wisdom and integrity " Lord Bacon in The Advancement of Learning commends, in having " cast all prodigious narrations which he thought worthy the recording into one book, that such whereupon observation and rule was to be built, should not be mingled or weakened with matter of doubtful credit." In this connexion may be cited Pitt Taylor's original edition of Professor Greenleaf's Law of Evidence. The various American Law Reports quoted therein are lettered A, B, C, D, in accordance with the relative estimation in which they were held by the profession. Some classification of this kind would be of great assistance to the student of Masonic antiquities.


I z



A new and more critical school has, however, at length arisen, which, while doing much to place the subject on a sound historical basis, has yet left something to be desired.


The publication of a General History of Freemasonry, by J. G. Findel (of Leipsic) in 1861 (Geschichte der Freimaurerei), marks a distinct era in the progress of Masonic literature. No universal history of the Masonic Craft (at all worthy of the name) had previously been compiled and the dictum of the Chevalier de Bonneville was generally acquiesced in, " That the span of ten men's lives was too short a period for the execution of so formidable an undertaking." The second (and revised) English edition of this work was published by Kenning in 1869.


Findel's work is a highly meritorious compilation and reflects great credit upon his industry. The writings of all previous Masonic authors appear to have been consulted, but the value of his history would have been much enhanced by a more frequent reference to authorities. He seems, indeed, to labour under a complete incapacity to distinguish between the relative degrees of value of the authorities he is attempting to analyse; but, putting all demerits on one side, his History of Freemasonry forms a very solid contribution to our stock of Masonic facts and, from his faculty of lucid condensation, has brought, for the first time within popular comprehension, the entire subject to the elucidation of which its scope is directed. Prehistoric Masonry is dealt with very briefly, but this branch of archaeological research has been taken up by G. F. Fort (Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, 1876), who, in an interesting volume of 481 pages, devoted entirely to the "Antiquities" of the Society, discusses very ably and clearly the legendary or traditionary history of the Fraternity.


The design of the present work is to embody in a single publication the legendary and the authentic histories of the Craft. The introductory portion will cover the ground already occupied by Fort and then will be traversed the field of research over which Findel has travelled. The differences from these writers will be material, both as regards the facts they accept and the inferences they have drawn and the record of occurrences will necessarily vary somewhat from theirs, whilst the general conclusions will be as novel as it is hoped they may prove to be well founded.


At the outset it may be remarked that the actual History of Freemasonry can only, in strictness, be deemed to commence from the period when the chaos of mythical traditions is succeeded by the era of Lodge records. This epoch cannot be very readily determined. The circumstances of the Lodges, even in North and South Britain, were dissimilar. In Scotland the veritable proceedings of Lodges for the year 15 99, as entered at the time in their minute‑books, are still extant. In England there are no Lodge minutes ranging back even into the seventeenth century and the records of but a single Lodge (Alnwick) between 1700 and the date of formation of the first Grand Lodge (1717). For the sake of convenience, therefore, the mythico‑historical period of Freemasonry will be held to have extended to 1717 and the special circumstances which distinguish the early Masonry of Scotland THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY 3 from that of its sister kingdom will, to the extent that may be requisite, be further considered when the histories of the British Grand Lodges are separately treated.


The period, therefore, antedating the era of Grand Lodges (1717), will be examined in the introductory part of this work.


In dealing with what Fort has happily styled the "Antiquities of Freemasonry," whilst discussing, at some point or other, all or nearly all the subjects this writer has so dexterously handled, the method of treatment adopted will, nevertheless, vary very much from the system he has followed.


In the progress of the inquiry it will be necessary to examine the leading theories with regard to the origin of Freemasonry that have seemed tenable to the learned. These will be subdivided into two classes, the one being properly introductory to the general bulk of evidence that will be adduced in the chapters which next follow ; and the other, claiming attention at a later stage, just before we part company with the " Antiquities " and emerge from the cloud‑land of legend and tradition into the domain of authentic history.


The sources to which the mysteries of Freemasonry have been ascribed by individual theorists are too numerous to be particularized, although some of the more curious will be briefly reviewed.


Two theories or hypotheses stand out in bold relief‑the conjectural origin of Freemasonry as disclosed in the pages of the Parentalia (or Memoirs of the Family of the Wrens, 1750, p. 306) and its more recent derivation from the customs of the German Steinmetzen (Fallon, Winzer, Findel, Steinbrenner and Fort). Each of these speculations has had its day. From 1750 until the publication of Findel's History (1861), the theory of "travelling Masons " ‑ ascribed to Wren‑held possession of our encyclopxdias. The German supposition has since prevailed, but an attempt will be made to show that it rests upon no more solid foundation of fact than the hypothesis it displaced.


In successive chapters will be discussed the various matters or subjects germane to the general inquiry whilst, in a final examination, the relation of one topic to another, with the conclusions that may rightly be drawn from the scope and tenor of the entire evidence, will be duly presented.


It has been well said, "that we must despair of ever being able to reach the fountain‑head of streams which have been running and increasing from the beginning of time. All that we can aspire to do is only to trace their course backward, as far as possible, on these charts that now remain of the distant countries whence they were first perceived to flow" (Brand's Popular Antiquities, 1849, vol. i, p. ix). It has also to be borne in mind that as all trustworthy history must necessarily be a work of compilation, the imagination of the writer must be held in subjection. He can but use and shape his materials and these unavoidably will take a somewhat fragmentary form.


Past events leave relics behind them more certainly than future events cast shadows before them. From the records that have come down to us, an endeavour will be made to present, as far as possible, the leading features of the real Antiquities 4 THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY of Freemasonry, that every reader may test the soundness of the general conclusions by an examination of the evidence upon which they are based. It must ever be recollected that " a large proportion of the general opinions of mankind are derived merely from authority and are entertained without any distinct understanding of the evidence on which they rest, or the argumentative grounds by which they are supported" (Sir G. C. Lewis : On the Influence of Authority in Matters of Opinion, p. 7). Lord Arundell of Wardour says (Tradition, principally with reference to Mythology and the Lazy of Nations, 1872, p. 13 9) : " Knowledge in many departments is becoming more and more the traditions of experts and must be taken by the outside world on faith." From this reproach, it will not be contended that the Freemasons of our own day merit an exemption, but the stigma, if such it be, under which they rest must assuredly be deemed to attach with even greater force to the inaccurate historians by whom they have been misled. It is true, no doubt, that the historian has no rules as to exclusion of evidence or incompetency of witnesses. In his court every document may be read, every statement may be heard. But, in proportion as he admits all evidence indiscriminately, he must exercise discrimination in judging of its effect. (See Lewis : Methods of Observation and Reasoning in Politics, vol. i, p. 196.) There is, indeed, no doubt that long habit, combined with a happy talent, may enable a person to discern the truth where it is invisible to ordinary minds possessing no special advantages. In order, however, that the truth so perceived should recommend itself to the convictions of others, it is a necessary condition that it should admit of proof which they can understand. (See Lewis: An Inquiry into the Credibility of the Early Roman History, vol. i, p. 14.) Much of the early history of Freemasonry is so interspersed with fable and romance that, however anxious we may be to deal tenderly with long‑cherished legends and traditions, some, at least, of these familiar superstitions‑unless we choose to violate every canon of historical criticism‑must be allowed to pass quietly into oblivion. The following mode of determining the authenticity of the Legends of the Saints, without dishonouring the authority of the Church or disturbng the faith of her children, suggests indeed one way out of the difficulty : " Les legendes sont dans 1'ordre historique ce que les reliques des saints sont dans le culte. 11 y a des reliques authentiques et des legendes certaines, des reliques evidemment fausses et des legendes evidemment fabuleuses, enfin des reliques douteuses et des legendes seulement probables et vraisemblables. Pour les legendes comme pour les reliques l'Eglise consacre ce qui est certain, proscrit le fableux et permet le douteux sans le consacrer " (Cours. d'Hist. Eccl., par l'Abbe Blanc, P. 5 52). In dealing with this subject, it is difficult‑indeed, almost impossible‑to lay down any fixed rules for our guidance. All the authorities seem hopelessly at variance. Gibbon states, " the Germans, in the days of Tacitus, were unacquainted with the use of letters. . . . Without that artificial help, the human memory ever dissipates or corrupts the ideas entrusted to her charge." " To this," says Lord Arundell (op. cit., pp. 120, 12 i), " I reply, that, although records are valuable for the attesta‑ THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY 5 tion, they are not guarantees for the fidelity of tradition. When mankind trusts mainly to tradition, the faculties by which it is sustained will be more strongly developed and the adaptation of societyfor its transmission more exactly conformed." Yet, if we turn to one of the greatest masters of historical criticism, the comforting assurance of Lord Arundell is seriously assailed. " A tradition," says Sir George Lewis, " should be proved by authentic evidence to be not of subsequent growth, but to be founded on a contemporary recollection of the fact recorded. A historical event may be handed down by oral tradition, as well as by a contemporary written record ; but, in that case, satisfactory proof must be given that the tradition is derived from contemporary witnesses " (On the Influence of Authority, etc., p. go).


The principle just enunciated is, however, demurred to by another high authority, whose words have a special bearing upon the point under consideration. The learned author of The Language and Literature of Ancient Greece observes : " We have without hesitation repudiated the hypercritical doctrine of a modern school of classical antiquaries that, in no case whatever, is the reality of any event or person to be admitted unless it can be authenticated by contemporaneous written evidence. If this dogmatical rule be valid at all, it must be valid to the extent of a condemnation of nearly the whole primitive annals of Greece down to the first rise of authentic history about the epoch of the Persian War. The more rational principle of research is, that the historical critic is entitled to test the truth or falsehood of national tradition by the standard of speculative historical probability. The general grounds of such speculative argument in favour of an element of truth in oral tradition admit of being ranged under the following heads First, The comparative recency of the age in which the event transmitted is supposed to have taken place and the proportionally limited number of stages through which the tradition has passed. Secondly, The inherent probability of the event and, more especially, the existence of any such close connexion in the ratio of cause and effect between it and some other more recent and better attested event, as might warrant the inference, even apart from the tradition on the subject, that the one was the consequence of the other. Thirdly, The presumption that, although the event itself may not have enjoyed the benefit of written transmission, the art of writing was, at the period from which the tradition dates, sufficiently prevalent to check, in regard to the more prominent vicissitudes of national history, the licence in which the popular organs of tradition in a totally illiterate age are apt to indulge " (W. Mute, A Critical History of the Language and Literature of Ancient Greece, 1853, vol. iv, pp. 317, 318).


The principle to be observed in inquiries of this character appears, indeed, up to a certain point, to have been best laid down by Dr. Isaac Taylor, who says " A notion may weigh against a notion, or one hypothesis may be left to contend with another ; but an hypothesis can never be permitted, even in the slightest degree, to counterbalance either actual facts, or direct inferences from such facts. This preference of facts and of direct inductions to hypotheses, however ingenious or specious they may be, is the great law of modern science, which none but dreamers attempt to violate. Now, the rules of criticism and the laws of historical evidence 6 THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY are as much matters of science as any other rules or laws derived by careful induction from a mass of facts " (The Process of Historical Proof, 18z8, p.3). In another part of this work (p. z62) the author says : " Our part is to scrutinize as carefully as we can the validity of the proofs ; not to weigh the probability of the factsa task to which we can scarcely ever be competent." The last branch of this definition carries us a little farther than we can safely go.


In the main, however, whilst carefully discarding the plainly fabulous narrations with which the Masonic system is encumbered, the view to which Schlegel has given expression is, perhaps, the one it would be well to adopt. He says : " I have laid it down as an invariable maxim to follow historical tradition and to hold fast by that clue, even when many things in the testimony and declarations of tradition appear strange and almost inexplicable, or at least enigmatical ; for as soon as, in the investigations of ancient history, we let slip that thread of Ariadne, we can find no outlet from the labyrinth of fanciful theories and the chaos of clashing opinions " (Philosophy of History, 183 S, vol. i, p. 29).


"The origin and source whence first sprang the institution of Freemasonry," says Dr. Mackey, " has given rise to more difference of opinion and discussion among Masonic scholars than any other topic in the literature of the institution." Indeed, were the books collected in which separate theories have been advanced, the dimensions of an ordinary library would be insufficient for their reception. For the most part, it may be stated that each commentator (as observed by Horace Walpole in the case of Stonehenge) has attributed to his theme that kind of antiquity of which he himself was most fond. Of Stonehenge it has been asserted " that nearly every prominent historical personage from the Devil to the Druids have at one time or another been credited with its erection‑the latter, however, enjoying the suffrages of the archeologists." Both the Devil and the Druids have had a large share ascribed to them in the institution of Freemasonry. In India, even at the present day, the Masonic Hall, or other place of meeting for the Lodges, is familiarly known as the "Shaitan" Bungalow, or Devil's house, whilst the Druidical theory of Masonic ancestry, although long since abandoned as untenable, was devoutly believed in by a large number of Masonic writers, whose works are even yet in demand.


The most fanciful representative of this school appears to have been Cleland, though Godfrey Higgins treads closely at his heels. The former, writing in 1766, presents a singular argument, which slightly abridged is as follows : "Considering that the May (May‑pole) was eminently the great sign of Druidism, as the Cross was of Christianity, is there anything forced or far‑fetched in the conjecture that the adherents to Druidism should take the name of Men of the May or Mays‑sons ? " This is by no means an unfair specimen of the conjectural etymology which has been lavishly resorted to in searching for the derivation of the word Mason. Dr. Mackey, after citing many derivations of this word, proceeds : " But all of these fanciful etymologies, which would have terrified Bopp, Grimm, Muller, or any other student of linguistic relations, forcibly remind us of the French epigrammist, THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY 7 who admitted that alphina came from equus, but that in so coming it had very considerably changed its route " (Encyclopadia of Freemasonry, p. 489). All known languages appear to have been consulted, with the natural result of enveloping the whole matter in confusion, the speculations of the learned (amongst whom figures Lessing, one of the first literary characters of his age) being honourably distinguished by their greater freedom of exposition. It is generally assumed that, in the ancient oriental tongues, the few primitive words must needs bear many different significations and the numerous derivatives be infinitely equivocal. Hence anything may be made of names, by turning them to oriental sounds, so as to suit every system past, present, and to come. "And when anyone is at a loss," says Warburton, " in this game of crambo, which can never happen but by being duller than ordinary, the kindred dialects of the Chaldee and Arabic lie always ready to make up their deficiencies " (Divine Legation, vol. ii, p. zzo, where he also says: "I have heard of an old humorist and a great dealer in etymologies, who boasted that he not only knew whence words came, but whither they were going ").


The connexion of the Druids with the Freemasons has, like many other learned hypotheses, both history and antiquity obstinately bent against it; but not more so, however, than its supporters are against history and antiquity, as from the researches of recent writers may be readily demonstrated. The whole question has been thoroughly discussed in Dudley Wright's Druidism, The Ancient Faith of Britain, where a full bibliography will also be found. Clinch, with a great parade of learning, has endeavoured to identify Freemasonry with the system of Pythagoras and, for the purpose of comparison, cites no fewer than fifteen particular features or points of resemblance which are to be found, he says, in the ancient and in the modern institutions. "Let the Freemasons," he continues, " if they please, call Hiram, King of Tyre, an architect, and tell each other, in bad rhymes, that they are the descendants of those who constructed the temple of Solomon. To me, however, the opinion which seems decisive is, that the sect has penetrated into Europe by means of the gypsies." See "Essay on the Origin of Freemasonry " in Anthologia Hibernica, vol. iii, pp. 34,178, 279, and 421. W. Simson, in his History of the Gypsies, 1865, pp. 456,457, says : "Not only have they had a language peculiar to themselves, but signs as exclusively theirs as are those of the Freemasons. The distinction consists in this people having blood, language, a cast of mind and signs, peculiar to itself." The learned author of Ernst and Falk and Nathan der W>eise, Gottfried Ephraim Lessing, was of opinion that the Masonic institution had its origin in a secret association of Templars, long existent in London, which was shaped into its present form by Sir Christopher Wren. That the society is, in some way or other, a continuation of that of the Templars has been widely credited. The Abbe Barruel supported this theory in Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism, translated by the Hon. Robert Clifford (2d edit., 1798). Edmund Burke wrote to Barruel, May 1, 1797, on the publication of his first volume, expressing an admiration of the work which posterity has failed to ratify. He says: "The whole of the wonderful 8 THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY narrative is supported by documents and proofs (?) with the most juridical regularity and exactness." This theory has endured to the present day (see Frost's Secret Societies of the European Revolution, 1876, vol. i, p. 22) and, more recently, found an eloquent exponent in E. T. Carson, of Cincinnati, U.S.A. Notwithstanding the entire absence of historical corroboration, it has been adopted by many writers of ability and has exercised no inconsiderable influence in the fabrication of what are termed "High Degrees" and in the invention of Continental Rites. The subject will be discussed more fully in a later chapter of the present work.


Nicholai, a learned bookseller of Berlin, advanced, in 1782, a singular hypothesis in I>ersuch fiber die Beschuldigungen. French and English translations respectively of the appendix to this work (which contains Nicholai's Essay on the Origin of Freemasonry) will be found in Thory's Acta Latomorum and in the Freemasons' Quarterly Review, 1853, p. 649. His belief was that Lord Bacon, influenced by the writings of Andrea, the alleged founder of the Rosicrucians and of his English disciple, Robert Fludd, gave to the world his New Atlantis, a beautiful apologue in which are to be found many ideas of a Masonic character. John Valentine Andrea was born in 1586 and died in 16 S4. The most important of his works (or of those ascribed to his pen) are the Fama Fraternitatis and the Chemical Marriage (Chemische Hockeit), published circa 1614 and 1616 respectively. It has been stated " that Fludd must be considered as the immediate father of Freemasonry, as Andrea was its remote father ! " (Freemasons' Magazine, April 18 5 8).


A ship which had been detained at Peru for one whole year, sails for China and Japan by the South Sea. In stress of weather the weary mariners gladly make the haven of a port of a fair city, which they find inhabited by Christians. They are brought to the strangers' house, the revenue of which is abundant; thirty‑seven years having elapsed since the arrival of similar visitors. The governor informs them "of the erection and institution, 1900 years ago, of an order or society by King Solamena, the noblest foundation that ever was upon the earth and the lanthorn of the kingdom." It was dedicated to the study of the works and creatures of God and appears to have been indifferently described as "Solomon's House," or "The College of the Six Days' Works." During the stay of the visitors at this city (in the Island of Bensalem), one of the fathers of "Solomon's House " came there and the historiographer of the party had the honour of an interview, to whom the patriarch, in the Spanish tongue, gave a full relation of the state of the " College." " Firstly," he said, " I will set forth unto you the end of our foundation ; secondly, the preparation or instruments we have for our works ; thirdly, the several employments and functions whereto our fellows are assigned ; and fourthly, the ordinances and rites which we observe." The society was formed of fellows or brethren ; and novices or apprentices. All took an oath of secrecy, " for the concealing of those things which we think fit to keep secret ; though some of those we do reveal sometimes to the State and some not." The narrative breaks off abruptly with the words, " The rest was not perfected." THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY 9 According to the latest of Baconian commentators, Spedding, " the story of Solomon's House is nothing more than a vision of the practical results which Lord Bacon anticipated from the study of natural history, diligently and systematically carried on through successive generations." See "The New Atlantis" in Spedding's Bacon, vol. iii, p. 129. The work seems to have been written in 1624 and was first published in 1627.


It will be seen from the foregoing abstract, in which every detail that can possibly interest the Masonic reader has been included, that the theory advanced by Nicholai rests upon a very slender, not to say forced, analogy. A better argument, if, indeed, one inconclusive chain of reasoning can be termed better or worse than another, whose links are alike defective, might be fashioned on the same lines, in favour of a Templar origin of Freemasonry.


The view about to be presented seems to have escaped the research of Dr. Mackey, whose admirable Encyclopa,dia seems to contain the substance of nearly everything of a Masonic character that has yet been printed. For this reason and, also, because it has been favourably regarded by Dr. Armstrong, who, otherwise, has a very poor opinion of all possible claims that can be urged in support of Masonic antiquity, the hypothesis will fit in very well with the observations that have preceded it and it will terminate the " short studies " on the origin of our society.


Dr. Armstrong says : " The order of the Temple was called `the knighthood of the Temple of Solomon,' not in allusion to the first temple built by Solomon, but to their hospital or residence at Jerusalem, which was so called to distinguish it from the temple erected on the site of that destroyed by Titus. Now, when we find a body said to be derived from the Templars, leaving, amongst the plumage with which the modern society has clumsily adorned itself, so much mention of the Temple of Solomon, there seems some sort of a ground for believing in the supposed connexion ! The Hospitallers of St. John, once the rivals, became the successors of the Templars and absorbed a large portion of their revenues at the time of their suppression. This would account for the connexion between the Freemasons and the order of St. John." See The Christian Remembrancer, July .1847, pp. I5‑.17. The authorities mainly relied upon by Dr. Armstrong are William of Tyre and James of Vitry (Bishop of Acre) : " Est prxterea," says the latter, " Hierosolymis Templum aliud immensx quantitatis et amplitudinis, a quo fratres militia, Templi, Templarii nominantur, quod Templum Salomonis nuncupatur, forsitan ad distinctionem alterius quod specialiter Templum Domini appellatur " (cited in Addison's History of the Knights Templar, 1842, p. 1o).


Passing from the fanciful speculations which, at different times, have exercised the minds of individual theorists, or have long since been given up as untenable, we may examine those derivations which have been accepted by our more trustworthy Masonic teachers and, by their long‑sustained vitality, claim at least our respectful consideration. By this, however, is not implied that those beliefs which have retained the greatest number of adherents are necessarily the most worthy of acceptance. In historical inquiry finality can have no place, and there is no greater i 10 THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY error than to conclude " that of former opinions, after variety and examination, the best hath still prevailed and suppressed the rest." " As if the multitude," says Lord Bacon, " or the wisest for the multitude's sake, were not ready to give passage rather to that which is popular and superficial than to that which is substantial and profound ; for the truth is, that time seemeth to be of the nature of a river or stream, which carrieth down to us that which is light and blown up and sinketh and drowneth that which is weighty and solid" (Advancement of Learning). This idea seems to have been happily paraphrased by Elias Ashmole in his Theatrum Chemicum Britannicum (1652, Proleg.).


Before, however, commencing an analysis a few general observations will not be out of place. Krause, in Die drei Aeltesten Kunsturkunden, writes When we find in any nation or age social efforts resembling in aim and organiza tion those of the Freemasons, we are by no means justified in tracing any closer connexion between them than such as human nature everywhere and in all ages, is known to have in common, unless it can be historically proved that an actual relationship exists.


Likewise, Von Humboldt, in his Researches (1844, vol. i, p. ii), says A small number of nations far distant from each other, the Etruscans, the Egyptians, the people of Thibet and the Aztecs, exhibit striking analogies in their buildings, their religious institutions, their division of time, their cycles of regenera tion and their mystic notions. It is the duty of the historian to point out these analogies, which are as difficult to explain as the relations that exist between the Sanscrit, the Persian, the Greek and the languages of German origin ; but, in attempting to generalize ideas, we should learn to stop at the point where precise data are wanting.


The explanation, however, which Von Humboldt withheld, had long previously been suggested by Warburton (Divine Legation, 1837, vol. ii, pp. 203, 221), who dwells with characteristic force upon " the old inveterate error that a similitude of customs and manners amongst the various tribes of mankind most remote from one another, must needs arise from some communication, whereas human nature, without any other help, will, in the same circumstances, always exhibit the same appearance " ; and, in another passage of his famous work, he speaks " of the general conformity which is commonly ascribed to imitation, when, in truth, its source is in our own common nature and the similar circumstances in which the partakers of it are generally found." Even in cases where an historical connexion is capable of demonstration, we must bear in mind that it may assume a Protean form. It is one thing when an institution flourishes through being constantly renewed by the addition of new members, its sphere of action and regulations undergoing, at the same time, repeated changes ; and another thing when, from a pre‑existing institution, an entirely new one takes its rise. It is also different when a newly formed institution takes for its model the views, sphere of action and the social forms of one which has long since come to an end.


 I2 THE ANCIENT MYSTERIES having been the model of all later imitations. If, then, Freemasonry in its existing form is regarded as a mere assimilation of the Mysteries, attention should be directed chiefly to the bewitching dreams of the Grecian mythologists which, enhanced by the attractions of poetry and romance, would, naturally, influence the minds of those " men of letters " who, it is asserted, " in the year 1646 " rearranged the forms for the reception of Masonic candidates,‑in preference to the degenerate or corrupted mysteries of a subsequent era. This is a deduction arising from the admission into a Warrington Lodge in 1645 of Elias Ashmole and Colonel Mainwaring, of which Lodge wealthy landowners in the neighbourhood were also members. See England's Masonic Pioneers, by Dudley Wright, pp. 12‑47; and Sandy's Short View of the History of Freemasonry (1829), p. 5 2.


On the other hand, if Freemasonry is regarded as the direct descendant, or as a survival of the Mysteries, the peculiarities of the Mithraic worship‑the latest form of paganism which lingered amidst the disjecta membra of the old Roman Empire‑will mainly claim notice. It is almost certain, therefore, that if a set of philosophers in the seventeenth century ransacked antiquity in order to discover a model for their newly‑born Freemasonry, the " Mysteries properly so called" furnished them with the object of their search. Also, that if, without break of continuity, the forms of the Mysteries are now possessed by Freemasons, their origin must be looked for in the rites of Mithraism.


The first and original Mysteries appear to have been those of Isis and Osiris in Egypt and it has been conjectured that they were established in Greece somewhere about 1400 B.c., during the sovereignty of Erectheus. The allegorical history of Osiris the Egyptians deemed the most solemn mystery of their religion. Herodotus always mentions it with great caution. It was the record of the misfortunes which had happened to one whose name he never ventures to utter ; and his cautious behaviour with regard to everything connected with Osiris shows that he had been initiated into the mysteries and was fearful of divulging any of the secrets he had solemnly bound himself to keep. Of the ceremonies performed at the initiation into the Egyptian mysteries, we must ever remain ignorant, and Sir Gardner Wilkinson expressly states " that our only means of forming any opinions respecting them are to be derived from our imperfect acquaintance with those of Greece, which were doubtless imitative of the rites practised in Egypt." See Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, 1878, vol. iii, pp. 3 8o, 3 87 ; Herodotus, vol. ii, p. 171.


The most celebrated of the Ancient Mysteries were the Orphic, the Bacchic, or Dionysiac, the Eleusinian, the Samothracian, the Cabiric and the Mithraic. The Mysteries were known in Greece as mysteria, teletai and orgia. The last term originally signified sacrifices only, accompanied, of course, by certain ceremonies, but it was afterwards applied especially to the ceremonies observed in the worship of Dionysius and, at a still later period, to Mysteries in general.


The Eleusinian were probably a part of the old Pelasgian religion, also those of the Cabiri, celebrated more especially in Thrace. All nations of antiquity THE ANCIENT MYSTERIES 13 appear to have been desirous of concealing some parts of their religious worship from the multitude, in order to render them the more venerated and, in the present case, an additional motive was to veil its celebration from the gaze of their Hellenic conquerors, as the Walpurgis Nights were adopted by the Saxons in Germany, in order to hide their pagan ceremonies from their Christian masters.


This practice of concealing rites and ceremonies from the uninitiated was a feature of the worship of the Early Church and it has persisted, to the present day, in some Oriental forms of Christian worship.


The Eleusinian were the holiest in Greece and, throughout every particular of those forms in which its Mysteries were concealed, may be discerned the evidences that they were the emblems or, rather, the machinery, of a great system‑a system at once mystical, philosophical and ethical. They were supposed to have been founded by Demeter, Eumolpus, Musxus, or Erectheus, the last named of whom is said to have brought them from Egypt. The story of Demeter is related by Diodorus Siculus and is also referred to by Isocrates. This version of their foundation was the one generally accepted by the ancients. All accounts, however, concur in stating that they originated when Athens was beginning to make progress in agriculture. When Eleusis was conquered by Athens, the inhabitants of the former district surrendered everything but the privilege of conducting the Mysteries. Ample details of the ceremonies observed at Eleusis will be found in The Eleusinian Mysteries and Rites by Dudley Wright.


The Mysteries, by the name of whatever god they might be called, were invariably of a mixed nature, beginning in sorrow and ending in joy. They sometimes described the allegorical death and subsequent revivification of the Deity, in whose honour they were celebrated ; whilst, at others, they represented the wanderings of a person in great distress on account of the loss, either of a husband, a lover, a son, or a daughter. It admits of very little doubt that the Mysteries, by whatever name they were called, were all in substance the same.


We are informed by Julius Firmicus that, in the nocturnal celebration of the Bacchic rites, a statue was laid out upon a couch as if dead and bewailed with the bitterest lamentations. When a sufficient space of time had been consumed in all the mock solemnity of woe, lights were introduced and the hierophant, having anointed the aspirants, slowly chanted the following distich Courage, ye Mystx, lo, our God is safe, And all our troubles speedily shall end.


And the epoptce now passed from the darkness of Tartarus to the divine splendour of Elysium.


Lucius, describing his initiation into the Mysteries of Isis, says : " Perhaps, inquisitive reader, you will very anxiously ask me what was then said and done ? I would tell you if it could be lawfully told. I approached to the confines of death and, having trod on the threshold of Proserpine, at midnight I saw the sun shining with a splendid light." He then goes on to say, " that his head was decorously 14 THE ANCIENT MYSTERIES encircled with a crown, the shining leaves of the palm tree projecting from it like rays of light, and that he celebrated the most joyful day of his initiation by delightful, pleasant and facetious banquets." In all the Mysteries there were Degrees or grades. Similar gradations occurred among the Pythagoreans. It was an old maxim of this sect, that everything was not to be told to everybody. It is said that they had common meals, resembling the Spartan syssitia, at which they met in companies of ten and, by some authorities, they were divided into three classes, Acustici, Mathematici, and Physici. It also appears that they had some secret conventional symbols, by which members of the Fraternity could recognize each other, even if they had never met before. See under " Pythagoras " in Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography.


That, in all the Mysteries, the initiated possessed secret signs of recognition, is free from doubt. In the Golden Ass of Apuleius, Lucius, the hero of the story, after many vicissitudes, regains his human shape and is initiated into the Mysteries of Isis ; he finds, however, that it is expected of him to be also instructed in those " of the great God and supreme father of the gods, the invincible Osiris." In a dream he perceives one of the officiating priests, of whom he thus speaks : " He also walked gently with a limping step, the ankle bone of his left foot being a little bent, in order that he might afford me some sign by which I might know him " (Taylor's ed., bk. xi, p. 287). In another work (Apologia) the author of the Metamorphosis says : " If any one happens to be present who has been initiated into the same rites as myself, if he will give me the sign, he shall then be at liberty to hear what it is that I keep with so much care." Plautus, too, alludes to this custom in one of his plays (Miles Gloriosus, iv. z), when he says Cedo Signum, harunc si es Baccharum.


It has been alleged, but on very insufficient authority, that the Dionysian architects, also said to have been a fraternity of priest and lay architects of Dionysus or Bacchus, present in their internal as well as external procedure the most perfect resemblance to the Society of Freemasons (see Lawrie, History of Freemasonry, 1804, p. 31 ; and Robison's Proofs of a Conspiracy, 1797, p. zo). They seem, says Woodford (in Kenning's Cyclopaedia, p. 163), to have granted honorary membership and admitted speculative members, as we term them ; and it has been asserted that they had grades and secret signs of recognition. The chief interest in their history, however, arises from the claim that has been advanced for their having employed in their ceremonial observances many of the implements which are now used by Freemasons for a similar purpose. In the oldest of the Chinese classics, which embraces a period reaching from the twenty‑fourth to the seventh century before Christ, we meet with distinct allusions to the symbolism of the mason's art. But " even if we begin," says H. A. Giles (Freemasonry in China, p. 4), " where the `Book of History' ends, we find curious Masonic expressions to have been in use ‑at any rate in the written language‑more than seven hundred years before the Christian era ; that is to say, only about a couple of hundred years after the death THE ANCIENT MYSTERIES 15 of King Solomon himself. But, inasmuch as there are no grounds whatever for impugning the authentic character of that work, as connected with periods much more remote, this would give to speculative Masonry a far higher antiquity than has ever yet been claimed." In a famous canonical work, called The Great Learning, which Dr. Legge (The Chinese Classics, vol. i, Proleg., p. 27) says may safely be referred to the fifth century before our era, we read that a man should abstain from doing unto others what he would not they should do unto him ; " and this," adds the writer, " is called the principle of acting on the square." Giles also quotes from Confucius, 481 B.c. and from his great follower, Mencius, who flourished nearly two hundred years later. In the writings of the last‑named philosopher, it is taught that men should apply the square and compasses figuratively to their lives and the level and the marking‑line besides, if they would walk in the straight and even paths of wisdom and keep themselves within the bounds of honour and virtue. In Book VI of his philosophy we find these words A master mason, in teaching his apprentices, makes use of the compasses and the square. Ye who are engaged in the pursuit of wisdom must also make use of the compasses and the square.


The origin, rites and meaning of the worship of Mithras are extremely obscure. The authorities differ as to the exact period of its introduction into Rome ; Von Hammer (Mithraica, 1833, p. 21), placing it at 68 B.c., whilst, by other historians, a later date has been assigned. It speedily, however, became so popular as, with the earlier‑imported Serapis worship, to have entirely usurped the place of the ancient Hellenic and Italian deities. In fact, during the second and third centuries of the Empire, Serapis and Mithras may be said to have become the sole objects of worship, even in the remotest corners of the Roman world. " There is very good reason to believe," says King (The Gnostics and their Remains, p. 47), " that, as in the East, the worship of Serapis was, at first, combined with Christianity and gradually merged into it with an entire change of name, not substance, carrying with it many of its ancient notions and rites ; so, in the West, a similar influence was exerted by the Mithraic religion. There is no record of their final overthrow and many have supposed that the faith in " Median Mithras " survived into comparatively modern times in heretical and semi‑pagan forms of Gnosticism ; although, as Elton points out (Origins of English History, p. 3 S 1), we must assume that its authority was destroyed or confined to the country districts when the pagan worships were finally forbidden by law.


By authors who attempt to prove that all secret fraternities form but the successive links of one unbroken chain, it is alleged that the esoteric doctrines which in Egypt, in Persia, and in Greece preserved the speculations of the wise from the ears and tongues of illiterate multitude, passed, with slight modifications, into the possession of the early Christian heretics ; from the Gnostic schools of Syria and Egypt to their successors the Manichxans ; and that from these through 16 THE ESSENES the Paulicians, Albigenses and Templars, they have been bequeathed to the modern Freemasons.


According to Mackey, an instance of the transmutation of Gnostic talismans into Masonic symbols, by a gradual transmission through alchemy, Rosicrucianism and medixval architecture, is afforded by a plate in the A.Zoth Philosophorum of Basil Valentine, the Hermetic philosopher, who flourished in the seventeenth century. This plate, which is hermetic in its design, but is full of Masonic symbolism, represents a winged globe inscribed with a triangle within a square and on it reposes a dragon. On the latter stands a human figure of two hands and two heads, surrounded by the sun, the moon and five stars, representing the seven planets. One of the heads is that of a male, the other of a female. The hand attached to the male part of the figure holds the compasses, that to the female a square. The square and compasses thus distributed appear to have convinced Dr. Mackey (see his Encyclopaedia, under article " Talisman ") that originally a phallic meaning was attached to these symbols, as there was to the point within the circle, which in this plate also appears in the centre of the globe. " The compasses held by the male figure would represent the male generative principle and the square held by the female, the female productive principle. The subsequent interpretation given to the combined square and compasses was the transmutation from the hermetic talisman to the Masonic symbol." II. THE ESSENES " The problem of the Essenes," says De Quincey (Essay on Secret Societies), " is the most important and, from its mysteriousness, the most interesting, but the most difficult of all known historic problems." The current information upon this remarkable sect, to be found in ecclesiastical histories and encyclopxdias, is derived from the short notices of Philo, Pliny, Josephus, Solinus, Porphyry, Eusebius and Epiphanius. Of these seven witnesses, the first and third were Jewish philosophers ; the second, fourth, and fifth, heathen writers ; and the last two, Christian church historians. The Masonic student is referred to C. D. Ginsburg's The Essenes : their History and Doctrines, 18 64, also to the series of articles which appeared in vols. lxi and lxii of The Freemason, i9zi and 1922.


According to Creuzer (Symbolik, vol. iv, p. 433), the Colleges of Essenes and Megabyzx at Ephesus, the Orphics of Thrace and the Curetes of Crete are all branches of one antique and common religion ; and that originally Asiatic. King (The Gnostics and their Remains, pp. i‑3, 17 z) says, " the priests of the Ephesian Diana were called Essenes, or Hessenes‑from the Arabic Hassan, pure‑in virtue of the strict chastity they were sworn to observe during the twelvemonth they held that office. Such ascetism is entirely an Indian institution, was developed fully in the sect flourishing under the same name around the Dead Sea and springing from the same root as the mysterious religion at Ephesus." Krause (Dei drei Aeltesten Kunsturkunden, bk. i, pt. i, p. i 17) finds in the THE ESSENES 17 earliest Masonic ritual, which he dates at A.D. 926 (from being mentioned in the York Constitutions of that year), evidence of customs " obviously taken from the usages of the Roman Colleges and other sources, that individually agree with the customs and doctrines of the Essenes, Stoics and the Soofees of Persia." This writer draws especial attention to the " agreement of the brotherhood of the Essenes with the chief doctrines which the Culdees associated with the three great lights of the Lodge (ibid., p. I I7). He then observes " that though coincidences, without any actual connexion, are of little value, yet, if it can be historically proved that the one society knew of the other, the case is altered." Having, then, clearly established (at least to his own satisfaction) that the Culdees were the authors of the 926 Constitutions, he next argues that they knew of and copied in many respects the Essenes and Therapeutx ; after which he cites Philo in order to establish that the three fundamental doctrines of the Essenes were Love of God, Love of Virtue and Love of Mankind.


These he compares with the phases of moral conduct, symbolized in Masonic Lodges by the Bible, square and compasses ; and, as he assumes that the " Three Great Lights " have always been the same and argues all through his book that Freemasonry has inherited its tenets or philosophy from the Culdees, the doctrinal parallel which he has drawn of the two religious systems becomes, from his point of view, of the highest interest. Connecting in turn the Essenes with the Soofees of Persia, Krause still further lengthens the Masonic pedigree.


Although the Soofee tenets are involved in mystery, they had secrets and mysteries for every gradation, which were never revealed to the profane. (See Malcolm's History of Persia, 1829, vol. ii, p. 281.) But there seems reason to believe that their doctrine " involved the grand idea of one universal creed, which could be secretly held under any profession of an outward faith ; and, in fact, took virtually the same view of religious systems as that in which the ancient philosophers had regarded such matters " (King, The Gnostics and their Remains, p. 185).


" Traces of the Soofee doctrine," says Sir John Malcolm, " exist, in some shape or other, in every region of the world. It is to be found in the most splendid theories of the ancient schools of Greece and of the modern philosophers of Europe. It is the dream of the most ignorant and of the most learned " (op. Cit., vol. ii, p. 267) It remains to be noticed that, by one writer, the introduction of Essenism into Britain has been actually described and the argumentative grounds on which this speculation is based afford, perhaps, not an unfair specimen of the ordinary reasoning which has linked the principles of this ancient sect with those of more modern institutions. Algernon Herbert (Britannia after the Romans, 1836, vol. i, pp. 120‑5 ; vol. ii, pp. 75‑92) contends that St. Germanus, on his visits to England, for the purpose of extirpating the Pelagian heresy, found that the doctrines which Pelagius had imbibed from the Origenists were, as far as they went, agreeable to those Britons among whom the notions of Druidism still lingered, or were beginning to revive ; but they had been framed by him in the form and character of a Christian sect and did not include the heathenish portion of Origenism, though I 18 THE ROMAN COLLEGIA the latter was so far identical with Druidism, that both were modifications of Pythagorism.


The description of the Essenes given in Lawrie's History of Freemasonry, 1804 (PP‑ 33‑9) has been followed for the most part in later Masonic works. It was based mainly on Basnage's History of the Jews, bk. ii. Of this last writer Dr. Ginsburg says, he mistook the character of the Essenes and confounds the brotherhood with the Therapeut e, hence asserting that " they borrowed several superstitions from the Egyptians, among whom they retired " (p. 66).


III. THE ROMAN COLLEGIA The leading authorities for this section are Heineccius, De Collegiis et Corporibvs Opificvm, Opera omnia, Geneva, 1766, vol. ii, pp. 368‑418 ; J. F. Massman, Libellus Aurarius, Leipsic, 1840, pp. 74‑85 ; Smith, Diet. of Antiquities, titles, " Collegium," " Societas," " Universitas " ; H. C. Coote, The Romans of Britain, 1878, pp. 383‑413. The precision observed by Massman is very remarkable‑no fewer than forty‑five footnotes appearing on a single page (78).


The Roman " colleges " were designated by the name either of collegium or corpus, between which there was no legal distinction and corporations were as frequently described by one title as by the other. A classification of these bodies will the better enable us in any subsequent investigation to consider the features which they possessed in common. They may be grouped in four leading divisions (a) Religious bodies, such as the College of Priests and the Vestal Virgins.


(b) Associations of official persons, such as those who were employed in administration, e.g. the body of Scribce, who were employed in all branches of administration.


(c) Corporations for trade and commerce, as Fabri (workmen in iron or other hard materials), Pistores (bakers), Navicularii, etc., the members of which had a common profession, trade, or craft upon which their union was based, although every man worked on his own account.


(d) Associations, called Sodalitates, Sodalitia, Collegia Sodalitia, which resembled modern clubs. In their origin they were friendly leagues or unions for feasting together, but, in course of time, many of them became political associations ; but from this it must not be concluded that their true nature really varied. They were associations not included in any other class that has been enumerated ; and they differed in their character according to the times. In periods of commotion they became the central points of political factions. Sometimes the public places were crowded by the Sodalitia and Decuriati and the Senate was at last compelled to propose a lex which should subject to the penalties of Vis (see Smith's Dictionary, p. 1 zoo, tit. " Vis ") those who would not disperse. This was followed by a general dissolution of collegia, according to some writers, but the dissolution only extended to mischievous associations.


 THE ROMAN COLLEGIA z9 There were also in the Imperial period the Collegia tenuiorum, or associations of poor people, but they were allowed to meet only once a month and they paid monthly contributions. A man could only belong to one of them. Slaves could belong to such a collegium, with the permission of their masters.


The following were their general characteristics i. The collegium (or societas), which corresponded with the hetaria of the Greeks, was composed of collega or sodales (companions). The term originally expressed the notion of several persons being voluntarily bound together for some common office or purpose, but ultimately came to signify a body of persons and the tie uniting them.


z. A lawfully constituted " college" was legitimum‑an unlawful one, illicitum. The distinction is not clearly laid down. Some of these institutions were established by especial laws and others, no doubt, were formed by the voluntary association of individuals under the provisions of some general legal authority.


3. No college could consist of fewer than three members. So indispensable was this rule that the expression tres faciunt collegium‑" three make a college"became a maxim of the civil law.


4. In its constitution the college was divided into decurice and centuricz‑bodies of ten and a hundred men ; and it was presided over by a magister and by decuriones ‑a master and wardens.


S . Amongst other officers there were a treasurer, sub‑treasurer, secretary and archivist.


6. In their corporate capacity the sodales could hold property. They had a common chest, a common cult, a meeting‑house and a common table.


7. To each candidate, on his admission, was administered an oath peculiar to the college. Palgrave, in Rise and Progress of the English Commonwealth, says that peculiar religious rites were also practised, perhaps with a veil of secrecy ; and those forms of worship constituted an additional bond of union. When a new member was received, he was said‑co‑optari and the old members were said, with respect to him, recipere in collegium.


8. Dues and subscriptions were imposed to meet the expenses of the college.


9. The sodales supported their poor and buried their deceased brethren. The latter were publicly interred in a common sepulchre or columbarium, all the survivors being present. Members were not liable for the debts of their college, but the property of the college itself could be seized. They could sue or be sued by their syndicus or actor.


io. Each college celebrated its natal day‑a day called cares, cognationis‑and two other days, called, severally, dies violarum and dies rose (see Coote, The Romans in Britain, p. 388).


i i. The sodales called and regarded themselves as fratres. "For amongst them," says Coote, " existed the dear bond of relationship which, though artificial, was that close alliance which a common sentiment can make. This it was which, in defiance of blood, they called cara cognatio." This bond of connexion the civil 20 THE CULDEES law ratified and extended ; for, allowing the assumption of kinship, it imposed on the sodales another duty in addition to those already taken, by compelling any one of them to accept the guardianship of the child of a deceased colleague. The fratres arvales formed a college of twelve persons, deriving their name from offering sacrifices for the fertility of the fields, the victim (hostia ambarvalis) that was slain on the occasion being led three times round the cornfield before the sickle was put to the corn. This ceremony was also called a lustratio or purification. Krause says, " that although the college did not especially call one another ` brother,' yet the appellation does occur and that the college was formed on the model of a family " (Die drei Kunsturkunden der Freimaurerbruderschaft, vol. ii, pt. ii, p. 166).


Although no rules are extant of any of the trade colleges of the Romans, some of those in use among the colleges Cultorum Dei have descended to us. Of one of these last‑mentioned corporations the rules or by‑laws are given by Coote, who next cites corresponding regulations of three guilds (or, as he prefers to style them, Colleges) established in London, Cambridge and Exeter respectively, composed of gentlemen or persons unconnected with trade ; and, having carefully compared the rules of the British guilds with those of the college of cultores dei already quoted, their resemblances are placed in formal juxtaposition and he adds, " These coincidences, which cannot be attributed to imitation or mere copying, demonstrate the absolute identity of the gild of England with the collegium of Rome and of Roman Britain " (The Romans in Britain, pp. 390‑413).


Stieglitz, in his History of Architecture, divides the influence of the early colleges or corporations upon British and Continental Masonry respectively. In England, he thinks it possible that the colleges may have influenced the Brotherhood in their external development, but he records a tradition that at the time the Lombards were in possession of Northern Italy, from the sixth to the seventh century, the Byzantine builders formed themselves into guilds and associations and that, on account of having received from the Popes the privilege of living according to their own laws and ordinances, they were called Freemasons. If, indeed, any direct continuation of the Collegia can be shown, it must be through the guilds or fraternities of Britain or of Southern France. The Roman Law remained in force in Southern France throughout all vicissitudes of government and, at the Revolution, it consolidated its authority by superseding the Feudal law of the North, in Pays Costumier.


IV. THE CULDEES Dr. J. Lanigaw, in his Ecclesiastical History of Ireland (1822, vol. iv, p. 295), has declared that " if ever subjects plain and easy in themselves have been distorted, misrepresented and corrupted through ignorance and religious prejudice, the [Culdeel question merits a distinguished place among them." Yet, although the simplicity of the inquiry in its original bearings, when unweighted with " the obstruction of ingenious theory, professional prejudice and ecclesiastical pre‑ THE CULDEES 21 dilections," has also been deposed to by the highest living authority among Irish antiquaries (Dr. W. Reeves of Armagh, author of The Culdees of the British Islands as they appear in History, 1864), the labours of over fifty writers who have taken up the subject, including those of Dr. Reeves himself, attest by their many points of divergence the substantial difficulties of the investigation.


Great stress has been laid by Dr. Reeves on the " national error " of supposing the Culdees to have been a peculiar order, who derived their origin from St. Columba ; or, in other words, that they were " Columbites," in the same sense that we speak of " Benedictines " and he contends that, though after the lapse of centuries Culdees were found in churches which St. Columba or his disciples founded, still their name was in no way distinctive, being, in the first instance, an epithet of asceticism and afterwards that of irregularity.


Many learned men have believed that there was some connexion between the Culdees and the Roman collegia, or the esoteric teaching of Phcenician or Eastern confraternities. This belief, indeed, has mainly arisen from the profound speculations of Krause, whose conclusions have been too hastily adopted by many German writers of distinction, whence they have in turn penetrated to this country (see Kunsturkunden, bk. i, pt. ii, p. 3 5 8 ; bk. ii, pt. i, p. 468).


In his laboured Inquiry into the Origin of all Languages, Nations and Religions, Higgins, the industrious author of the Anacalypsis, finds room for many allusions to Freemasonry. According to his view, the Essenes, the Druids and the Culdees were all Freemasons in progressive stages of development. Higgins says : " I request my reader to think upon the Culidei or Culdees in the crypt of the Cathedral of York, at Ripon and in Scotland and Ireland‑that these Culdees or Chaldeans were masons, mathematici, builders of the Temple of Solomon ; and that the country where Ellis found access to the temple in South India (referring to the statement that this member of the Madras Civil Service, in the capacity of a Free mason, had actually passed himself into the sacred part, or adytum, of one of the Indian temples, Anacalypsis, 1836, vol. i, p. 767) was called Colida and Uria; that the religion of Abraham's descendants was that of Ras ; that Masonry in that country is called Raj or Mystery ; that we have also found the Colida and most other of these matters on the Jumna, a thousand miles distant in North India and, when he has considered all these matters, as it is clear that one must have bor rowed from the other, let him determine the question‑Did York and Scotland borrow from the Jumna and Carnatic, or the Jumna and Carnatic from them ? " In another work Higgins says : " The Culdees were the last remains of the Druids, who had been converted to Christianity before the Roman Church got any footing in Britain. They were Pythagoreans, Druidical monks, probably Essenes and this accounts for their easily embracing Christianity ; for the Essenes were as nearly Christians as possible " (The Celtic Druids, the Priests of the Nations who Emigrated from India, 1829, p. zos). Higgins is in error in his statement that the Druids were converted to Christianity before the Roman Church got any footing in Britain. There is abundant historical, even epistolary, evidence to the contrary.


 22 THE CULDEES The most remarkable, however, of all theories connecting the Culdees with the Freemasons was advanced by the Hon. Algernon Herbert in 1844 and has been characterized by Dr. Reeves " as a strange combination of originality and learning, joined to wild theory and sweeping assertion " (see British Magazine, vol. xxvi, pp. 1‑13). According to this writer, under the shell of orthodoxy, Culdeism con tained a heterodox kernel, which consisted of secret rites and the practice of human sacrifice.


" Taking the question," he says, " as against the Culdees to be whether or not they had secret mysteries inconsistent with the orthodoxy of their outward profession, we may approach it in two ways‑the external, or testimony directly bearing on the fact of their having such secrets ; and the internal, or indications of specific evils appearing in the course of their history. The first mode resolves itself into this question : Are they charged with having secrets ? They are, both by ancients and moderns, although the fact of their being so is neither notorious nor prominent." We are next informed that " they made their appearance in the Continent under Colman or Columban in A.D. 589. Whilst in Burgundy, the courtiers of the king inflamed him against the man of God and urged him to go and examine into his religion. The king accordingly went to the monastery of Luxeuil and demanded of the holy abbot why he departed from the manners of the rest of the province and 2vhy access within the more secret enclosure was not permitted to all Christians 1 He also went on to say that if Columban wished the royal support, all persons must be admitted into all places. The man of God replied, If you come hither for the purpose of destroying the ccenobia of the servants of God and casting a stain on the regular discipline, know that your kingdom will entirely fall and perish." " From this statement it appears that the early Culdees excluded strangers from their septa secretioria in such a manner as was unknown in Burgundy and dissonant from the mores comprovinciales, sufficing to raise up doubts of their religion, and ` cast a stain upon their rule' ; and that Columban neither denied, nor explained, nor in any way modified the circumstances complained of. He might have denied the peculiarity of his system and shown that the Gallican or comprovincial usages permitted it ; or he might have maintained its general expediency, whilst inviting the most searching investigation of his secret places, things and practices, by a commission of holy bishops, or other suitable persons : he might, in some way, have sought his own compurgation and exposed his calumniators, but he did not. All this amounts to the substance of the proposition sought for‑viz. that their system was actually censured of old, not for this or that evil, but for the secrecy which may (if abused) cloak any evil whatsoever." In the view of the same writer, " the most remarkable incident to Culdeism is the idea of human sacrifice " ; and the legend of St. Oran is subjected to minute criticism. " Poor Oran," he says, " was overwhelmed, and an end for ever put to his prating." In Donald Mackintosh's Collection of Gaelic Proverbs occurs one which reads : " Earth ! Earth 1 on the mouth of Oran, that he may not blab more." Hence we learn that the mysteries of early Culdeism, as known to those who had THE CULDEES 23 penetrated into the septa secretioria, contained an acknowledgment of the falsehood of the Christian religion as outwardly taught by the Culdees. The founder suppressed those dangerous avowals. But on what grounds ? Solely because the blabbing of secrets, so manifestly true as Oran's resurrection might seem to make them, was impolitic. Double doctrine, maintained by organic secrecy (and that secrecy vindicated by murder), is as clearly set forth in the traditions of Columba as any sovereign Prince of Heredom could ever have desired it to be in the mysteries framed " first at Icolmkill." Herbert here quotes from a French Masonic work, in which, what is spoken of as the eighteenth Degree is declared to have been established " first at Icolmkill " and afterwards at Kilwinning (see British Magazine, vol. xxvi, p. 12).


Herbert further contends that the stories and proverbs he has adduced show that some such ideas were once connected with Culdeism. But if, subsequently to Adamnan and Bede, no such opinions prevailed either in books or in vulgar estimation, these legends must date from anterior times and from the very beginning. " When general charges exist against a body and are believed by many, any given tale to their prejudice may be false and of recent invention. But, if no such general opinion prevails, or hath prevailed at any known time, specific tales or proverbs involving that opinion must flow from the fountain head. This latter proposition is the more certain when the things said of the parties are not said against them. But the legend of St. Oran was evidently not commemorated to their prejudice. No inferences were drawn from it, the consequences which it involves were not evolved and the reputation which it tends to fix upon them did not adhere to them." CHAPTER II THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS THE ancient documents handed down from the operative masons in Great Britain and Germany respectively‑all generically described under the misleading title of " Constitutions "‑require to be examined carefully and described separately. The so‑called " Constitutions," peculiar to England and Scotland, contain legends or traditional history, which are not to be found in the regulations or working statutes of the latter country, nor do they appear in the Ordinances of the Craft either in France or Germany. The only point of identity between the English and German Constitutions in the shape of legend or tradition is the reference to the " Four Holy Crowned Martyrs," but as they are only mentioned in one of the English versions and then merely in that portion of the MS. devoted to religious duties, the thread that connects them is a very slender one indeed. It will be found that, as a general rule, early documents of the guilds or crafts commence with .an invocation of saintly patronage and the " Holy Martyrs " were not monopolized in this respect by the masons of Germany, as they were the assumed patrons of numerous other fraternities. Nor can it be maintained, with any show of reason, that the slender thread of union already cited at all warrants the conclusion that the English Masons derived the legend of the " Quatuor Coronati " from their German Brethren. The British Constitutions, or " Old Charges," have indeed neither predecessors nor rivals and their peculiar characteristics will be found, in truth, amply to warrant the detailed examination which follows.


By no other craft in Great Britain has documentary evidence been furnished of its having claimed at any time a legendary or traditional history. Oral testimony of any real antiquity is also wanting when it is sought to maintain that the British Freemasons are not singular in the preservation of their old legends. The amusing pretensions of certain benefit societies do not affect the claim, for no " traditions " of these associations can be traced historically to a period sufficiently remote to prove their independent origin ; the probability being that they are all modern adaptations of Masonic traditions and customs.


In saying " no other craft," the French Compagnons are excluded from consideration. They were afterwards members of all crafts, though, in the first instance, the association was confined to the masons and carpenters. Not that the " Compagnons " were without legendary histories, but they now possess no early writings with which we can compare the " Old Charges of British Freemasons," as the " Constitutions " under examination have been aptly termed by W. J. Hughan, the Masonic author whose labours have been the longest sustained in this branch of archaeological research.


24 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 25 The legends peculiar to the Compagnonage have been lightly passed over by Masonic and other historians. This is in a great measure to be accounted for, no doubt, by the absence of any literature bearing on the subject until a comparatively recent date. Authors of repute have merely alluded to this obscure subject in the most casual way and, virtually, the customs and legends of this association were quite unknown to the outer world, until the appearance of a small work in 1841, by Agricol Perdiguier, entitled Le Livre du Compagnonage. The leading features of the Compagnonage are given by Dr. Mackey in his Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, pp. I79‑8I (Philadelphia, 1874). The subject is also discussed, though at less length, by Woodford and Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, in the excellent Cyclopeedias for which they are responsible.


Perdiguier, who was a Compagnon, writes of the organization as a Freemason would of Freemasonry, i.e. without disclosing aught of an esoteric character ; but the legends and customs are carefully described. The analogies between distinctive portions of the English and French legends occur too frequently and are too strongly marked to be accidental. If, then, we may assume that certain legends were afloat in early days of the Compagnonage, anterior to the date of our earliest British Constitution‑the " Halliwell," circa 139o‑the following is the result In the fourteenth century there is, on the one hand, an organization (the Compagnons) in full activity, though without manuscript Constitutions, or legends, which has endured to this day. On the other hand, there is documentary evidence satisfactorily proving that the legendary history of the English Masons was not only enshrined in tradition, but was embalmed in their records. Yet we have little or no evidence of the activity of English Masons in their Lodges at so early a period, beyond what is inferentially supplied by the testimony of these Old Charges or Constitutions, which form the subject of the present investigation.


On the‑whole, it may reasonably be concluded that the Compagnons of the Middle Ages preserved legends of their own which were not derived from the Freemasons (or Masons) ; and the latter, doubtless, assembled in Lodges, although Acts of Parliament and other historical records are provokingly silent upon the point.


But if the legends of the Compagnonage were not derivative, can the same be said of those which have been preserved by the Masons ? The points of similarity are so varied and distinct, that if it be conceded that the present legends of the two bodies have been faithfully transmitted from their ancestors of the Middle Ages, the inference is irresistible, either that the Masons borrowed from the Compagnons, or that the traditions of both associations are inherited from a common original.


At no previous period have equal facilities been afforded for a study of these " Old Charges of British Freemasons," either as respects their particular character, or their relations to the Compagnonage and other organizations, Masonic or otherwise. Until the middle of the nineteenth century barely ten copies were known to be in existence, but since i 86o (chiefly through the zeal of W. J. Hughan, who published the result of his labours in 1872 and the patient and discriminative 26 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS research of the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford) more than double that number have been brought to light. Many extracts from manuscripts, which were missing, have now been noted and all references to such documents, for the last two hundred years, have been duly arranged and their precise nature estimated.


Without an exception, all these " Old Charges " have been carefully collated and their points of agreement and divergence as far as possible extracted, in order that their value as ancient Masonic chronicles may accurately be gauged. One at least of these MSS., possibly two, date before the introduction of the printing press. Of the remainder, some twenty were in circulation amongst the Masonic Lodges prior to the last century, the majority being over two hundred years old and all being copies of still older documents.


No two of the MSS. are exactly alike, though there is a substantial agreement between them all and evidently they had a common origin, just as they were designed to serve a common purpose. As it is probable that each Lodge, prior to the last century, had one of these " Old Charges " amongst its effects, which was read to an apprentice on his introduction to the Craft, it is almost certain that additional scrolls still await discovery, the only wonder being, that considering how numerous the Lodges must have been, so few have yet been traced. Possibly, however, the " several very valuable manuscripts concerning the Fraternity (particularly one written by Nicholas Stone, the warden of Inigo Jones), too hastily burned by some scrupulous brothers " (this statement of Dr. Anderson must be accepted with reserve), mainly consisted of forms of the " Old Charges." When and how the first of these documents was compiled, or by whom, it is impossible now to decide, for we possess no autographic versions of the Masonic Constitutions.


It will be desirable to furnish something like a detailed account of the copies extant and, in order to do so, Hughan's Old Charges (which, singular to state, contains the only collection ever published of these ancient Constitutions) has been consulted ; also the remarkable preface to that work, by the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford. Since the issue of this volume in 1872, additional MSS. have been discovered ; so, for the sake of perspicuity and general convenience, they will all be considered seriatim, according to their actual or supposed age, each being indicated by a number for facility of reference, which number has been prefixed to their popular titles. An alphabetical classification was adopted by Hughan, but these transcripts are now so numerous, that no single alphabet would suffice for the purpose.


As many of these old MSS. are undated, their age is partly a matter of conjecture ; but it may be assumed that the periods of origin herein assigned approximate closely to the actual dates. Preference has been given to the testimony of such independent paleographical authorities as Edward A. Bond (late principal librarian of the British Museum) and other non‑Masonic " experts," to the possibly interested opinions of those connected with the Fraternity and the antiquity of these or any other documents relating to Freemasonry has not been overstated. Whilst anxious, however, to disconnect such ancient writings from modern adaptations and erroneous interpretations, there is no minimizing of appreciation of their importance and value, THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 27 as the repertories of time‑honoured traditions and regulations. Even regarded in this light alone, these old legends and traditions, these bygone usages and regulations of the operative guilds, thus happily preserved, have and always must have for all thoughtful Freemasons, the deepest value and the most lasting interest.


The classification adopted consists of three divisions, which will include all the versions, viz. (A) originals ; (B) late transcripts ; (C) printed copies, extracts, or references. An asterisk denotes that the date is an approximation.


(A) MS. VERSIONS OF THE "OLD CHARGES" 1. " HALLIWELL." *14th Century. British Museum (Bib. Reg., 17A I).


Early History of Freemasonry in England, by J. O. Halliwell, Esq., F.R.S., London, 1840 and 1844 ; Dr. C. W. Asher, Hamburg, 1842, and other reprints. Masonic Magazine, London, 1874, etc. (modernized). A small MS. on vellum, about 5 inches by 4 inches, bound in russia, having thereon G. R. II, 1757 and the royal arms. It formerly belonged to Charles Theyer, a noted collector of the seventeenth century and is No. 146 in his catalogue, as described in Bernard's Manuscribtorum Anglite (p. 200, col. 2). Soon afterwards it was placed in the Old Royal Library, founded by King Henry VII, for the princes of the blood royal, comprising nearly 12,000 volumes, the munificent gift of His Majesty George II to the nation, A.D. 1757. In A Catalogue of the Manuscripts of the King's Library (London, 1734), by David Casley (deputy‑librarian of the Cottonian Library), the MS. is erroneously entitled A Poem of Moral Duties and it was not until April 18, 1839, that its chief contents were made known in a very suggestive paper by Halliwell (Phillips), " On the Introduction of Freemasonry into England," read before the Society of Antiquaries, which will be found in the Proceedings of that body, session 1838‑9. See Archceologia, vol. xxviii, p. 444. Casley, who was considered an accurate judge of the age of MSS., ascribed it to the fourteenth century and the learned editor of the poem considers it was written not later than the latter part of that century. E. A. Bond places it at the middle of the fifteenth century ; Dr. Kloss between 1427 and 1445. Halliwell believes he is right in stating " that this is the earliest document yet brought to light connected with the progress of Freemasonry in Great Britain " and, apart from " Fabric Rolls " and similar records, he is doubtless justified in making the claim. The Rev. A. F. A. Woodford says : " The poem is of high antiquity. . . . If ever Pars Oculi turns up, an old poem, now missing, from which John Myre borrowed his poem, a portion of which is found in the Masonic poem (and Myre wrote in 1420), we shall probably find that it is Norman‑French, or Latin originally " (The Freemason, November 18 79).


2. " COOKE." *15th Century. British Museum (Addl. MSS. 23,198).


Published by R. Spencer, London, 1861 and edited by Matthew Cooke, hence its title. It was purchased from a Mrs. Caroline Baker, October 14, 1859, for the National Collection and its original cover of wood remains, with the rough twine connecting the vellum sheets, apparently as sewn some four hundred years ago. In size it resembles its senior (MS. 1) ; the reproduction by Spencer, excepting the facsimile at the beginning, being an amplification of the original.


Bond's estimate is, " Early 15th Century " and there seems to be no reason z8 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS to differ from him, although some authorities have sought to refer it to the latter part of that century, because there are several references in the MS. to the Policronicon. It has been too hastily assumed that Caxton's celebrated work of A.D. 1482 is the one thus alluded to (Findel makes this erroneous statement and others have copied from him), the fact being lost sight of, that, whilst the first typographical edition was not issued until that year, the compilation itself, from certain old Latin chronicles, is supposed to have been arranged by Roger, a Benedictine monk of St. Werburgh's Abbey, in Chester, early in the previous century. It was soon afterwards enlarged by Ranulph Higden of the same monastery, styled a Polycronicon, or Universal History and was brought down to his own time. He died about A.D. 13 6o. The earliest edition is believed to have been issued in 1342 and numerous Latin transcripts were in circulation, as well as a translation in English prose, by John de Trevisa (chaplain to the Earl of Berkeley) during the same century. There will be occasion to refer to these later on, but there is no evidence whatever of any printed work being alluded to in this quaint chronicle (MS. z). Findel terms it the " Cooke‑Baker document," simply on the ground that Dr. Rawlinson, about 1730, spoke of a MS. being in the possession of a Mr. Baker, but the latter was in the form of a Roll, whereas the Cooke MS. never was ; hence such a title is both misleading and improper.


 3. " LANSDOWNE." *16th Century. British Museum (No. 98, Art. 48).


Published in Freemasons' Magazine (February z4, 18 5 8) and Hughan's Old Charges (p. 31), but not in the Freemasons' Magazine, 1794, as stated by M. Cooke and other writers, neither is it dated 156o as Fort asserts. Bond sets it down at about 16oo and by all authorities it is considered to be of a very early date, probably of the middle or latter half of the sixteenth century, as these " Free Masons Orders and Constitutions " are believed to have been part of the collectioh made by Lord Burghley (Secretary of State, temp. Edward VI and Lord High Treasurer, temp.


Elizabeth), who died A.D. 15 98.


The MS. is contained on the inner sides of three sheets and a half of stout paper, 11 inches by 15, making in all seven folios, many of the principal words being in large letters of an ornamental character (see Hughan's Masonic Sketches, part z, p. z1). Sims (MS. Department of the British Museum) does not consider these " Orders " ever formed a Roll, though there are indications of the sheets having been stitched together at the top and paper or vellum was used for additional protection. It has evidently " seen service" and is entitled to the third place in order of actual transcription. The catalogue of the Lansdowne MSS., A.D. 1812, fol. 19o, has the following note on the contents of this document‑" No. 48. A very foolish legendary account of the original of the order of Freemasonry," in the handwriting, it is said, of Sir Henry Ellis. The Lansdowne MSS. are so called in honour of the Marquess of Lansdowne. On his death the MSS., consisting of 1,245 vols., were purchased in 1807 by a Parliamentary grant of 04,925.


 4. " GRAND LODGE." A.D. 15 83. Grand Lodge of England.


First published by Hughan in his Old Charges. This roll of parchment (9 feet in length and 5 inches in breadth) was purchased by the Board of General Purposes, THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 29 for the Library and Museum, in 1839, for the sum of Cz5, from Miss Siddall, the granddaughter of Thomas Dunckerley's second wife. At the time of purchase it was declared to be " dated 25th December 1183, in the twenty‑ninth year of Henry II ; and that this date is nearly correct may be inferred from the writing, which is the court hand of that time." After describing its character, the same writer asserts that it contains " the ancient Charges as agreed on at the Grand Lodge, held at York A.D. (about) 926." This appears to have been too much even for the Rev. Dr. Oliver to accept for, on the Roll being shown to him, he placed it as late as the time of Elizabeth, in this respect differing from the writer of the article (see Freemasons' Quarterly Review, 1842, p. 149). A careful examination of the manuscript itself, however, reveals the fact that the date is " Scriptum anno domini 1583, Die Decembris 250." In early days, figures were not always traced with mathematical precision and the mistake in reading five for one may be accounted for in many ways. On the reverse of the scroll occurs the first verse of the 1st chapter of John (" Whose sacred and universal law I will endeavour to observe, so help me God "), in Dunckerley's handwriting (it is said), so that it may be easily surmised what use he made of the Roll as an ardent Royal Arch Mason.


 5. "York, No. i." *17th Century. The York Lodge, No. 236, York.


Published in Hughan's Old Charges and Masonic Magazine (August 1873). In an inventory of the effects of the Grand Lodge of All England (extinct), held at York, six copies of the Old Charges were catalogued, five of which are now carefully treasured by the York Lodge. They were numbered one to six without respect to their relative antiquity for, though the first is certainly the oldest, the second is the junior of the series. The senior is thus described in the Inventory of A.D. 1779 ‑" No. i. A parchment roll in three slips, containing the Constitutions of Masonry and, by an endorsement, appears to have been found in Pontefract Castle at the demolition and given to the Grand Lodge by Brother Drake " (1736). It was used as a roll, measuring about 7 feet in length and 5 inches in width. Francis Drake, F.R.S., was a native of Pontefract, of which place both his father and grandfather had been in turn the vicar. His great‑grandfather, prior to his ordination, was a Royalist officer and his diary of the siege was published some years ago by the Surtees Society. The history of this MS. and that of the last on the inventory, after the Grand Lodge at York died out, has been a singular one. They had been lost sight of by the York Brethren for several years. Hughan, whose sight was preternaturally keen when Masonic MSS. were being searched for, at last identified the " wanderers " at Freemasons' Hall, London, through their description in the inventory and,.having announced his discovery to the members of the York Lodge, who had become possessed of the bulk of the archives formerly appertaining to the Grand Lodge of that city, they made application to the then Grand Master, the Earl of Zetland, for the two Rolls. He willingly acceded to the petition and they were restored to the custody of their rightful owners in 1877. During its absence from York this MS. was transcribed (circa 1830) and a second copy afterwards made by Robert Lemon, Deputy‑Keeper of State Papers (in consequence of some imperfection in the first one), which was presented to H.R.H. the Duke of Sussex, the then Grand Master. When the rolls were examined by Hughan the two transcripts were tied up with them, also a letter from Lemon, dated September 9, 1830, suggesting a 30 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS collation of the original Roll with the one owned by the Lodge of Antiquity. The date of the MS. is partly determined from internal evidence, partly from a consideration of the date when Pontefract Castle surrendered to the Parliamentary Forces (March 25, 1649). The demolition began during the following month. The Roll seems to have formed the text for at least three of the other York MSS. It is mentioned in Hargrove's History of York as being in the possession of the Lodge, to which it was given by Francis Drake.


6&7‑ "WILSON, Nos. i & z." *17th Century. Thirlestane House, Cheltenham.


Published in Masonic Magazine, 1876 and in Kenning's Archa'ological Library, 1879. The earliest known reference to this MS. occurs in the " Manifesto of the Right Worshipful Lodge of Antiquity, 1778," as follows : " O. MS. [meaning Original MS.] in the hands of Mr. Wilson, of Broomhead, near Sheffield, Yorkshire, written in the reign of K. Henry VIII." This Manifesto is published in extenso in Hughan's Masonic Sketches, pp. 1oz‑8. Until, however, fifty years ago, all attempts to trace the actual MS. resulted in failure. A clue being at length obtained, the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford (and others assisting) ultimately succeeded in obtaining an exact transcript. The search elicited the fact that there existed " a duplicate copy. Both seem about the same age and are verbatim et literatim " (see The Freemason, July z6, 1879). They were sold to Sir Thomas Phillips (a great collector of MSS.) by Wilson and were afterwards in the possession of his son‑in‑law, the Rev. J. E. A. Fenwick, of Cheltenham, who kindly permitted a transcript to be made. The MSS. are written on vellum and certain words are rubricated. By some authorities, their origin is placed early in the seventeenth century, although Woodford, whose opinion is entitled to great weight, considers that the sixteenth century would be a more correct estimate.


8. " INIGO JONES." A.D. 1607. The Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, London.


Published only in the Masonic Magazine, July 1881. Its right to the above title is based upon the claim made in the document itself, which was sold November 12, 1879, by Puttick & Simpson. The cataloguer described it as " The ancient Constitutions of the Free and Accepted Masons. A very curious folio manuscript, ornamented title and drawing by Inigo Jones, old red morocco, gilt leaves, dated 1607." Woodford subsequently became its fortunate possessor and, as usual with him, lost no time in making the Craft acquainted with its contents. He mentions that " it is a curious and valuable MS. per se, not only on account of its special verbiage, but because it possesses a frontispiece of masons at work, with the words ` Inigo Jones delin' (not fecit as incorrectly printed in the Masonic Magazine, July 1881) at the bottom. It is also highly ornamented throughout, both in the capital letters and with ` finials.' It may be regarded as almost certain that it did belong to Inigo Jones. It is of date 1607." Woodford also states that he considers " it a peculiarly interesting MS. in that it differs from all known transcripts in many points and agrees with no one copy extant." The validity of these claims is open to remark, but the subject will again be referred to later on. Its importance has been rather under than over stated ; for this, one of the latest " discoveries," is certainly to be classed amongst the most valuable of existing versions of the manuscript Constitutions.


 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 31 9. "WOOD." A.D. 16io. The Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, London.


Published only in the Masonic Magazine, June 1881. For the acquisition of this scroll in 1879, the Craft has again to thank the fortunate owner and discoverer of the " Inigo Jones " MS. Wood, from whom it was obtained, is unable to furnish particulars of its history, beyond that the MS. had been in his possession for about twenty years. " It belonged to a family who died out many years ago and is of great age " (see The Freemason, February z, 1880). In editing the manuscript, Woodford informs us that it is " written on parchment (or vellum), with partially illuminated letters here and there.. The ` Finis de Tabula,' at the end of the Index (for it has also an index), is, according to some authorities, most archaic and may refer to an original two hundred years older. It therefore deserves careful noting and perusal." It is entitled The Constitution of Masonrye. Wherein is briefly declared the first foundation of divers Sciences and principally the Science of Masonrye. With divers good Rules, Orders and Precepts, necessary to be observed of all Masons." Then follow the first verse of Psalm cxxvii and the declaration " Newlye Translated by J. Whitestones for John Sargensonne, 16io." If, as Woodford suggests, No. 9 was copied from another MS. of the fifteenth century, which is not at all unlikely, the term " Translated " may be simply an equivalent for modernized.


10. " YORK, No. 3." A.D. 163o. At York A.D. 1779.


The MS. third in order on the " Inventory " at York of A.D. 1779 (already alluded to) has not been traced of late years. We know that it was a version of the Constitutions by the description " No. 3. A parchment Roll of Charges on Masonry, 1630 " ; and it is just possible that No. 41 may have been this document. At all events, it is not No. 15, though some plausible reasons have been advanced in favour of this view, because that Roll bears no date and, apparently, was not transcribed until fifty years later than No. 1o.


I I. " HARLEIAN, 1942." *17th Century. British Museum.


An incomplete copy was published in the Freemasons' Quarterly Review of 1836 (p. z88), by Henry Phillips (of the Moira Lodge, now No. 92). Another transcript was printed in Hughan's Old Charges. Bond (Freemasons' Magazine, July 10, 1869), in reply to W. P. Buchan (of Glasgow), respecting the ages of the Masonic MSS. in the British Museum, stated that " he could speak without any hesitation as to the general period of their date " and he ascribed the present MS. to the " beginning of the seventeenth century " ; the document next following in this series being, he considered, half a century later in point of time. There cannot, however, be much difference between them as to the dates of transcription, but it is probable that No. 12 was copied from a much older text.


There are only two versions of the Old Charges in the vast collection made towards the end of the seventeenth century by Robert Harley (afterwards Earl of Oxford and Mortimer), viz. in vols. 1942 and 20S4. The collection consisted of some 1o,ooo vols. of MSS. and more than 16,ooo original rolls, charters, etc. In the Catalogue Bibliothecee Harleiana, of A.D. 18o8, the number 1942 is thus described : " A very thin book in 4to, wherein I find‑1. The harangue to be made 1 32 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS at the admittance of a new member into the Society or Fellowship of the Freemasons ; 2. The articles to be observed by the several members of that Society ; 3. The new articles and form of the oath to be taken at admission. Whether this be a copie of that old book mentioned by Dr. Plot in his Staffordshire I cannot say." No. i i contains The New Articles (z6 to 31), which are not in any other known MS., also the " Apprentice Charge," peculiar to a few versions only (the latter being entirely omitted by Phillips in his transcript of the MS.). These two specialities and, particularly, the clauses 26 to 31, constitute a text of great importance and will again be referred to.


12. " HARLEIAN, 2054." *17th Century. British Museum.


Published in Hughan's Masonic Sketches and Masonic Magarine, 1873. The official catalogue describes vol. 2054 as " A Book in folio consisting of many Tracts and loose papers by the second Randle Holme and others . . . and the third Randle Holme's account of the Principal Matters contained in this Book." In it are " Charters of the joyners, carvers and turners ; weavers, bakers, wrights, carpenters, slaters and sawyers ; beer brewers, mercers and ironmongers ; saddlers, drapers," being various guilds or companies of Chester. There is no original record of these in the British Museum, but the MSS. were transcribed by the second and third Randle Holme, sometimes dated and at other times not, from records, for the most part written, it is supposed, before 16oo.


The Holmes of Chester were evidently enthusiastic students of heraldry, and three generations were represented in the persons of the grandfather, father and son‑all bearing the Christian name of Randle‑at the Herald's Office, as deputy to the College of Arms for Cheshire and other counties. The first Randle Holme died 1654‑5, the second in 1649 and the third in 1699‑1700 (born 1627). The second Holme is stated to have died A.D. 1659, but, according to W. H. Rylands (Masonic Magazine, January 1882), his death occurred in 1649 (1 Charles II, i.e. computing the reign from the death of Charles I). Now, if No. 12 is in the hand‑writing of the third Randle Holme, Clearly A.D. 1650 is quite early enough for the transcription, as it is believed to have been copied by that diligent antiquary. The original, however, from which it was taken was evidently much older ; but, having classified the MSS. according to the periods of their transcription, rather than the presumed age of their original texts, in strictness this document should be numbered after No. 13, though, for the sake of convenience, the " Harleian " (11 and 12) have been coupled with the " Sloane " MSS. (13 and 14).


No. 12 is written on four leaves of paper, containing six and a half pages of close writing in a very cramped hand. The water‑mark is indistinct and undated. After the recital of the Old Charges, entitled the Freemasons' Orders and Constitutions, is a copy of a remarkable obligation to " keep secret " certain " words and signes of a free mason," etc. and likewise a register of the fees paid (varying from five shillings to twenty) " for to be a free mason," by twenty‑seven persons whose names appear. We have here the earliest known mention of words and signer (see Masonic Sketches, pt. 2, p. 46 and Masonic Magazine, January and February 1882). As Hughan states, they are apparently not connected with the Old Charges, as forming an integral part of this version, though they were most probably used by one and the same body.


 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 33 13. " SLOANE, 3848." A.D. 1646. British Museum.


Published in the Old Charges (also Masonic Magazine, 1873) and named by Hughan as the probable text for 1 z and 14. This may have been the case as regards the latter, but not, possibly, as to the former. There is an undated water‑mark in the paper, which is of no importance, the conclusion of the MS. being " Finis p. me Edwardu Sankey, decimo sexto die Octobris Anno Domini, 1646." Fort draws attention to the fact that it was written on the same day and year that Elias Ashmole, the celebrated antiquary, was initiated as a Freemason at Warrington. Rylands has proved (Masonic Magazine, December 1881 ; see also Wright's England's Masonic Pioneers, p. 31) that Richard Sankey and his family for generations before him, were landowners in Warrington and that, in the Warrington registers, is the entry, " Edward, son to Richard Sankey, Gent., Bapt. 3rd February 1621‑2," so it is quite within the limits of probability that the same Edward Sankey transcribed No 13 for use at the initiation of Ashmole and Colonel Mainwaring on October 16, 1646.


14. " SLOANE, 3323." A.D. 1659. British Museum.


Published in Hughan's Masonic Sketches. It is signed and dated " H ec scripta fuerunt p. me Thomam Martin, 1659." The entire collection of 50,000 vols., printed books and MSS., conditionally bequeathed by Sir Hans Sloane was secured by Act of Parliament in 175 3 for the use of the nation, to all posterity, at the nominal cost of 20,000. Sir Hans Sloane has labelled this volume " Loose papers of mine concerning curiosities." The part endorsed " Freemasons " is written on six leaves of paper (5 inches by 4) and is briefer than usual in the historical narrative. The writing is small and neat. Its text presents a variation from the ordinary form, which will be noticed hereafter.


15. " BUCHANAN." *17th Century. Freemasons' Hall, London.


Published for the first time in this work and adopted as a type of the ordinary MSS. This parchment roll was presented to the Grand Lodge of England by George Buchanan, Whitby, March 3, 188o; and, in proposing a vote of thanks to the donor, the Earl of Carnarvon, Pro Grand Master, stated that " he had no doubt it would be very much to the satisfaction of Grand Lodge, if other members were found as generous as Brother Buchanan." As respects its age, Buchanan's opinion that it is of the latter part of the seventeenth century‑say from 166o to 168o‑appears, after a careful examination of the MS., to be well founded. Its history may thus briefly be summarized. The scroll was found with the papers of the late Henry Belcher, an antiquary, who was a partner with the father of Buchanan (solicitor). Belcher was a friend of Blanchard, who, according to Hargrove, was the last Grand Secretary under the Northern organization and from whom he obtained some of the effects of the then extinct Grand Lodge of All England (York). For this reason it has been sought to identify No. 15 with the missing MS. of the York Inventory, but Hughan has clearly set aside the claim, having cited the fact that "York MS. No. 3 " was dated A.D. 1630 (see Nos. 1o and 41).


 34 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 16. " KILWINNING." *17th Century. Mother Kilwinning Lodge, Scotland.


Published in Hughan's Masonic Sketches (Part 2) and Lyon's History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, 1873, pp. 108‑11. In glancing at the minutes of the Lodge of Edinburgh for the years 1675 to 1678, D. Murray Lyon, the Scottish Masonic historiographer, was struck with the similarity which the handwriting bore to that in which the Kilwinning copy of the " Narration of the Founding of the Craft of Masonry is written " ; and, upon closer examination, he felt convinced that in both cases " the caligraphy was the same," the writer having been the clerk of the former Lodge (see Lyon, op. cit., p. 107): Lyon, however, is not justified in stating that this document is entitled to prominence because of its being the only one in which the term Free Mason occurs in a MS. of the seventeenth century or earlier ; as Nos. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 15, and others, contain precisely the same expression, whilst in some, " True Mason " and " Free Mason " are both used. As will be noticed more fully hereafter, all the Scottish versions are evidently of English origin. Lyon, in his History of Lodge No. 1, Scotland, states that " in the early part of the last century it was a custom of the Lodge of Kilwinning to sell to Lodges receiving its charters, written copies of this document (MS. 16), which was termed the old buik " (p. .107). The " Kilwinning " version is very similar to No. 4, but differs considerably from the " Melrose " text.


17. " ATCHESON HAVEN." A.D. 1666. Grand Lodge of Scotland.


The " Musselburgh " or " Atcheson Haven " MS. was published in the History of Freemasonry and the Grand Lodge of Scotland (zd edit., 1859), by W. A. Lawrie ; but, having been slightly altered and modernized, a correct transcript of the original in Freemasons' Hall, Edinburgh, was printed by Lyon in his History of No. 1, Scotland. " Ane Narratione of the finding out of the craft of Masonrie and by whom it heth been cherished," is engrossed in the earliest known minutebook of this old Lodge and bears date A.D. 1666.


18. " ABERDEEN." A.D. 1670. Ancient Lodge at Aberdeen.


Published in Voice of Masonry, Chicago, U.S.A. (December 1874). After the " Laws and Statutes " of the old Lodge at Aberdeen, A.D. 1670 (the earliest preserved), comes the " Measson Charter," as it is called and then the general laws, list of members, etc., etc., all beginning in 1670, when the " mark book " was commenced.


As the records of this remarkable Lodge will again be considered, they need scarcely be particularized further in this place. It may be stated, in brief, that its ancient members " ordained likeways that the Measson Charter be read at the entering of every Entered Apprentice and the whole Laws of this Book. Ye shall find the charter in the hinder end of this Book‑Farewell." This transcript does not seem to have been made from any complete standard text, as it breaks off abruptly at clause 9 of the " General Charges" (vide MS. 15). It is curious, on perusing the copy, to find that, whilst the clerk was content to acknowledge the English origin of the text, by inserting the clause True leidgeman to the King of England, he gratified his national proclivities by making the " First Charge " to read " true man to God and to the holy kirk." THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 35 19. "MELROSE, No. 2." A.D. 1674. Old Lodge at Melrose, Scotland.


Published in Masonic Magazine (January i88o). For the discovery of this important MS. in 1879, the Craft is indebted to W. Fred. Vernon, of Kelso. Notwithstanding the number of Masonic pilgrimages to Melrose and the diligent searches instituted from time to time, this copy of the "Old Charges" eluded detection until the date mentioned. Apparently, there was no allusion to this version until 1879, though its existence had been suspected by Hughan, who made frequent inquiries on the subject and induced friends to search for a copy, but without success, until Vernon's visit, when the latter kindly furnished him with an exact transcript, afterwards published as before stated. It has been contended that this MS. is similar to the other Scottish versions, and that it is most probably a copy of No. 16 (see The Freemason, October 18, 1879). The facts, however, are, that, in many portions, it varies considerably from the other Scottish MSS. and the document is of far greater value than the other three (Nos. 16, 17, and 18) already described. One can almost positively declare it to be a transcript of an extinct MS. Of A.D. 15 81 (Melrose No. 1), or even earlier, as the conclusion is a certificate from a " master freemason," in favour, apparently, of the lawful service by his apprentice. The copyist has likewise certified the days and date of his transcription, viz. " Extracted by me, A. M., upon the 1, 2, 3, and 4 dayes of December, anno MDCL.


IIII." Vernon, in his sketch of the old Melrose Lodge, suggests the clue to the name of the transcriber, viz. Andro Mein, who wrote also a copy of the " Mutuall Agreemint Betwixt the Maisonis of the Lodge of Melros," of the year 1675, which still exists. The family of the Meins supported the Craft for many generations and, in 1695, out of twelve signatures attached to a resolution of the Lodge, no fewer than eight were those of members distinguished by that patronymic.


20. "HOPE." *17th Century. Lodge of Hope, Bradford, Yorkshire.


Published in Hughan's Old Charges, pp. 5 8‑63. The transcript thus printed was a copy kindly supplied by the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford and compared with the original parchment scroll by William W. Barlow, who, as the then Master of the Lodge, consented to its publication. It is slightly imperfect in the Apprentice Charge and, in its present state, is about six feet in length, the deficiencies being easily supplied by comparison with MS. 25, which it resembles. Its title is, " The Constitutions, articles which are to be observed and fulfilled by all those who are made free by the Rt. Wor'. M‑. Fellowes and Brethren of Free Masons at any Lodge or assemblie." 21. "YORK, No. 5." *17th Century. York Lodge at York.


Published in Masonic Magazine, August 1881, from a transcript made by William Cowling and Ralph Davison. It bears neither date nor signature, but seems to have been written about A.D. 1670. The roll of paper is 71‑ feet by 8 inches and must have been still longer originally, as the first portion of the introduction is wanting at the present time. Its text is that of MS. 5 and was described in 1779 as " Part of another Paper Roll of Charges on Masonry." 36 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 22. "YORK, No. 6." *17th Century. The York Lodge.


Published in Masonic Magazine, March i88o. It is described in the York Inventory as " a parchment Roll of Charges, whereof the bottom part is awanting," which description occasioned its identification by Hughan as being in the custody of the Grand Lodge of England, to which reference has already been made. It is strange that the part missing was found with the Roll and appears to have been cut off designedly from the original. The severed portion, when applied to the remainder of the scroll, clearly establishes, if further proof was necessary (see Old Charges, p. 13), that it is the roll so long missing from York ; but it is now scarcely probable that its history in the interim will be cleared up. In the Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of England, March 4, 1840, there is an intimation that " Bro. White, the Grand Secretary, had presented to the library a valuable and interesting collection of Masonic works, consisting of 63 printed volumes, also an ancient manuscript." If the latter was a copy of the Old Charges, it must have been this particular MS. or No. S, as the origin of No. 4 has been clearly established. There were but three MSS. in Grand Lodge until the advent of No. 15 and at present Nos. 4 and 15 are the only representatives of their class at Freemasons' Hall. It is considered to be of a little later date than No. 21 and is a very indifferent copy of one of the earlier York Rolls, its imperfection being increased by the careless tracing of an indistinct text by a transcriber. According to Hughan, the conclusion is unique, viz., " Doe all as you would bee done unto and I beseech you att every meeting and Assembly you pray heartily for all Christians‑Farewell." 23. "ANTIQUITY." A.D. 1686. Lodge of Antiquity, London.


Published in Hughan's Old Charges from a transcript of the original, certified by E. Jackson Barron, who also furnished an interesting account of the scroll, which is of parchment (9 feet by I I inches) and headed by an engraving of the Royal Arms after the fashion usual in deeds of the period. The date of the engraving is fixed by the initials at the top " I z R " (James II, King) and under are emblazoned in separate shields the arms of the City of London and the Masons' Company. Then follows the injunction, " Fear God and keep his Commandments, for this is the whole duty of man." The invocation beginning, " In the name of the Great and Holy God," is in that respect different from the majority of the MSS. which commence, " The might of the Father of Heaven." The word " Cratches " (cratch = " a rack for hay or straw "‑Bailey. In the Breeches Bible, published a century before this MS., cratch is printed instead of " manger " in Luke ii, 16) occurs before the recital of the General Charges, which Preston quotes as `t Crafties," but there is no doubt of the word being as stated, whatever meaning was intended to be conveyed by the term. Preston also makes an unwarrantable addition to the conclusion of the fifteen articles, by inserting, " At the installment of master " (see Illustrations of Masonry, 1788, pp. 100‑3), not to be found in the original. The final sentences are very suggestive, viz. " William Bray, Free‑man of London and Free‑mason. Written by Robert Padgett, clearke to the Worshipful Society of the Free Masons of the City of London, in the second yeare of the Raigne of our most Gracious Soveraign Lord, King James the Second of England, etc., Annoq. Domini, 1686." According to Kenning's Masonic Cyclopiedia, Robert Padgett did not belong to, nor is his name to be found on the books of the Masons' Company THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 37 24. " SUPREME COUNCIL, No. 1." A.D. 1686. Duke Street, St. James's, London.


Not yet published. The Roll was met with in Wales and acquired by Colonel Shadwell H. Clerke, who, in 1879, placed it in Hughan's hands for transcription (The Freemason, October 11, 1879) and afterwards presented it to the Supreme Council, 3 30, London, for their extensive Masonic Library. The Old Charges are written on two parchment skins, sewn together and headed with an ornate illumination, the arms of London and the Masons' Company (in two ovals) and the inscription " J. 2d R. 1686," the date being the same as that of its partner and predecessor, No. 23. The text seems to be that of the Dowland version (MS. 39), slightly modernised.


 25. "YORK, No. 4." A.D. 1693. The York Lodge.


Published in Hughan's Masonic Sketches. It is written on a large roll of paper, slightly mutilated and endorsed, " Brother Geo. Walker of Wetherby, to the Grand Lodge of York, 1777, No. 4, 1693 " ; the date is further certified by, " These be the Constitucions of the noble and famous History, called Masonry, made and now in practice by the best Masters and Fellowes for directing and guideing all that use the said Craft, scripted p. me vicesimo tertio die Octobris, anno Regni regis et Regina Gulielmy et Marie quinto annoque Domini 1693‑Mark Kypling." The following singular record is at the foot of the Roll " The names of the Lodg.


William Simpson Cristopher Thompson Anthony Horsman Cristopher Gill Mr. Isaac Brent, Lodg Ward," making, with the copyist five members and the Warden of the Lodge‑six names in all.


The text of No. 25 is not only valuable, from its containing the Apprentice Charge, which is absent from the other York MSS., but especially so, from the anomalous instructions which are preliminary to the " Charges," viz. " The one of the elders takeing the Booke and that bee or shee that is to bee made mason, shall lay their hands thereon and the charge shall be given." The possibility of females having been admitted as Freemasons and duly obligated, as in ordinary instances has been a fruitful topic of inquiry and discussion since the publication of this Roll in 1871 ; and, so far as a settlement of the point is concerned, we are no nearer to it now than we were then, because we cannot be certain that the insertion of " shee," instead of they, was not a clerical error (which is the opinion of Hughan, Lyon and Dr. Mackey). More, however, on this topic hereafter. Findel is unfortunate in his suggestion that " the contents are almost exactly like those of the so‑called York Constitution," the fact being that they are quite dissimilar. (See Findel's History of Freemasonry, p. 34. He also cites Krause in confirmation.) 26. " ALNWICK." A.D. 1701. Alnwick.


Published in American edition of Hughan's Masonic Sketches, etc., 1871 and in his Old Charges, 1872 ; also Masonic Magazine, February 1874. "The Masons' Constitutions " (as they are termed) are written on the first twelve pages preceding 3 8 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS the records of the " Company and Fellowship of Freemasons of a Lodge held at Alnwicke," the first Minute of which begins 29th September 1701, " being the Generall head meeting Day," when several " orders to be observed " were agreed to. Evidently a recital of the " Old Charges " was considered as a necessary prerequisite to the rules and so they were entered accordingly. The folio volume belonged to Edwin Thew Turnbull of Alnwick, who lent the whole of the records, including the MS., to Hughan for perusal and for publication, if considered desirable. A sketch of the old Lodge by Hughan was given in The Freemason, January 21, 1871 and reprinted in the Masonic Magazine, February 1874, also in other publications. The Latin sentences at the end of No. 26 have been discovered by the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford in a little work of 1618, but they are not of any Masonic importance.


27. "YORK, No. 2." A.D. 1704. The York Lodge.


Published in Hughan's Masonic Sketches, pp. 79‑88. It is the junior of the York Rolls, written on parchment (6o by 71 inches) and is entitled " The Constitutions of Masonrie, 1704," the certificate being " Script nono Die Septembris Anno Regni Dome Nre Anne Regina nunc Angl., etc., Tertio. Annoq. Dom. 1704 " ; but there is no signature. The heading, however, may indicate the name of the scribe, " An Annagrame on the name of Masonrie. Robert Preston to his friend Daniel Moult, upon the Art of Masonrie, as followeth." It is singular that No. 5 has a similar " Anagraime," only given by William Kay " to his friend Robt. Preston." Findel, on his visit to York, failed to decipher this anagram, which is now reproduced Much might be said of the noble art, A Craft that is worth esteeming in each part ; S undry nations, nobles and their kings also, 0 h how they sought its worth to know, N imrod and Solomon the wisest of all men, Reason saw to love this science, then I 'll say no more, lest by my shallow verses I E ndeavouring to praise, should blemish Masonrie.


This poem on the Craft, forming the prologue to two copies of the Old Charges, is certainly old as a composition, whatever may be said of its merits, for it probably dates from the sixteenth century. As seen, by reference to the above, it was made to do duty in 1704, just as it was used in its prototype (No. i of the York series), about a century earlier, with a few trifling alterations in the orthography.


28. " SCARBOROUGH." A.D. 1705. Grand Lodge of Canada.


Published in Mirror and Keystone, Philadelphia, 186o ; The Craftsman, Hamilton, Ontario, February 1874; and Masonic Magazine, September 1879. It was published in 186o by Leon Hyneman, as editor of the Mirror and Keystone, August 22, 186o, but had been quite lost sight of until Jacob Norton of Boston, U.S.A., made inquiries respecting the original, which was owned by the Rev. J. Wilton Kerr of Clinton, Canada. Unfortunately it had been lent and mislaid ; but, after a search, it was traced and generously placed in the hands of T. B. Harris, Grand Secretary THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 39 of Canada, for that Grand Lodge. A verbatim transcript was published shortly afterwards, by the editor of The Craftsman, whose appeal for its recovery (in connexion with the earnest endeavours of Jacob Norton) was so successful. Hughan has forcibly observed, " Such a result illustrates what may yet be done in the tracing of further MSS. if other Brethren displayed equal earnestness and persistence " (Masonic Magazine, 1879, p. 104). The value of this version is really greater on account of the endorsement, than for the text of the MS. itself, the former being of special importance (as also the concluding record of No. z5). Moreover, the date of the Minute partly determines the age of the document, the antiquity claimed by the Rev. J. Wilton Kerr being the first decade of the sixteenth century. The record reads thus :‑" We ... That att a private lodge held att Scarbrough in the County of York, the tenth day of July 1705, before William Thompson, Esq., P'sident of the said Lodge and severall others Brethren Free Masons, the severall p'sons whose names are herevnto subscribed were then admitted into the said Fraternity. Ed. Thompson, Jo. Tempest, Robt. Johnson, Tho. Lister, Samuel W. Buck, Richard Hudson." The editor of The Craftsman, who has carefully scrutinized the MS., says, "unhesitatingly the year is 1705 " and so did Leon Hyneman ; but Kerr maintains that it is 1505. On internal evidence the editor of The Craftsman says " that there is reason to believe that the figure has been altered, a microscopic examination showing a difference in the colour of the ink between that part of the figure which makes a good seven and that part which has been added, if the seven has been transformed into a five. It is a very awkward and unsymmetrical five as it stands ; remove the part supposed to be added and a very good seven remains." Hughan accepts the year as 1705 and considers that the copy of the Old Charges was probably made for that meeting and subsequent ones intended to be held, the admissions being recorded on the blank side with the signatures of the initiates. The newly initiated members signed the record of their admission in the early proceedings of the old Lodge at York (see Masonic Sketches, part 1, p. 40). There are several Thompsons entered as members in those records, but not a " William " Thompson, the President in 1705 being Sir George Tempest.


29. " PAPWORTH." *A.D. 1714. Wyatt Papworth, London.


Published in Hughan's Old Charges, pp. 75‑9. The document was originally in the form of a Roll, written on pages of foolscap size, which were joined continuously. Afterwards, probably for convenience, the pages were again separated and made into a book of twenty‑four folios. The water‑mark consists of a crown and the letters " G.R." above, so that it could not have been written before 1714. It was purchased by Wyatt Papworth from a London bookseller ; and, as it lacked the conclusion of the ordinary MSS. (Rules 16 to 18 inclusive as in No. 15), that gentleman has supplied the omission from No. 39, which it closely resembles. The motto at the beginning of the Roll is, " In God is all our Trust," the previous MS. (No. z8) having a similar one on its seal (" In the Lord is all our Trust ").


30. "GATESHEAD." *A.D. 173o. Lodge of Industry, Gateshead.


Published in Masonic Magazine, September 1875, with an article (continued from the August number) by the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, explanatory of the early history of the Lodge of Industry, Gateshead. We here find a very late instance of 40 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS a Lodge utilizing the Old Charges, presumably for reading to the initiates. Their occurrence at so advanced a period of the eighteenth century, as a portion of the laws of the Craft, is doubtless owing to the Lodge having been mainly an operative one and independent of the Grand Lodge until 173 5. The general and special clauses, which closely resemble those of No. 15, are entitled " Orders of Antiquity " and consist of some twenty‑one rules, being numbered accordingly. They were written about A.D. 1730, the oldest Minutes being bound up with a copy of the Constitutions of A.D. 1723. The Apprentice Orders were entered a little later and, as Woodford says, " in their present form are unique." They begin by reminding the apprentices about to be " charged," that, " as you are Contracted and Bound to one of our Brethren, we are here assembled together with one accord to declare unto you the Laudable Dutys appertaining unto those yt are apprentices ; " and then recite an epitomized history of the Craft from the Tower of Babylon to the royal Solomon, the remainder corresponding with similar clauses in Nos. 11, zo, 25 and 37, though exceeding them in length ; then comes the parting counsel to the neophytes, that they should " behave one to another gentlely, Friendily, Lovingly and Brotherly ; not churlishly, presumptuously and forwardly ; but so that all your works (words ?) and actions may redound to the Glory of God, the good report of the Fellowship and Company. So help you God. Amen." In all probability, these " Orders of Antiquity" reproduce a much older version, now missing.


 31. " RAWLINSON." *A.D. 1730. Bodleian Library, Oxford.


Published in Freemasons' Magazine, March and April 18 5 5 and Masonic Magazine, September 1876. The original has not been traced, the note in the Scrap Book being to the effect, " Copied from an old MS. in the possession of Dr. Rawlinson," by which we know that Richard Rawlinson, LL.D., F.R.S., who was an enthusiastic Masonic collector, possessed an ancient version, from which this transcript was made about 1730. The termination is unusual, for, instead of " the contents of this Booke," or some such form, the words substituted are the holy contents of this Roll.


(B) LATE TRANSCRIPTS OF THE " OLD CHARGES " 32. (MS. 8) " SPENCER." A.D. 1726. Grand Lodge of Massachusetts.


Published in the Old Constitutions, by R. Spencer, 1871. This seems to be in the main a copy of No. 8, or, at all events, of one very like it. Five years before the discovery of No. 8, the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford suggested that this document was a copy of an older MS. and not a transcript of No. 47. It would seem, therefore, that the surmise of 1872 was realized in 1879, as many points of resemblance plainly indicate No. 8 as the original of Nos. 3 2 and 47. It is the only version that resembles No. 8, though there are printed copies that generally agree, which, as they are evidently taken from Nos. 8 or 32, need not be quoted as extra versions. The MS. was purchased in July 1875, at the sale of Richard Spencer's valuable Masonic library, for Enoch Terry Carson, of Cincinnati, the well‑known Masonic bibliographer. It is beautifully written, in imitation of the copper‑plate style, in a small book, the size of the early issues of Cole's Constitutions and was probably the text from which those editions were engraved. It may have been actually a THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 41 copy of No. 8, not necessarily exact ; and if so, the Inigo Jones MS. is the only document of its kind now known. Some authorities set up No. 37. as an independent version. Colour is lent to the supposition by the style in which the MS. is written, which is highly suggestive of its being intended as a model for the art of the engraver.


33. (MS. z) " WOODFORD." A.D. 1728. The Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, London. 34. (MS. 2) " SUPREME COUNCIL, No. 2." A.D. 1728. Duke Street, London.


These MSS. are certainly copies of No. 2 and are little gems of caligraphy. The first was purchased some years ago by the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford from Kerslake, bookseller, Bristol and contains the arms plate of " William Cowper, Esq., Clerk to the Parliaments " [Grand Secretary, 1723] and the inscription, " This is a very ancient record of Masonry, w`h was copy'd for me by Wm Reid, Secretary to the Grand Lodge, 17z8‑Ld Coleraine, Grd. Master, Al. Choke Depy ; Nat. Blackesby and Jo. Higmore, Gd Wardens." The second is in the library of the Supreme Council, 3 3', London and, in a pencil note, is termed, Lord Coleraine MS. In date, size and style it resembles the former and was probably a transcript made for Lord Coleraine, Grand Master, 1727‑8. Bound in morocco gilt, or otherwise attractively habilitated, Nos. 32, 33 and 34 form a handsome trio.


35. (MS. 18) " MELROSE No. 3." A.D. 1762. Old Lodge at Melrose.


This is simply a transcript of No. 18 and is thus referred to in the Records " Given out this day, the old Rights of the Lodge contained in a long Roll to be extracted by Nichol Bowr and Thomas Marr and they are to be allowed for their trouble " (see Masonic Magazine, May 188o). The copy is still preserved by the Lodge and was probably in common use, the older Roll being reserved for important occasions. A similar practice now obtains in the York Lodge, where to ordinary visitors are exhibited copies of the ancient documents‑a precautionary measure which cannot be too highly commended‑and, doubtless, affords ample satisfaction to all who have not made the subject a special study.


36. (MS. 13) " TUNNAH." *A.D. 1828. W. J. Hughan, Truro.


The transcript, which resembles No. 13, was once the property of John Tunnah, of Bolton, for many years Provincial Grand Secretary of East Lancashire ; and, on his decease, was presented by his partner, James Newton, to a fellow Masonic student, W. J. Hughan. The water‑mark in the paper is of the year 1828. There are a variety of notes on the manuscript, one being, " This may be a copy of the old MS. said to have been in the possession of Nics Stone, a sculptor under Inigo Jones, which was destroyed with many others, 1720 (vide Preston, p. 217) " ; and another, " The Parchment MS. may be the original Charter of Constitution and Obligation sent from the Grand Lodge (or Lodge of Antiquity), when the Lodge at Bolton was constituted, A.D.‑,varied according to circumstances of the time " ‑to all of which the answer must be‑Yes 1 it may be ! 37. "WREN." A.D. 185 z. The Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, London.


Published in Masonic Magazine, December 1879. It is endorsed " Copy from an ancient parchment Roll, written in old Norman English about the date of 16oo and said to be a true copy of the original found amongst the papers of Sir Christopher 42 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS Wren, who built St. Paul's Cathedral, London. This parchment roll belonged to the late Rev. Mr. Crane, a very learned divine and zealous Mason, for many years Provincial Grand Secretary, when Sir Robert S. Cotton [father of the late Lord Combermere, afterwards Provincial Grand Master] was the Provincial Grand Master for Cheshire." Signed " Bro. S. Browne, Secretary and Treasurer of the ` Cestrian,' 615, Chester A. L., 4852, December 4th." It was purchased, with other papers from the latter, by W. R. Bainbridge, of Liverpool, prior to S. Browne leaving for North Wales, where he died ; and its name has also been known as the " Browne " or "Crane" MS.; but, as the endorsement is particular in mentioning its origin, the title selected is the preferable one, especially as every item is useful as a means of possible identification. The MS. begins with the concluding part of the Euclid Charges and apparently did so from the first, the folios being numbered consecutively as if complete (see The Freemason, March 6, 1880). The conclusion is in Latin, signed Vera copia, &c., J. L. Higsom. Possibly the Latin sentences were inserted in the original of this MS., as in No. 26, to exhibit the linguistic abilities of the scribe‑certainly not for the information of the Craftsmen, to whom all such recitals must have been even less edifying than they would be to operative masons of the present day.


 (C) PRINTED COPIES, EXTRACTS, OR REFERENCES 38. "DERMOTT." *16th Century. G. L. Minutes (Ancients). 42. " MORGAN." *17th Century. G. L. Minutes (Ancients).


The only allusion to versions of the Constitutions in the records of the Ancients occurs in a minute of December 6, 175 2, viz.: " The Grand Secretary desired to know whether there was any other books or manuscripts more than had been delivered to him upon the 2d of Feb. 175 2. To which several of the Brethren answered that they did not know of any. Others said, they knew Mr. Morgan had a roll of parchment of prodigious length which contained some historical matters relative to the ancient Craft, which parchment they did suppose he had taken abroad with him. It was further said, that many manuscripts were lost amongst the Lodges lately modernized, where a vestige of the Ancient Craft was not suffered to be revived or practized ; and that it was for this reason so many of them withdrew from Lodges (under the modern sanction) to support the true ancient system. ..‑. The Grand Secretary produced a very old manuscript, written or copied by one Bramhall, of Canterbury, in the reign of King Henry the Seventh, which was presented to Br. Dermott (in 1748) by one of the descendants of the Writer. On perusal, it proved to contain the whole matter in the fore‑mentioned parchment, as well as other matters not in that parchment." It may fairly be assumed that these two Rolls are rightly placed in the present series, being in all probability copies of the Old Charges. Laurence Dermott was the Grand Secretary alluded to, his predecessor being John Morgan. The documents still await discovery.


 3 9 " DOwL.AND." *17th Century.


Published in Gentleman's Magazine, March 31, 1815 and Hughan's Old Charges. The original of this copy is also missing; and though, in 1872, Hughan expressed the hope "that after careful comparison, it will be traced to one of the MSS. extant," THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 43 the expectation has not yet been realized. James Dowland, who forwarded it to the editor of the Gentleman's Magazine for publication in 1815, thus described the document, " For the gratification of your readers, I send you a curious address respecting Freemasonry, which not long since came into my possession. It is written on a long roll of parchment, in a very clear hand, apparently early in the seventeenth century and, very probably, is copied from a MS. of earlier date." Woodford styles it " that most ancient form of the Constitution " and places it at " about 15 00," or, rather, as representing a MS. of that period (see Preface to Old Charges, p. xi). Of course Dowland's estimate may have been an erroneous one, as nothing is really known as to his paleographical qualifications ; still, in present circumstances, one can but accept the period assigned by him, because of whatever date the original or autographic version may have been, the Dowland Scroll and the other Old Charges (properly so termed) that have come down to us, are but later copies of types differing more or less from those circulated in the first instance. The estimate furnished by Findel is of a very unsatisfactory character, viz.: " With this document most of the manuscripts known to us agree, excepting only in a few unessential and unimportant particulars, as, for example, a scroll of the Lodge of Hope, at Bradford ; also one in York, of the year 1704 ; the Lansdowne Manuscript ; one of Lawrie's," etc. (History of Freemasonry, pp. 32, 33). As Dowland's text is of the ordinary kind, it will readily be seen that the differences are neither few nor unimportant.


 40. " DR. PLOT." *17th Century.


Published in Natural History of Staffordshire (c. viii, pp. 316‑18) 1686. Dr. Robert Plot, Keeper of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, in a rather sarcastic manner, examines the claims of the " Society of Freemasons " to antiquity in his noted Natural History of A.D. 1686 and alludes particularly to the " large parchment volum they have amongst them, containing the History and Rules of the craft of masonry. Which is there deduced, not only from sacred writ, but profane story, particularly that it was brought into England by St Amphibal and first communicated to St Alban, who set down the Charges of masonry and was made paymaster and Governor of the King's works and gave them charges and manners as St Amphibal had taught him. Which were after confirmed by King Athelstan, whose youngest son Edwyn loved well masonry, took upon him the charges and learned the manners and obtained for them of his father, a free‑Charter. Whereupon he caused them to assemble at York and to bring all the old Books of their craft and out of them ordained such charges and manners, as they then thought fit ; which charges on the said Schrole or Parchment volum, are in part declared ; and thus was the craft of masonry grounded and confirmed in England. It is also there declared that these charges and manners were after perused and approved by King Hen. 6. and his council, both as to Masters and Fellows of this right Worshipfull craft." It is impossible to decide as to the date of the " Schrole of parchment," so the latest estimate that can be fixed has been inserted : no existing MS. agrees exactly with these references or extracts from the " parchment volum." 41. " HARGROVE." *17th Century.


The extract from a MS. not now known, which was said to be at York A.D. 1818, in Hargrove's History of that city (vol. ii, pp. 475‑8o), does not agree 1 44 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS with any existing MS., either at York or elsewhere, for which reason Hughan, in his Old Charg es, gives a portion of the quotation, the remainder being, " And when this Assembly was gathered together, they made a cry, that all masons, both old and young, that had any writeinge or understanding of the charges that were before in the land, or in any other land, that they should bring them forth ; and when they were secured and examined, there was found some in French, some in Greek, some in English and some in other languages ; and he commanded a booke thereof to be made and that it should be read and told when any Mason should be made and to give his charge ; and, from that time to this, Masons have kept and observed this form." The only living member of the extinct Grand Lodge, when this work was written, was Blanchard, proprietor of the York Chronicle. The author (Hargrove) states :‑" About the year 1787, the meetings of this (Grand) Lodge were discontinued, and the only member now remaining is Mr. Blanchard, to whom the writer is indebted for information on the subject. He was a member many years and being Grand Secretary, all the books and papers which belonged to the Lodge are still in his possession " (ibid., p. 476. See also No. 15). In the extract the " Royal Edwin " is spoken of as " a Great Protector " for the Craft and it is also recorded that " When the ancient Mysterie of Masonrie had been depressed in England by reason of great warrs, through diverse nations, then Athelston, our worthye king, did bring the land to rest and peace." In some respects the language of the extract agrees more nearly with the quotation from an old MS. noted in Dr. Anderson's Constitutions, than with any of the existing texts.


 42. See Ante. No. 38.


 43. " MASONS' Co." *17th Century.


In the Edinburgh Review," April 1839, p. 103, is an interesting article by Sir Francis Palgrave, wherein mention is made of an inventory of the contents of the chest of the London (Masons') Company, " which not very long since contained (i.e. shortly before 1839), a Book wrote on parchment and bound or sticht in parchment, containing an 113 annals of the antiquity, rise and progress of the art and mystery of Masonry." Sir F. Palgrave adds : " But this document is now not to be found." 44. (MS. I I) "ROBERTS." *17th Century.


The library of the late Richard Spencer contained several rare Masonic works, some being unique copies. No. 24o at the " Spencer‑Sale " was published in 1722 at the moderate price of sixpence. The only copy known was purchased at this sale on behalf of R. F. Bower, of Keokuk, Iowa, who had one of the finest Masonic libraries in the world, consisting of some thousands of volumes of books, pamphlets, MSS. and medals. The price paid for it was L8 ios. The valuable works and MSS. at the sale were mainly divided by competition between him and his friend Carson, the eminent Masonic bibliographer. How many the edition consisted of (hundreds or thousands) it is not possible to say, but in the catalogue it is described as " unique, the public museums have been searched in vain." It was republished in Spencer's edition of the Old Constitutions, 1871, also separately by that indefatigable Masonic collector and student. Its title (" Printed and sold by J. Roberts in Warwick‑Lane, MDCC.


II.") is " THE THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 45 OLD CONSTITUTIONS Belonging to the ANCIENT and HONOURABLE SOCIETY of Free and accepted MASONS Taken from a Manuscript wrote above Five Hundred Years Since." The claim for its great antiquity was scarcely commensurate with the modest price asked for a copy of the publication in 1722 and was not justified.


As the first printed pamphlet for general sale on Freemasonry and, typographically, one of the best issued, it has a special value quite apart from its alleged age and, particularly, as it preceded the first Book of Constitutions of the premier Grand Lodge by one year. The preface is chiefly an apology for the existence of the Society of Freemasons, in which it is stated that " none of the Persons of Honour who have lately grac'd the Society with their Presence, have yet seen any Reason to be asham'd of them, or to withdraw their Protection from them," therefore, it seems probable that the tract was edited by some one who was at least well acquainted with, if not a member of, the Fraternity. The conclusion also suggests the aim of the publisher, viz. " It has yet seen the World but in Fragments, but is now put together as a Thing of too much Significancy to pass our Observation and which will effectually vindicate the Ancient Society of Freemasons from all that has or can be said against them." The writer does not inform us of what the " fragments " consisted, unless, indeed, he refers to a portion of the legendary history not peculiar to the society.


The " Roberts " version is undoubtedly a reproduction, or a counterpart, of No. 11, not only because there is not another MS. which so resembles it, but also because the differences are so trivial in the text and the additions so evidently of an editorial character, that the proofs of such an origin are irrefragable. Woodford and Hughan both concur in this view. The 13th rule of No. 11 is omitted (apparently a clerical error), but is supplied in No. 44 (it is, however, common to most MSS. and will be generally recognizable in No. 15, Clause 2, of the Special Charges). The 21st rule of the one is divided into two in the other and, after the 26th, (the whole of the rules being numbered consecutively from the first), the obligation is inserted in No. 44, as well as at the end, the latter only being in No. ii. Then, again, the ten separate rules entitled " This Charge belongeth to Apprentices," which immediately follow in the former, come after " The New Articles " in the latter, but it only denotes a variation in the order and does not effect the contents. The " New Articles," which are undated and undescribed in No. 11, are in No. 44 entitled " Additional Orders and Constitutions made and agreed upon at a General Assembly held at . . . , on the Eighth Day of December 1663." Had he been placed in a " witness box," the editor of the " Roberts MS." might have found a difficulty in producing authority for his statement, that the original document was written " more than five hundred years since " ; indeed, he himself dates a portion of it in the seventeenth century. Clause VI, " That no person shall be accepted a Freemason, unless he be one and twenty years old, or more," is manifestly a modern innovation. The Constitutions of 1722 are said to have contained allusions to several " High Degrees of Freemasonry," but the statement is wholly incorrect, as Hughan had a letter from the owner of this pamphlet and publisher of the first reproduction (Richard Spencer of London), explicitly denying the assertion.


45. (MS. 12) "BRISCOE." *17th Century.


" Sam. Briscoe, at the Bell Savage on Ludgate Hill," was the publisher of another version, the editor of which was less pretentious in his claim than his 46 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS immediate predecessor ; for in 1724 he only assumed the original to be " of near 300 years Translation into the English." R. F. Bower of Keokuk, U.S.A., had one of the pamphlets and other copies have been mentioned. The first and second editions (1724‑5) are represented in the British Museum. " A Masonic Student " (The Freemason, March 29, 1873) says he " does not attach much value to such works as Briscoe's pamphlet . . . many of the observances are purely imaginary, meant, in fact, as a ` skit' upon the order, resembling Dean Swift's more humorous, but equally idle, attack on Freemasonry." These well‑deserved strictures are fulminated against the compilation under review, wherein is narrated in a somewhat facetious manner, " An Accidental Discovery of the Ceremonies made use of in the several Lodges, upon the admittance of a Brother as a Free and Accepted Mason." The printed copy of the " Old Charges " is substantially founded on No. 12 ; the reasons for which view have been partially given by Hughan in The Freemason, April 5, 1873. It does not appear to have been again reprinted in full until October 1873, in the Masonic Magazine and in the Freemason's Chronicle, 1876.


46. "BAKER." *17th Century.


As it is well to register all references to the Old Charges, this is inserted in the enumeration. It occurs in a foot‑note by Dr. Rawlinson, in the copy of his MS. in explanation of the legend of King Athelstan having caused " a Roll or Book to be made, which declared how this Science was first invented ; . . . which Roll or Book he Commanded to be read and plainly recited when a man was to be made a Free Mason, that he might fully understand what Articles, Rules and Orders he laid himself under, well and truly keep and observe to the utmost of his power " (see Masonic Magazine, 1876, p. 1oz), as follows : " One of these Rolls I have seen in the possession of Mr. Baker, a carpenter in Moorfields." 47. (MSS. 8 & 32) " COLE." *17th Century.


As it is probable that No. 32, the original of Benjamin Cole's engraved editions of 172.8‑9 and 1731, was derived from No. 8, it is but fair to class the present number as a representative at least of a seventeenth‑century version ; and, of all reproductions, it was the finest issued in the 18th century. The whole of the interesting little book was printed from engraved plates, dedicated in 1728‑9 to the Right Hon. the Lord Kingston, Grand Master and, though not dated, the dedication is sufficient to fix the period of its advent. The second edition was dedicated in 1731 to Lord Lovel, Grand Master. Ordinary editions were published in 1751, etc. ; but it was not until 1869 that a facsimile of the engraved series was issued, when Hughan made it an attractive feature of his first literary venture‑the Constitutions of the Freemasons. Dr. Kloss is incorrect in classing this version with No. 45, in his Bibliographic der Freimaurer, p. 125 48. (MSS. 8 & 32) " DODD." *17th Century.


Spencer thinks that from one or two differences " and minor alterations in portions of the text, the printer, or editor, had never seen Cole's book " ; but Hughan is of opinion that the one is a reproduction of the other, with simply a few fanciful changes, for which an example had been set by Masonic historians of the period. Carson, for whom it was purchased at the Spencer‑Sale, concurs in THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 47 this view and adds‑" therefore it appears to me that Cole's Editions, 1728‑31‑5 I, etc. and the Spencer manuscript now in my collection, with the present reprint, are substantially, though not identically, one and the same Constitutions" (see Introduction to the third reprint by the Masonic Archxological Society of Cincinnati, 1876). Two copies are known to be in the United States, viz., the one herein described and another owned by R. F. Bower. Spencer knew of three in all. It has been faithfully reproduced by E. T. Carson (1876) for the first time, the original being a small quarto of twenty pages. The title is " The Beginning and first Foundation of the most worthy Craft of Masonry, with the Charges thereunto belonging " and it is said to be " By a Deceas'd Brother, for the Benefit of his Widow " ! It was " Printed for Mrs. Dodd, at the Peacock without Temple Bar, MDCC.


XIX (Price Six‑pence)." No statement is made as to its origin or age, but there is no doubt of its being a copy of Nos. 8 or 32, or a reprint of No.'47, engraved edition, the original of the two last being a seventeenth‑century version.


49. HARRIS. The Bedford Lodge, London.


From the minutes of the Bedford Lodge, No. 157, we learn that in January 18o9, its then secretary, " Bro. Harris," was thanked " for his present of ancient manuscripts, in parchment, containing the original Charges and part of the lectures on Craft Masonry." 5 0. " BATTY LANGLEY." 18th Century.


Published in the Builder's Compleat Assistant, 3 d edition, 1738. Batty Langley, a prolific writer, published his Practical Geometry in 1726, which he dedicated to Lord Paisley, as " the Head of a most Ancient and Honourable Society " and subscribed himself " your most devoted servant." In 1736 appeared his Ancient Masonry, Both in the Theory and Practice, dedicated to Francis, Duke of Lorraine and forty British noblemen ; also " to all others the Right Hon. and Right Worshipful Masters of Masonry, by their humble servant and affectionate brother, B. Langley." These words seem to establish the fact that the Builder's Compleat Assistant, of which only the third edition is available in the library of the British Museum, must have originally appeared after 1726, when Langley was not a Freemason and to found an inference that it was published some few years at least before the second edition of the Book of Constitutions. The Masonic legend, which is given with some fullness, is called " The Introduction of Geometry" and, amongst famous " Geometers," are named " Nimrod, Abraham, Euclid, Hiram, Grecus," etc. The sources of information open to Langley at the time of writing were MSS. 44, 45, and 47 in this series and Anderson's Constitutions of A.D. 1723. As Edwin is styled the son of Athelstan, No. 47, which calls him brother, could not have been referred to. No. 44 recites the Edwin legend, but leaves out his name ; whilst No. 45 uses the word son, but spells the name in such a manner as to defy identification. On the whole, it is fairly clear that Langley must have followed Dr. Anderson (1723), who plainly designates Edwin as the son of Athelstan. It may be added, that the two legends are in general agreement. Without being of any special value, per se, the fact of the legendary history of the Craft being given at such length by a practical architect and builder, taken into consideration with the dedication of his work on Ancient Masonry to a number of " Freemasons " of exalted rank, afford additional I 48 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS evidence, if such be required, of the close and intimate connexion which continued to exist between operative and speculative Masonry for many years after the establishment of the Grand Lodge of England.


s i. "KRAUSE." *18th Century.


The so‑called " York MS. Of A.D. 9z6 " has been invested with much more importance and antiquity than it deserves, for it is quite possible that even the eighteenth century is too early a date to assign for its compilation. It was first announced in 18o8, through a German version having been issued by Herr Schneider, of Altenburg, from a Latin translation said to be certified by " Stonehouse, York, January 4, 18o6 " (of whom no trace can be found) ; and, in 181o, this German re‑translation was printed by Dr. Krause in Die drei Aeltesten Kunsturkunden der Freimaurer Briiderschaft. An English version was presented to Hughan by Woodford for insertion in the Old Charges of British Freemasons ; but neither of these experts believes it to be of any real antiquity. Dr. George Kloss denied its genuineness, " and contended that the Latin translation, which was certified by Stonehouse, had been prepared before i 8o6 and that, in preparing it, an ancient manuscript had been remodelled on the same basis as the 173 8 edition of Anderson's Constitutions, because the term ` Noachida' is employed in both, but is found nowhere else." Findel visited England, by desire of the German Union of Freemasons, thoroughly to investigate the matter ; the historian, however, failed to find aught to confirm its claims to antiquity and returned to Germany with a stronger belief than ever as to its being neither a York Charter, nor of the year 9z6 ; and, in fact, he " brings it down to a much more modern date " (see his History of Freemasonry, p. 89). The character and history of this MS. will be considered in a separate chapter.


Mere partial reprints of any one of the MSS. have been omitted from the foregoing list. There are many of these, acknowledged or otherwise, each of which takes its text from one or more of the versions described. There are also numerous regulations of the Craft, from an early date, which, in many respects, contain points of agreement with the MS. Constitutions, particularly those of Scottish origin. These will be duly considered in their regular order.


If the Old Charges are grouped according to their texts‑their several dates of compilation having already been considered‑it will be found that only five divisions will be requisite.


(D) " HALLIWELL " MS. (NO. i) On November 1, 13 8 8, Richard II made an order for returns from the guilds and the crafts (i.e. " Mysteries ") and, in all probability, the material thus brought to light, as the result of a thorough examination of the effects of the various guilds, crafts and brotherhoods, was utilized by the priest‑poet in this manner and, in the exercise of his spiritual functions, he added sundry instructions for the guidance of the Fraternity in their religious observances and general behaviour. It must be remembered that the first laws of all nations were composed in verse and sung (see Goguet, Origin des Lois, vol. i, p. 29). Palgrave, in his History of the Anglo‑Saxons (1867,.P‑ 128) tells us that Aldheim, Bishop of Sherborne, could find no mode of THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 49 commanding the attention of his townsmen so efficacious as that of standing on the bridge and singing a ballad which he had composed. " The harp was handed round at their festivals ; and he who could not join in the glee was considered as unfit for respectable company." As to the exact age of this MS. the point is immaterial, as ten, twenty, or a few more years after 1389 will accord with the judgments passed upon its caligraphy ; whilst, even if the estimate of Dr. Kloss (1427‑3S) is accepted, it will still remain the oldest representative of the " Charges " peculiar to the Freemasons.


The following epitome of the various articles and points will serve to illustrate the stamp of laws in operation during the fourteenth century. Their general similarity to those of later periods cannot fail to strike the most casual reader.


FIFTEEN POINTS FOR THE CRAFTSMEN I. " Most love wel God, and holy churche, and his mayster and felows." 2. Work truly for " huyres apon werk and halydays." 3. Apprentices to keep " their mayster cownsel " in chamber and " yn logge." 4. " No mon to hys craft be false," and apprentices to " have the same lawe. " 5 . Masons to accept their pay meekly from the master, and not to strive, 6. But to seek in all ways " that they stonde wel yn Goddes lawe." 7. Respect the chastity of his master's wife, and " his felows concubyne." 8. Be a true mediator " To his mayster and felows fre," and act fairly to all. 9. As steward to pay well, and truly " To mon or to wommon, whether be be." io. Disobedient Masons dealt with by the Assembly, the Law, and forswear the craft.


II. Masons to help one another by instructing those deficient in knowledge and skill.


I z. The decisions of the Assembly to be respected, or imprisonment may follow. 13. " He schal swere never to be no thef," and never to succour any of " fals craft." 14. Be true " to hys lyge Lord the Kynge," and be sworn to keep all these points. 15. And obey the Assembly on pain of having to forsake the craft, and be imprisoned.


I. 2.




6. 7.




I0. II. 12.


131415 FIFTEEN ARTICLES FOR THE " MAYSTER MASON " He must be " stedefast, trusty, and trve," and upright as a judge.


" Most ben at the generale congregacyon," to know where it " schal be holde." Take apprentices for seven years " Hys craft to lurne, that ys profytable." No bondemon prentys make . . . Chef yn the logge he were y‑take." The prentes be of lawful blod," and " have hys lymes hole." " To take of the Lord for hyse prentyse, also muche as hys felows." Schal no thef " accept, " lest hyt wolde turne the craft to schame." " Any mon of crafte, be not also perfyt, he may hym change." " No werke he undurtake, but he conne bothe hyt ende and make." Ther schal no mayster supplante other, but be as systur and brother." He ought to be " bothe fayr and fre," and " techyt by hys mychth." " Schal not hys felows werk deprave," but " hyt amende." His apprentice " he hym teche," in all the requisite particulars. So " that he, withynne hys terme, of hym dyvers poyntes may lurne." Finally, do nothing that " wolde turne the craft to schame." 1 50 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS (E) " COOKE " MS. (NO. 2) The expression of thankfulness to " God our Glorious Fader " (not to the Trinity, as in the ordinary forms), which introduces the historical narration in No. 2, differs somewhat from the extract which is given by Halliwell, as Norton has pointed out, so much so, indeed, as to lead some readers to suppose that the excerpt was taken from an entirely distinct MS. As the phraseology of No. 2, however, more closely resembles it than that of any other existing version and, as it is scarcely possible that any MS. Constitution has " disappeared " since the publication of the first edition of Halliwell's work in 1840, it may fairly be assumed that the quotation is given by that well‑known antiquary without the exercise of his usual care and exactitude. No. 2 is much more like the ordinary MSS. than its senior and hence will be found to contain nearly all the legend of the usual " Charges," as in No. 15, though not always in quite such an orderly fashion, for, at line 644, the historical introduction is begun anew respecting Euclid and other celebrities.


(F) MSS. 11, 19, 20, 25, 30, & 37 The " Harleian 1942 " (11 in this series) might well claim a separate examination, containing, as it does, the " New Articles," in the possession of which it stands alone ; but, in order to avoid a numerous classification, six MSS. are now selected for criticism, which present, as a common feature, what is known as the " Apprentice Charges," or additional rules for the apprentices, not in the ordinary clauses, as set out in No. 15.


The " New Articles " are undated and run as follows " HARLEIAN MS.," No. 1942 (11) 26. " Noe person (of what degree soever) bee accepted a free mason, unless hee shall have a lodge of five free masons ; at least, whereof one to bee a master, or warden, of that limitt, or devision wherein such Lodge shalbee kept, and another of the trade of Free Masonry." 27. " That no p'son shal bee accepted a Free Mason, but such as are of able body, honest parentage, good reputacon, and observes of the Laws of the Land." z8. " That noe p'son hereafter bee accepted free mason, nor shalbee admitted into any Lodge or assembly untill hee hath brought a certificate of the time of adoption from the Lodge yt accepted him, unto the Master of that Limit, and devision, where such Lodge was kept, which sayd Master shall enrole the same in parchm't in a role to bee kept for that purpose, to give an acct of all such acceptions at every General Assembly." z9. " That every person whoe now is Free Mason, shall bring to the Master a note of the time of his acception to the end the same may bee enroll'd in such priority of place of the p'son shall deserve, and to ye end the whole company and fellows may the better know each other." 30. " That for the future the sayd Society, Company, and fraternity of Free Masons, shalbee regulated and governed by one Master, and Assembly, and Wardens, as ye said Company shall think fit to chose, at every yearely generall assembly." 31. " That noe~~'son shalbee accepted a Free Mason, or know the secrets of the said Society, until hee hath first taken the oath of secrecy hereafter following THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 51 'I, A. B., Doe in the presence of Almighty God, and my Fellowes, and Brethren here present, promise and declare, that I will not at any time hereafter, by any Act or circumstance whatsoever, Directly or Indirectly, publish, discover, reveale, or make knowne any of the secrets, priviledges, or Counsells, of the Fraternity or Fellowship of Free Masonry, which at this time, or anytime hereafter, shalbee made knowne unto mee soe helpe mee God, and the holy contents of this booke.' " The additional regulations already noted are variously entitled the Apprentices' Orders (3o), the Future Charges (37), and the Apprentice Charge (zo and 25), but are not distinguished by any title in No. II, simply succeeding the New Articles, and are numbered I to io, the fifth rule being absent. The text of the " York No. 4 " (z5) has been selected to contribute this section of the laws.


" THE APPRENTICE CHARGE" (25) I. " That he shall be true to God and the holy Church, the prince his Mr and dame whome he shall serve." 2. " And that he shall not steale nor peke away his Mr or dames goods, nor absent himselfe from their service, nor goe from them about his own pleasure by day or by night without their Licence." 3. " And that he do not commit adultry or fornication in his Master's house with his wife, daughter, or servant, or any other." 4. " And that he shall keepe councell in all things spoken in Lodg or Chamber by any Masons, fellows, or fremasons." 5. " And that he shall not hold any disobedient argument against any fremason, nor disclose any secret whereby any difference may arise amongst any Masons, or fellowes, or apprentices, but Reverently to behave himselfe to all fremasons being sworne brethren to his Mr.,, 6. "And not to use any carding, diceing, or any other unlawfull games." 7. " Nor haunt Taverns or alehouses there to waste any mans goods, without Licence of his said Mr or some other fremason." 8. " And that he shall not commit adultry in any mans house where he shall worke or be tabled." 9. " And that he shall not purloyn nor steale the goods of any p'son, nor willingly suffer harme or shame or consent thereto, during his said apprentisshyp either to his Mr or dame, or any other fremason. But to withstand the same to the utmost of his power, and thereof to informe his said Mr or some other fremason, with all convenient speed that may bee." The extra rules of the following MS. differ so materially from those we ordinarily find in documents of a like class, that a brief summary of these regulations becomes essential.


" MELROSE MS." (I9) I. A " Frie Masone " not to take more than three apprentices in his lifetime. z. To obtain consent of " ye set Lodge," of " all his masters and Fellows." 3. Apprentices (" lawfully taken "), after serving their time, " ought not to be named losses," but " to be named frie men, if they have their Mrs Discharge." 4. " All others not lawfully taken are to be namit loses." I 52 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 5. Apprentices to furnish essays to prove their skill, before being made " frie masons." 6. Masters and Fellows only to engage " Losses " when regular Masons cannot be had.


7. Not to let " Losses " know " ye priviledge of y compass, square, levell, and ye plumb rule." 8. " Plumming " to be set " Losses," and " let them work between ym wt a Tyne." 9. " Frie Masons " on coming to labour ought to displace such " Losses " (or cowans).


io. If lawful members cannot be given work, they must be furnished with money.


i i. If apprentices " doe run away and are found," their lawful Mr must be informed.


i z. " We do swear, so God us helpe, and holy dome, and by the contents of this book," etc.


This MS. (iv) is the oldest, virtually, of the four Scottish versions (i6 to i9 inclusive), of which all but the Atcheson Haven (i7) contain the important clause " treu to ye King of England," as in the second of the General Charges of our English copies. This is the more noticeable, if we bear in mind that the Melrose version is clearly a transcript of one of A.D. 15 8 t, or earlier ; also that No. 17, whilst it omits " England," has still the clause " true to the king," the addendum either being purposely omitted, or simply left out through non‑existence in the text copied from, some even of the English versions not containing the complete sentence. It would not, perhaps, be possible to have more convincing proof of the English origin of these Scottish versions of the Old Charges. The historian of the Lodge of Edinburgh, D. Murray Lyon, commenting upon the " Kilwinning " MS. (16), says emphatically, " that it was a production of the sister kingdom is evident from its containing a charge in which `every man that is a mason,' is taken bound to be ` liedgeman to the king of England' and also from that part of the legend which refers to the introduction and spread of masonry in Britain being confined to the rehearsal of the patronage extended to the craft by English kings." It may, indeed, positively be affirmed that every form or version of the Masonic documents, which it is the design of this chapter to classify and describe, had its origin in South Britain.


Another peculiarity of the Melrose text is its addition to the third of the special charges, viz. " Also that no Mr nor fellow supplant on other of his mark," which clause is not to be found elsewhere (though quite in accordance with the Schaw Statutes, of A.D. 1598) and, as already intimated, it varies so much from the other Scottish forms, that, as a version, it should not be classed with them, save as respects locality and common features of agreement. In Scotland it is as notably sui generic as No. 8 (including 32 and copies) is in England, both being curious examples of departure from what might fairly be termed the accepted text.


The oldest of the York MSS. (No. 5 of this series) reads teneat Librum ut ille vell illi, etc., but in No. z 5 a translation is given of the customary Latin instructions, in which ille veil illi appears as hee or shee ; illi (they), having through error or design been set aside for illa (she). Taking the testimony of all the other MSS., the translation should read he or they, but, as a matter of fact, in No. 25 it reads he THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 5 3 or she. Mackey, Hughan and Lyon believe the latter is a faulty translation and nothing more ; but there are others (including the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford) who accept this document as evidence of the admission of females into Masonic fellowship, especially as so many of the old guilds were composed of women as well as men (see Introduction to Smith's Guilds, p. xxx). Not one out of a hundred but recruited their ranks from both sexes ; and even in guilds under the management of priests, such as the Brotherhood of Corpus Christi of York, begun 1408, lay members were allowed (of some honest craft), without regard to sex, if " of good fame and conversation," the payments and privileges being the same for the " brethren and sisteren." Women " were sworne upon a book " in the same manner as the men. In 1348 the general assembly of the Grocers' Company, held at Ringed Hall, Thames Street, agreed to certain " new points," one being in favour of the admission of female members (see Herbert's Companies of London, vol. i, pp. 306, 423 ; vol. ii, pp. 44, 68z).


It may, indeed, be suggested that women were admitted into craft guilds in cases where such membership was not obviously unfit or unsuitable ; but the mason's handicraft being so ill‑adapted for female exercise, the balance of probability leans strongly against their ever having been admitted to full membership in the Masonic body. To this it may be replied, that the trade of a carpenter was not more favourable to the employment of women than that of a mason. Yet in the carpenters' guild of Norwich, founded A.D. 137 S, " In the name of ye fader and sone and holi gost and of oure ladi seinte marie, cristes moder and al yo holi cumpayne of heuene " the ordinances were agreed to for " ye bretherin and sistrin " (see Smith's Guilds, p. 37). The charter of the Carpenters' Company of London describes the company to consist of " the brethren and sisters of freemen of the said mystery " and the records of this Fraternity attest that " on August 5, 1679, Rebecca Gyles, spinster, sometime servant to Rebecca Cooper, a free servant of the company, was admitted to the freedome, haveing served her said Mistres faithfully a terme of seaven years " (E. B. Jupp, History of the Carpenters' Company, 1848, p. 161). The " Gild of the Peltyers " (Furriers), of A.D. 1376, also made provision for female membership and the records of craft guilds in numerous cities might be cited in corroboration of this usage. Still, there is no direct testimony as to the admission of females into Masonic Lodges or assemblies at any time, though they were sometimes allowed partially to reap the benefit, as widows, of a deceased husband's business, if they had a Freemason to help them. The records of Mary's Chapel Lodge, under date of AJ?ril 17, 1683, furnish an instance of the legality of a female occupying the position of " dame," or " mistress," in a Masonic sense, but from the minute of the Lodge it will be observed that it was only to a very limited extent that the widows of master masons could benefit by the privilege (see Lyon's History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 1z2). On this point Lyon observes : " In the case of female members of Scottish Incorporations, `the freedom of craft' carried with it no right to a voice in the administration of affairs. The city of Lichfield was anciently governed by a Guild and Guild‑Master. King Henry II and Anne his Queen ; Henry VII and his Queen ; and many other illustrious names, were enrolled as members, the Guild comprising brothers and sisters, but the rules provided for the Brothers only, choosing the Master and Wardens annually (Rev. T. Harwood, F.S.A., History of Lichfield, 18o6, p. 319). Neither was their presence required at enrolment, although their entry‑money was double that of members' sons." 54 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS Lyon thinks that the reference in certain clauses of the MS. of 1693 (25) " to an entered apprentice's obligation to protect the interests of his ` master or dame,' i.e. mistress, clearly indicates that at that time it was lawful for females, in the capacity of employers, to execute mason‑work." On the whole, we must accept the clause in question, either as an error or fancy of the translator or copyist ; but it is certainly very singular that there is no record of females having belonged to Masonic guilds or companies, though they were connected with those of other crafts, such as the saddlers and spurriers, carpenters, peltyers (furriers), calendrers and tailors.


 (G) " INIGO JONES" & "SPENCER" (8 & 3 z. Also Reproductions) This text obviously formed the basis, in part, of Dr. Anderson's Constitutions. Its chief importance is derived from the additional clauses in the legendary history, rather than from any changes in the language of that part which is to be found in the ordinary versions. Mere arbitrary alterations of the copyist only demand notice as possible means of identification in tracing families of MSS. Of these many examples are found in copies not otherwise of any importance whatever, whilst some are so plainly errors of transcription that any arguments based upon them are of little, if indeed of any value, e.g. in No. 8, the conclusion runs, " So Help you God, and the Itallidom," for " your holy‑dome " (halidom‑Saxon, " holy judgment "‑whence the ancient oath, " By my halidom "). Fort has some interesting observations upon the usual finale of the " Old Charges " and thinks that the word " holy‑dome " is evidently derived from the old form of administering an oath upon the shrine in which the sacred relics of some martyred saint were enclosed, the receptacle of the bones being ordinarily constructed in the form of a house (domus), so that the elision was easy from holi‑domus to holi‑dome (see his Antiquities of Freemasonry, pp. 171, 292, 404). Without impugning the correct ness of this view in reference to a very early period of guild life, its applicability to the Old Charges from the fifteenth century must be contested strongly, for the form in which the concluding charge is generally given suggests only the solemnity of the obligation about to be taken, " So healpe you God and your halydome and by this booke in yor hands unto yr. power." On the admission of the Masonic apprentices, according to the direct or indirect testimony of the several versions and of the prevailing custom in later times, they were " sworn " on the Bible, not " on the holidom," as were those of the Tailors' Guild of Norwich (fourteenth century) and there is nothing resembling the ordinance of the " Smiths " of Chesterfield (of the same era) in the Masonic Constitutions, the former requiring all the brethren to be bound " by touch of relics " as a pledge of their fidelity (see Smith's Guilds, p. 170).


That a change was effected in the manner of administering the obligation, may be inferred from a reference to " The Oaths to be Taken," by the " Fraternyte of Synt John the Babtyste of Taylors " (Exeter), for the words holy dome, and by this boke, have been crossed out by a later hand, and the holy contentes of this boke substituted, which corresponds with MS. I I and others. It is in the text of No. 8, the prototype of No. 32 and its reproductions, that Prince Edwin is spoken of as " Brother to King Athelstane," all the other forms either describing him as a son, or maintaining a discreet silence as to the relationship. The historical narrative is also chronologically arranged and the years of many of the events are inserted, THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 5 5 which is unusual in these documents. The omission of the name of Charles Martel is noteworthy, also that of Naymus Grecus, but otherwise the text, as stated, is more remarkable for the additions to, rather than the deviations from, the ordinary versions.


(H) ORDINARY VERSIONS Under this description may be ranged all the MSS. not included in the four divisions preceding (D to G), excepting only such as are merely reproductions which naturally belong to the same class as their originals, whether or not the connexion has been noted. This division includes a majority of the transcripts, which are thus grouped together, because whilst each MS. contains some peculiarity of its own, there is a substantial agreement between them all. The recital of the legend is, generally speaking, similar ; also the various Charges, whilst the differences being nominal are virtually referable to the transforming influences of time and circumstances. In all, the Apprentice Charge and the New Articles are wanting, whilst they contain none of those clauses which, in the previous division (G), confer a special value on the text for purposes of comparison with the early editions of the Grand Lodge Constitutions. Attention having been already directed to the special differences in the MSS. of other types (D to G), the reproduction of an ordinary version will give the general reader a fair conception of the prevailing characteristics of the different Old Charges. For this purpose the text of the following Roll has been selected.


The prose Constitution, which will now be given in its entirety, is a fair specimen of the others ; all these scrolls being much alike and, indeed, differing only in minor details. In making a selection for purposes of illustration and reference, a document of the seventeenth century, which combines the chief points of agreement between the Old Charges and has not hitherto been printed, has been selected. It was transcribed by W. J. Hughan from Buchanan's copy and collated with the original in the library of Grand Lodge.


 THE " BUCHANAN MS." (15) I.‑O Lord God Father of Heaven with the wisdom of the glorious Sonn through the grace and goodness of the Holy Ghost three persons in one Godhead Bee with us att our begining And give us grace soe to governe us in our Lives here that wee may come to his heavenly bliss that never shall have ending Amen.


II. Good Brethren and Fellowes our purppose is to tell you how and in what manner this worthy craft of Masonry was begun And afterwards how it was upholden maynetained by many worthy Kings and Princes and other worthy men And also to them that bee here we shall declare the charges that belongeth to every Free Mason to Keppe for it is a science that is worthy to be kept for a worthy craft and vertuous science for it is one of the seven Liberall Sciences : And these be the names of them. The First is Grammar : that teacheth a man to speake truly and to write truly : The Second is Rhethorick and that teacheth a man to speake faire and in subtill termes The third is Dialectica that teacheth a man to decerne and know truth from falsehood : The fourth is Arrithmetike And it teacheth a man to reckon and count all numbers : The fifth is Geometrye and it teacheth a man to mete and measure the Earth and all other things of which is masonry The sixth is musicke and it teacheth the Crafte of Songe and voice of tongue orggann harpe and Trumpett. The Seventh is Astronomye and teacheth a man to know the course of the Sunne Moone and Stars : These be the seven sciences which are all found by one science which is Geometrye.


1 56 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS III. Thus may you prove that all the sciences of the world were found by this science of geometrye and grounded thereon for it teacheth mete and measure ponderation and weight of all manner of kind of the earth for there is noe man that worketh in any craft but hee worketh by some mete or measure nor any man that buyeth or selleth but he may use mete measure or weight and belongeth to Geometrye and these Marchants and Craft of Geometrye doe find all other of the six sciences Especially the plowemen and tiller of the ground for all manner of corne and grayne vynes plants and setters of other fruits For Grammar nor Musicke neither Astronomye nor any of the other six sciences can find mete measure or weight without Geometrye wherefore that science may well be called the most worthyest of all sciences which findeth mete and measure to all the Rest IV. If you aske how this Science began I shall you tell : before the flood of Noah there was a man called Lamech : as you may find in the fourth Chapter of Genisis, whoe had two wives, the name of the one was Adah : and the name of the other was Zillah : by his first wife Adah hee had two sonnes the name of the Elder was Jaball : and the other was called Juball : and by his other wife Zillah hee had a sonne called Tuball and a daughter called Naamah : These foure children found the begining of all the Crafts in the world : And the Eldest sonne Jaball found the Craft of Geometrye and hee parted flocks of sheepe and lands in the field and first built a house of stoone and timber as is noted in the Chapter aforesaid : and his brother Juball found the Craft of Musicke songe of tongue harpe organn and Trumpett : And the third brother Tuball found the Smith's Craft to worke in Gold Silver Brasse Copper Iron and Steele and the Daughter Naamah found the Craft of Weaveing : and these children knew that God would take vengeance for sinns either by fire, water, wherefore they did write the sciences they had found in two pillars of stone that they might be found after God had taken vengeance for sine the one was Marble and would not burne with fire : the other was Laterus and it would not droune in water.


V. There resteth more to tell you how the stones were found that the Sciences were written in after the said flood the great Hermarynes that was Tusses his Sonne the which was the sonne of Sem the sonne of Noah the same Hermarynes was afterwards called Hermes the father of wise men : he found one of the two pillars of stone and hee found the sciences written therin and he taught them to other men.


VI. And at the makeing of the Tower of Babilon there masonrye was much made of: the Kinge of Babilon that height Nemorth and Nemorth himself was a Mason : and loved well the Craft as is said with Masters of Histories and when the Citie of Neneve and other Cities of the East Asia should bee made this Nemorth Kinge of Babilon sent thither 6o masons art the desire of the Kinge of Neneve his cousin and when they went forth hee gave them a charge in this manner that they should be true each of them to other and that they should love truly together soe that hee might have worshipp for his sending of them to his cousin the Kinge of Neneve And further hee gave them two charges as concerning their science And they were the first charge that ever any Mason had of his worke or Crafte.


VII. Moreover when Abraham and Sarah his wife went into Egypt hee taught the seven sciences to the Egyptians And hee had a worthy scholler whose name was Euclid which learned very well and became Master of all the seven sciences And in his Dais it befell that Lords and Great men of those quarters and Dominions had soe many sonnes some by their wives and some by other women for those Countries bee hott of Generation and they had not competent goods and hands to maintayne their children which made much care And the Kinge of that Land considering theire poverty called his counsell together and caused a Parliment to be houlden the greatest of his intent was to know how they should maintayne their children and they could not find any way unlesse it were by cunning and good science whereupon he let a proclamation bee made through his Realme if there were any that could teach an informe them in any good Cuning art or science hee should come unto them and bee very well contented for his paynes and travell : after this proclamation made came this worthy Clarke Eclid and said unto the Kinge and his Nobles if you will betake THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS S7 your children unto my government I will teach them the seven Liberall Sciences whereby they may live honestly and like gentlemen upon this condition that you will grant mee a Comisson to have rule and power over them according as science ought to be ruled and upon this Covenant I shall take care and charge of them : the Kinge and his counsel granted the same and sealled the Comisson and then this worthy Docter tooke to him those Lordes sonnes and taught them the science of Geometric in practise for to worke all manner of worthy workes that should bellong to building of Temples Churches Castles mannors Towers houses and all manner of buildings And he gave them a charge.


VIII. The First was that they should bee true to the Kinge and Lords they served.


IX. And that they should love well together And be true each one to other.


X. And to call each other his fellowe or else his brother And not servant nor knave nor any other foule name.


XI. And that they should deserve theire pay of the Lord or Master they should serve XII. And that they should ordaine the wisest of them to bee the Master of their Lords worke And that neither Lord nor man of Great Linage or Riches or for favour should make and ordaine such a one to beare Rule and be governour of theire worke that hath but small knowledge or understanding in the science whereby the owner of the worke should bee evil served and you ashamed of your worke‑manshipp.


XIII. And alsoe that they should call the governour of the worke master whilest they wrought with him.


XIV. And many other charges that are to long to tell : and to all the charges hee made them to sweare the . . . great oath which men used in that time XV. And hee ordered for them reasonable wages that they might live with honesty.


XVI. And alsoe that they should come and assemble themselves together once every yeare That they might take advice and councell together how they might worke best to serve theire Lord and Master for his proffitt an theire owne creditt and honestie And to Correct amongst themselves him or them that erred and trespassed And thus was the Craft or science of Geometric grounded there XVII. And this worthy Master gave it the name of Geometric And now it is called Masonrie.


XVIII. Sith the time when the children of Israell were come into the land of behest that is now called amongst us the land of Cannaan the countrie of Jerusalem, Kinge David began the Temple which is called Templum Dominum and is now called with us the Temple of Jerusalem and the same Kinge David loved Masons well and cherished them and gave good paiement unto them and gave them charges in manner as hee had in Egipt by Euclid and other charges more as you shall heare afterwards And after the Decease of Kinge David Solomon sonne unto the said King finnished the Temple that his father had begunn and hee sent after masons of divers towns and countries and gathered them together soe that he had 24,000 Masons and iooo of them were ordayned Masters and governours of his worke.


XIX. And there was another Kinge of another Land which was called Huram and hee loved Kinge Solomon well and hee gave him timber for his worke and hee had a sonn named Aymon and hee was master of Geometric and the chiefest master of all his masons and Governour of all his graven and carved worke and of all manner of other masonrie that belonge unto the Temple and all this witnesseth the Fourth booke of the Kings in the Bible .


. And this same Kinge Solomon confirmed both charges and manners that his father had given to masons and soe was this worthy craft or science of Masonrie confirmed in the Countrie of Jerusalem and in many other Countries and Kingdoms glorious Craftsmen about full wide into divers countries some because of learning more knowledge and skill in the Craft and some to teach others and soe it befell that there was a curious mason whose name was Mamon [Naymus] Grecus that had been att the building of Solomon's Temple And hee came into France and there he taught the Craft of Masonrie to men in France.




I. And there was a man in France named Carolus Martill came to this Mamon Grecus aforesaid and learned of him the craft of Masonrie well hee tooke upon the charges And afterwards by the grace of God hee was elected Kinge of France and where hee was in his estate hee tooke many Masons and helpe to make men masons that were none before and sett them on worke and gave them good wages and confirmed to them a Charter to hould theire Assemblie from yeare to yeare where the would and cherished the much and thus came the Craft of Masonrie into France.




II. England stood att that time void from any charge of Masonrie untill the time of Saint Albons and in his time the Kinge of England being a pajan walled the Towne about that is now called Saint Albons and Saint Albons was a worthy Knight and chiefe steward with the King and the governance of the Realme and alsoe of the making of the Towne walls and hee loved masons well and cherrished them right much and hee made theire pay right good standing as the Realme did then for he gave them two shillings and sixpence a weeke and three‑pence for thiere nonesynches and before that time throughout this Land A Mason took but a pennie a day and his meate until Saint Albons did amend it and hee gave to them a charter which hee obtained of the Kinge and his Councill for to hold a general councell and hee gave it the name of an Assemblie And hee being a Mason himself thereat hee was hee helped to make Masons and gave to them the charges as you shall heare Afterwards.




III. Right soone after the decease of Saint Albons there came men of divers nations to wart against the Realme of England soe that the Rule of good Masonrie was destroyed untill the Time of King Athelston in his dayes hee was a worthy Kinge in England and brought this Land to rest and peace and builded many great buildings of Abbey's and castles and divers other great buildings And hee loved masons well.




IV. And hee had a sonn named Edwin and hee loved masons much more then his father did and hee was a great practizer in Geometric and came himselfe to comune and talke much with masons and to learn of them the Craft and afterwards for the love hee had to Masons and to the craft hee was made a mason himselfe.




V. And hee obtained of his father the Kinge a Charter and a Comission to hould every year once an Assembly where they would within the Realme of England that they might correct faults errors and trespasses if that any there were comitted and done concerning the craft of Masonrie.




VI. And hee with other Masons held an Assemblie at Yorke and there hee made Masons and gave them a Charge and comanded that rule to be houlden and kept ever after and hee made an ordinance that it should be renewed from Kinge to Kinge.




VII. And when the assemblie were gathered together hee caused a crie to be made after this manner that all old Masons and younge that had any writeings or understandings of the charges and manners that were made before in this Land or in any other that they should show them forth and there were found some in Greeke some in Latine and some in French and some in English and some in other Languages and the meaning of them were all one.




VIII. And hee caused a booke to be made thereof : And how the Craft was found and hee comanded that it should be read or told when any free mason should bee made for to give him his charge. And from that day untill this time Masonrie hath bene much made on and kept and that from time to time as well as men might governe it.




IX. And furthermore att divers Assemblies there hath bene put and ordained certaine charges by the best advised Masters and Fellowes.




X. The manner of taking an oath att the making of free Masons Tunc unus ex Seniorebus teneat librum ut illi vel ille ponant vel ponat manus supra librum tunc precepta debeant legi.




XI. Every man that is a Mason take heed right wisely to these charges if you find yourselves guiltie of any of these that you may amend of your errors against god and principally they that be charged for it is a great perrill to forswears themselves upon a booke.




XII. (r.) The charges are that you shall bee true men to God and his holy church : that you use noe heresie nor errors in your understanding to distract mens teacheings.


(z.) And Alsoe that you bee true men to the Kinge without any treason or falshood and that you shall know noe treason or falshood but you shall amend it or else give notice thereof to the Kinge and Councell or other officers thereof.


(3.) And alsoe you shall be true each one to other that is to say to every Master and Fellow of the Craft of Masonrie that be free masons allowed and doe you to them as you would that they should doe to you.


(4.) And Alsoe that every free Mason Keepe councill truly of the secret and of the Craft and all other Councell that ought to bee Kept by way of Masonrie.


(5.) And Alsoe that noe Mason shall be a Theife or accesary to a theife as farr forth as you shall know.


(6.) And Alsoe you shall be true men to the Lord and Master you serve and truly see to his profitt and advantage.


(7.) And Alsoe you shall call Masons your fellowes or brethren and noe other foule name nor take your fellowes wife violently nor desire his daughter ungodly nor his servant in villanie.


(8.) And Alsoe that you truly pay for your table and for your meate and drinke where you goe to table.


(9.) And Alsoe you shall doe noe villanie in the house in which you table whereby you may be ashamed.


These are the Charges in generall that belong to all free masons to keepe both Masters and Fellows.




XIII. These bee the Charges singular for every Master and Fellowe as followeth (Special Charges) (z.) First that noe Mason take upon him noe Lord's worke nor other mens worke unlesse hee know himselfe able and skilfull to performe it soe as the Craft have noe slander nor disworshipp but that the Lord and owner of the worke may bee well and truly served.


(z.) And Alsoe that noe Master nor Fellow take noe worke but that hee take it reasonably soe that the Lord may bee truly served with his owne goods and the Master may live honestly and pay his fellowes truly as manners aske of the Craft.


(3.) And Alsoe that noe Master nor Fellow shall suplant any other man of his worke that is to say if hee have taken of a Lord or Master that you put him not out unlesse hee bee unable n knowledge to finish that worke.


(4.) And Alsoe that noe Master nor Fellow take any Apprentice to bee allowed to bee his Apprentice any longer then seven years and the apprentice to bee able of birth and limbs as hee ought to bee (5.) And Alsoe that noe Master nor Fellow shall take any allowance to bee allowed to make any Free Mason without the consent of Sixe or Five att the least of his Fellowes and that they bee free borne and of Good Kindred and not a bondman and that hee have his right limbs as a man ought to have.


(6.) And Alsoe that noe Master nor Fellow put any Lordes woke to taske that is wont to goc journey.


(7.) And Alsoe that noe Master shall give noe pay to his Fellowes but as hee may deserve soe as they may not bee Deceived by false workmen.


(8.) And Alsoe that noe Fellow slander another behind his backe whereby hee may loose his good name and his worldly goods.


(9.) And Alsoe that noe fellow within the Lodge or without the Lodge missweare one another ungodly without any just cause.


 6o THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS (io.) And Alsoe that every one reverence his fellow elder and put him to worshipp.


(i i.) And Alsoe that noe Mason play att Cards or Dice or any other game whereby they should be slandered.


(12.) And Alsoe noe Mason shall bee a Comon Ribald in Lechary to make the Craft slandered.


(i3.) And Alsoe that noe fellow shall goe into the towne in the night thereas is a Lodge of Fellowes without some Fellowes that may beare him witnesse that hee was in a honest place.


(i4.) And Alsoe that every Master and Fellow shall come to the Assembly if it be within seven miles about him if hee have warning or else to stand to the award of Master and Fellowes.


(15.) And Alsoe every Master and Fellow if hee have trespassed shall stand att the award of the Masters and Fellowes to make the accord if hee may, and if hee may not accord then to goe to the Common Law.


(i6.) And Alsoe that noe mason make mould nor square nor noe Rule to any lyer within the Lodge nor without the Lodge how to mould stones without noe mould of his own making.


(17.) And Alsoe that every Mason shall receive and cherrish every strange Mason when they come to theire Country and set them to worke as the manner is that is to say if hee have mould stones in the place hee shall sett them or him a fornight at least on worke and give him his pay and if hee have noe stones for him bee shall refresh him with money to the next Lodge.


(18.) And Alsoe you shall every mason serve truly the Lord for his pay and truly finish his worke bee it Taske or journey if you may have your pay as you ought to have.




XIV. These charges that you have received you shall well and truly keepe not discloseing the secresy of our Lodge to man woman nor child : Sticke nor stone : thing moveable nor immoveable soe God you helpe and his holy Doome, Amen. . . . Finis.


 The Introductory Prayer or Invocation of the Buchanan MS. differs from the generality of these supplications, but is after the manner of No. 17, although, in other respects, the MSS. are not identical. It is curious, however, that as regards the radius within which attendance at the assembly was obligatory, this is the only version which specifies seven miles, three others having five (1z, zo, and z9), two having ten (ii and 31), one alone forty (19) and the remainder fifty miles. The distinctive feature of No. 15 is its obligation, which, if a fair representation of the pledge given by the newly admitted Brethren, is certainly destructive of any theories in favour of female membership, which are based upon No. 25. There are many copies of the oaths imposed by craft guilds, but few of those in use among the masons are of an entirely trustworthy character. Assuming those appended to the Old Charges to be fairly correct, there would seem to have been no particular set form for the purpose, the three samples extant not agreeing with one another as to the verbiage, albeit the intention is clear enough throughout the whole. The titles of the MSS. vary, some being very suggestive, e.g. " The Freemasons Orders and Constitutions " (1 z) ; " Here Begineth the True Order of Masonrie " (3) ; " A discourse : hade : before : A : meeting : of Meassones " (18) ; " The Booke of Constitutions " (6),‑besides others already recorded. The earliest known extracts or references to the Old Charges are to be found in Dr. Plot's History of Staffordshire, A.D. 1686 (40) and The Constitutions of the Freemasons, by the Rev. James Anderson, M.A. (afterwards D.D.), of A.D. 1723. The first complete typographical reproduction of a copy of these Old Charges was " Printed and sold by J. Roberts in Warwick Lane, MDCC.


II " (44). This handsome little tract was THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 61 evidently edited by one who was either a Freemason or favourably disposed towards the Society, as the preface is laudatory of the aims of the Fraternity and is the first distinctly Masonic work known that was issued for general sale. The pamphlet (which was never authorized) appeared one year earlier than the premier Book of Constitutions. The resolution to empower " Bro. James Anderson, A.M., to digest the old Gothic Constitutions, in a new and better method " was agreed to by the Grand Lodge, held September 29, 1721 and, on December 27 following, " 14 learned Brothers " were appointed to examine the manuscript, who reported favourably on March z5, 1722, when the Grand Master was desired " to order it to be printed." The New Book of Constitutions was submitted in print to the members, January I7, 1723 (3) and again approved, with the addition of " the ancient manner of Constituting a Lodge," from which it may be inferred that the work could not have appeared before 1723 (the year stated on the title page), as the additional matter is to be found in the copies extant, paged consecutively with the former portion and followed by some twenty more pages. The General Regulations inserted in this work were first compiled by George Payne in 1720 and approved in 1721. They were subjected to revision by Dr. Anderson.


The Roberts version (44) appears to have been based upon the text of No. II, so that if the latter was not known to Dr. Anderson, early last century, he was doubtless familiar with the former, but whether before or after the preparation of his work cannot now be determined. The first extract is said to be made from " a certain Record of Freemasons written in the Reign of King Edward IV " (about A.D. 1475) and is in exact conformity with no MS. extant, though in some respects it resembles the quotation of Hargrove (41) and others, as it alludes to King Athelstan and his youngest son, Prince Edwin ; so far, many MSS. confirm this excerpt. None, however, sanction the statement that the Prince summoned the masons at York in " a General Lodge of which he was Grand Master " (p. 33), neither do they recite aught about the " Laws of the Freemasons having been seen and perused by our late sovereign King Henry VI." Possibly the latter information was obtained from Dr. Plot, but the former is well known to have been an unwarrantable and pernicious interpolation. The second extract is almost word for word with the concluding sentences of No. z, except that the verbiage is modernized and, as it is known that such a version was exhibited to the Grand Lodge in 1721, by Grand Master Payne, there need be no hesitation in accepting the Cooke MS. as the document from which Dr. Anderson quoted. It is not so easy to decide as to the first excerpt, especially so far as it seems to be actually taken from some old MS., for such particulars are to be found in the majority of the scrolls. The subject was new to Dr. Anderson in ‑1721‑3, but in 1738 there were many sources available from which a rational history and resume of the ancient Regulations might have been compiled and he had special facilities for acquiring the facts upon which such a history ought to have been founded. The result of Dr. Anderson's researches, as seen in the ‑1738 edition, is very far from satisfactory and tests the credulity of his readers even more than the previous one of 1723. Since the publication of 62 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS the latter, various reproductions of MS. Constitutions had appeared and, including the one before alluded to (which may not have been known to Dr. Anderson before 1723), there were in circulation the following : Roberts (44), Briscoe (45), and Cole (47), virtually representing the text of Nos. ii, 12 and 8 in this series respectively. It is quite clear that Dr. Anderson had more MSS. before him in the preparation of the 1738 than he had for that of the 1723 edition and there is so much to confirm this view that it only requires examination to be adopted. The historical introduction is much fuller in the former and varies considerably from the earlier issue ; e.g. the Edwin legend is altered and reads that he was the King's brother (not son), a variation only to be found in the Inigo Jones text (8) and which was engraved in the Cole MS. (47). His imagination developing (1738), the word general was altered before Lodge for Grand by the editor and the year added, which has led the so‑called York Constitution to be dated A.D. 926. The concluding paragraph of the 1723 edition is separated from the Edwin legend in the 1738 issue and, after a few minor changes, is added to the second extract already noticed, which was from quite a distinct MS., as Dr. Anderson himself declares, accompanied at page 71 by the declaration‑" The Constitutions were now meliorated, for an old record imports, ` that in the glorious reign of King Edward III,' " etc., about which the first publication is silent. Moreover, the reproduction of this second extract is but partial, as a portion is omitted and other sentences are so altered as to make them read like modern Constitutions, the title Grand Master being interpolated and the qualification, " if a brother," inserted respecting the attendance " of the Sheriff, or the Mayor, or the Alderman " ; also the word Congregation is turned into Chapter I Two extracts are printed, which are not in the earlier publication ; the one preceding, the other following, those before mentioned. The first agrees with the Cole MS. and recites the St. Alban legend, both terming that Saint " the Proto‑Martyr," only the value of the quotation is seriously diminished by Dr. Anderson again adding the modern title of Grand Master. The last citation from the old MSS. is to be found at p. 101 and is based upon No. ii, or its typographical representative, the Roberts MS. (44). The Additional Orders are those selected for insertion in the second edition of the Grand Lodge Constitutions (173 8), which are undated in the original text (11) ; but are said in No. 44 to have been agreed to " at a General Assembly, held at . . . on the Eighth Day of December 1663." Dr. Anderson was evidently not so careful in his statements as Roberts, for he supplies the names of the Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master and Grand Wardens, present on the occasion (of frees, by the way, then unknown) and alters the day to the Feast of St. John the Evangelist 1663, doubtless to bring it into conformity with modern usage. The text of No. 11 should be consulted at p. 5 6 and compared with that supplied by Dr. Anderson, when it will readily be seen that the learned Divine has changed the 5th Rule (No. 30 in MS. 11) so as to read " one Grand Master," in lieu of " one Master " and has appropriated the 6th Rule of the Roberts MS. (not in No. 11), though he has discreetly omitted the 7th, and the Obligation. Preston follows in THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 63 Anderson's footsteps and is, therefore, entitled to no greater credence than the authority upon whom he relies.


A modern arrangement entitled " The CHARGES of a FREEMASON, extracted from the ancient RECORDS of LODGES beyond sea and of those in England, Scotland, and Ireland, for the use of the Lodges in London : To be read at the making of NEW BRETHREN, or when the MASTER shall order it," prefaces " The General Regulations," printed A.D. 1723. Although Dr. Anderson presented an " improved " (?) version in 1738, it was not liked and, in subsequent editions, that of 1723 was reverted to and, indeed, is substantially the same as those Charges which have been circulated with the " Regulations for the Government of the Craft " of the United Grand Lodge of England, from 1815 to the present date.


Additional confirmation of the Inigo Jones text having been adopted in part by Dr. Anderson, or at least that of the Cole MS. (which is virtually the same), will be found by comparing the 1738 Constitutions with either of those MSS. so far as respects " The History of Masonry from the Creation throughout the Known Earth." Of what has been termed in late years " learned credulity," the labours of Dr. Anderson afford an excellent illustration. Of the creationist school of Masonic historians, he is the facile princeps and, if imitation may be regarded as the sincerest form of flattery, the late Dr. George Oliver has been, beyond all comparison, his most appreciative disciple.


Over eighty different copies of these Old Charges or Constitutions of the Fraternity are now known to have been or to be still in existence ; these, for the most part being preserved with great care in Public or Masonic Libraries. They are generally written on parchment or paper rolls, which vary from about five to nine feet in length and from five to eleven inches in breadth. There are seven of these Old Charges in the British Museum, others in the archives of the United Grand Lodge of England, at York, Edinburgh and other places ; York being very fortunate in having the richest collection.


The Masonic Year‑book for the Province of Shropshire for 1912 contained particulars of a copy of the Old Charges which the Rev. C. H. Drinkwater of Shrewsbury discovered in a MS. book in the custody of the Rector of Warburton. This copy appears to have been made in 1748 from an older copy contained in another book written in 1694.


In 1908 W. J. Hughan announced the discovery of the Tho. Carmick MS. of A.D. 1727, so named after the owner and, probably, the transcriber of the document, from one belonging to St. John's Lodge of Philadelphia, U.S.A. The text is, in chief respects, similar to the well‑known Alnwick MS. of 1701, but has features peculiar to itself, more especially in relation to its Christian character and sundry additions and omissions ; besides which the anonymity of the MS. generally is varied in this instance by the Apprentice charge being declared to be " Invented by Mr. William harige, Sury and Meason, of his Majesty's town of harwich." CHAPTER III THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY THE ceaseless progress of the building art, throughout the strife and turmoil of the Middle Ages, is a remarkable phenomenon which at once arrests our attention and challenges our research. A bare list of the monuments of architecture erected from the ninth to the fifteenth centuries would cover many pages ; in no country is this movement more emphatically marked than throughout the length and breadth of Germany. Devout men from the British Isles, chiefly from Ireland, crossed over to the mainland and, penetrating into the depths of the German forests, carried the pure doctrines of primitive Christianity to the German tribes. Wherever they came, they raised churches and dwellings for their priests, cleared the forests, tilled the virgin soil and instructed the heathen in the first principles of civilization.


And who were these builders ? What manner of men were they ? Whence came they? They were the Steinmetzen. They were a class of simple workmen, bound together by strong ties of brotherhood, but containing in their midst master builders whose minds were stored with all the mathematical knowledge of those days, who contentedly worked for a lifetime at an edifice, satisfied to know that, although they might never see its completion, their successors would carry on the work to a glorious conclusion and raise one more temple to the worship of the Most High.


Fallou (Mysterien der Frei>naurer, p. 157) asserts that, in the eleventh century, the monks in Germany first copied their brethren in Gaul by instituting lay brotherhoods attached to the convent and that the Abbot Marquardt of Corvey made use of this institution to procure builders for his new convent. Schauberg, however, refers to Springer (De Artificibur Monachis, Bonn, 186 1) as proving that, throughout the Middle Ages, the chief artificers were laymen‑not lay brothers of the convent ‑and that even at Corvey the great majority of the artists were laymen. There is no proof that these lay brotherhoods were builders ; more probably they consisted of nobles, knights and rich burghers, as is clearly pointed out by a further assertion of Fallou's, on the same page, that, in the year 1140, the Cistercians of Walkenried (in Brunswick, at the foot of the Hartz Mountains, on the Wieda) instituted such a fraternity and boasted that they could travel thence to Rome, dine each day with one lay brother, sup and sleep with another. This most certainly discloses the nature of these fraternities and it is impossible to connect them in any way with the building craft : they were not lay brothers in the ordinary sense and evidently did not reside in the convent. On p. 198,,however, he is inclined to attribute the institution of a lay brotherhood to a still earlier date‑say A.D. io8o, when 64 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 65 William, Count Palatine of Scheuren, was elected Abbot of Hirschau (on the Nagold, in the Black Forest, Wurtemberg), of whom it was reported that he was so famous that crowds flocked to his convent, praying for admission. These petitioners were all admitted as lay brothers and speedily taught the various manipulations of masonry, etc. ; so that, in io8z, he was enabled to undertake the reconstruction of the monastery. At that time no fewer than three hundred monks and laymen dwelt in the convent under his orders. He instituted a rule for them, partitioned out their hours of labour, rest, worship and refreshment, inculcated above all things brotherly love and enjoined strict silence at work, unless desirous of communicating with the master. His school of art rapidly acquired such extended fame that he was overwhelmed by entreaties from all parts of Europe to furnish architects and artists for building operations. Nevertheless, in spite of his best workmen being constantly drafted off elsewhere, he was enabled to see his convent completed before his death, A.D. 1091.


Thus far Fallou. As he unfortunately omits to quote his authorities, it can only be assumed that he drew his facts from some monkish chronicle. That Abbot Wilhelm was a great man in his day is indisputable. St. Anselm, afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury, visited him in 1084 ; and the ruins of his splendid monastery are still in evidence. But the above account scarcely justifies the deduction that he was the originator of the craft of stonemasons. It is perfectly evident ‑(1) That the lapse of time was totally insufficient to create a large class of skilled artificers ; and (z) We have no trace here of divisions into grades, such as apprentice, fellow and master. As regards the first point. In io8o he succeeded to his post and, in 1o82, he was enabled to commence reconstruction. It is, therefore, evident that many of the laymen who are reported to have joined him were already skilled masons (two years being wholly insufficient for the instruction of such a large body of men) ; nor would the ensuing nine years have sufficed to raise such a superstructure by means of only half‑trained workmen. In fact, a passage further on in Fallou (op. cit., p. zoi) distinctly states that, according to the chronicle of Walkenried, Abbot Henry III admitted into his convent " z 1 skilled laymen, chiefly stonemasons," as lay brothers. It is important to distinguish between a layman and a lay brotherthat is, between a citizen of the world and a semi‑member of the Church. Fallou would seem almost purposely to have confounded them. As to any organization of the workmen, the idea is untenable. If any such existed, it was doubtless amongst the free artisans of the town, who may have entered into the pay of the monks ; but the lay brothers in all cases became the servants of the convent, dependent on them for food, lodging and raiment ; and the necessity for a term of apprenticeship is entirely absent. The title of magister, or master, was doubtless in use and may have denoted the monk directing the operations. The distinctive feature of apprenticeship is the obligation to serve a certain master for a fixed time at a reduced rate of payment, or even gratis, as the case may be. But a lay brother of a monastery would be under the same rule as the monk himself‑allowed to possess no private property‑hence could receive no pay beyond his sustenance ; so that if grades 66 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY of workmen existed at the building of these monasteries, they were either craft masons in the pay of the abbot, or something totally dissimilar to any association subsequently known to us. Speaking of Fallou's assertions as above, Winzer (Die Deutschen Bruderschaften, p. 47) says : " But these fraternities cannot interest us, being organizations of serfs " ; and probably he is right the workmen, or labourers, with the exception of a certain proportion of craft masons, being most likely the serfs, vassals and villeins of the convent. Fort (Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, p. 73), however, distinctly maintains that the Freemasons at a very early age appropriated the several degrees then existing in the monasteries. On p. 46 he gives his reasons for this statement, which are wholly unsatisfactory " Lacroix asserts, in a chronicle of the time of Dagobert (A.D. 6z8‑‑9), that Saint Eloi organized the jewellers, whom he selected from different monasteries, into a society comprising three degrees of labourers‑masters, fellows and apprentices." There is no proof that these monks were clerics ; in the early ages monks could enter or leave a monastery as they chose ; vows of chastity, etc., were unknown ; in fact the life of a monk was a purely voluntary one ; and in the quotation we are told that they left their different monasteries and were organized into a society. Lacroix (Les Arts au Moyen age, p. 16o) himself says : " Already was the jeweller's trade organized into a corps d'etat "‑i.e. a trade association‑which is far from proving Fort's assertion ; indeed, more naturally suggests the usual features of an ordinary craft guild.


It should be added that Fallou had previously maintained the same theory and even went further, in endeavouring to show that the ceremonies of the Steinmetzen were an adaptation of those used at the reception of a Benedictine novice, thereby implying that Freemasonry, as (according to this author) we now have it, was directly due to the inspiration or influence of the Abbot Wilhelm. Unfortunately for this theory, the Benedictine ceremonies, relied upon by Fallou, appear to have had no existence outside the pages of his work, indeed his statements on this head are positively contradicted by more than one writer of authority (Gurlitt, Geschichte des Benedictiner Ordens and Aubrey, History of England, vol, i, p. 98).


We thus see that from the sixth (perhaps fifth) century onwards up to the twelfth, when most of the monasteries were completed, they afforded the means of acquiring skill in the manipulation of building materials and may thus be looked upon in Germany as the earliest school of masonry and the cradle of architecture, furnishing large numbers of cunning artificers and experienced master builders, but not contributing in any way towards the organization of the stonemasons. For the origin of this sodality we must look to the trade guilds ; which, beginning in the towns as early as the tenth century, or even earlier, had meanwhile been acquiring increasing importance and extent ; until, in the twelfth, we find them fully developed throughout Germany. When the German tribes first appeared on the pages of history, they consisted of perfectly free and independent members only ; subject in matters of external policy and war to a chief of their own election, who THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 67 is described generally as their king, but whose office was not hereditary‑those cases in which the dignity descended from father to son arising solely from the superiority of the son to the other members of the tribe. Even the great Attila's kingdom fell to pieces on his death. The great bond of society was the patriarchal ; every member of a family owed allegiance and support to its head and assistance to every other member of the family. In course of time as the families grew larger and extended over a wider territory, their bond of union was loosened and voluntary associations of neighbours, having a community of interests, took its place. When Charlemagne established his supremacy in the ninth century, he introduced the feudal system and, from this time, we find German society divided into feudal lords‑feudal retainers‑smaller freeholders and serfs. About this time, also, cities first began to arise, probably from various causes. In some cases fortified places were necessary for protection against the still savage and predatory tribes of the North, or of Hungary. Charlemagne was himself the founder of a city, by establishing a court there, as at Aix‑la‑Chapelle. In others, the increasing population round a bishop's seat frequently developed into a town.


In the German towns of the Middle Ages we find two distinct classes. First, the original freeholders, in whom resided the whole government of the town, represented by the burghers' guild. This guild underwent various denominations in the different cities : it was called the old guild, the high guild, the guild, the patrician guild, etc. In some cases, where it monopolized the chief trade (not craft), it was otherwise styled‑for instance, the weavers' guild. But under whatever denomination, it had grown exclusive ; it no longer admitted all free burghers, not even if they possessed the territorial qualification ; demanding, in all cases, that the claimant to the honour should have forsworn his craft for a year and a day ; that none " with dirty hands," or " with blue nails," or who " hawked his wares in the street," should be admitted (Brentano, On the History and Development of Guilds, p. 43). Thus a distinct class had been formed‑the patrician class, the rights and emoluments of which were hereditary and acquired with great difficulty by strangers ; whose members reserved to those among themselves who were not thoroughly independent of all labour the most lucrative and considerable trades, such as the goldsmiths, the bankers, the general merchants, etc. They had also grown proud, domineering and aggressive ; so that no sooner did the second class, the craft guilds, feel themselves strong on their legs, than in one city after another bloody feuds ensued ; the final result of which was the dethronement of the patricians from their supremacy and, in some cases, the breaking‑up of the high guild.


Generally, however, the conquerors, with rare magnanimity, still allowed the patrician guild to contribute its delegates to the municipal council and, in some cases, even granted them a casting vote in consideration of their past services (ibid., p. 47). Brentano fixes the time of the final victory of the craft guilds as towards the end of the fourteenth century, although in some cities the consummation had been arrived at much earlier.


 68 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY The craft guilds having thus acquired a high position, we now find another movement initiated by the masters‑who in their turn became proud‑viz. that of gradually excluding the workmen from their meetings. This took place in all guilds, the stonemasons only excepted, as will presently appear ; and even with it, the same evolution must have occurred, only much later‑probably not till the end of the seventeenth century. The workmen (journeymen) therefore formed guilds or fraternities of their own ; in some cases electing officers of their own body ; in others, from amongst the masters. The literature treating of these societies is extensive and, in many cases, their customs and usages may enable us to form some idea of the customs of the stonemasons, who were a craft guild resembling in many things the other craft guilds and, in some matters, wherever the exigencies of their trade required it, differing from all. This fraternity of builders, whose first authentic charter is the one already quoted of the thirteenth century, had doubtless been in existence much earlier, as a contract has been preserved to us made in 1133 between the Bishop of Wurzburg, Embricho and the lay master mason Enzelin (see Dr. Ang. Reichensperger, Die Bauhiitte des Mittelalrers, p. 12, Cologne, 1879) ; to them we must look for the organization of the society, which was not to be found amongst the convent builders. It is probable that in the twelfth century, or thereabouts, the skilled masons of the convent builders left the employ of their masters, the monks, now grown opulent, fat, lazy, and vicious and unable to provide them with further work, amalgamated with the craft builders in the town and that the two together formed the society afterwards known throughout Germany as the Steinmetzen.


In the codes of laws and ordinances we find one new feature that doubtless dates from 1459‑that of the bond embracing all Germany and Switzerland‑that is, the inner fraternity and the supreme authority. There can be no doubt that previous and constant intercommunication had reduced the various guilds of stonemasons scattered throughout Germany to one general uniformity, except in some small matters (the length of apprenticeship, for instance) and that, like all other trades, a journeyman free to work in one place was acceptable in another. Yet differences, tending to positive strife, were by no means impossible under such circumstances ; but, in 145 9, this was rendered excessively difficult by the institution of a universal guild or fraternity and four chief lodges, to which all disputes must be referred. Of the latter, in spite of some obscurity in the wording, the lodge at Strasburg was the supreme head. It is even more than likely that this assembly in 1459 and the rules then laid down were the direct result of some quarrel which had threatened to become prejudicial to the trade ; or they may have taken their rise from a feeling in the craft that the days of their highest prosperity and power were slipping away from them and that some mighty effort was necessary to consolidate their associations and combine their interests ; or they may, on the other hand, have been simply the outcome of a desire to obtain royal authority for their future proceedings, as immediately afterwards these statutes were laid before the Emperor for confirmation.


 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 69 These Ordinances apparently remained in full force till 1563, with possibly some slight alterations of individual sections ; a proceeding perfectly allowable according to the laws themselves. Heldmann, indeed, supposes that such did take place, at the assemblies held (as he avers) in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries at Strasburg, Cologne, Bale and other places, although he does not cite his authority for this statement (see Die drei Aeltesten Geschichtlichen Denkmale, p. 5 2). It is, however, quite obvious that the Ordinances of 1459 are given in a very confused manner, without any attempt at natural sequence or order ; and for this, as well possibly as for other reasons, it became highly desirable that they should undergo a general revision, which accordingly took place in 1563, at two meetings, held respectively on the festivals of St. Bartholomew and St. Michael. These revised laws were printed in folio and a copy distributed to every lodge of importance the master of which was willing to join the fraternity ; and the following are excerpts from what is described as The Brother Book of 1563, containing " The Ordinances and Articles of the Fraternity of Stonemasons renewed at the Chief Lodge at Strasburg on St. Michael's Day MDLXIII." No English translation of these Ordinances has hitherto appeared. They were first published as the Secret Book (Geheimbuch) of the Stonemasons, in folio, with the imprint 1563 and the imperial eagle on the title page and, from this copy, were republished by Heldmann, Krause, and Heideloff.


The preamble reads as follows His Imperial Roman Majesty, our most gracious Lord, having in this one thousand five hundred and sixty‑third year most graciously renewed, confirmed and approved to the general fellowship and brotherhood of the Stonemasons in German Lands their regulations and duties ; and, whereas for some time past, many irregularities and bad habits have arisen and obtained in the craft of masonry, therefore have many masters and fellows of aforesaid craft and fraternity, as they are named hereafter, met together in the aforesaid sixty‑third year at Bale on St. Bartholomew's and at Strasburg on St. Michael's Day, in order to elucidate and better aforesaid Ordinances and Articles of the Craft and Brotherhood and the aforesaid have elucidated and bettered said Ordinances and settled that they shall be held as hereafter follows ; and no one who is of this guild shall do or act contrary thereto.


It is unnecessary to reproduce the Ordinances in full, but the following are of interest to modern Freemasons Of the Duties of those who are of this Guild.


II. Whoso comes into this guild of his own good will, as hereafter stands written in this book, he shall promise to keep every point and article if he be of our craft of Masonry. Those shall be masters who can erect costly edifices and such like work, for the which they are authorized and serve no other craft unless they choose so to do. And be it masters or fellows they shall and must conduct themselves honourably and none shall be wronged by them ; therefore have we taken power in these Ordinances to punish them on the occasion of every such act.


4 70 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY Who may be taught to execute Work from the Ground Plan or other Carved Work.


XIII. And no craftsman, warden, or fellow shall teach any one, whoever he be, that is not of our craft, to make extracts from the ground plan or other usages of masonry, who has not practised masonry in his day, or not served long enough with a stonemason according to our craft, customs and ordinances.


No Master shall teach a Fellow anything for Money.


XIV. And no craftsman or master shall take money from a fellow for showing or teaching him anything touching masonry. In like manner no warden or fellow shall show or instruct any one for money in carving as aforesaid. Should, however, one wish to instruct or teach another, he may well do it, one piece for the other, or for fellowship sake, or to serve their master thereby.


How many Apprentices a Master may have.


XV. A master who has only one building or work may have three apprentices, two rough and one art apprentice, that he may also employ fellows in the same lodge, that is, if his superiors permit. If he have more than one building he shall not have more than two apprentices on the first works and buildings, so that he have not more than five apprentices on all his buildings. Nevertheless, so that each may serve his five years on that building and work on which he serves.


Who openly lives in Concubinage.


XVI. No craftsman or master of masonry shall live openly in adultery. If, however, such a one will not desist therefrom, no travelling fellow nor stonemason shall stand in his employ, or have communion with him.


 Who lives not as a Christian, and goes not yearly to the Holy Sacrament.


XVII. No craftsman or master shall be received into the guild who goes not yearly to Holy Sacrament, or keeps not Christian discipline and squanders his substance in play. But should any one be inadvertently accepted into the guild who does these things as aforesaid, no master shall keep company with him, nor shall any fellow stand by him until he shall have ceased so to do and been punished by those of this guild.


How Complaints are to be heard, judged, and conducted.


XIX. And if a master have a complaint against another master for having violated the regulations of the craftsmen, or in the same way a master against a fellow, or a fellow against another fellow, whatever master or fellow is concerned therein shall give notice thereof to the masters who hold these books of the regulations. And the masters who are informed thereof shall hear both parties and set a day when they will hear the cause. And meanwhile, before the fixed or appointed day no fellow shall avoid the master, nor master the fellow, but render services mutually until the hour when the matter is to be heard and settled. And this shall all be done according to the judgment of the craftsmen and what is adjudged shall be observed accordingly. And, moreover, where the case arose there shall it be tried, by the nearest masters who hold the book of these regulations, and in whose district it occurred.


Where a Book is, there shall be the Collection for the Poor and Sick Brothers.




IV. And all those to whom books of the ordinances are given, shall faithfully collect the weekly penny from the fellows ; and if a fellow becomes sick, shall assist him. Likewise, where such a superior has a master under him, having employment and fellows, he shall order him to collect the weekly pennies in a box and give him a box for that purpose, which box shall THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 71 be emptied by and accounted for to each superior of a district every year and be employed for the assistance of the poor and sick of our craft who are under him.


And every master who has a box and has received account every year of his neighbours of their boxes, shall send a bohemian [a coin of trifling value] every year at Michaelmas to the chief lodge at Strasburg, with a ticket whence it comes, as a sign of obedience and brotherly love ; that it may be known that all things as aforesaid have been carried out.


 How the Masters of this Guild shall preserve the Book.




VIII. The master who has charge of the book shall, on his oath to the guild, have a care that the same be not copied either by himself or by any other person, or lent ; so that the books remain in full force, as resolved by the craftsmen. But should any one be in need of one or two articles more or less, that may any master give him in writing. And every master shall cause these Ordinances to be read every year to the fellows in the lodge.


 No Fellow to be employed who lives in adultery.


XLVI. No master or craftsman shall employ any fellow who consorts with a woman in adultery, or who openly lives a dishonourable life with women, or who goes not to the holy communion according to Christian discipline, or one who is so foolish as to game away his clothing.


Not to leave the Lodge without permission.


LI. No fellow shall go out from the lodge without leave, or if he go to his broth or any other meal, remain out without leave ; nor shall any make Holy Monday. If any one do so, he shall stand to punishment by the master and fellows and the master shall have power to discharge him in the week when he will.


What an Apprentice shall vow to the Craft when he has served his time and is declared free.


LIV. In the first place, every apprentice when he has served his time and is declared free, shall promise the craft, on his truth and honour, in lieu of oath, under pain of losing his right to practise masonry, that he will disclose or communicate the mason's greeting and grip to no one, except to him to whom he may justly communicate it ; and also that he will write nothing thereof.


Secondly, He shall promise as aforesaid, to be obedient to the craft of masonry in all things concerning the craft and if he be sentenced by the craft he shall conform wholly to such sentence and yield obedience thereto.


Thirdly, He shall promise not to weaken but to strengthen the craft, so far as his means may extend.


Fourthly, No one shall stand by another to hew stones who is not honestly of the craft ; and no master shall employ any one to hew stones who is not a true stonemason, unless it be previously permitted to him of a whole craft.


LV. And no one shall alter of his own will and power his mark which has been granted and lent him by a craft ; but if he ever desire to alter it he shall only do it with the knowledge, will and approval of a whole craft.


LVI. And every master, having aforesaid apprentices, shall earnestly enjoin and invite each one when he has thus completed the above‑written five years to become a brother, by the oath which each one has taken to the craft and is offered to each.


 No Apprentice to be made a Warden.


LVII. No craftsman or master shall appoint as warden any one of his apprentices whom he has taken from his rough state, who is still in his years of apprenticeship.


LVIII. And no craftsman or master shall appoint as warden any apprentice whom he has 72 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY taken from his rough state to apprentice, even if he have served his years of apprenticeship, unless he have also travelled for one year.


Ordinances of the Apprentices.


LX. And no craftsman shall knowingly accept an apprentice of illegitimate birth, but shall have made earnest inquiries before accepting him and shall ask the apprentice on his truth whether his father and mother have lived together in wedlock.


LXI. And it is also decreed that no craftsman shall accept an apprentice in the rough otherwise than for five years and henceforth none shall pay any money for the time which he has not served, but shall completely serve his five years. Nevertheless, what has heretofore been done, that shall so remain, but in future it shall only be done as aforesaid.


LXII. And a father, being himself a mason, shall have power to bind one or more of his sons for five years and to complete their instruction, but only in the presence of other stonemasons ; and such an apprentice shall not be under fourteen years of age.


A few paragraphs of the 1459 Ordinances are totally omitted in 1563. These principally provide for divine worship, the singing of masses for the departed and the return of the book and box to Strasburg, should a master's building be completed and he have no further employment for his fellows. One of the omitted Ordinances is, however, curious ; and to render the review complete it is now inserted Item. Whoever desires to enter this fraternity shall promise ever to keep steadfastly all these articles hereinbefore and hereafter written in this book ; except our gracious lord the Emperor or the king, princes, lords, or any other nobles, by force or right should be opposed to his belonging to the fraternity ; that shall be a sufficient excuse ; so that there be no harm therein. But for what he is indebted to the fraternity, he shall come to an agreement thereon with the craftsmen who are in the fraternity.


The Ordinances of 1459 and 1563 provide that an apprentice shall not be appointed warden ; whereas those of 1462 permit the master to appoint an apprentice to the office of warden, " if he be able to maintain it " ; that is, if he be sufficiently instructed and capable, in order that no harm may thereby ensue. In all other points, the Torgau Ordinances are merely complemental to those of 1459 The stonemasons were divided, like all other crafts whatsoever, into three classes‑masters, fellows and apprentices. The apprentices, however, though of the craft, were not admitted to the brotherhood ; in this respect an analogy existing with the other craft guilds. But with the stonemasons, as their laws reveal, the master remained a member of the brotherhood and owed his position in the fraternity as presiding judge, solely to his qualification of workmaster ; whereas, in other crafts, the masters had formed fraternities of their own and the journeymen also ; and the journeymen fraternities were presided over in some instances by one of the masters of the locality and, in others, by one or more of the journeymen themselves, who then took the title of " Old‑fellow " (Alt ge rell). In both cases, however, the officer was elected by the votes of the members ; and in the former the master was admitted more as a representative of the masters than THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 73 as a president, the proceedings being always conducted by the " Old‑fellow," the master sitting as a sort of coadjutor (see Berlepsch, Chronik der Gewerbe, vol. i).


On the completion of his apprenticeship a new life awaited the young workman. He was declared free of the craft and obtained rank as a fellow craft (Gesell) ; but did not necessarily thereby enter the fraternity. This act was solemnly performed before the assembled Lodge and was doubtless accompanied by some formalities, of which the leading features are pointed out. We know that he had to take a solemn obligation " on his truth and honour in lieu of oath," under the penalty of being expelled the craft, that he would be a true, loyal, and obedient mason, that he would maintain the craft as far as in him lay, that he would not of his own initiative alter or change his distinctive mark and that he would not disclose the greeting (Gruss) or grip (Schenck) to any non‑mason ; even that he would not commit any part thereof to writing. These methods of recognition were then imparted to him and the ceremony concluded with a jovial feast, which was partly at the master's expense, partly at his own. To this feast sundry guests were invited, probably the clergy attached to the building then in course of erection ; even the bill of fare was provided for. The master was strictly enjoined not to delay this action for a longer period than fourteen days, except on good and valid grounds ; and it was expressly stipulated that henceforth nothing shall be unjustly withheld, in order that no excuse may be pleaded in after‑times ; hence it may be assumed that amongst other matters the Ordinances were read to him. This was called pledging his mark, toasting it, or drinking good luck to it ; and, so important was the occasion considered, that the stipulated rules of frugality were suspended and the warden was empowered to cease work one hour sooner. This mark henceforth became his distinctive property and was used by him as a species of signature ; he was required to engrave it on all his work upon completion and severely punished if he did so before the work had been proved and passed. What the grip was we are not told ; but at the beginning of last century, Herr Osterrieth, an architect, who had been professionally educated at Strasburg, where he joined a survival of the stonemasons, on being admitted to Freemasonry by Heldmann at Aarau (in the province of Aargau, Switzerland), expressed his astonishment at recognizing in the entered apprentice grip the token of the Strasburg stonemasons (see Heldmann, Die drei Aeltesten Geschichtlichen Denkmale, p. zSo). Unless we think fit to doubt this assertion, the Masonic reader will know what the stonemason's grip was ; if we believe it, the curious question remains, is the resemblance a mere coincidence, or a proof of a connecting link between the German and English stonemasons of the Middle Ages ? On Osterrieth's own showing, he must have violated his promise of secrecy to his Strasburg Brethren and, therefore, cannot be regarded as a witness of scrupulous veracity. He places himself in the awkward dilemma, either of having deceived the Freemasons of Aarau by a falsehood, or of having perjured himself, so that we shall be justified in receiving his disclosure with caution. It is also to be noted, that, although all writers claim a grip for the stonemasons, the only evidence by which this claim can be supported, is one word quoted, viz. Schenck. This 74 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY word is derived from schencken, to give ; hence handschencken, to give or shake hands ; and in this case we must suppose that the word Hand is omitted and understood, as Schenck alone would not import the fuller meaning. The word Schenck occurs very frequently in the Ordinances and, in other clauses, always refers to the pledge feast ; ausschencken or verschencken is to pour out, a libation, a toast, pledge, etc. and as these toasts were always drunk in other handicrafts, with a prescribed movement of hand and cup, accompanied by a fixed form of words, it may be assumed that the stonemasons also had their pledge‑ritual. It is therefore just possible that here the word alludes to the pledge and that the article forbids the fellow craft to divulge to the non‑mason this peculiar ceremonial. Inasmuch, however, as all German writers agree in attributing the possession of a certain grip to the present descendants of the stonemasons and, taking into consideration that the word is used conjointly with " greeting " (Grass), it may reasonably be concluded that the existence of a grip has fairly been demonstrated.


Heldmann also states (p. z50) that the Steinmetzen had a series of prescribed steps, identical with those of the Freemasons, but he cites no authority, not even his friend Osterrieth ; so that it remains more than questionable whether the former has not given a very loose rein to his imagination. Fallou more than once describes these steps, asserting, but always without authority, that they were usual on various specified occasions ; and Winzer (p. 67) copies him. According to Heinsch, they reappear amongst the Stone‑heivers and are described as three equal steps forward and backward, in which, however, there is nothing suggestive of Masonic identity.


But the new craftsman was also charged not to reveal the greeting. Findel, Fort, Steinbrenner and others, translate this word by " salute," a term conveying a sense which appears to be unauthorized. A salute combines the idea of a greeting by word of mouth and a greeting by action ; in fact, a sign and a speech. There is no mention in an authentic document of a sign. Fallou writes throughout in such a manner as to leave the impression that the salute was accompanied by a sign ; and Fort (p. 215) expressly declares that a wandering journeyman on entering a Lodge " advanced by three upright measured steps and gave the salute, Gruss, or hailing sign." It is impossible to restrain a feeling of impatience when writers, whose works would otherwise be valuable, destroy the confidence of a critical reader by such baseless assertions. In no trade of the Middle Ages, not even amongst the Steinmetzen, is it possible to find the slightest trace of a sign or of anything approaching thereto. It would not, however, be fair to leave unnoticed the remark that sculptured images may still be seen in existing medixval churches whose attitudes bear a close resemblance to certain of our Masonic positions. Indeed, Fort (Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, p. 89) positively asserts " that in one of the churches at Florence there are life‑size figures in Masonic attitudes." The idea thus suggested is further supported by a pictorial representation of the entrance to the cathedral in the same city, which he gives as a frontispiece to his well‑known work. In this sketch there are portrayed (exclusive of minor figures) the forms of five ecclesiastics in reverential attitudes. The postures they assume THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 75 will remind those conversant with the services of the Roman Church of the attitude of the officiating priest and, beyond the strong family likeness which must always exist between supplicatory and reverential positions of all kinds and in all countries, assumed in invocation of Divine aid, there does not seem anything to merit attention in the similitude upon which Fort has laid so much stress. It may be added, that to what has been happily termed by Hyde Clarke " the doctrine of chance coincidences " are due all the " traveller's tales " of later years, wherein, as a common feature, appear either the manifestation or the recognition of Masonic signs, by Arabs of the desert, native Australians, Bushmen, Afghans, etc. Upon the whole, we may safely infer that whatever resemblances may appear to exist between the Masonic ceremonial and the attitudes to which Fort has alluded are as much the product of chance as the " supposititious masonry " of our own times, which has evoked the excellent definition of Hyde Clarke (see Freemason's Magazine, November 26, :1864).


As for the greeting itself we are distinctly told what it was, also the words in which a fellow was to claim assistance and how he was to return thanks for the help tendered. It may seem strange that what was considered a secret should have been committed to writing ; and, in fact, Fallou (Mysterien der Freimaurer, p. 3 5 3) asserts that it was never in use and that the Torgau Ordinances were of no authority, being merely a private sketch of a proposed new ordinance and rule ; and he elsewhere states that they never received confirmation. The latter statement is correct and, moreover, they were never meant to be confirmed, being entirely subsidiary to and elucidatory of, the 1459 Ordinances ; but, as to the former, it is so palpably erroneous, as shown in another place and by the preamble itself, that no words about it need be wasted here. Fallou prefers to this documentary evidence the statements of a Steinmetz of the present day ; the greeting, however, as told by him is so similar, that it may well have arisen from the old original‑all except the three upright steps. When we take into account, however, the fact that the Torgau Ordinances were never printed, or intended to be and were probably only entrusted to well‑known masters, as may be presumed from the fact that up to the present time only one copy has come to light ; when we consider how important it was that this greeting should be given with great exactitude, in order to distinguish a bona fide craftsman, we can no longer wonder at the Saxon masters ensuring its accurate preservation. But if so, why was not the grip similarly preserved? Because it was so simple in its very nature, that once learned, it could not be forgotten or perverted.


A careful glance at the Ordinances will convince us that no single clue of the remotest kind is afforded as to the nature of the affiliation ceremony ; we are not even told that a ceremony existed, nor is it probable that it did in 145 9, although one may have become usual in after‑years. We are not informed that there were any secrets to be communicated, or mysteries to be concealed, or any further instruction to be acquired ; nay, we are directly assured that there were none ; because the perfect apprentice was no longer to have aught concealed from him ; that is to say, that 7 76 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY everything necessary to the due prosecution of his profession became his by right, whether or not he joined the fraternity. Fort, in his description (which is chiefly copied from Fallou), evidently confuses the distinct occasions of passing to the journeyman's degree and of entering the fraternity, which mistake, however, Fallou has avoided. Findel also, following the same lead, has not only fallen into a similar error, but contrives to entangle with both these incidents some of the preliminaries of indenture. Steinbrenner has gone even farther astray, placing the conferring of the mark last of all. Their great authority Fallou presents a graphic description of this ceremony, but it will be sufficient in this place to glance at its leading features. He avers that the candidate was blindfolded, half unclothed, slipshod, deprived of weapons and metals (a cord about his neck), led three times round the Lodge ; that he then advanced by three upright steps to the master, undertook an obligation on the Scriptures, square and compasses, was restored to sight, shown the three great lights, invested with a white apron and gloves, etc., etc. Now, it may positively be affirmed that if Fallou could have fortified these assertions by the merest colour of authority, he would have done so ; also that if subsequent writers had been able to discover any confirmatory evidence, they would have given it. Endeavours to trace any foundation of authority have proved lamentable failures and, combining this experience with the above considerations, it does not seem difficult to pronounce that the entire ceremony has been invented by Fallou. The account is in itself improbable. Why should the fellow craft be blindfolded ? There was no concealed light to be revealed to him as far as operative masonry was concerned and of a speculative science there is no trace in the annals of the Steinmetzen. It should be recollected, moreover, that Fallou places before us the details of an affiliation, not of an initiation. Beyond a doubt the novice would be "deprived of weapons"; these were never at anytime allowed in Lodge ; and possibly he may have been partially unclothed in token of humility and to remind him of his distressed brethren. But wherefore the cord " about his neck " and the rest of the ceremony ? The whole account is palpably absurd. It may at once frankly be avowed that no record exists of the ceremony of affiliation amongst the stonemasons and, even according to Fallou, their present descendants have preserved none of any kind. It is, therefore, in the highest degree improbable that we shall ever know whether one existed ; but we have means at hand, if we concede its possible existence, of forming an imperfect idea of its nature, in the recorded ceremonies of other journeyman fraternities. Some of these usages certainly survived until the early part of this century and may perhaps even now be more or less practised.


We find, then, that the first thing necessary to render a meeting of the fraternities legal was the opened chest of the society. This contained their documents, minute‑books, registers and treasury ; and was usually secured by three locks and keys, which keys were in possession of three different officials ; hence their joint presence must also have been necessary. The presiding officer then knocked with some symbol of authority (usually a staff or hammer), to procure silence. The THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 77 periodical contributions of the members were then collected. Complaints were next heard and strife adjusted. The locksmiths (see Berlepsch, Chronik der Gewerbe, vol. vii, pp. 173‑6) (and possibly other crafts) closed their meetings by three formal inquiries, whether anything for the good of the craft or of the fraternity offered itself. All ceremonial operations were conducted in the form of a dialogue between the officials. Now note the ceremony of affiliating a journeyman joiner (Stock, Grunddiige der TVerfassung, p. 24). He was ushered into the assembly and placed before the president in an upright position, his heels joined, his feet at right angles, which was ensured by the square being placed between them. His posture was proved by the level, he was required to stand erect, elbows on his hips and hands spread out sideways so as to represent an equilateral triangle, of which his head was the apex. He was denominated throughout " rough wood." He was then directed to listen to a lecture. The first part of this lecture treats of the origin of the joiner's art and includes remarks on architecture in general, couched in rude verse, the phraseology of which (according to Stock) denotes an early eighteenth‑century origin ; much of it is based upon Vitruvius. In the generality of crafts he underwent a rude symbolical ceremony called Hdnseln (see Berlepsch, op. cit., vol. iv, p. 66 ; vol. vi, p. i i 8)‑that is, handling or manipulation. In the case of the joiners this consisted of being stretched on a bench, rather roughly planed and shaped with various tools, in fact treated as rough wood under the joiner's hands. The locksmiths turned a key round three times in the mouth of the candidate (Stock, op. cit., p. 29). After this ceremony the joiner was called in future " smooth wood " and, the proceedings being ended, was once more placed under the level. We then are treated to a reminiscence of knightly installations ; for the master having asked his name and received for an answer, say, " Martin," exhorts him thus‑" Until now you were Martin under the bench, now you are Martin above the bench " ; he then slaps his face and continues, " Suffer this, this once from me, henceforth from no man " (ibid., p. 28). The joiners' ceremony has been selected for quotation, being the most symbolic and, therefore, the least inimical to the theory of there being at this period any species of speculative Masonry ; and because, as might be expected from their intimacy with the masons, it shows traces of a connexion with architecture. The lecture contains excellent rules for conduct and some lessons in morality. Although couched in rude language, it is brimming over with the rather ponderous German wit.


The office of warden does not appear to have existed in guilds other than those of the stonemasons, but there full information as to his duties is found. In his installation we find traces of another solemn ceremony. He was to be appointed personally, not by a message or a third party, master and warden being both present and no doubt the whole Lodge ; the master then addressed him on the importance of his office and its duties (" he shall impress him with the wardenship ") and the warden made oath to the saints (the four crowned martyrs), on the square and gauge, to perform his duties to the best of his ability. The fellows then hailed him as warden and swore obedience to him as the master's representative, the whole of course, 78 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY concluding with a feast at the warden's expense. As to his duties, they were manifold. The 1563 Ordinances merely state generally, that he is to be true, trusty and obedient, but those of Torgau are much more minute. We are told that his signal was two knocks, but whenever an announcement was made, such as to begin or to cease work, command attention, etc., one knock only. He was to preserve the order, the privileges, the tools and appliances of the Lodge and to see that all instruments of precision, square, gauge, etc., were maintained in full accuracy. He was to act as general instructor to the fellows and apprentices and prepare, prove and pass their work for them, to reject spoilt work and to levy all fines for negligence or otherwise. He was to call the brethren to labour at the proper time, without fear or favour and to fine those who did not make their appearance ; in this latter respect, his attention being forcibly directed to the influence of a good example. Whilst true and faithful to his master, ever on the alert to safeguard his interests, he was to be conciliatory and kind to the fellows, ever ready to help them, of a peaceable disposition, to avoid giving cause of strife and, on no account, to act with greater severity than the usages of the craft permitted. He was to preside at their ordinary vesper meal and to enforce a becoming frugality ; he had power to assist a traveller and to engage and dismiss workmen and, in the master's absence, succeeded to all his authority, even to the extent of reducing the hours of labour. His name is differently given. The Strasburg Ordinances always call him parlierer. According to Fallou and others this word would signify " the speaker," from the French parler, to speak ; and, in fact, he was, undoubtedly, to a certain extent, the mouthpiece of the master. But a glance at the original language of the Statutes will show that no other word there used indicates a French origin and the custom, since so prevalent with a certain class of German writers and speakers, of Teutonizing French words, to the great detriment of their fine old mother tongue, had not yet arisen. Fort gives a far more probable derivation (Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, p. 267). The Torgau Ordinances spell the word pallirer ; and he states that, in former times amongst the Germans, all places of worship, justice, etc., were fenced around with a row of stakes, in modern German pfahl, formerly pal ; the guardian or warden of the enclosure would thence take his name, pfablirer or pallirer and, when the real meaning of the word was forgotten and the present office of the holder only remembered, it might easily have become corrupted into parlierer.


Individual Lodges were subordinate to a district Lodge ; several district Lodges owed obedience to a provincial Lodge and all culminated in the chief Lodge of Strasburg, all being united by the tie of brotherhood.


Masonic writers all combine in placing vividly before us the importance and the dignity of the chief master at Strasburg ; and scarcely one of them omits to mention that he was invested with a sword and sat enthroned under a canopy or baldachin. If, however, this assertion is carefully traced from one authority to another up to the fountain‑head, we find that it originates in the work of a nonmason, viz. Stock (p. 85), who says he has been informed " that such was the case." THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 79 Fallou (p. 72) ascribes the origin of this statement to Grandidier, but questions his accuracy. It therefore rests simply on hearsay. Without being a matter of importance either way, it affords, nevertheless, a good example of the manner in which Masonic history has been written. But, without importing into the case any extravagant conclusions, no doubt need be entertained that the overjudge at Strasburg wielded an immense influence ; although, looking at the whole spirit of the Ordinances before us, it is hardly conceivable that his judicial decisions were promulgated on his own sole and undivided authority. Like the district masters, he had probably to avail himself of the assistance of neighbouring or, perhaps, provincial masters and of the fellows of the craft in general. In 1461 the Town Council of Strasburg formally made over to him the adjudication of all disputes amongst the citizens relating to their buildings and he was provided with an assistant versed in the law. But, as he misused this power, it was withdrawn in 16zo. See Alsatia Illustrata, by Schopflin, quoted by Krause, znd edit., vol. ii, pt. iv, P. 245.


In the Cathedral of Wurzburg two pillars stand within the building, which at some period formed a part of the original porch. They are of peculiar construction. Their names, Jachin and Boaz, suggest a derivation from the celebrated pillars at the entrance of King Solomon's Temple, with which, however, their architectural form in no way corresponds. Jachin is composed of two series of eight columns ; the eight springing from the capital extend to the centre and are there curved and joined two and two, so as to form in reality only four U‑shaped columns ; the same applies to the four whose eight open ends rest on the base. At the bends of the opposing U's, the pillar is completed by an interlaced fillet or band. Boaz consists of two U's at the top and two at the base, these are joined by two O's of equal length, so that this pillar consists of apparently three series of four columns each. The names are engraved on the capitals. A sketch of these will be found in Steinbrenner, p. 76. A counterpart of Jachin is to be found in Bamberg Cathedral and one of Boaz in the New Market Church of Merseburg ; various ornamental forms in other buildings resemble these columns in one or more respects (see Steinbrenner, Origin and Early History of Freemasonry, p. 79). It is obvious that these curious monuments are suggestive of many mystical interpretations ; they may be intended to represent man (body and soul), the Trinity (three in one), or, in fact, almost anything‑a little ingenuity will discover numberless hidden meanings ‑or they may simply be the result of the inventive fancy of some skilful workman. Their names merely prove that the masons were acquainted with that part of the Old Testament most interesting to them as architects, which in itself may have suggested the idea of constructing something unusual. Of Church symbolism, Stieglitz (Geschichte der Baukunst, p. 448) observes, " and because the Apostles were considered the pillars of the Church, the columns at the side of the porch were referred to them ; although the pillars in front of King Solomon's Temple were thereby more especially brought to mind." But, admitting that the ancient builders attached a hidden symbolical meaning to these pillars, the fact is sufficient to sustain 8o THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY the theory that a speculative system of philosophy or of theology was nurtured in the masons' lodges.


One point, however, demands attention before we pass from this subject. According to Schauberg (Vergleichendes Handbuch der Symbolik der Freimaurerei, vol. ii, p. S33) on each side of the Meistertafel (master's tablet) at Bale is a sculptured representation of one of the four martyrs, with the addition of a couplet in rude rhyme. Identical verses, in slightly modernized phraseology, are also engraved on the treasury chest of the Hamburg Lodge of Masons, which reverted to Vienna together with the Brother‑book, after the death of the last Steinmetz, Wittgreff. These verses run as follows I The square possesses science enough, But use it always with propriety.


II The level teaches the true faith ; Therefore is it to be treasured.


III Justice and the compass' scienceIt boots naught to establish them.


IV The gauge is fine and scientific, And is used by great and small.


 The versifiers, in the second and third rhymes more especially, clearly show that they grasped the idea of an ethical symbolization of the implements of their handicraft ; yet the question arises, whether this ought not rather to be taken as a proof of philosophical reflection on the part of some individual members, than as indicative of a system of speculative philosophy having been co‑existent with medixval stonemasonry? It has been already shown that the masons enjoyed no monopoly of the symbolism of their trade. H. A. Giles (Freemasonry in China, p. 3) observes : "From time immemorial we find the square and compasses used by Chinese writers, to symbolize exactly the same phases of moral conduct as in our own system of Freemasonry." If such a system existed, why has it not survived ? why are there no traces of it in the still existing lodges of the stonemasons ? Why, when Freemasonry was introduced from England, did no recognition take place of its previous existence in Germany ? The reason is obvious. Stonemasonry, purely operative, had existed in Germany ; Freemasonry, that is, a speculative science‑never ! The Steinmetzen may have claimed a few thoughtful, speculative members and so, for that matter, might a society of coalheavers ; but it never concealed within the bosom of its operative fraternity any society which consciously and systematically practised a speculative science.


 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 81 In view of the assertions so often made, that the stonemasons were in the habit of admitting into their fraternity the most learned men of the age, it is somewhat surprising to find no provision for this contingency in the Ordinances. Albertus Argentinus and Albertus Magnus are both claimed as masons. To the former is attributed the design for the towers of Strasburg Cathedral and, to the latter, the plan of Cologne Cathedral, although some writers are inclined to consider them as one and the same person. This is the opinion of, amongst others, Heideloff, who says (Die Bauhiitte des Mittelalters, p. 15), " the masons' traditions connect Albertus Argentinus with the Cathedral of Strasburg, but he is probably Albertus Magnus, born 1193 or 1206, living in 1230 as a Benedictine monk in Strasburg, teacher of theology, philosophy, physics and metaphysics." If he really designed the plan of Cologne Cathedral, we can scarcely wonder at the masons desiring to claim him as a brother, but proof is, in such a case, of course, hardly to be expected. The Emperor, Frederick III (1440‑1492), is said to have been admitted to the fraternity, as shown in his Veiskunig. All this is not impossible, but there is nowhere any proof of, nor provision made for it. Nevertheless, we know that other crafts admitted honorary members ; indeed, when the town government was divided amongst the craft guilds, it became necessary that every citizen should belong pro forma to one of them and provision is very early made for this. In the charter granted in i z6o by the Bishop of Bale to the tailors, we find this clause : " The same conditions shall be submitted to by those who are not of this craft and wish to join the society or brotherhood." See Berlepsch, Chronik der Gewerbe (vol. ii, pp. 18, 19).


It is a remarkable fact that, throughout this roll of documents, no mention is made of the four martyrs, but that the guild of stonemasons and carpenters, who were always cited together, is repeatedly called the Fraternity of St. John the Baptist. This arose from their having originally held their headquarters at the Chapel of St. John in the cathedral square ; but it also points to the possibility of their having formed only one fraternity.


In 15 61 (two years before the Strasburg Ordinances of 15 63), the burgomaster and council of Cologne issued a charter of constitution to the stonemasons and carpenters, containing eighteen clauses, some of which were in direct conflict with the 1459 and 1563 Ordinances. Even if we admit that the craft first drew up the Ordinances and the council then confirmed them, as was probably the case, the importance of these contradictions is none the less. Either way, it implies that the municipality was able to impose terms on the masons within its walls, subversive of the formally recognized Ordinances of the craft, which ordinances had even been approved and confirmed by the Emperor.


One or two traditions of the craft remain to be noticed. At p. 146 of Steinbrenner's work (also Findel, p. 66o), we find an examination of a travelling salutemason. Fallou seems to have been the first to attach any great importance to this catechism, which he declared to be in use on the seaboard of North Germany ; and he professed to find in it a great resemblance to the examination of an entered 82 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY apprentice freemason and a clear proof of the early existence in Germany of Speculative Masonry. Steinbrenner goes even further and claims that it was used by the stonemasons of the Middle Ages. Here he is clearly in error, as no other writer, not even Fallou, claims for it any great antiquity, but all cite the catechism as tending to prove the former existence of something more to the purpose. Fallou no doubt got it from Krause or Stock ; but it seems to have been first published in i 803 by Schneider in his Book of Constitutions for the Lodge at Altenburg, from which Stock owns to having copied it ; so that its very existence is not above suspicion, at least in this exact form, as Schneider says, " he has discovered the secrets of these masons with great difficulty " and he may not have obtained a veritable transcript of their " examination." The following are a few extracts " What was the name of the first mason ? " Anton Hieronymus [Adon‑Hiram ?] and the working tool was invented by Walkan " [Tubal Cain?].


In regard to these expressions, the two pillars previously referred to sufficiently attest that the masons were conversant with the architectural details of the Holy Writings ; and there is nothing to excite surprise in their claiming Adon‑Hiram as a brother, or in their affirming that the first artificer in metals designed the implements of their handicraft. Fallou lays great stress on the following Q. What dost thou carry under thy hat ? A. A laudable wisdom.


Q. What dost thou carry under thy tongue ? A. A praiseworthy truth.


Q. What is the strength of the craft ? A. That which fire and water cannot destroy.


And he explains the substitution of truth for beauty, by the fact [sic] that beauty is no longer a part of a mason's art (see Mysteries der Freimaurer, p. 366).


But even if this is conceded, we only arrive at the simple conclusion already forced upon us‑that the stonemasons, like all other guild‑members, were fond of symbolism and allegory. The most interesting part of this catechism is the tradition contained in the following dialogue " Where was the worshipful craft of masons first instituted in Germany? " "At the Cathedral of Magdeburg, under the Emperor Charles II, in the year 876." From this it may reasonably be concluded that the tradition amongst the stonemasons ran to the effect that their craft guild took its rise at the building of Magdeburg Cathedral. The inner fraternity, as we know, only originated in 1459. But the earlier date (876) is undoubtedly an anachronism. The first cathedral was built in the tenth century, its successor in the twelfth, whilst Charles (the second of Germany, the third of France, surnamed Le Gros) was deposed in the year 887! Putting the Emperor's name on one side, the date first in order of time (876) will coincide fairly well with the incipience of the German craft guilds and the second with that of the culminating point in their history. The whole matter is, of course, merely legendary and of no great importance in an historical study.


 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 83 Another tradition, which is constantly cited, appears to have been first published in 1617 by Schadeus in his description of Strasburg Cathedral. It runs to the effect that the cathedral, being completed in 1275, the tower was begun in 1277 by the famous architect, Erwin of Steinbach and that his daughter Sabina, being a skilful mason, carved the porch. Why Fort (p. 81) speaks of the " undoubted authenticity " of this tale it is difficult to conjecture. Assertion does not merge into demonstration by the mere fact of constant repetition. Stieglitz's argument (Geschichte der Baukunst, p. 573) that women were admitted to membership in the majority of the mediaeval guilds is valueless. Membership of a guild did not carry with it the right of being apprenticed, although it implied that a female member might share in all its benefits, pious and pecuniary and, in the event of her husband's death (he being a master), might carry on his trade. But this was easily done with the help of a managing journeyman and provision was made for his promptly acquiring the master's rights by marrying such a widow. From the records that are accessible, there is no evidence that the stonemasons ever contemplated the contingency of female membership. Apprenticeship and travel were essentials and, of these ordeals, though the fortitude of a determined woman might have sustained her throughout the labours of the former, it is scarcely to be conceived that a member of the gentler sex could have endured the perils and privations of the latter. It should be stated, however, that in London a woman was admitted to the " freedome " of the Carpenters' Company in 1679, " haveing served her Mistres a terme of seaven years." A remarkable tradition appears to have been prevalent from the earliest times viz. that the stonemasons had obtained extensive privileges from the Popes. Heideloff gives, among the confirmations of the Emperors already cited, two papal bulls, viz. from Pope Alexander VI, Rome, 16th September 15 oz. Pope Leo X, pridie calendarium Januarii 1517.


He also says that they received an indulgence from Pope Nicholas III, which was renewed by all his successors up to Benedict XII, covering the period from 1277 to 1334. He, confesses, however, that he could never obtain one of these documents for perusal. The Strasburg Lodge, in its quarrel with the Annaberg Lodge (1518‑1521), besides relying upon the confirmations of the Emperors, also alludes to the authority granted it by the papal bulls, so that this tradition (if such it be) is found in force very early. Kloss and Krause have both made strenuous efforts to discover these bulls. It is well known that Governor Pownall, in 1773, was allowed to make a careful search in the archives of the Vatican, which was fruitless in its result, although he was rendered every possible assistance by the Pope himself (see Archceologia, vol. ix, p. 1 z6). Krause searched the Bullarium Magnum Rome in vain ; and Kloss, the Bullarium Magnum Luxemburgi (Kloss, p. 236), with a similar want of success. But whether or not the tradition rests on any solid 84 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY foundation, it is certain that the Church, by holding out from time to time special inducements, sought to attract both funds and labour for the erection of its splendid cathedrals ; and some of these tempting offers were not quite consistent with strict morality. For instance, there is a document which Lacomblet states was signed on April i, 1 279, by Archbishop Sifrid of Cologne, promising full absolution to all who shall, for the furthering of the cathedral building operations, present to him any wrongfully acquired goods (see Lacomblet, Urkundenbuch fur Geschichte des Nieder Rheins, vol. ii, p. 429). Pope Innocent IV, on May zi, 1248, issued a bull promising indulgence to all " who shall contribute to the restoration of the Cathedral at Cologne, recently destroyed by fire " (ibid., vol. ii, p. 173). This does not quite amount to granting privileges to the stonemasons, but comes somewhat near it. It is, however, only fair to add, that of this latter document no original appears to be extant, the only copy of it being in Gelen's manuscript, de admir. magnit. Coloniae, p. 231 (ibid., vol. ii, p. xviii).


The general conclusions to which we are led by the foregoing inquiry may be thus briefly summarized i. The cradle of German architectural skill is to be found in the convents, not the organization of the Steinmetz guild.


z. This organization had its origin in the craft guilds of the cities.


3. About the twelfth century the convent and the craft builders imperceptibly amalgamated and formed the guilds of the Steinmetzen.


4. These guilds differed only from other guilds in never having split into separate fraternities for masters and journeymen.


5. In 1459 they constituted themselves into one all‑embracing fraternity, with its perpetual head at Strasburg.


6. The Steinmetzen were not singular in possessing a general bond of union, although their system of centralization has received greater notice than that of other fraternities.


7. As in all other guilds, there was in use a secret method of communication, consisting of a form of greeting.


8. It is possible that there was a grip, in the possession of which the Steinmetzen may have differed slightly from the other crafts.


9. There is not the slightest proof or indication of a word and the existence of a sign is very doubtful.


10. There was no initiation ceremony.


11. There was possibly, but not probably, a ceremony at affiliation.


i z. The symbolism did not go further than that of other craft guilds. 13. There is not the least trace of a speculative science. 14. The admission of honorary members is very doubtful.


15. The independence of State control was attempted but never established. 16. The Ordinances of the Steinmetzen and their institution of a fraternity, were designed to prolong their corporate existence by bringing into play a machinery analogous to that of a modern trades union.


 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 8 5 17. The confirmations of the Emperors were fraudulently obtained.


18. Whether privileges were granted by the Popes remains undecided.


i 9. Although the Steinmetzen preserved a continuous existence until within living memory, Freemasonry, on its introduction into Germany from England in the last century, was not recognized as having any connexion with them, although in outward forms there were many points of resemblance between the usages of the German Stonemasons and of the English Freemasons. The Abbe Grandidier (a non‑Mason) in 1778, or the following year, first broached the theory of there being an historical connexion between the Freemasons and the Steinmetzen, although Freemasonry in its present form had penetrated into Germany from England nearly half a century previously.


 CHAPTER IV THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE J T is somewhat remarkable that French Masonic writers have not been tempted to seek the origin of the institution in their own past history and in the traditions and usages of their own land. German authors, from Fallou onwards, have seized upon every trifling circumstance, every chance coincidence, tending to show a German origin of Freemasonry and, when a link was wanting in the chain of evidence, have not scrupled either to forge one, even to the extent of inventing ceremonies, or placidly to accept, without inquiry, the audacious inventions of their predecessors. And yet, by a judicious combination of the history of the French trade guilds with that of the Companionage, a much better case might be made out than the Steinmetz theory, requiring for its complete establishment no deliberate falsification of history, as in the former instance, but only a slight amount of faith in some very plausible conclusions and natural deductions from undoubted facts. A glimmering of this possibility does occasionally manifest itself. An anonymous pamphlet of ‑1848 (Les Compagnons du Devoir) casually remarks, " Let us point out the community of origin which unites the societies of the Companionage with that of the Freemasons." Another writer (C. G. Simon, Etude historique et Morale sur la Compagnonage) says, " The moment we begin to reflect, we are quickly led in studying the facts to the conclusion that the Companionage and Freemasonry have one common origin." Many other French writers and one English one, (Heckethorn), make similar allusions, but without attaching any importance to the subject, or proceeding any further with it ; treating, in fact, the journeymen societies of France as a species of poor relations of the Freemasons‑as somewhat disreputable hangers‑on to the skirts of Freemasonry. Two French authors are more explicit. Thory (Acta Latomorum, p. 301), writing many years before those quoted above, gives a very slight sketch of the Companionage and remarks, " Some authors have maintained that the coteries of working masons gave rise to the order of Freemasons." Unfortunately, he affords no clue to the identity of these authors and it has not been possible to trace them. Besuchet (Precis historique de l'Ordre de la Franc‑maconnerie, p. S) observes that in 1729 the prevailing opinion in France was that " England only restored to her what she had already borrowed, inasmuch as it is probable, according to a mass of authorities and traditions, that Freemasonry, in its three first or symbolic Degrees, is of French origin." Besuchet then also lets the matter drop ; and there is no serious attempt to examine the craft guilds of France from a Masonic point of view. Although French historians could undoubtedly have made out a good and plausible case if they had wished to do so, it is not by any means probable that their theory would have been unassailable.


86 THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE 87 In Paris the rise of the municipality is characterized by a singular feature‑the government of the city being vested not in the delegates of all the guilds, but in the officers of one huge guild only, that of the Parisian Hanse. It is, however, well to bear in mind that the Hanse was not only the chief source of the opulence and prosperity of the capital, but also, in course of time, came to include all the well‑to‑do citizens.


At the period when history first affords us any definite picture of this association, we meet with it under the name of the Marchands de 1'eau de Paris and, later, simply as Marchands de l'eau and it possessed a monopoly of the commerce of the Seine within certain limits above and below the city. No ship could enter this territory without taking into partnership and sailing under the protection of one of the members of the company ; otherwise all its cargo was confiscated. In return for lending his name, the Paris merchant had the option either of taking over half the freight at cost price, or of selling such goods as were intended for Paris under his own auspices and halving the net profits. Furthermore, no goods were allowed to proceed beyond Paris, if the Paris merchants thought them suitable and required in that city. They were enabled to secure all the profits of extensive trading without the risk attending it, their own capital not being called into requisition. The head of this association was called the provost of the merchants and he very early assumed all the functions of a mayor of the city, even collecting the taxes until the reign of Louis IX (1226‑1270). For this guild the French writers claim a Roman origin and all agree in considering it the direct successor of the Nautm Parisiaci. The fact is that a corporation of Nautx did exist under the Romans, also that in the reign of Tiberius Cxsar they erected an altar to Jupiter, which was found, in the eighteenth century, on the spot now occupied by the Hotel de Ville (see Levasseur, Histoire des Classes Ouvrieres en France, vol. i, p. 22). It bears the following inscription TIB . C.+ESARE . AVG . IOVI OPTVM MAXSVMO . . . . M NAVT.E PARISIACI PVBLICE . POSIERV . TN The earliest document in which this company is legally recognized bears date A.D. 1121, wherein Louis VI grants certain privileges which had previously vested in him and in which it is treated as an already ancient institution (ibid., p.193). These privileges were confirmed in 1170 by Louis VII and once more in 1192 by Philippe Auguste. This society appears shortly afterwards under another name, whilst still retaining its ancient fluvial jurisdiction‑viz. that of the Marchands, or Six Corps de Paris. These six bodies were the cloth‑workers (drapiers), grocers (Ipiciers), mercers (merciers), hatters (bonnetiers), furriers (pelletiers) and goldsmiths (orfivres). These constituted the municipality ; each corps elected biennially its master and 88 THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE wardens (garden) ; each of these masters became successively juge, consul and, finally, Echevin de la ville de Paris. They were regarded as the most distinguished citizens, and became ipso facto ennobled, taking the title of esquire (ecuyer) ; their provost assuming that of chevalier (see Lavergne, Introduction to Delacroix, Memoire a Consulter sur l'Existence den Six Corps, p. 7). Levasseur (p. 482) is of opinion that these guilds were not descended from the Hanse, but he gives no reasons and is directly opposed by all other writers.


All the remaining trades and crafts of Paris seem to have arisen much in the same manner as those of the other cities of the kingdom and some very ancient records are still in existence. The jewellers were organized as early as the time of Dagobert (6z8, 629) by St. Eloi, recognized by a royal charter (traditional) in 768 and their privileges confirmed in a capitulary of Charles the Bald (846). The Dictionnarius of Jean de Garlande‑in the second half of the eleventh centuryenumerates four classes of workers in gold (aurifabrorum industria)‑viz. the coiners (nummularii), enamellers (firmacularii), gobletmakers (cipharii) and the goldsmiths properly so called (aurifabri). In io6i Philippe I granted privileges to the candlemakers and, in 116o, Louis VII conceded no fewer than five trades in fief to the wife of Yves Laccohre. The ancient customs of the butchers are mentioned in 1162 and confirmed by Philippe Auguste in 1182. In 1183 the furriers and clothworkers were also the objects of his benevolence. Of the butchers Levasseur says that, already at the beginning of the twelfth century, the date of their origin was unknown and a charter of 1134 speaks of their old‑established stalls. In course of time these stalls were limited to a fixed number and became hereditary (like the Roman corporation of butchers), forming a very thorough monopoly. So strong was the guild of butchers, that, on several occasions, when neighbouring landowners wished to erect markets on their own property, the king was induced by the monopolists to forbid their erection, or to confine the number of new stalls within a very small limit.


But this excessive power of the trades guilds naturally gave rise to various abuses and it seems that after the reign of Philippe Auguste even the provost became venal and, in consequence, the collection of the taxes was taken out of his hands by Louis IX, who, in 125 8, appointed Etienne Boileau provost of Paris. Under this new arrangement the various craft guilds and general administration of the city came under the supervision of the provost of Paris ; but the governance of the six corps and the fluvial jurisdiction still remained with the provost of the merchants. In spite of this, in 1305, the six corps were so strong, that under their provost, Marcel, they were enabled to dictate to the young regent of France the impeachment of his ministers, the liberation of the King of Navarre and the appointment of a council of four bishops, twelve knights and twelve bourgeois to assist the Dauphin. This victory must have rankled in the minds of the sovereigns of France ; for, in 13 83, Charles VI, believing himself to be irresistible after his defeat of the Flemish at Roosebeck, abolished the municipality altogether ; suppressed the prevoti of the merchants, transferring the remnant of its jurisdiction to the prevot de Paris; inter‑ THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE 89 dicted all trade fraternities and forbade the craftsmen in general to have any other chiefs than those appointed by himself. He had, however, over‑estimated his power : the guilds did not disband ; the butchers were the first to be legally reinstated in 1387; the others followed suit ; and, in 1411, the municipality itself was restored (see Levasseur, vol. i, pp. 409‑II). Ultimately the provost of Paris was suppressed and the provost of the merchants recovered the whole of his former authority, which, in spite of many temporary reverses, continued in full force until the great revolution at the end of the eighteenth century (Depping, Livre des Mitiers d'Etienne Boileau, Introduction, p. 86).


Under what title the earliest trade guilds exercised their authority it is now impossible accurately to determine. It may have been the inherent right in any body of men to settle their own line of conduct, provided such conduct obtained the general approbation of their fellow citizens. Subsequently, in the feudal ages, the consent of the lord paramount was absolutely essential to the validity of their statutes (see Ouin‑Lacroix, Histoire des Anciennes Corporations d'Arts et Mitiers, p. 5) ; whilst, in the fourteenth century, the trade guilds could not legally exist without the king's express approval of their rules and regulations.


There are occasional traces of curious ceremonies in connexion with the reception of new masters. Whether they were usual in all trades it is difficultto decide, as upon this point historical records leave us very much in the dark. With the bakers of Paris the modus operandi is thus described : " On the day agreed upon the candidate leaves his house followed by all the bakers of the city and, coming to the master of the bakers, presents to him a new jar full of nuts, saying, `Master, I have done and accomplished my four years ; behold my pot full of nuts.' Then the master of the bakers turning to the secretary (clerc lcrivain) of the craft, demands to know if that is truly so. Upon receiving a reply in the affirmative, the master of the bakers returns the jar to the candidate, who smashes it against the wall, and ‑behold him master 1 " (see Monteil, Histoire des Francais des Divers .tats, 4th edit., 1853, vol. i, p. 294).


Another ceremony of greater interest (as taking place at the reception of the millstone‑makers, who were classed in the same category as the stonemasons) is the following : " A banqueting hall was prepared and above that a loft, whither, whilst the masters were partaking of good cheer below, the youngest accepted master, with a broomstick stuck into his belt in lieu of a sword, conducted the candidate. Shortly after, there issued therefrom cries which never ceased, as though he were being cudgelled to death " (see Ouin‑Lacroix, Histoire des Anciennes Corporations, 1850, p. 243) In 1467 Louis XI organized the crafts into a species of militia or garde national. The various trades were ranged under sixty‑one banners. The king granted them a distinguishing banner bearing a white cross in chief and below, the private blazon of the craft. These banners were only produced on special occasions and in the king's service, not on the ordinary festivals of the crafts. They were confided to the chiefs of each trade and kept in a chest under triple lock, one key of which go THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE was retained by the king or his officers (see Migne, Nouvelle Encyclopedie theologique, Dict. des Confreries et Corporations, p. 75).


The first occasion on which these corps assembled they numbered 8o,ooo men and were reviewed by Louis XI, Cardinal de la Ballue and others. The leading banners were those of the six corps of merchants ; the thirty‑second being that of St. Blaise, comprising the masons, quarrymen, stonemasons, etc. (see Migne, op. cit., p. 78). This organization was afterwards extended throughout the kingdom. The trade guilds not only possessed their distinguishing banners, but also assumed coats of arms and mottoes. That of the six corps in Paris was, Vincit concordia fratrum ; of the apothecaries, Avec noun securite et coniance ; and of the locksmiths, Fidelite et secret.


An institution closely allied with the craft guilds was that of the fraternity (confrairie, conphrairie, frairie, confrerie le cierge, la caritat, etc.). Every craft guild belonged, as a body, to some fraternity, maintained an altar in some neighbouring church and decorated it with candles, to supply which it levied on its members fines and fees to be paid in wax. From this wax candle the fraternity was sometimes spoken of simply as le cierge, " the candle." La caritat is the Provencal form of la charite, " the charity." The other synonyms given above are archaic forms of confrerie, " confraternity." The society was composed of the same members as the craft and is, in many cases, difficult to distinguish from it on that account ; nevertheless, it was always a distinct entity and was often legislated for separately. It provided for the assembly of the brethren at stated periods, for religious exercises and social pleasures ; those of the table occupying a large share. The newlyreceived master was expected to provide the members of the fraternity with a banquet and it was the excess to which the feasting was carried which eventually formed one of the great hindrances to becoming a master. Their most useful sphere of action was the sustenance and relief of aged and poor masters, their widows and children, the assistance rendered to members in cases of illness and to companions on their travels. The members appear to have belonged solely to the body of masters, although apprentices entering on their indentures and companions working in the city, were required to contribute to the funds. In return they were assisted from the treasury and shared the benefit of the religious services. Louandre says (Introduction to Monteil, Histoire de l'Industrie francaise, 1872, p. S 4), " Entirely distinct from the corporation, although composed of the same elements, the fraternity was placed under the invocation of some saint reputed to have exercised the profession of the members. The symbol of the craft was a banner, that of the fraternity a wax taper." The craft guilds were dedicated to particular saints ; e.g. the cordwainers of all kinds to St. Crispin, the carpenters to St. Joseph, the goldsmiths to St. Eloi and so on ; but the fraternities appear to have been generally dedicated to the patron saints of the churches or chapels in which their altars were raised. At Rouen in x61o the masons had a fraternity under the patronage of Saints Simon and Jude; (Ouin‑Lacroix, Histoire des Anciennes Corporations, p. 238), who were never even traditionally connected with the building trades. That the THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE 91 fellow‑crafts were not admitted seems very probable from the fact that, as early as November 1394, the fellow‑craft furriers (garcons pelletiers) were permitted by royal ordinance to form their own fraternity (Levasseur, Histoire des Classes Ouvrieres en France, p. 497). But, although the craft and the fraternity may usually be described as two names for one body, this was not always the case. There were sometimes several fraternities in one craft ; at other times several crafts united to form one fraternity (ibid., p. 470). In Montpellier the glassmakers united with the mercers, because in the first‑mentioned craft there was only one resident master, who did not suffice to form a fraternity. We hear of an early fraternity of stonemasons in 1365, the statutes of which have been preserved (Confrerie de pejriers de Montpelier). One of the earliest decrees against the fraternities, whether of citizens (and at that time we may take it that citizens were always tradesmen), or of nobles or others, has more than antiquity to recommend it, inasmuch as it was promulgated by the father of one who played a great part in the history of our own country, viz. Simon, Count de Montfort, whose son was the celebrated Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester. It is dated A.D. 1212, and runs as follows : " No baron, bourgeois, or peasant shall dare in any way to pledge obedience by way of oath or good faith in any conjuration whatsoever, even under pretext of fraternity or other good thing, the which is often mendacious (mensonger), unless it be with the consent and pleasure of the said lord (seigneur) ; and, if any are convicted of having so taken oath against him, they shall be held, body and chattels, at his pleasure. But if it be not against the said lord, then the members of the fraternity (conjurateurs) shall only pay, if barons, 1o livres, if knights, loo sols, if citizens, 6o sols, and if peasants, zo sols " (Ouin‑Lacroix, Q. cit., p. 423).


In 1308 the number of these fraternities was so great as to provoke the fear of Philippe le Bel, who interdicted them ; and this was more especially the case in the south of France, under the name of La Caritat (Levasseur, op. cit., vol. i, p. 468). Of these bodies‑so numerous as to be considered dangerous by the State‑but few records have come down, so that the absence of any statutes of a prior date to A.D. 1170 by no means implies that such fraternities had not previously existed.


The following code is preserved in the archives of the city of Amiens. It is dated June 15, 1407 and styled the " Statutes regulating the Fraternity (cierge, candle) of the masons' trade (du mestier de Machonnerie) of Amiens " (A. Thierry, Recueil des Monuments inidits de l'Histoire du Tiers Etat, vol. ii, p. z6).


Know all men who may see or read these presents, that it has been and is ordained by the Mayor and 1~chevins of the city of Amiens, for the common wellbeing and profit, at the request of the men of the craft of masonry in the said city and with their consent, or that of the major and more sane part of them, assembled before the said mayor and 1chevins or their commissioners, as follows : Firstly. It is ordained that the masters of the said craft are and be required to attend at the honours funereal and nuptials of those who are of this craft, if they be in the city of Amiens and have no sufficient excuse, which excuse they are required to make known to the sergeant or clerk of the " candle " of the said craft and if any one fail to do so he shall be liable each time to a fine of xii pence, to be applied to the profit of said candle.


 92 THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE z. Item. It is ordained that all such sums as shall be presented for libations to those of the craft on their return from the funeral honours of any of this craft, the one half of the said donation, whether large or small, shall be placed and converted to the profit of said " candle " and the other half to be expended in drink amongst them, as may seem good to them.


3. Item. When any apprentice shall be first received into the said craft he shall be required to give one pound of wax as soon as he commences to earn money in the said craft, to be applied to the profit of the said " candle." 4. Item. If any of the said craft work for the first time in said city of Amiens, as soon as he shall have worked xv days, he shall be required to pay to the profit of the said " candle " one pound of wax and as long as he remain there be quit of paying it any more, excepting the first time only.


5. Item. It is ordained that all those of the said craft who do earn money here, living in the city of Amiens, shall be required to belong to the said " candle," to enter into it and shall be constrained to pay, observe and accomplish the matters above said and each single clause hereof the which constraint shall be exercised by the sergeant or clerk of the said " candle," who shall also constrain each one of the said craft, who in this place earns money, to pay his part and portion of the said " candle : " and for so doing he shall have for wages every year xii sols of Paris, a hood of the livery of those of the said craft and ii sols for each funeral or wedding which he shall summon, such ii sols to be levied on him, or them who gave the order.


The above ordinances were made, ordained and established in the echevinaae of Amiens, with the assent of the said mayor and ichevins, by Sire Fremin Piedeleu, Mayor of Amiens, Jacque Clabaut, Jehan Plantehaie, Jacque de Gard, Pierre Waignet, Jehan Liesse, Thumas de Henault, Jehan Lecomcte, Jacque de,Cocquerel et Thumas de Courchelles, ichevins the xv day of June in the year one thousand four hundred and seven.


The above statutes may advantageously be supplemented by two articles from those of the masons of Rheims ; one of which exhibits a curious regulation touching their religious services, whilst the other indicates that the constant endeavours of the authorities to put down the abuse of the banquets had not been entirely fruitless, inasmuch as the statutes outwardly conform to the royal commands. It must not be forgotten, however, that the statutes of this date, though drawn up in all cases for the perusal of the king or his ministers, the royal approval being necessary to render them valid, it by no means follows that they were not systematically evaded by a private understanding amongst the masters. The statutes referred to are dated July z6, 1625 and the clauses are as follows (see Collection de Documents inidits sur l'Histoire de France, Section Pierre Varin, Archives Legislatives de la Ville de Reims, pt. ii, vol. ii, p. 483).


 XVI. The masters of the said craft shall be required every year, at the procession of the Holy Sacrament of the altar, according to their invariable custom, to carry four torches of the weight of ten pounds each one, which torches shall be borne by the four junior masters of the craft.




I. And we forbid the said wardens (iureZ) to accept any banquet from those who shall achieve their masterpiece, under penalty of arbitrary fine ; and the said companions to offer any such under penalty of being deprived of the masterpiece [i.e. not allowed to benefit by its successful completion] and without the faculty of being admitted under three years ensuing.


Of all the French handicrafts, the building trade of the Middle Ages naturally possesses the greatest interest. Without pausing to touch on the disputed point THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE 93 as to the country in which the Gothic style of architecture originated, it may safely be asserted that, as regards boldness of conception and dexterity of execution, the French artists were not behind their contemporaries in other parts of Europe. The churches, cathedrals, town‑halls and other monuments scattered throughout France, testify to their skill. It should be noticed that the familiar tradition of bands of builders wandering from one country to another has also obtained credence in France and even misled so careful a writer as Ouin‑Lacroix. He says (Histoire des Anciennes Corporations, p. zz7) : " The corporation of masons offers a proof of its early regular organization as far back as the twelfth century, in the grand manifestation of zeal which it displayed about i 145 in proceeding to Chartres to take part in the construction of the cathedral there, which has since become so famous. There were to be seen, as wrote Archbishop Hugues of Rouen to Theodoric of Amiens, immense Norman companies, organized in vast corporations under the conduct of a chief named Prince, emigrating in a crowd to the Chartres country. On their return, according to Haimon, Abbot of St. Pierre‑sur‑Dive, these same companies built and repaired a great number of churches in Rouen and that province." Levasseur has not allowed himself to be led astray, but gives the true interpretation of these letters (op. cit., vol. i, p. 3z6), portions of which he appends in a footnote. The " immense companies " consisted of amateurs‑lords and ladies, knights, priests and peasants‑who harnessed themselves to the cars and helped to drag along their destined route the huge stones of which the cathedral is built. Miracles are even reported of the rising tide being stayed in order to suit the convenience of some parties of these devotees, who might otherwise have been placed in a very awkward fix. The members of these associations performed the useful functions of common labourers and beasts of burden, but nothing tends to show that they were in any sense masons. It was a grand and remarkable demonstration of the allconsuming religious zeal of the Middle Ages‑a manifestation of the same spirit which underlay the pilgrimages and the Crusades.


Very early notices of the building trades are to be found ; but the oldest code which has been preserved is probably that of Boileau (about iz6o). In it we find them already subdivided into many branches, which of itself presupposes a much earlier existence, as the division of labour always marks a considerable development of a trade. This code unites under the banner of St. Blaise, the masons, stonemasons, plasterers (both makers and users) and the mortarers (both makers and users of mortar). From other sources we know that the quarry‑workers and the tylers (but not tyle‑makers) owed allegiance to the same banner, also the millstonemakers.


In this code the stonemasons are not particularly mentioned, although towards the end a decided distinction is drawn between the members of this craft and the masons. It is probable that they are classed throughout with the ordinary masons and that only in the special instance alluded to did any difference exist. The code contains twenty‑four articles, but, as some of these relate solely to the plasterers and mortarers, those only are given which are of interest in the present inquiry.


 94 THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE OF THE MASONS, THE STONEMASONS, THE PLASTERERS, AND THE MORTARERS I. He may be mason in Paris who wishes, provided always that he knows the handicraft and that he works after the usages and customs of the craft ; and they are these II. None may have in his employ but j apprentice ; and if he have an apprentice, he may not accept him for less than vj years' service, but for longer service may he well accept him, and also for pay if he be able to obtain it. And if he accept him for less than vj years, then is he cast in a fine of xx sols, to be paid to the Chapel of St Blaise, unless they be his own sons born only in honourable wedlock.


III. And the mason may take to himself one other apprentice so soon as the first shall have served v years, for whatsoever time he may have taken the first.


IV. And the king who is at this time and to whom God grant long life, has granted the mastership of the masons to Master William of Saint Patu, for so long as it shall please him. Which Master William took oath in Paris, within the precincts of the palace aforesaid, that he would the aforesaid craft well and loyally keep to the best of his power, as well for poor as rich, for weak as strong, for so long as it shall please the king that he keep the said craft ; and afterwards the said Master William did take, the form of oath aforesaid before the Provost of Paris at the Chastelet.


VII. The masons, the mortarers and the plasterers may have as many assistants and workmen in their service as they please, provided always that they instruct them not in any point of their handicraft.


VIII. And every mason and every mortarer and every plasterer, shall swear by the saints that he will keep the craft aforesaid well and truly, each one in his place : and if they know that any one do ill in anything and act not according to the usages and customs of the craft aforesaid, that they will lay the same before the master whensoever they shall know thereof, and on their oath.


IX. The master whose apprentice shall have served and completed his time shall appear before the master of the craft and bear witness that his apprentice has served his time well and truly : and then the master who keeps the craft shall cause the apprentice to swear by the saints that he will conform to the usages and customs of the craft well and truly.


X. And no one shall work at his craft aforesaid after the stroke of none (3 p.m.) of Notre Dame during flesh time ; and of a Saturday in Lent, after vespers shall have been chanted at Notre Dame ; unless it be to close an arch or a stairway, or to close a door frame placed on the street. And if any one work beyond the hours aforesaid, unless it be of necessity in the works aforesaid, he shall pay iiij pence as fine to the master who keeps the craft and the master may seize the tools of him who shall be recast in the fine.


XVII. The master of the craft has cognisance of the petty justice and fines of the masons, the plasterers and the mortarers and of their workmen and apprentices, as long as it shall please the king, as also of deprivation of their craft and of bloodless beatings and of clameur de proprete.


XVIII. And if any of the aforesaid craftsmen be summoned before the master who keeps the craft, if he absent himself he shall pay a fine of iiij pence to the master and, if he appear' at the time and acknowledge [his fault] he shall forfeit and if he pay not before night he shall be fined iiij pence to the master and if he deny and be found to have done wrong he shall pay iiij pence to the master.


XIX. The master who rules the craft can not levy but one fine for each offence ; and if he who has been fined is so stiffnecked and so false that he will not obey the master or pay his fine, the master may forbid him his craft.




. If any one of the aforementioned crafts whose craft shall have been forbidden him by the master shall nevertheless use his craft, the master may seize his tools and keep them until he have paid the fine ; and if he forcibly resist, the master shall make it known to the Provost of Paris, and the Provost of Paris shall compel him.




I. The masons and the plasterers owe the watch duty and the tax and the other dues which the other citizens of Paris owe the king.




II. The mortarers are free of watch duty and all stonemasons since the time of Charles Martel, as the wardens (preudomes) have heard tell from father to son.




III. The master who keeps the craft in the name of the king is free of the watch duty for the service he renders in keeping the craft.




IV. He who is over lx years of age and he whose wife is in childbed, so long as she lies abed, are free of watch duty ; but he shall make it known to him who keeps the watch by order of the king.


These statutes were published in the original French as an appendix by G. F. Fort, The Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry. A translation, with notes, appeared in Moore's Freemasons' Monthly Magazine, Boston, U.S.A., May 1863, vol. xxii, p. 201.


On Art. IV Fort has built up two erroneous conclusions which need correction. The less important one is making a nobleman out of plain Master William de Saint Patu. This has probably arisen from the prefix de, though the plebeian title of mestre should have warned him that it only signified that St. Patu was some district or hamlet where Master William was born. At a time when the commonalty were only just beginning to assume surnames, this was the usual mode of distinguishing one William from another.


The other mistake into which Fort has stumbled is of more consequence, as he manages to open a " lodge " within the palace. This would imply that the Paris masons called their workshops " lodges "‑a form of expression they never used, with which French artisans have not even yet become familiarized ; and as a lodge in the palace could merely exist for the purposes of government, it would very closely resemble our present Freemasons' Lodges. The word loge, which he has thus contrived to mistranslate, signifies an enclosure or space partitioned off and survives in the loge du theatre, or box at a theatre. Es loges du pales, or, in more modern form, En les loges du palais, simply means, in the enclosures of the palace, i.e. within its precincts.


Additional proof of the corporate existence at an early age of the building trades may present some interest. At Amiens the masons (machons) appear to have taken part in the municipal elections, for the first time, in 1348 (see A. Thierry, Recueil des Monuments inidits de l'Histoire du Tiers Etat, p. 540). In 1387 the municipality had a city architect (maitre des ouvrages, master of the works).


The archives of Montpellier supply the following references (Renouvier et Ricard, Des Maitres de Pierre, pp. 23, z6, zo and So).


1201. Bertrandus : Jai la peira (does stone work).


1244. Paul Olivier : maistre de peira (master‑mason).


1334. Peri Daspanhayc : maistre que hobra al pout de Castlenou (master who works at the bridge of Castlenau).


The statutes of the probes hommes of Avignon regulate, in 1243, the pay of the stonemasons.


 i 96 THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE In 1493, Peyre Borgonhon, master‑mason, reports to the consuls of Montpellier that he could no longer find masons to work at the fortifications under 4 sons per diem ; and these, " after taking information respecting the prices elsewhere and considering also that the days in the month of April were amongst the longest in the year, resigned themselves to pay the price asked." This is one of the earliest strikes in the building trade.


In 1zo8, Ingelram was architect of Rouen Cathedral ; in 128o, Jehan Davi constructed the south porch (Ouin‑Lacroix, op. cit., p. 229).


In 1389, Jehan de Boyeaux was appointed master‑mason of the city of Rouen. His title was " master of the works of masonry," his salary 1o livres a year : he had a seat at the municipal board, and wore a distinctive dress almost like that of the echevins of the city. The salary, however, rapidly increased. In 1562, Pierre de Marromme received 75 livres and, in 1692, Nicolas de Carpentier 1500 livres, besides other emoluments (Ouin‑Lacroix, op. cit., p. 236). This title and office of master of the works still existed in 1777, Fontaine being then the architect.


Guillaume de Saint Leonard, mayor, revised the statutes of the plasterers of Rouen in 1289. They must, therefore, have been previously drawn up.


The statutes of the tylers of Rouen, in 1399, prove that already their slates were in use.


In 15 07, Jehan Gougeon is styled tailleur de Pierre et Masson, affording another proof that the masons and stonemasons were virtually one craft, although, as seen already, in certain cases distinctions were made.


In 1498, the Parliament prohibited all banquets and confriries and, at the same time, enacted laws to regulate the guilds ; which measures proving inoperative, led to further legislation in 1500. In 15o,, however, the Parliament had to content itself with forbidding the formation of new associations. In 15 3 5, the prohibition was renewed ; but, meanwhile in 152.9 and 1534, fresh laws regulating the guilds were passed. This constant see‑saw brings us to the statute of Francis I of August 1, 1539. French Masonic writers have signally failed to understand this enactment, from which they have drawn the most absurd conclusions ; but non‑Masonic authors have escaped these errors, Levasseur, Louandre, Heckethorn and others, all seeing it in its true light. Thory broadly states that it abolished all trade guilds. Rebold says, " The Masonic corporations were in a large measure dispersed and dissolved in France at the beginning of the sixteenth century, when their scattered fragments were absorbed by the city guilds." (Here he evidently alludes to the bodies of travelling masons, with special papal privileges, whose very existence in this sense is problematical.) "At length, in 1539, Francis I abolished all guilds of workmen and, in France, thus perished Freemasonry, according to the old signification of the word " (see E. Rebold, Histoire generale de la Franc‑maconnerie, 1851, p. 76). The inaccuracy of this historian is evident still more glaringly in a later work‑" The number of these fraternities diminished by degrees in almost all countries and, in France, they were dissolved in 1539, by edict of Francis I, for having persisted in the revindication of their ancient privileges, but particularly r THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE 97 for having given umbrage to the clergy by the purity of their religious ideas and secret reunions." The gravamen of the charges against the fraternities was the bad not the good use they made of their secret meetings, in conspiring against the supremacy in trade matters of the State and in buttressing the pernicious monopolies of the masters ; and when, a hundred and twenty years later, some of these came into collision with the clergy, it was not on account of the purity of their religious ideas, but was due entirely to the travesties of religion exhibited in their rites and ceremonies. These writers, instead of following blind guides, would have done infinitely better had they turned to the French statutes and drawn from the fountain‑head. The truth of the matter simply is, that Francis I attempted (though unsuccessfully) to suppress the fraternities, but he never sought to abolish the guilds ; on the contrary, the same law acknowledged their legality by regulating them. Both the guilds and the fraternities survived him for two centuries and more.


A translation of a few of the most important paragraphs of the ordinance will show its real character.


 (185) All fraternities (confrairies) of craftsmen and artisans shall be abolished, interdicted and forbidden throughout our kingdom, according to the ancient ordinances and edicts of our sovereign courts.


(186) We ordain that all matters formerly tried before the fraternities shall in future be carried before the ordinary justices of those places.


(188) And, in order to pass the mastership of said crafts (mestiers), there shall be no dinners, banquets, nor convivialities (disnies, banquets, ni convis), nor any other expenses whatsoever, even should it be done voluntarily, under penalty of a fine of loo sols of Paris, to be levied on each one who shall have assisted at said banquet.


(189) The wardens (gardes) shall pass the masters as soon as they shall truly have achieved their masterpiece.


(191) We forbid all the said masters, together with their journeymen and apprentices (compagnons et serviteurs) in all trades, to make any congregations or assemblies (congregations ou assemblies) be they large or small and for whatever cause or occasion whatsoever ; nor to erect any mono polies, nor to have or take any council together concerning their craft, under penalty of confiscation of body and goods.


 The effect of this sweeping enactment was simply nil. The societies were for a time carried on in secret, then one was excepted as a particular favour, then another and so on, till none remained to claim exemption. As late as 1673 new crafts were incorporated into guilds, but there is no occasion to pursue the inquiry. Laws more or less severe were enacted one year, to be modified or reversed the next and this vacillating policy continued, until, in 1776, a vigorous attempt was made to reconstruct the whole system and to establish absolute free trade. In the reign of Louis XVI and under the ministry of Turgot, it was perceived that the guilds exercised an evil influence on the industry of the country by limiting competition, checking progress and invention and confining the stalwart limbs of the eighteenth‑century giant in the swaddling clothes so appropriate and serviceable to the fifth‑century babe. That astute minister threw open the crafts and trades to all comers, suppressed and I 98 THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE abolished all guilds and fraternities, excepting only the goldsmiths, chemists (pharmaciens), publishers and printers and the maitres barbierr perruquiers‑etuvistes ‑compound‑craftsmen who united the functions of barber, wigmaker and bathkeeper.


But this edict, coupled with reforms of other flagrant abuses, cost Turgot his position and the ordinance did not long survive him. His successor Necker reconstituted all the corporations in a slightly modified form in 1778. It required the terribly clean‑sweeping broom of the French Revolution to annihilate all these dusty cobwebs, the growth of centuries of privilege and abuse. The trades guilds had served their turn as the nurseries of art and industry, their fraternal bonds had been excellent institutions in the " good old times " when might was right, but for ages they had ceased to be anything else but irritating fetters on the extension of commerce. The National Assembly of 1793 at once and for ever abolished them and the Chambers of Commerce, the masters unions and the trades unions of to‑day‑possibly their lineal descendants‑have taken their place.


 CHAPTER V THE COMPANIONAGE, OR LES COMPAGNONS DU TOUR DE FRANCE BROADLY stated, the Companionage, or Compagnonnage, means the associations formed by the journeymen of France for mutual support and assistance during their travels. In many regulations of this association it may compare with those of the German fraternities, but in others the difference is strongly marked. For example, it was divided into three great divisions ; to one of these each trade belonged, whilst in three handicrafts some members belonged to one division and some to another ; and these three divisions were extended throughout France : whereas in Germany each craft was a separate entity ; and, in many cases, the members of a trade in one town had no bond of union connecting them with a similar Bruderschaft of another town, beyond the ordinary results following the exercise of a common employment. Another great point of difference was, that the French fraternities practised a veritable initiation‑a mystic reception ‑and treasured venerable legends ; whilst the affiliation of the German craftsmen was simply a burlesque ceremony, enriched by a certain amount of symbolism. With Freemasonry it had not only these points in common, but also others : its existence was patent to all and readily acknowledged ; with its works of charity and festivals the public were familiar ; but its legends, its ceremonies, its signs and tokens, were shrouded in mystery and even a bare allusion to them was considered highly culpable. Although latterly by enlightened members of this fraternity it has not been considered improper partially to unveil its legendary lore, yet to this day no revelation of its more important secrets has been made.


Not the least wonderful fact relating to the Companionage is that, apparently, its very existence was only generally known from the bloody battles arising out of the enmity between the various corps. If two bodies of workmen met and fought, the survivors were condemned to the galleys and the public journals announced another fatal affray between inimical artisans; but no one (previously to 1841) ever thought it worth while to inquire into the cause of the ever‑recurring feuds between rival fraternities, or sought to obtain any information as to their usages and customs. By the public in general the Companions appear to have been regarded with the same indifference which has been manifested by the Masonic writers of a subsequent era.


A light was, however, suddenly shed on this obscure subject. Wearied by their pernicious and insensate strife, Agricol Perdiguier,aworkman of superior intelligence, undertook the apparently hopeless task of reconciling the various factions. In 1841 he published his Livre du Compagnonnage, giving as accurate an account of their 99 I zoo THE COMPANIONAGE history and traditions as the nature of his oath would permit, followed by very sensible reflections and an earnest appeal to all parties to cease their fratricidal quarrels and unite for the general good. Previous attempts had been made in a like direction, but without having recourse to the printing‑press. This writer was replied to by another workman, Moreau (Un mot sur le Compagnonnage in 1841 and De la Reforme des Abus du Compagnonnage in 1843), whose intentions were equally enlightened, but who objected to the means employed by Perdiguier. Perdiguier's work, however, seems to have startled France. The late George Sand invited the author to visit her and was so impressed by his philanthropic aims, that, as related by Perdiguier himself, she furnished him with funds to undertake afresh the tour of France and to preach his new gospel to his fellows. The same year the talented authoress published her novel Le Compagnon du Tour du France ; and attention being thus forcibly called to the Companionage, within the next few years the subject was further dealt with by other writers, many of whom were themselves companions. See Capus, Conseils d'un Vieux Compagnon, 1844 ; Giraud, Reflexions sur le Compagnonnage, 1847 ; Sciandro, Le Compagnonnage, 18 S o ; and C. G. Simon, Etude historique et Morale sur le Compagnonnage, 18 5 3 It will be seen that a new spirit was already infused into the society, inasmuch as but a few years previously such proceedings would have been looked upon with horror. In 1834, when Perdiguier was about to publish a volume of simple songs for the use of his fellows at their festive reunions and, by means of a preparatory circular canvassed for subscribers, he was indignantly informed that " such a thing never had been and never ought to be done." Such was the scrupulous secrecy observed by the Companions. But, although the society objected to the publicity of the press, it by no means follows that all their instruction was purely oral ; much of an important nature was committed to writing and carefully preserved from the ken of the profane.


Surprise has already been expressed that the Companionage has been so lightly passed over by Masonic writers. Its ceremonies and legends are so interesting of themselves, its resemblance to our present system of Freemasonry so obvious, that no history of Freemasonry would be complete without a searching examination of the whole subject. Schauberg (Vergleichendes Handbuch der Symbolik, vol. i, p. 5o4) knew of the Companionage in 1861 and gives its salient features, as detailed by the Gartenlaube (an illustrated German monthly). Subsequent German writers have studied and quoted Schauberg, yet not one of them has had the candour to even mention the French Companions. Are we to conclude that they might have been formidable rivals of the Steinmet!~en ? In dealing with the Companionage it will be well to make its acquaintance in its full development as it existed previously to the Revolution of 1848 and then to trace it as far back as possible into the mists of antiquity. The following description refers more particularly to the year 1841 (the date of Perdiguier's publication) and many of its regulations have consequently fallen into disuse : its old enmities and feuds are especially out of date, but in one form or another it still exists.






is a personage about whom very little is known and each of the societies has invented a more or less probable story concerning him ; nevertheless there is one which enjoys an extended acceptance with very many Companions du Devoir‑it is from this that I extract, without changing a single word, the following details."




Maitre Jacques, one of the first masters of Solomon and a colleague of Hiram, was born in a small town called Carte, now St. Romili [undoubtedly legendary], in the south of Gaul ; he was the son of Jacquin [?Jachin], a celebrated architect, and devoted himself to stone‑cutting. At the age of fifteen he left his family and travelled into Greece, then the centre of the fine arts, where he entered into close alliance with * * * [?Pythagoras], a philosopher of the highest genius, who taught him sculpture and architecture. He soon became celebrated in both these arts.


Hearing that Solomon had summoned to himself all famous men, he passed into Egypt, thence to Jerusalem. He did not at first gain much distinction amongst the workmen ; but at last, having received an order from the chief master to construct two columns, he sculptured them with such art and taste that he was accepted a master.


[Perdiguier then ceases to quote verbally from the legend, but remarks]," Hereafter follows a long catalogue of all his works at the temple and the history is thus continued : " Maitre Jacques arrived in Jerusalem at the age of twenty‑six years ; he remained there only for a short time after the construction of the temple and many masters, wishing to return to their country, took leave of Solomon loaded with benefits.


Maitre Jacques and Maitre Soubise made their way back to Gaul. They had sworn never to part ; but before long M. Soubise, a man of violent character, becoming jealous of the ascendency which M. Jacques had acquired over their disciples and of the love which they bore him, separated from his friend and chose other disciples. M. Jacques landed at Marseilles, M. Soubise at Bordeaux. Before commencing his travels M. Jacques chose thirteen Companions [Compagnons] and forty disciples ; being deserted by one of them he chose another. He travelled for three years, leaving everywhere the memory of his talents and virtues. One day, being at some distance from his disciples, he was assailed by ten of the followers of M. Soubise, who attempted to assassinate him. In order to save himself he plunged into a swamp, the canes [or reeds, in French joncs] of which not only supported him, but afforded a refuge from the blows of his assailants. Whilst these cowards were seeking some means of reaching him, his disciples arrived and effected his rescue.


He withdrew to St. Beaume. One of his disciples, called by some Jeron, by others Jamais, betrayed him to the disciples of M. Soubise. One day, before sunrise, M. Jacques being alone and engaged in prayer in his accustomed spot, the traitor arrived accompanied by the executioners and gave, as usual, the kiss of peace, which was the preconcerted death signal. Five villains at once fell upon and killed him with five dagger wounds.


His disciples arrived too late, but yet in time to receive his last farewell. " I die," said he, " for God has so willed it ; I forgive my assassins and forbid you to follow them ; they are already miserable enough ; some day they will repent. I 







deliver my soul to God, my Creator; and you, my friends, receive from me the kiss of peace. When I shall have rejoined the Supreme Being, I shall still watch over you. I desire that the last kiss which I give you, be imparted always to the Companions whom you may make, as coming from their Father; they will transmit it to those whom they make; I will watch over them as over you; tell them I shall follow them everywhere so long as they remain faithful to God and to their charge [devoir] and never forget. . . ." He pronounced a few more words which they were unable to understand and, crossing his arms over his breast, expired in his fortyseventh year, four years and nine days after leaving Jerusalem and 989 years before Christ.


The Companions, having disrobed him, found a small piece of cane, which he wore in memory of the canes that had saved his life when he fell into the swamp. Since then the Companions have adopted the cane. It was not known whether Maitre Soubise was the instigator of his death ; the tears which he shed over his tomb and the pursuit of the assassins which he ordered, contributed to weaken in a great measure the suspicions that were entertained. As for the traitor, he very soon repented of his crime and, driven to despair by his poignant regrets, he threw himself into a pit, which the Companions filled up with stones.


M. Jacques' career being thus closed, the Companions constructed a beir and carried him into the desert of Cabra, now called St. Magdalen.


[Perdiguier once more ceases to quote verbally and summarizes as follows :] Here follows the embalming of M. Jacques and the funeral ceremonies, which lasted three days ; the procession encountered a terrible storm, crossed forests and mountains, made stations in a place now called Caverne St. Evreux, by others named Saint Maximin, Cabane St. Zozime, etc. The procession at length arrived at the final resting‑place.


[At this point Perdiguier once more gives the legend in full.] Before lowering the body into the tomb, the elder gave it the kiss of peace; every one followed his example, after which, having removed the pilgrim's staff, the body was replaced in the bier and lowered into the grave. The elder descended beside it, the Companions covering both with the pall and, after the former had given the Guilbrette [this term will be explained later], he caused them to hand him some bread, wine and meat, which he deposited in the grave and then returned to the surface. The Companions covered the grave with large stones and sealed it ' with heavy bars of iron; after which they made a great fire and threw into it their torches and all that had been used during the obsequies of their master.


His raiment was preserved in a chest. At the destruction of the temples, the sons of M. Jacques separated and divided amongst them his clothing, which was thus distributed


His hat to the hatters.

His tunic to the stonemasons.

His sandals to the locksmiths.

His cloak to the joiners.

His belt to the carpenters.

His staff (bourdon) to the wagonmakers.


Perdiguier then concludes as follows: " After the division of the articles belonging to M. Jacques, the act of faith was found which was pronounced by him




on the day of his reception [as master, probably] before Solomon; Hiram, the high priest; and all the masters. This act of faith, or rather this prayer, is very beautiful." In respect to Maitre Soubise, we are afforded even less information than in the case of Solomon. Perdiguier remarks that he has been unable to find any document relating to him and that we must be content with the particulars furnished by the legend of Maitre Jacques. Judging by the legends of Hiram and Maitre Jacques, we might expect to have some record of the tragic ending of Soubise, but if such existed, Perdiguier failed apparently to find it.


Each of these masters, Solomon, Jacques and Soubise, has been selected by the different crafts as chief patron, three of the trades‑the stonemasons, joiners and locksmiths‑being divided in their allegiance between Solomon and Jacques, the carpenters between Solomon and Soubise. Under one of these three banners each craft forms its own fraternity, entirely independent of all other crafts and sometimes at open enmity with its sister societies of the same detoir. This, however, is only a family quarrel and gives way to firm alliance when a question arises as between the various divisions. For instance, in the family of Jacques we find the joiners friendly with the stonemasons, but enemies of their friends the farriers ; yet, they all unite as one man against the common foe, the Sons of Solomon. As a general rule, the families of Jacques and Soubise are at variance; but, although they love each other little, they hate Solomon more.


The fraternities which are thus formed are only open to journeymen, that is, apprentices who have served their time. Perdiguier ‑ who was a joiner of Solomon ‑ has not given any hint of the ceremonies used at their reception; probably with the exception of his own society, these would remain a secret even to himself, whilst his oath would forbid any revelation. In his own handicraft the following customs and arrangements prevailed :‑A young workman presents himself and requests to be made a member of the society. His sentiments are inquired into, and if the replies are satisfactory, he is embauche. At the next General Assembly he is brought into an upper room (fait monter en chambre), when, in the presence of all the companions and of filie.r, questions are put to him to ascertain that he has made no mistake, that it is into this particular society and not in some other that he wishes to enter; and he is informed that there are many distinct societies and that he is quite free in his choice. The ordinances, to which all companions and afflies are obliged to conform, are then read to him and he is asked whether he can and will conform thereto. Should he answer " No," he is at liberty to retire; if he replies " Yes," he is affiliated and conducted to his proper place in the room. If he is honest and intelligent, he obtains in due course all the degrees of the Companionage, and succeeds to the various offices of the society.


The candidate is affiliated‑but in what manner is not stated‑and thus attains the first step. In this particular society there are three further steps‑accepted companion (compagnon reFu), finished companion (compagnon fina) and initiated companion (compagnon initie). All these Degrees were probably attended with a io6 THE COMPANIONAGE ceremony, but Perdiguier is silent on the subject. Doubtless the ceremonies of the Companionage comprised a rehearsal of some tragic scene similar to that recounted in the career of Maitre Jacques or of Hiram. Thory, writing (a generation earlier than Perdiguier) of the Companions, says, " their initiations are accompanied by secret forms and their unions existed from time immemorial." (See Acta Latamorum (i8i5,) p. 3oi). J. C. Besuchet (Precis historique de l'Ordre de la Franc‑Mafonnerie, 18zg), who evidently knew nothing of M. Jacques and Hiram says the New Testament furnished them with the chief part of their mystic ordeals (epreuves mysterieuses). Clavel (Histoire pittoresque de la Franc‑Mafonnerie, 1843, p. 367) maintains that, in the superior grades of the Companionage, the " funereal catastrophes " of the legends were acted, but as he gives no authority and wrote two years after the publication of Perdiguier's work, it is possible that he only arrived at this conclusion on the ground of its inherent probability.


Whether the several grades held separate meetings is indeterminable, though with the Enfants de Salomon, even the " affiliates " assisted at the General Assemblies. The Degrees of the locksmiths were identical with those of the joiners as above specified; indeed, these societies often amalgamated, but the stonemasons of Solomon slightly differed from the cognate crafts in styling their affiliates " young men " (jeunes hommes) and they did not subdivide the degree of Companion.


In the system of Maitre Jacques all the members were included in two grades, the lower being termed Aspirants and the upper Companions. The sons of Maitre Soubise were divided into Companions and foxes (renards). These two families allowed the younger class no participation in their ceremonies, assemblies, or festivals; and the members of the upper class sometimes assumed nicknames descriptive of their scorn for the novices, such as " the scourge of the foxes," " the terror of the aspirants," etc. To all the societies the connexion of the stonemasons with Hiram appears to have been known and, in some, the members habitually wore white gloves, giving as a reason that they did so in order to testify to their innocence in his death.


Once a year each craft held high festival. The proceedings commenced with a special Mass, after which there was a grand assembly. Officers were elected for the ensuing year and the whole concluded with a banquet, followed by a dance, to which the Companions invited their sweethearts and friends. The members of friendly crafts were also invited. But the same distinctions were made as on ordinary occasions. The Companions held their festivities apart and suffered no intrusion from the aspirants. The aspirants had their own jollification, but were unable to exclude the Companions if any were inclined to take part. With the Sons of Solomon, however, the case was different : they held joint meetings. Each society had its festival on the day of its patron saint, who was always supposed to have exercised that particular craft. Thus the carpenters celebrated St. Joseph ; the joiners St. Anne; the locksmiths St. Peter; the farriers the summer festival of St. Eloy ; the smiths the winter St. Eloy ; and the shoemakers St. Crispin. The stonemasons celebrated the Ascension. On the day following, a second dance was usually given, to which the masters and their families were invited.


From Perdiguier we learn that in every town of the Tour de France technical schools were established and maintained by the stonemasons, joiners and locksmiths. The other crafts do not appear to have shared in this highly beneficial institution. In those schools, which were open in the evening, the workman was taught architectural and lineal drawing, designing, modelling, carving and the elements of all sciences connected with his profession. Perdiguier gives no data by which to judge at the age of this institution, but he speaks of it as already old in 1841. This illustration of provident thought in a body of simple journeymen is as astonishing in one sense as their idiotic feuds are in another.


Between 1651 and 1841 our knowledge of the Companions appear to be restricted to the criminal prosecutions entailed by their perpetual quarrels. Between 1648 and 1651, however, we obtain a further insight into their secrets and are enabled to form some idea of the ceremonies of the societies of Maitre Jacques, through the apostasy of the shoemakers. It will be seen that the leading idea is still that of a betrayal, death and resurrection, although the hero is not a semi‑fictitious personage like Hiram, but no one less than our Saviour Himself. That much of an indefensible nature took place cannot be denied, but it is possible that the information afforded is prejudiced and one‑sided. A Companion shoemaker of a highly religious turn of mind seems to have been the first to take offence at the questionable practices of his fellows and to have abjured them. He even went further : he instituted a body of lay brothers composed of journeyman shoemakers, adopted a peculiar dress, established a rule enjoining them to enter the various shops of the craft and, by instruction and good example, to reform the manners of their fellows. They took the name of Brothers of St. Crispin and obtained ecclesiastical authority for their proceedings. In consequence of these measures and the revelations made by him and those of his way of thinking, the municipality of Paris interdicted the assemblies in 1648. The societies of the Companionage took refuge in the Temple, which was under a separate jurisdiction. The clergy also took the alarm and used all the terrors of the ecclesiastical law to forbid the ceremonies and institutions.


Some of their Mysteries were printed and revealed in 1651 and, in consequence of renewed thunders from the pulpit, more revelations succeeded. At length the Companions were foolish enough to cause a riot in the precincts of the Temple, the Bailli was worked upon by the bishops and, eventually, the Companions were sentenced and expelled by him on September 11, 1651. (See Thory, Annales Originis Magni Galliarum Orientis, 1812, pp. 329, 33o.) The cordwainers (shoemakers) were the first to disclose their secret ceremonies, March 23, 165 1 and, on May 16 following, together with their masters, solemnly forswore them; but many of the societies refused to follow their example and continued to meet. Others, however, also divulged their secrets and addressed a string of questions to the doctors of the Sorbonne respecting their practices. But from the very io8 THE COMPANIONAGE wording of these questions and revelations, it is abundantly evident that they were drawn up by a prejudiced and probably priestly hand, so as to make the replies a foregone conclusion.


Thory, in his History of the Grand Orient, reproduces the material portions of the revelations and declares that his extracts are taken from old works, but without affording any clue to their identification. He has probably relied on some of the writings of Pere Pierre Lebrun (1700‑50), as these are referred to by Simon in connexion with the same subject. When, however, Thory maintains that the customs of the Companionage and of Freemasonry present no features of resemblance, it can only be supposed that he resolutely closed his eyes to the surprising similarities which exist in the two systems. The parallelism, indeed, though claiming attention, may, of course, be only fortuitous and, without further evidence, will by no means establish the connexion of one institution with the other. From the same source we derive further information concerning the tailors and the ceremonies of the charcoal burners. As regards the tailors, Thory states that the second or banquet chamber was decorated with a painting of the gallantries of the first three Companion tailors and that, before the banquet, a lecture was given, consisting of the explanation of these obscene adventures.


The charcoal burners met in a forest and called themselves " cousins." Thory and all other writers look upon the word as signifying a cousin by blood and maintain that Francis I was himself admitted a Companion, also that he subsequently introduced the fashion amongst royal personages of calling each other " cousin." But when we remember the fondness of the Companions for the animal kingdom and take into account that the candidate amongst the charcoal burners was called a " wasp," is it not just possible that " cousin " is applied in its other meaning, viz. a gnat, which would be a most appropriate name for these denizens of the forest. At their initiation a white cloth was spread on the ground, on which was placed a full salt‑cellar, a goblet of water, a wax candle and a cross. The candidate took the oath lying prostrate on the cloth and, with his hands, one on the salt, the other on the goblet. He was then raised and, after some " mystification " given the password; which would prove him a true and good " cousin " in all forests. The master afterwards explained the symbols ; the cloth represents the shroud ; the salt, the three theological virtues ; the fire, our funeral torches ; the water, that which will be sprinkled over our grave; the cross, that which will be borne before our coffin. The candidate was then taught that the true cross was of holly, that it had seventy‑two thorns, that St. Theobald was the first charcoal burner, St. Joseph the first carpenter, St. Balthasar the first mason, etc.


All writers on secret societies seem to be of opinion that the Carbonari were the direct offspring of this society. This is immaterial to the present inquiry, but anyone who has travelled much in the forests of France and Germany must be aware that the secret societies of the charcoal burners still exist and receive amongst them honorary members, principally huntsmen, gamekeepers, lumbermen, etc. Heckethorn (Secret Societies of all Ages and Countries, 1875, vol. ii, p. 70), without THE COMPANIONAGE log quoting his authority, has given a charcoal burner's examination, which is absolutely unsurpassed for pathetic resignation to a very unenviable lot Whence come you, cousin of the oak?‑From the forest.‑Where is your Father ?‑Raise your eyes to Heaven.‑Where is your mother ?‑Cast your eyes on the earth.‑What worship do you render your Father ?‑Homage and respect.


‑What do you bestow on your mother ?‑My care during life, and my body hereafter.‑If I want help, what will you give me ?‑I will share with you my day's earnings and my bread of sorrow ; you shall rest in my hut, and warm yourself at my fire.


Between 140o and 1648 we almost lose sight of the Companions, for the glimpse obtained during that period is a very slight one. Yet it is valuable, as showing that the shoemakers had added to the recognized legends of their patron saints an unauthorized version of the recovery of their bodies, thus bringing the legend once more into harmony with the heathen mysteries and the familiar traditions which have come to us from antiquity. The following passage is from Migne's Nouvelle Encyclopedie theoiogique, Dictionnaire des Mysteres, vol. xliii, p. 274 Many manuscripts of the mystery of St. Crispin and St. Crepinian are in existence. .‑. .‑. One is in the Archives of the Empire .‑. .‑. published in print 1836, by Messieurs Chabailles & Dessales. . ‑. . ‑. date, commencement of the fifteenth century [it took four days to represent]. The first three days follow the legend pretty closely; in the fourth the authors have allowed their imaginations much licence. The subject thereof is the invention or discovery of the bodies of the two masters. .‑. .‑. Messieurs Chabailles & Dessales also say, the mystery of St. Crispin and St. Crepinian was singular in this respect, that instead of being acted by the brotherhood of the Passion like most of the other mysteries, it was represented by a special troop, a society of workmen who every year assembled to celebrate the glory of their patron saints. Such was in effect the usage of the Fraternity of Cordwainers of Paris.


This is the earliest indication of the Companionage, but it must not be supposed that still earlier and. more important references do not exist. No study of the Compagnonnage at all worthy of the name has yet been made. Perdiguier attempted nothing of the kind; he merely stated what was usual in his own time. Simon's Etude historique is not what its title implies; he is content with the information supplied by Thory and Perdiguier; and the foregoing barely does more than touch the fringe of a vast subject. The origin of the institution cannot be determined with precision. Its antiquity, if we believe Thory, is " time immemorial," whilst, if we turn to Perdiguier, " it has existed for ages." Simon and those who follow him, date its origin in the twelfth century, but give no reasons for their assertion. Having regard to these discrepancies, let us examine whether the facts in evidence admit of forming an independent opinion. We find I. That in 1841 (Perdiguier's time) the Companionage consisted solely of journeymen.


1 io THE COMPANIONAGE II. That, according to the revelations which called forth the opinion of the doctors of the Sorbonne (March 14, 1655), such was then also the case.


III. That the previous revelations and the renunciation of May 1, 1651, indicate that the masters at that date took part in the ceremonies and, therefore, in the Companionage.


IV. That, according to A. Monteil, distinct indications of a similar ceremony are evident in the reception of a master millstone‑maker, a branch of the stonemasons, in the fifteenth century.


V. We must guard ourselves from confusing in any way the religious fraternities of either the masters or the journeymen with the Companionage. The fraternities were acknowledged by the state and ruled by codes of laws under governmental sanction: the Companionage statutes have never to this day been revealed. In France we have to do with the following distinct bodies : the craft guilds, the masters fraternities, the journeymen's fraternities and the Companionage, all working into each other like the cogs of a train of wheels, but all distinct pieces of mechanism.


VI. We may add to the preceding, the great probability that the French trade guilds were direct descendants of the Roman colleges, without serious break of continuity ; and VII. That no theory can be tenable which does not reconcile all the facts of the case.


One point of absorbing interest is, of course, the age of the Hiramic Legend did it, or did it not, exist previously to the Masonic revival Of A.D. 1717 ? And here we are met with Perdiguier's assertion that it is derived directly from Freemasonry. He says (Le Litre du Compagnonnage, vol. ii, p. 8o) in answer to a letter of Beau Desir le Gascon As to this history of Hiram's, I regard it as a mere fable, ingenious enough, but of which the consequences are horrible; for it tends to separate those who take it seriously. The Bible‑the only book of any real authority concerning the con structors of Solomon's Temple‑says nothing about Hiram's murder; and, for my part, I do not believe it. The Compagnoas strangers and those of Liberty have no authentic details of this fable, which is quite new to them and I fancy that the Companions of the other societies are not more advanced: I look upon it, therefore, in the light of a Masonic invention, introduced into the Companionage by persons initiated into both of these secret societies. Freemasonry, according to the most zealous historians‑‑and M. Bazot is of the number‑was only introduced into France in 1715. The Companionage is indisputably anterior; nevertheless, from the day it was introduced into this country our Companions frequented it and found in its bosom useful truths, but also numerous errors.


In judging the question, however, it must be remembered that Perdiguier was a simple journeyman joiner, of enlightened views and great intelligence, but of limited education. He apologizes for his own songs by explaining that he was ignorant of the art of versification, owing to a poor education, until, for the better THE COMPANIONAGE III carrying out of his purposes, he endeavoured to obtain some slight insight into its rules. That, according to his lights, he was scrupulously exact in all his works, every word in them testifies. We may therefore blindly follow him when he describes the usages of his own day and implicitly accept, as then existent, the traditions which he hands down; but, in matters of history, his statements must be sifted. It will be observed that he fixes the introduction of Freemasonry into France at 1715 ! The fact embedded in the above quotation was not within his personal knowledge, nor, to judge from his own words, was it even a tradition current amongst the Companions.


Sir G. Cornewall Lewis, in Methods of Observation and Reasoning in Politics, says In the case of customs and of laws dependent on usage, there is more security against alteration than in the repetition of a story by one person to another, because there is the agreement of many persons in its observance.


It is submitted, therefore, that we are at liberty to reject some of his conclusions or inferences, without thereby invalidating his testimony in other matters. But it may be argued, why then accept his account of the battle at Lacrau in 1730, the contests of skill at Lyons in 1726 and Marseilles in 18o8, these also being matters of history, on which important conclusions are founded? Because they are traditions of the society, given with such minuteness, that each is doubtless based upon a substratum of fact. He gives them with equal impartiality, although one tells against his own society; and the Companionage songs commemorate both. On the other hand, although legendary, the traditions date from so recent a period, that if fabulous, some protest against their reception would have been recorded.


It may, therefore, be suggested that, as regards the Hiramic Legend, Perdiguier has jumped at an illogical conclusion; and that the Legend of Hiram the builder is not only anterior to I 7z6‑the date of the introduction of Freemasonry into France‑but probably coeval with the Companionage itself. The reasons are obvious. We may fairly assume that the two societies of Solomon and Jacques existed separately previously to I7z6. This is evident from the battle of Lacrau, 1730; the contest at Lyons, I7z6 ; and from an inscription on the top of the Tour St. Gilles in Languedoc. Perdiguier there found the following names hewn in the stone: " Joli Cceur de Landun, 1640 " ; " L'Invention de Nancy, 1646 " ; " L'Esperance le Berichon, 165 5 " ; " La Verdure le Picard, 165 6 "‑the words showing that the first two are Sons of Solomon, the two latter of Jacques. Accompanying the names are carvings of masons' picks, compasses, squares, levels and other stonemasons' tools. (See Le Livre du Compagnonnage, vol. ii, p. 85.) But all the crafts and societies agree in this, that the Sons of Solomon were anterior to those of Jacques, whose legend follows the lines of the Hiramic myth. The revelations to the doctors of the Sorbonne were those of shoemakers, hatters, etc.‑all crafts owing allegiance to the charge of Maitre Jacques. Earlier still, in 1400, we find the shoemakers acting a mystery: they were Sons of Jacques, as we know, yet, if tradition is at all to be relied on, the shoemakers were of later origin than the I I Z THE COMPANIONAGE Stonemasons of Jacques and these than the Stonemasons of Solomon. Yet we hear of the shoemakers at that early date making unauthorized additions to the history of St. Crispin, which bring it into harmony with those of Jacques, of Hiram, of Isis and Osiris, of Bacchus and of that Grand Mystery, an irreverent representation of which ultimately called down upon the Companionage the wrath of the Church. The Sons of Jacques, therefore, possessed and acted a legend from a very early date; and, if the Sons of Solomon did not then cherish the Hiramic Legend, what preceded it ? From the very nature of the society, some traditionary tragedy was necessary. What was it? It could not refer to Solomon; the Companions possess no legend relating to him, beyond the fact that he granted them a charge. We have no trace of any other personage‑no hint of any other legend. We are driven to the conclusion that the Sons of Solomon either possessed the Hiramic myth, or none at all ; and the latter supposition is hardly conceivable. But as we have seen that the Sons of Solomon, as opposed to the Sons of Jacques, certainly existed as early as I64o and, inferentially, before A.D. 1400, we may safely conclude that their distinctive legend is of prior date to the introduction of modern Freemasonry into France.


Another curious point for research is that of the fondness of the Companions for nicknames derived from the animal kingdom. If we assume that the Companions who formed the first corps took the name of wolves for some obscure reason, we may legitimately conclude that the other societies adopted theirs on the same grounds, or in rivalry or emulation. Our task is, therefore, reduced to tracing the origin of the title " wolves." In connexion with this word, another curious subject arises. In England and America the son of a Freemason is termed a Lewis. Technically, a Lewis is an instrument consisting of two side pieces of iron in the shape of a wedge, or right‑angled triangle. These are placed within a dovetailed excavation in a large stone, so that the slanting sides fit the walls of the perforation, leaving space to insert, between the two wedges, a flat piece of iron which fits the two upright sides of the others and forces them well into the corner, all three projecting above the surface of the stone. A hole exists through all three, into which a ring is passed and we have thus inside the stone a dovetail of iron which cannot be withdrawn, by means of which the heavier stones are raised by ropes or chains. We are told that as the Lewis supports the burden of the stone, so should the Lewis or Mason's son support the burden of his father's declining days. The analogy is completed by the fact that the Mason is termed a perfect ashlar, i.e. a truly squared stone. But the Companions possess this analogy more completely still. With them the aggregate of pieces forming the Lewis is a Louve, or female wolf and the two wedge‑shaped side pieces are Louveteaux, or sucking wolves. A Companion is a wolf, all Companions' sons are called Louveteaux, or little wolves and it is probable that the same reasoning is applied, although we are not told so directly. But why the title " wolf " at all ? Are we to believe that this is a distinct relic of the Roman traditions (possibly a survival of the Bacchic Mysteries) and does it furnish another link to the chain of evidence THE COMPANIONAGE 113 connecting the Companions with the Collegia ? Amongst the various symbols which served as military ensigns with the Roman armies was the wolf. The Lupercalia were celebrated in many of the cities of Gaul and were not abolished till A.D. 496 by Pope Gelasius I. The reference to a wolf is frequent in the French language and seems to be interwoven with the national life. A strong iron holdfast is called a Dent de Louve, a wolf's tooth. Even their royal palaces were called Lupara, wolves' lairs and, later, Louvres. The ancient palace of the Louvre in Paris still retains the name. And, during the last century, a festival strongly suggesting the Lupercalia was annually held at Jumieges. The hero was elected by his Com panions and called the Loupvert, green wolf. On the morning of June 23, the eve of St. John the Baptist, he was conducted round the place in procession, attended mass, etc. At a certain moment he gave, by running a‑muck and striking every one with his fists, a signal for the commencement of coarse amusements, in which all the troop took part. Young men and maidens joined in the revels, which continued throughout the ensuing day and ended with a banquet (Langlois, Les _nerves de Jumieges, 1838, p. 17). If this was a survival of the Lupercalia, the transposition of its date from the feast of St. Valentine to that of St. John is curious and, perhaps, significant. Migne (see Nouvelle Encyclopedie theologique, Dictionnaire des Mysteres, tom. xliii, p. 498) also mentions the games of Saint Loup as amongst the most important and ancient of France. Saint Loup was a Burgundian saint and bishop of Sens, and took the part of the Burgundians against Clothair in the seventh century. (Troisieme Encyclopedie theologique, Dictionnaire des Legendes, tom. xiv, p. 790.) Clavel and Heckethorn both derive the name of wolf from the mysteries of Isis. Heckethorn says In the mysteries of Isis the candidate was made to wear the mask of a wolf's head. Hence a wolf and a candidate in these mysteries were synonymous. Macrobius, in his Saturnalia, says that the ancients perceived a relationship between the sun, the great symbol of these mysteries; and a wolf, for, as the flocks of sheep and cattle disperse at the sight of the wolf, so the flocks of stars disappear at the approach of the sun's light. And in Greek, Avrcos means both the sun and a wolf. There is a family of fellow crafts that still derive their name from that idea.


But as it is " a far cry " to Egypt, something nearer home may content. The name alone of the Lupercal games is suggestive, but we are met with the fact that no mention of masks is found connected therewith. A French writer (Encyclopedie Methodique, Antiquites, tom. iii, Luperces) has, however, endeavoured to get over this circumstance in the following words There is to be seen on a chalcedony in the collection of Stosch, a naked figure, erect, clothed with a sort of large girdle of the skin of some animal around his loins ; a robust man, who having a thyrsus reclining against his shoulder, is in the act of using both hands to put on a mask. The figure doubtless represents one of the Luperci, or priests of Pan, who ran naked in the streets, etc. The rites of the festivals of Pan did not differ much from those of Bacchus ; these were celebrated by plays in the theatre ; the festivals of Pan were perhaps also distinguished by spectacular performances, to which the mask would allude. It is true we do not read that the Luperci ran about masked, but the silence of the ancients does not render this supposition impossible.


But has not the writer made a mistake ? Does not the thyrsus prove that the figure represents an actor in the Dionysia ? All things considered, it is to the Bacchic mysteries, which were derived from those of Egypt, that we may attribute the wolves, foxes and dogs of the Companions. (See Sainte‑Croix, Mysteres du Pa ganisme, tom. ii, pp. 7z‑98.) This supposition derives extra force from the name of Maitre Soubise. Perdiguier can only feebly suggest that there was perhaps a Pere Soubise, a Benedictine monk, a personage it has not been possible to trace, but Clavel (P. 366) thinks it not impossible that the name of Soubise is derived from Sabazius, one of the many epithets applied to Bacchus. If this view is accepted it may be possible to unravel the mystery of the " howling," something very similar having taken place at the Dionysia. Robert Brown in The Great Dionysian Ayth (vol. ii, p. 31) says According to the mythologists, whose views are noticed by Diodorus Sikelos, Sabazios was a very ancient Dionysos, son of Zeus and Persephone, whose cult was performed at night and who was horned. He was also called Sabos and Ploutarchos remarks " that many even now call the Bakchik votaries Saboi and utter this word when they celebrate orgies to the god." Saboi was one of the sacred names shouted at the Bakchik and Phrygian celebrations in honour of Dionysos. . . . As already explained, Sabazios is the Phcrnician god Sbat, the seventh planet, or Saturnus who presides over the seventh or Sabbath day.


Again, have we not a reminiscence of the Bacchic legends in the obscene love adventures of the three primitive tailor Companions, as hinted at in the revelations of 1655 ? As regards Maitre Jacques, Perdiguier says that, in the earliest ages, the Sons of Solomon were the only society; that there arose a schism in the bosom of this fraternity and that the seceders placed themselves under the protection of Jacques Molay, the last Grand Master of the Templars. In the legend we find, as if in corroboration of this, an allusion to the " destruction of the Temples." There is much in the legend to bear out this construction of their origin. We have the name of Jacques, the residence in the Holy Land, with the canes, which might be taken to represent the knightly lance. Soubise might figure for the Pope, who was a friend and protector of the Templars previous to Molay's return to France, while the traitor would stand for the King of France. The traitor's kiss might be looked upon as the symbol of the christening when Molay stood sponsor to the king's child, prior to his arrest and the large fire which the Companions built over his grave might be the type of Molay's awful death. But, apart from the fact that all this similitude is somewhat forced, it is evident that the Legend of Maitre Jacques bears much more resemblance to the passion of our Lord. The traitor was one of Jacques' own disciples, he betrayed him with a kiss, his clothes were divided amongst THE COMPANIONAGE 115 his followers, his betrayer committed suicide and the wounds inflicted by the daggers of the assassins were five in number, corresponding with the punctured hands, feet, and side of our Saviour. Again, it is almost impossible to believe that Molay ever had the opportunity of becoming the protector of such a body. A schism of this kind is not accomplished and crowned in one day. The Pope's letter inviting Molay to return from Cyprus and confer with him was dated June 1306 and the Grand Master arrived in France at the commencement of 1307. On October 13 of the same year he was imprisoned and never regained his liberty; and, in the interval, after depositing the treasure of the order in the Temple at Paris, he had visited Poictiers to have an interview with the Pope. (See C. G. Addison, The Knights Templars, 18 5 z, pp, z 3 ‑41.) What time had he to place himself at the head of the dissenting Companions ? But, if this theory is rejected, what shall be substituted for it ? In the first place, is it absolutely certain that the masons of Jacques were seceders from those of Solomon ? That they are of later formation is evident, inasmuch as the Hiramic Legend shows no traces of Christianity, whereas that of the Maitre Jacques does. But, if the points of agreement are reviewed, it may be possible to glean indiscriminately from all three families. If Freemasonry owes anything to the Companionage,it is probably to the Sons of Solomon more especially, but concerning these there is very little information. The following coincidences are worthy of attention i. " Sons of Solomon " certainly reminds us in general terms of our own fraternity. 2. Companions de Liberte, free companions, of Freemasons. 3. Devoir is a literal translation of our English Charge and the documents appear to be very similar in form. 4. General Assembly is a term common to both societies. 5. Accepted Companion and Initiated Companion sound strangely familiar. 6. Passed Companion presents a remarkable coincidence with our own expression. 7. The identity of idea and application between the Lewis and the Louveteau can scarcely be a mere chance correspondence.


The above are similarities of expression and phraseology; let us now pass on to those of procedure preparatory to initiation. In both societies we find 8. A previous inquiry into the candidate's character. 9. An absence of com pulsion and a perfect freedom of choice. io. A preliminary exposition of the general tendency of the society. ii. Perfect liberty to withdraw up to the last possible moment. i 2. Sponsors, represented in Freemasonry by the proposer and seconder.


As regards the government of the societies, it will have been observed that13. Each particular society was thoroughly independent, but welded into uniformity with the other societies by the various charges. Previously to 1717 this was generally the status of Freemasonry. 14. Each society exercised the powers of petty justice over its own members. (Compare Brentano, Gilds, 1870, PP. 54, 63, and Fort, p. 132.) 15. Punishments took the form of fines and, in grave cases, of expulsion. The Hallizvell poem is very explicit as to the punishment 116 THE COMPANIONAGE of disobedient masons. The loth Punctus requires that if " the mason lyve amysse, and yn hys werk be false, he schal thenne be chasted after the lawe." 16. Amongst the Sons of Solomon there was a perfect equality of membership. 17. All the members took part in the election of officers. 18. Every Companion was eligible for office.


icg. The officers were a president, elders and secretary. If we regard the president as master and the elders as wardens, the exact counterpart is met with in the three principal officers of a Freemason's Lodge. The Steinmetzen had only one warden, the Companions evidently had more.


The acknowledged principles of the two institutions‑the Companionage and Freemasonry‑rest upon a common foundation 2o. The Companions profess Honour to God, the desire of preserving their master's interests and of yielding to one another mutual support and assistance. The second of these protestations may well be paraphrased as their bounden duty. Now, honour to the Almighty, the pursuit of duty here below and brotherly relief, are cardinal points of a Freemason's profession. The Companion, on entering his lodge, is asked, " What seek you here ? " and answers, " God and the apostles." To arrive at the knowledge of God and of His truth, is the leading precept imparted in Masonic Lodges.


The ceremonies of the Companionage present many singular features, some of which have their analogues in Freemasonry and in the usages of the Steinmetzen ; whilst of others, the types are found in the proceedings of the Vehm Gerichte, or Vehmic tribunals of Westphalia, in the ceremonial of the Mysteries and, even, in the Israelitish customs recorded in the Holy Writings. Amongst these may be briefly noticed 21. The sequence of degrees.


22. The costume and posture of a candidate. Describing the procedure of the Holy Vehme, Sir F. Palgrave (The Rise and Progress of the English Commonwealth, vol. i, pp. 149, 15 o) says Bareheaded and ungirt, the candidate is conducted before the dread tribunal. He is interrogated as to his qualifications, or, rather, as to the absence of any disqualification. He must be free born and a Teuton. If the answers are satisfactory, he then takes the oath, swearing by the Holy Law. The new Freisschopff was then entrusted with the secrets. He received the pass‑word, by which he was to know his fellows and the grip or sign by which they recognized each other in silence. If he discloses the secrets, he is to expect that he will be suddenly seized by the ministers of vengeance. His eyes are bound, he is cast down on the soil, his tongue is torn out through the back of his neck.


According to Jacob Grimm (Deutsche Rechts‑Alterthumer, 1828, pp. 184, 714), a cord about the neck was used symbolically, in criminal courts, to denote that the accused submitted his life to the judgment of the court. When used upon the person of a freeman, it signified a slight degree of subjection or servitude.


THE COMPANIONAGE 117 23. Prescribed steps during a ceremony. 24. Conventional knocks. 25. Pro gression from one officer to another. 26. An examination on previously imparted instruction.


27. Circumambulation. This rite is probably a relic of Sun‑worship. In ancient Greece, when the priests were engaged in the rite of sacrifice, they and the people always walked three times round the altar while singing a sacred hymn.


In making this procession, great care was taken to move in imitation of the sun. At the ancient Symposia the cups were always carried round from right to left and the same order was observed in everything that took place in the entertainment. See Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities; Dudley Wright, Druidism, pp. 26‑7 ; Fort, P. 321 ; Oliver, Historical Landmarks, 1846, vol. i, p. 311 ; Asiatic Researches, 1798, vol. v, p. 3 5 7 ; Pliny, Natural History, xxii, 2 ; Elton, Origins, P‑ 293 28. Discalceation. In the Israelitish, as well as in the Germanic nationalities, this rite, in its widest signification, was symbolized to mean a total relinquishing of personal claim and complete humiliation and subjection. Dr. Adam Clarke thinks that the custom of worshipping the Deity barefooted was so general among all nations of antiquity, that he assigns it as one of his thirteen proofs that the whole human race have been derived from one family.


29. The living circle. 3o. The two lighted candles, representing the sun and moon. 31. The oath of secrecy. 32. The avoidance of a conventional method of salutation. 33. The banquet following the ceremony. 34. The use of two separate rooms. (The Steinmetzen only used one, their workshop.) 3 5. The Guilbrette. This evidence of membership may be held to correspond with the signs of antiquity. It will be remembered that no trace of a sign was discoverable amongst the Steinmetzen. 36. The watch or pass‑word. This also was unknown in Germany. The Companions probably made use of Biblical words. 37. The use of the square and compasses.


3 8. The custom of holding monthly meetings, generally on the first Sunday. Freemasons also meet on the first, second, third, etc., Monday, Tuesday, or as the case may be ; that is to say, both societies as a rule avoid appointing for their assemblies a fixed day of the month, but arrange to meet on a certain day of the week.


39. The custom of holding a yearly festival, accompanied by a religious service and followed by a banquet. 40. The habit of converting fines into liquor for the general benefit. The By‑laws of our old Lodges prove the existence of this custom among the Freemasons.


As accidental coincidences, which cannot influence conclusions, may be mentioned the enmity of the Roman Church towards both Freemasonry and the Companionage, the admission of candidates of all religions and the blue sash edged with gold. But the most striking factors in the final judgment must be 41. The mutual possession of an Hiramic Legend; with its probable existence amongst the Companions from a very remote period. Candour, however, demands 118 THE COMPANIONAGE the acknowledgment, that in Freemasonry we meet with but sparing allusions to Hiram, until the early part of the eighteenth century.


Many of the characteristics are only what must arise in every secret society and those in which may possibly be discerned the germs of our existing Freemasonry, if viewed singly, would be of very slight value. Taken conjointly, their weight materially increases. It is necessary, however, to call attention to the possible absence amongst the Companions of one of the leading features of Freemasonry. Nowhere is there any distinct mention of a grip. The guilbrette may include one; it appears more than probable, but Perdiguier does not hint or declare that the giving of hands in this ceremony is performed in any special manner.


As we ponder over the evidence which has been unfolded, the question naturally arises, If this striking similitude to English Freemasonry existed in France as late as 184i‑that is, for more than a century after the first Lodge in France was warranted by the Grand Lodge of England‑why did the two societies never intermingle ? Why should Frenchmen have accepted warrants at English hands, when they might as well have applied to the Enfants de Salomon ? The difficulty is, however more apparent than real. Whatever may have been the primary object of the Companionage, it must be evident that it had long ceased to possess any speculative character. The ceremonies were still worked and preserved with that obstinacy which characterizes all popular usages, of which many remarkable instances might be cited. They served their purpose in fostering amongst the workmen an esprit de corps, they had become part and parcel of a system of mutual assistance. In England, however, they had attained, or perhaps retained, a higher significance; and, though alike in outward form, were wide as the poles asunder in moral tendency. The supporters of Freemasonry, in France at least, were chosen from amongst the higher classes ; those of the Companionage from the lower. If we admit, with Perdiguier, that Companions were received into Freemasonry, we need not be surprised at their failing to recognize in our beautiful morality and ritual anything more than a chance resemblance to their own ancient institution. An illiterate journeyman would scarcely look for any connexion between a society that strove to reconcile all mankind and one that taught him that his first duty was to hate and combat his fellows of another and rival fraternity; between a society that upheld the moral equality of all men, combined with a cheerful submission to authority and one whose chief endeavour was to counteract the power of the masters and employers. Even such an enlightened man as Perdiguier, when struck with certain resemblances, is rather inclined to account for them by presuming that his fraternity has copied the Freemasons, than by imagining a common origin. The failure on the part of the ignorant workman to recognize the relationship is not extraordinary. Yet what can be said of the French Freemasons ? Their blindness may be accounted for by ignorance, pride and ambition. Ignorance of the ways and usages, history and traditions of the Companionage ; pride in their own position, which would have declined such humble relations ; ambition to be thought descendants of the Templars, Rosicrucians, Magi, etc. etc. ? Have we not seen, although nothing can THE COMPANIONAGE zip be more indisputably evident than the descent of English and, consequently, of all Freemasons, from the medixval builders, that this descent was largely denied, or only grudgingly admitted, as a convenient cloak in whose ample folds the haughty Templars deigned to masquerade ? If Freemasons scorned as parents the glorious architects of the Middle Ages, how could they be expected to acknowledge brotherhood or seek affinity with a set of ignorant present‑day workmen, who were only known to them by means of the police reports continually detailing their revolting battles, of whose inner constitution absolutely nothing was known to the general public previously to 1841 ? CHAPTER VI MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY A PREVALENT theory at one time was that all Gothic churches were erected by a body of travelling Freemasons acting in concert, who, being apparently a kind of lay brethren, guided entirely by the monks and always working as one man, were assumedly under the control of one supreme chief, as the Franciscans and Jesuits of later times by a " General." Coupled with this is ordinarily found a belief that the Gothic architecture practised by these monks and masons was, in its origin, an emanation from Byzantium, thus forming a link by which to connect the Masonic bodies and their architecture with the East, so on up to the Temple and further still, if necessary, ad infinitum. (See Thomas Hope, Historical Essay on Architecture, chap. xxi ; Fort, Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, p. 33.) Another and more scientific, though equally baseless hypothesis, places the origin of Gothic architecture in Germany, making the Germans its apostles, sometimes, indeed, going so far as to deny the natives of other countries even the poor merit of imitation‑their churches being supposed to have been built for them by Germans; while a third scheme contents itself with simply ridiculing in toto the pretensions of the Freemasons. (See Findel, History of Freemasonry, p. 76; G. Edmund Street, Gothic Architecture in Spain, 1865, p. 464; Joseph Gwilt, Encyclopcedia of Architecture, 1876, pp. iz8, 130; and Rev. J. Dallaway, Discourses upon Architecture, 1833, pp. 405‑7) It is essential to examine the Parentalia and duly to consider the elaborate arguments by which Governor Pownall, Sir James Hall and Hope have supported their respective contentions, in order to form a correct estimate of the influence these have exercised in shaping or fashioning the theory of Masonic origin, believed in by encyclopxdists between 1750 and 1861.


It is true that J. S. Hawkins's History of Gothic Architecture, 1813, is honourably distinguished from all similar works published after the disclosure of Sir J. Hall's hypothesis, 1803, by the absence of the word Freemasons from both index and letterpress; but, with this solitary exception, all writers (after Hall) who selected architecture as their theme have associated the Freemasons with the Gothic, or pointed style‑a theory which reached its fullest development in the well‑known essay of Hope.


Wren‑if we accord him the credit of the outline of Masonic history given in the Parentalia‑blended conjecture with tradition. Hall found in the statement ascribed to Sir Christopher, the principle of authority and looked no further. The greatest architect of his age and the " Grand Master of the Freemasons," could
















OF 1745‑1757‑1849‑1812


They depict meetings of Freemasons

for the reception of Apprentices and

admission of Masters









not possibly err in coupling the profession he adorned with the society over which he ruled. Dallaway in 1833 published his Discourses upon Architecture, the last of which he entitled " Collections for an Historical Account of Master and Free masons " and from this fount Masonic writers have largely drawn. He cites approvingly " that the incorporation of masons, in the thirteenth century, may have finally brought the pointed arch to that consistency and perfection to which it had not then attained " (R. Smirke, in the Archaologia, vol. xxiii). " The denomination of Free‑masons in England, he deemed to be merely a vernacular corruption of the Freres‑Mafons established in France " (Discourses, etc., pp. 407, 434). Hope quotes no authorities ; and though, at the present day, many people might think that the verdict formerly passed upon his Anastasius (18ig) would now apply to his history of the Freemasons‑viz. " a romance which holds a distinguished rank among modern works of fiction "‑it was at one time so much in request, as a professional textbook, that an analytical Index to its contents, consisting of eightynine pages and with twelve illustrations in wood, had a very extended sale. Dean Milman remarks: " All the documentary evidence adduced by Mr. Hope amounts to a Papal privilege to certain builders or masons, or a guild of builders, at Como, published by Muratori and a charter to certain painters by our Henry VI. Schnaase (Geschichte der Bildende Kunst, iv, ch. 5) examines and rejects the theory " (History of Latin Christianity, vol. vi, p. 5 87).


According to the editors of the Parentalia, he [Wren] was of opinion (as has been mentioned in another Place) that what we now vulgarly call Gothick ought properly and truly to be named the Saracenick Architecture refined by the Christians, which first of all began in the East, after the Fall of the Greek Empire, by the prodigious Success of those People that adhered to Mahomet's Doctrine, who, out of Zeal to their Religion, built Mosques, Caravansaras and Sepulchres wherever they came.


These they contrived of a round Form, because they would not imitate the Christian Figure of a Cross, nor the old Greek Manner, which they thought to be idolatrous and, for that Reason, all Sculpture became offensive to them.


They then fell into a new Mode of their own Invention, tho' it might have been expected with better Sense, considering the Arabians wanted not Geometricians in that Age, nor the Moors, who translated many of the most useful old Greek Books. As they propagated their Religion with great Diligence, so they built Mosques in all their conquered Cities in Haste. The Quarries of great Marble, by which the vanquished Nations of Syria, Egypt and all the East had been supplied, for Columns, Architraves and great Stones, were now deserted; the Saracens, therefore, were necessitated to accommodate their Architecture to such Materials, whether Marble or Free‑stone, as every Country readily afforded. They thought Columns and heavy Cornices impertinent and might be omitted; and, affecting the round Form for Mosques, they elevated Cupolas, in some Instances with Grace enough. The Holy War gave the Christians, who had been there, an Idea of the Saracen Works, which were afterwards by them imitated in the West; and they refined upon it every Day as they proceeded in building Churches. The Italians (among which were yet some Greek Refugees) and with them French, German and 122 MEDIYEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY Flemings, joined into a Fraternity of Architects, procuring Papal Bulls for their Encouragement and particular Privileges; they stiled themselves Freemasons and ranged from one Nation to another as they found Churches to be built (for very many in those Ages were everywhere in Building, through Piety or Emulation). Their Government was regular and where they fixed near the Building in Hand, they made a Camp of Huts. A Surveyor govern'd in chief ; every tenth Man was called a Warden and overlooked each nine. The Gentlemen of the Neighbourhood, either out of Charity or Commutation of Pennance, gave the Materials and Carriage. Those who have seen the exact Accounts in Records of the Charge of the Fabricks of some of our Cathedrals near four hundred Years old, cannot but have a great Esteem for their (Economy, and admire how soon they erected such lofty Structures.


The full title of the work is Parentalia, or Memoirs of the Family of the Wrens; but chiefly of Sir Christopher Wren. Compiled by his son Christopher. Now published by his grandson, Stephen Wren, Esq., with the care of Joseph Ames, F.R.S. London, MDCCL, p. 3o6.


Governor T. Pownall, in Arch&ologia, 1788, vol. ix, pp. i io‑z6, " Observations on the Origin and Progress of Gothic Architecture and on the Corporation of Freemasons," believed that " the collegium or corporation of Freemasons were the first formers of Gothick Architecture into a regular and scientific order, by applying the models and proportions of timber frame‑work to building in stone " ; and was further of opinion that this method " came into use and application about the close of the twelfth or commencement of the thirteenth century." The times of building the Gothick new‑works coincide with this xra. A fact which coincides with this period offers itself to me‑that, the churches throughout all the northern parts of Europe being in a ruinous state, the Pope created several corporations of Roman or Italian architects and artists, with corporate powers and exclusive privileges, particularly with a power of setting by themselves the price of their own work and labour, independent of the municipal laws of the country wherein they worked, according as Hiram had done by the corporations of architects and mechanicks which he sent to Solomon. The Pope not only thus formed them into such a corporation, but is said to have sent them (as exclusively appropriated) to repair and rebuild these churches and other religious edifices. This body had a power of taking apprentices, and of admitting or accepting into their corporation approved masons. The common and usual appellation of this corporation in England was that of The Free and Accepted Masons.


Governor Pownall then goes on to say that, claiming to hold primarily and exclusively of the Pope, they assumed a right, as Free‑masons, of being exempt from the regulations of the statutes of labourers, to which they constantly refused obedience. One might collect historical proofs of this, but as the fact stands upon record in our statute laws, I shall rest on that.


Our author next fixes the establishment of the Freemasons in England about the early part of the reign of Henry III, at which period " the Gothic architecture came forward into practice as a regular established order " ; and suggests as irresistible MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY 123 ‑the inference that the invention and introduction of this bold and very highly scientific order of architecture must be referred to these chosen and selected artists. Pownall concludes Having shown from incontrovertible record that there was in England a corporation of architects and masons, instituted by a foreign power and that this foreign jurisdiction, from which they derived and under which they claimed, was the Pope, who created them by bull, diploma, or charter, about the close of the twelfth or commencement of the thirteenth century, I was very solicitous to have inquiry and search made amongst the archives at Rome, whether it was not possible to find the record of this curious transaction and institution. The librarian of the Vatican was, in '1773, on my behalf, applied to. He examined the archives deposited there and, after a long search, said, " he could not find the least traces of any such record." The head keeper of the archives was next applied to and his answer was the same. The Pope himself, in consequence of a conversation which the inquiries in my letter led to, interested himself in the inquiry and, with the utmost politeness, ordered the most minute research to be made; but no discovery arose from it. I cannot, however, yet be persuaded but that some record or copy of the diploma must be somewhere buried at Rome, amidst some forgotten and unknown bundles or rolls.


Patrick F. Tytler, in his History of Scotland, '1845, vol, ii, p. 278, says : " I have in vain looked for the original authority upon which Sir Christopher Wren and Governor Pownall have founded their description of the travelling corporations of Roman architects." Of Gothic architecture Sir James Hall (Essay on Gothic Architecture, pp. 2, 112) says During the three centuries in which it prevailed exclusively over the greater part of Europe, its principles remained fixed and unchanged, in passing through a multitude of hands, eager to outdo their predecessors and their rivals by the novelty as well as by the elegance of their compositions. Such a conformity cannot be accounted for but by supposing that the artists were guided in their work by some principle known to them all and handed down from one generation to another. But that no such principle has reached our knowledge, is proved by the various unsuccessful attempts which have been made of late to explain the forms of Gothic architecture and to reconcile them to each other. We must, therefore, conclude that if there had been any such principle, it was known to the artists only and concealed by them from the rest of the world. In order to determine this point, it is necessary to inquire by whom the art was practised. In that view, I shall refer, in the first place, to Sir Christopher Wren, an authority of great weight.


This writer then transfers to his pages the extract already given from the Parentalia, adding, after the words " he [Wren] was of opinion," " says his son, Mr. Wren," and continues The architecture here pointed out, as practised by the Freemasons in contradistinction to the Romans, being decidedly what we call Gothic, it is quite obvious 124 MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY that Sir Christopher Wren considered Gothic architecture as belonging to the Freemasons exclusively. Sir Christopher, who was surveyor‑general of the works of architecture carried on in the kingdom and, at the same time, a man of learning and curiosity, was led to examine the old records, to which he had free access. Being, likewise, for many years, the leading man among the Freemasons, and their Grand Master, we may consider his testimony in this question as the strongest that the subject will admit of.


It is fairly inferential that in the view thus expressed Sir James Hall was largely influenced by a belief in the actual testimony of a Grand Master of the Freemasons. There is no proof that Wren ever held that office or that he was a Freemason.


Reviewing the condition of architecture towards the end of the tenth century, Hope says It may be supposed that, among the arts exercised and improved in Lombardy, that of building held a pre‑eminent tank; and, in fact, we find in Muratori, that already, under the Lombard kings, the inhabitants of Como were so superior as masons and bricklayers, that the appellation of Magistri Comacini, or Masters from Como, became generic to all those of the profession. We cannot, then, wonder that, at a period when artificers and artists of every class formed themselves into exclusive corporations, architects should, above all others, have associated themselves into similar bodies, which, in conformity to the general style of such corporations, assumed that of free and accepted masons and was composed of those members who, after a regular passage through the different fixed stages of apprenticeship, were received as masters and entitled to exercise the profession on their own account.


In the view of the same writer, " Lombardy itself soon became nearly saturated with the requisite edifices " and unable to give the Freemasons " a longer continuance of sufficient custom, or to render the further maintenance of their exclusive privileges of great benefit to them at home." The Italian corporations of builders, therefore, began to look abroad for that employment which they no longer found at home ; and a certain number united and formed themselves into a single greater association of fraternity‑seeking a monopoly, as it were, over the whole face of Christendom.


They were fraught with Papal bulls, or diplomas, granting to them the right of holding directly and solely under the Pope alone ; they acquired the power, not only themselves to fix the price of their labour, but to regulate whatever else might appertain to their own internal government, exclusively in their own general chapters ; prohibiting all native artists not admitted into their society from entering with it into any sort of competition.


That an art so peculiarly connected with every branch of religion and hierarchy as that of church architecture, should become, in every country, a favourite occupation with its ecclesiastics, need not, Hope thinks, excite surprise.


MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY 125 Lest, however, such as belonged not to their communities should benefit surreptitiously by the arrangements for its advantage, the Freemasons "framed signs of mutual recognition, as carefully concealed from the knowledge of the uninitiated as the mysteries of their art themselves." Wherever they came, they appeared headed by a chief surveyor, who governed the whole troop, and named one man out of every ten, under the name of warden, to overlook the nine others.


This last statement is evidently copied from the Parentalia ; and a careful collation of Hope's work with the three previously cited, will prove that his remarks on the Freemasons are mainly, if not entirely, borrowed without the slightest acknowledgment from the Memoirs of the Vrens and the Essays of Governor Pownall and Sir James Hall.


Hope says further (Historical Essay, pp. 228‑38, 527) The architects of all the sacred edifices of the Latin Church, wherever such arose‑north, south, east, or west‑thus derived their science from the same central school; obeyed in their designs the dictates of the same hierarchy and rendered every minute improvement the property of the whole body.


The downfall of the Freemasons of that body composed of so many lesser societies dispersed and united all over Europe, which, throughout all Europe, was alone initiated in all the secrets of the pressure and the counter‑pressure of the most complicated arches, so essential to the achievement of constructions after the pointed fashion and so intricate, that even Wren confessed his inability to understand all their mysteries ;‑the passage of the whole art of building, from the hands of these able masters, into those of mere tyros, not bred in the schools of Freemasonry and not qualified to hazard its bold designs, forced architecture immediately backwards from that highly complex and scientific system, into one more simple in its principles and more easy in its execution.


It will excite no surprise that a treatise so highly esteemed by those who studied architecture as a profession and elevated, for the time being, by the general voice, into the character of a standard work, should have impressed with even greater force the somewhat careless writers by whom Masonic history has been compiled. Traces, however, of Hope's influence upon succeeding writers are to be found in many works of high reputation and these, as would naturally happen, still further disseminated and popularized the views of which an outline has been given, until, in the result, a natural reaction took place and, what Sir Gilbert Scott calls the " fables of the Freemasons " have so far extended their sway, that, as long since pointed out, the historians of the craft, by supporting what is false, have prevented thinking men from believing what is true.


Even the judicious Hallam has been carried along with the current, and remarks Some have ascribed the principal ecclesiastical structures to the fraternity of Freemasons, depositaries of a concealed and traditionary science. There is probably i26 MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY some ground for this opinion; and the earlier archives of that mysterious association, if they existed, might illustrate the progress of Gothic architecture, and perhaps reveal its origin. (See Hallam's Europe in the Middle Ages, ed. 18 S 3, vol. iii, p. 3 S 8. This work was originally published in 1832, the year following Hope's death. Cf. F. A. Paley, Manual of Gothic Architecture, 1846, p. z11 and G. A. Poole, History of Ecclesiastical Architecture in England, 1848, pp. r 16, 119.) Sir Francis Palgrave, writing in the Edinburgh Review, April 1839, pp. 102, io3, says Those who have hitherto attributed Gothic architecture to the Freemasons have considered the style as " the offsprings of a congregated body " ; and, deeming the members of the fraternity to have acted in concert, have attempted to show them working and calculating as a fraternity, for the purpose of arriving at the definite results which they afterwards so gloriously attained‑an hypothesis which will become perfectly credible when any scientific society shall have discovered a system of gravitation, any literary academy shall have composed a Paradise Lost, or any academy of the fine arts shall have painted a " Transfiguration." But we believe that the fraternity of Freemasons just performed the very useful and important duties properly belonging to the society or the academy. They assisted in the spread of knowledge and in bestowing upon talent the countenance and protection of station and established power.


An amazing analogy has occasionally been traced for the men who built the churches, bridges and abbeys, the ruins of many of which exist to the present day, but the only one for which any rational ground can be assumed is that of the Roman Collegia. These Collegia were certainly introduced into England, as is witnessed by the famous Chichester inscription (which, however, does not refer unequivocally to builders), even if the fact had not been certain from the nature of things and, because of this, added to a few vague traditions and certain loose expressions in panegyrists, with other late and unsatisfactory writers, it is sought to establish a great school of masons in this country, from whom the medixval operative masons and, subsequently, the modern Freemasons, can trace a direct descent. But, in the first place, it is very doubtful how far the British element, which is supposed to have carried on the Collegia until they reappeared in the Saxon form of guilds, survived the Saxon Conquest. Works of great research and ingenuity have been written on the one side and on the other, with the only apparent result of proving how irremediable and hopeless is the divergence of the learned and what little chance there is of the question ever being satisfactorily settled, or, at least, until the learned condescend to lay aside their individual crotchets, which, practically speaking, amounts to the same thing. But, even assuming a very considerable Celtic population and great Celtic influence, so that the Collegia may be the parents of the subsequent guilds, there is no evidence that any such Collegia belonged to the building trades, but a good deal of negative evidence to the contrary. The Celts, wherever and whenever found, were emphatically not builders‑the native works in Wales, Ireland and Scotland consisting either of mounds and earthworks, or MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY 127 subsequently of stonework of the rudest construction; their circular, beehiveshaped huts of stone, which were used also to a certain extent for religious purposes, being common to the merest savages. Gildas, speaking more than forty years after the decisive battle of Mount Badon had pretty well rid the country of the first swarms of invaders, says, that the towns still lie dreary and neglected (adhuc deserta squalent) and there is no evidence of either Silchester or Wroxeter having been restored by the Romano‑Britons after its first destruction. The discovery of British churches by Augustine proves nothing. Britain was a Roman colony for nearly ioo years after the conversion of Constantine, during which period they may have been built and, even if that were not so, the mere fact of the existence of a few small churches of rude construction is no proof of the existence of an extensive building fraternity, with regular rules and corporations. Moreover, the Anglo‑Saxons when they began to build were obliged to import workmen and they also sent abroad when they commenced to restore. Benedict Biscop, who may be regarded as the first patron of architecture amongst them, about 674, went over to France to engage " cementarios," in order that his church at Monk Wearmouth might be built " according to the manner of the Romans, which he had always loved " ; and St. Wilfrid, of York, slightly later, brought over with him eminent builders and artists from Rome, Italy, France and other countries. (See W. H. Rylands, " The Legend of the Introduction of Masons into England " in Masonic Magazine, April and May 188z.) We may, therefore, feel tolerably certain that all knowledge of the art of Roman building and with it the Roman building corporations‑though they still had Roman buildings in their midsthad long been lost and had never been handed down to the Saxons. Guilds, however, undoubtedly existed before the Conquest, as well as among the Saxon population afterwards. Brentano mentions three and Pike, in his History of Crime (vol. i, p. 68 et seq.) shows that the merchant guild of Dover and the burgesses guild at Canterbury, existed at least as early as the time of the Confessor ; and the various weaver guilds appear as regularly constituted, in the earliest records of the Exchequer dating not long after the compilation of Domesday. The learned Heineccius affirms that in Germany (which, though never a province of the Roman Empire, was much more influenced by it than is usually supposed) the guilds appeared first in the eleventh century and considers further, that they were an imitation of, not descendants from, the Collegia of Rome. Hence, on the whole, considering the double uncertainty of, firstly, the descent of any guild from classic institutions; and, secondly, of the chance of the building guilds in England at least having formed part of them, even if such descent existed, we must, however reluctantly, decide against the high antiquity of the Masonic bodies in the British Islands. Nor do organized bodies of masons seem to have arisen‑though on this point it should be observed that present conclusions may be at any time invalidated by the production of further evidence‑until long after the appearance of guilds among the other trades. The reason of this is obvious; the necessity of moving from place to place as work called them would long preclude their having 128 MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY associations by which the other trades were strengthened and controlled, the essence of which, as was the case also with the Collegia, was a local habitation. The early masons were probably to a certain extent under the direction of the monks and priests for whom they worked and it is highly probable that an ecclesiastic who had some taste for and, what is more, some practical knowledge of, architecture, was far more common then than now, while, in the more primitive countries, the missionaries would have, in many cases, to assist personally in the work. This and the naturally and necessarily migratory habits of the workmen, together with the occasional passing of styles, architects and workmen from one country to another, will account for the myth of a cosmopolitan body working under the monks. All the legends of the Freemasons, both here and abroad, are manifestly of a late medixval origin; while the stories of Euclid, the one mathematician of classic times known to the Middle Ages, are involved in that charming disregard of all chronology, which is one of their chief characteristics. There was a strange vein of imagination in the medixval character; witness the style of architecture, indigenous and utterly unlike anything either before or since‑the institution of chivalry, the crusades, the romances, strange tales, legends and travesties of history. Witness the legends of St. Alban, of " Ewclyde," King Pharaoh, of Virgil as a magician and the stories of King Lud, Brutus, Troynovant and others, for all of which no kind of foundation, or excuse for a foundation, exists. It may be observed, however, that the ancient Irish manuscripts undoubtedly conceal ethnic traditions pointing to an Eastern origin‑cf. the Irish version of Nennius, edited by Todd and Herbert, published by the Irish Archxological Society, 1848. As an illustration of the manufacture of legends a manuscript note on the margin of a copy of the 1723 Constitutions, preserved in the library of the Grand Lodge of England, has the following: " Witness the story of Meron [Naymus] Grecus, who was at ye building of Solomon's Temple, in the year of the world 293 3 and after came into France to Charles Martel, their king, who began to reign in the year of ye world 466o. So the man was 1727 years old 1 " But, at whatever period the Masonic bodies first took form, the ceremonies and customs by which they were distinguished are at least of much earlier origin than our oldest constitutions. The fabric rolls of York Minster, which have been published at length by Canon Raine for the Surtees Society, show that in 1355 Orders for the Masons and Workmen were issued.


The first and second masons who are called masters of the same and the carpenters, shall make oath that they cause the ancient customs underwritten to be faithfully observed. In summer they are to begin to work immediately after sunrise until the ringing of the bell of the Virgin Mary, then to breakfast in the fabric lodge, then one of the masters shall knock upon the door of the lodge and forthwith all are to return to work until noon. Between April and August, after dinner they shall sleep in the lodge, then work until the first bell for vespers, then sit to drink to the end of the third bell and return to work so long as they can see by daylight. It was usual for this church to find tunics (probably gowns), aprons, MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY 12q gloves, and clogs and to give occasional potations and remuneration for extra work. Gloves were also given to the carpenters.


Strikes, boycotting and rattening were, even in those remote times, not wholly unknown, for there is an account of a conspiracy that certain stonecutters or masons, being moved by a most wicked spirit of envy, wickedly conspiring for the death and ultimate destruction of Magister William Colchester, assigned to us and to the fabric of our church by our most dread lord the king, by his letters patent [Colchester had been master mason of Westminster Abbey] for the government of the said fabric and specially received under the protection of the same, treacherously assaulting the said William, did grievously wound him and did so injure another person, his assistant, that his life is considered in serious danger.


In 1433 two " setters " had 1 6s. 8d. given to them as remuneration, also two skins for aprons, according to custom, which cost 12d. and ten pair of gloves, given at the time of setting stones, costing 18d. A nearly similar entry occurs in the following year. In 1472 William Hyndely, warden of the lodge of masons, was paid at the rate of 3s. 4d. a week for twenty‑eight weeks, for working in the office of the master of the masons and had 13s. 4d. for a reward. He became master mason and, two years later, was working with two apprentices and three labourers ; and, five years after that, with eleven masons and two apprentices. The bridge at Catterick, 1412, was contracted for by three masons at a lump sum, with a gown to each, " according to their degree." The building of Walberswick steeple, 1426, was undertaken for 4os., with a cade of herrings and a gown of " lenore ones," which is not very clear‑possibly leuere once, or " livery once," each time of working. A parish in Suffolk, 1430, was to provide every Freemason with a pair of white leather gloves and a white apron during the works. So the mason contractor for rebuilding the bell tower of Bury St. Edmunds, 1435, was to have 'Cio a year, board for himself in the convent hall as a gentleman and for his servant as a yeoman, also two robes, one for himself of gentleman's livery, that of the servant to be a yeoman's livery. Livery at that time was not a badge of servitude or menial office as at present, but of subservience and was worn by young gentlemen of high rank when in attendance on some great lord, which was a part of their education. " Wearing the Queen's livery " is an undoubted survival of these ideas, which is mentioned to show that builders were not the masters but the employes (not exactly the servants) of those who paid them. A " house " seems to have very commonly been part of the salary of the master mason, as in the agreement between the Prior of Durham and John Bell latimus, 1488 and in many other and earlier instances. The said John Bell had also an apprentice for whom he was to be paid by the sacristan. In 161o " a Freemason, who can draw his plot, work and set accordingly, having charge over others," is considered as worth 12d. a day before Michaelmas and iod. after it. A rough mason who can take 130 MEDIIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY charge over others, was, at that time, worth iod. and 8d. according to the same seasons, showing that the old customs subsisted, occasionally at least, until very late times.


One of the earliest intimations of the " lodge " occurs in i zoo, when a tabulatum domicialem was the shed erected in front of St. Albans Abbey‑by Hugh Goldcliffe aforesaid and, in 132 1, is an entry of zs. 6d. for straw to cover the masons' lodge at Carnarvon Castle. At the chapel of St. Stephen, Westminster, a man was paid, in 1320, to clean out the lodge, amongst other work. In 1399, there occurs at York a list of the stores at the " loge " in the cemetery. In 1395, at the additions to Westminster Hall, the king engaged to find " herbergage " (harbourage) for the masons and their companions (journeymen) ; and, in the same year, is noticed the fact of two carpenters working upon the new house for the masons of Westminster Abbey and another house in Tothill Street; and of 15s. 6d. being paid to the " dauber " for the lodge for the masons and the house in that street. The earliest of the Masonic Constitutions or Charger, the Halliwell, circa 1400, has" If in the logge the apprentice were taken," also The prevystye of the chamber telle he no mon, Ny yn the logge whatsever they done; which is styled by Wyatt Papworth " a satisfactory instance of the attempt at concealment of trade mysteries." In 1421, at Catterick church, a " luge " of four rooms is specified as having to be made for the masons. In 1426, the masons engaged to build Walberswick steeple were to be provided with a " hows " to eat, drink, work and sleep in, and to " make mete in," i.e. fitting or convenient. These lodges were formerly thatched, but one properly " tiled " was to be provided at the expense of some parishioners in Suffolk. In 1432 a " luge " was erected in the cemetery at Durham. And, in 1541, Thomas Philips, freemason, with John Pettit, covenanted " to set up and fully finish " the Coventry Cross and, at their own charge, " to prepare, find and make a house or lodge for masons to work in during the time of making the same cross." (See T. W. Whitley, The Coventry Cross, 188o, pp. 8, 9.) Various customs of trade are mentioned in the manuscript Con stitutions of later date. The word Loge in Anglo‑Norman means " a lodge, habita tion, lodging." (See Wright's Glossary to Chaucer's Poems.) In the Dictionary of Architecture there are twenty‑four instances of " lodge" referred to between 1 zoo and 1523 in England; and four between 1483 and 1527 in Scotland.


As regards the origin of Masonic guilds there are two traditions, besides the alleged charter of Athelstan and the familiar legend of St. Alban, namely, one making Godfrey de Lucy, Bishop of Winchester, who first rebuilt the eastern portion of his cathedral, the founder of a confraternity, izoz, which is accepted by Milner as the origin of the society of Freemasons ; the second, that advanced by Anderson, 1738, but never authenticated, who assigns the honour to William Molart, Prior of Canterbury Cathedral, 14z9, under the patronage of Archbishop Chichele. Neither of these is really worth discussing. Even supposing that such societies were 132 MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY As regards the grips and signs attributed to the early builders, the masons' marks, the secrets, the lewd and profane symbols and the numerous figures indicative of a dislike of and contempt for the clergy, very few words are necessary, the more especially as the " signs and tokens " and the " masons' marks," will be referred to in subsequent chapters. That artisans of an especial trade should have peculiar modes of recognizing each other when travelling in search of work, is nothing but what might have been expected‑such practices exist in the Companionage and may in England, for all we know to the contrary. Moreover, a secret society has certain political, religious, or social‑some may call them anti‑social‑objects. These they would ill serve, by devoting their time to the practice of working stonemasonry and would serve it still less by contributing to the advancement and glorification of the Church, which has always considered the repression of such societies and such aspirations as being among her chiefest duties. Furthermore, all documentary and trustworthy evidence, all the dictates of sound common sense, tend to discourage, even ridicule, such a notion as being the mere chimera of visionaries and enthusiasts. So the marks are nothing but the ordinary marks similar to those made and chosen by each individual mason at the present day, whereby, in case of necessity, each man's work is ascertained. They are, apart from immediate trade purposes, useful and interesting to the antiquary, as showing the numbers who worked on any particular building, as well as whether the same masons worked on any other edifice and, if so, where ; but how anyone but a theorist, who prefers dreaming in his study to acquiring wholesome practical knowledge, could imagine that‑when used by the masons‑they referred to any esoteric doctrines, certainly surpasses all comprehension. That our medixval ancestors were superstitious and fond of alchemy, believing in certain signs, etc., is undoubtedly true and that workmen may have occasionally chosen such figures for their marks, partly from superstition and partly from caprice, is likely enough, but one can scarcely imagine any man foolish enough to waste his time and trouble in inscribing some mysterious secret on that side of a stone which was to be immediately covered up, there to remain for centuries, if it was ever destined to see the light at all. As to their secrets, all trades have their own, important or otherwise, to the present day and the medixval masons must have been more likely to have possessed theirs, when we consider the extreme height and comparative fragility of their buildings, the thinness of the walls and vaulting and the smallness of the stone employed. Both Wren and Soufflot, the builders of St. Paul's and St. Genevieve (Pantheon) and, certainly, the two most scientific architects of their respective countries, conceived the highest opinion of the skill of their medixval predecessors and we must remember that books in our sense of the word scarcely existed, that the great bulk of the teaching was oral, whilst books of practical geometry did not exist at all. Out of the thousands of names of authors and their works collected by the laborious compilers of the famous Histoire Litteraire de la France, none treat upon this subject. " It may be conceived," says Poole (History of Ecclesiastical Architecture in England, 1848, p. i 18), "that the MEDIYEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY 133 great secret of the Society resided in the practical way in which many principles, after which we are now feeling in vain and many rules of construction which each man now learns to employ by a mathematical process, were reduced to what is vulgarly, but expressively, called `the rule of thumb.' " " Perhaps," he continues, " John Wastell, the master mason of King's College Chapel, followed with the utmost assurance a rule of which he could not give a philosophical account, but which he was ready to apply again and again to works of every magnitude." There was a double motive with these men for keeping their trade secrets close, for, besides the mystery which mankind are so prone to affect, they really had something both to learn and to conceal.


As for the various symbols, lewd, profane, or merely caricatures, it should never be forgotten that the medixval nations were extremely coarse and, in their way, extremely witty. A very slight acquaintance with medixval literature will cause us to feel no surprise when we meet with stone caricatures equal in strength and coarseness to those of Rowlandson and Gillray, nor need we be astonished to find a good deal turn upon the clergy, as do a great number of those of our English draughtsmen, especially in the matter of tithe; and these, together with indecencies which are, after all, not quite unknown in more refined ages, were probably the amusements of carnally‑minded workmen when they thought they could indulge in them without risk of discovery. But a strong anti‑religious and anti‑social sub‑current certainly existed throughout the Middle Ages and these figures may possibly be the expressions of the feelings and opinions of individuals among the masons, though that any large body of men should combine to erect a magnificent edifice for the furtherance of a diametrically opposite creed, in order to put somewhere out of sight a little figure or symbol indicating their own, is an absurdity that the secret societies with all their inconsistencies‑and they have committed many and striking ones‑could not commit.


Lastly come the most curious, the most important and, at the same time, the most obscure questions of all: Who were the actual architects and designers of the mediaeval edifices ? were they Operative Masons or at least men belonging to that body ? Various theories have been advanced on this most interesting subject ‑the monks, the master masons, the architects, the Freemasons, while some have gone so far as to say that the reason why so few names are known is, that the medixval architects concealed their names from an excess of piety.


Crementarius, says Papworth, " is naturally the earliest, 1077 and the term most constantly used. Artifices were collected at Canterbury to a consultation, from which William of Sens came out the 1tilagister, a term also applied to his successor‑William, the Englishman; but it is not clear whether ` master of the work' or' master mason' is to be applied to these two. In 1217, a popular educational writer noted the word cementarii, together with the old French synonym maszun, leaving little hesitation for accepting the one for the other. The London Assize of IzI2, besides cementarii has sculptores lapidum IEberorZlm, words of very exceptional use. At the end of the thirteenth and beginning of the fourteenth 134 MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY centuries, the terms magister cementarii, with his sociis or fellows, are obtained. Marmorarius has been noted; also a new word latomus, which is, after that period, found written in all manner of spellings. A masoune, in old French, is to erect a house, de pere fraunche ; and, of somewhat later date, is found a mestre mason de franche pere ; while still later, 136o, a mason de fraunche pere ou de grosse pere appears in the statutes. In a writ of 1415 are the words petras vocatas ragge calces et liberal petras. During the fourteenth century lathomus is constantly found and it would appear to be applied as often to the mason who was to execute cut‑work, as to the mason who was required for rougher work or to labour at the quarry. Under the date of 1396, the contractors for the works at Westminster Hall were citiens et masons de Londres ; and, of the same year, are the passages lathomos vocatos fre Maceons and lathomos vocatos ligiers, or, as we should translate the words, masons called free (stone) masons, and masons (the same term is used for both) called layers or setters." (See Transactions K.I.B.A., 1861‑2, pp. 37‑6o.) The Westminster Hall deed will be found printed in The Freemason of November 26, 18 and the Masonic Magazine of February 1882, reproduced from the copy of the original document preserved in the Sloane MSS. No. 4595, p. 50‑ W. H. Rylands describes the entry in Rymer's Fcdera (vol. xvii, edit. 1717), cited by Papworth in the Dictionary of Architecture, s.v. " Freemason," as occurring in a syllabus of manuscript Acts, not published, at the end of the volume, after the index, p. 5 5.


Cementarius, or Sirnentarius before and " fremason " after, 1396, are found in the Fabric Rolls of Exeter Cathedral. In the Roll for 1426 (the 5th year of Henry VI), which is composed of parchment sheets joined continuously, about 15 feet in length and i i in breadth, occurs the following entry Johi Harry fremason opanti ibim p septiam . 3s.


Johi Umfray fremason p hanc septiam . nl. q, hic recessit.


James Jerman of Exeter, who supplied the preceding reference and the late Rev. H. Reynolds (the Chapter librarian), vainly searched the Fabric Roll of 1396 for the name of " William Foundyng, freemason," mentioned by Britton in his Exeter Cathedral, 1827, p. z6.


As already observed, Lathomus is appended to William de Wynneford's portrait at Winchester College; and, somewhat later, amongst the latimi at Durham, one is specially called a " ffremason." " Thereafter," continues Papworth, " mason and freemason are terms in constant use down to the present time. From these details three facts are obtained, ‑the first, that the earliest use of the English term Freemason was in 1396, without any previous Latin word. The second is, that the word freestone, or its equivalent Latin term, had been employed from the beginning of the previous century, i.e. I2I2 ; and the third fact, if that word be permitted, is, that the term Freemason itself is clearly derived from a mason who worked freestone, in contradistinction to the mason who was employed in rough work." Papworth cites William Horwode, freemason, Fotheringay, 143 5 ; John Wode, MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY 135 masoun, who contracted to build the tower of the Abbey Church of St. Edmundsbury, " in all mannere of thinges that longe to free masonry," 143 S ; John Stowell, ffremason, Wells, 1470; William Este, fremason, Oxford, 1494; John Hylmer and William Vertue, freemasons, Windsor, 1507. In the sixteenth century the term free mason becomes more common. The words cementarius and latomus are repeatedly found in the two volumes of Vocabularies, dating from the tenth to the sixteenth century, edited by the late Thomas Wright, privately printed, x857 and 1873. Many extracts from this work were given by W. H. Rylands, in The Freevnason of September 3, 1881. Papworth says : " that the terms magister lapicida and liberi muratores are nowhere to be met with in documents relating to England, thus there is not sufficient authority for that constant use of them observable in writers of former years." The terms architect, ingeniator, supervisor, surveyor, overseer, keeper of the works, keeper of the fabric, director, clerk of the works and devizor, are all o comparatively recent date, at least in their general use and application. That these medixval terms are not yet clearly comprehended may be gathered from an amusing quotation in the case of Richard of Wolveston, cited as a prudens architectus in a register of the period of Bishop Pudsey of Durham, early in the twelfth century. In a charter relating to an exchange of lands, this Richard is styled ingeniator and the translator, commenting upon the term, writes, " Dick the Snarer, then, doubtless, a title of honour ; a gin is still technically called an engine or ingene " ; though, as Papworth observes, such a sobriquet would now, however applicable, be deemed the reverse of complimentary, if bestowed on the gamekeeper of a bishop. It has been urged, however, that this surname (ingeniator) was not uncommon in the North of England at the period and was applied to any person who manifested genius in his vocation. (See Transactions R.I.B.A., 1861‑2.) Many interesting papers have been read before the Institute of British Architects, followed by discussion and debate, the object of which was to clear up the mystery attending the real architects of the great medixval buildings, in which three principal theories were maintained (Transactions R.I.B.A., i856‑6o, pp. 38‑51 ; 1861‑2, pp. 37‑6o; and 1863‑4, PP‑ 130‑46)‑one being the old popular notion that the architects were the monks themselves ; another, that they were the master masons ; and the third, that there existed, as at present, a regular order of architects who worked in precisely the same way as men in the profession do now; but, in spite of a great deal of argument and learning, the grand crux, as Digby Wyatt observed at the close of one discussion, " remains unsolved." It seems, however, that the difficulty encountered at this point of the research arises (i) from the fact of different words being used at different times to signify the same thing, a fact which is too often disregarded ; (2) from not sufficiently contrasting the modes in which trades and professions were carried on at periods of time remote from our own; and (3) from too hasty a generalization upon imperfect data, without pausing to reflect that customs and ideas have been influenced both by nationality and locality and that because one set or description of men were numerously employed, 136 MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY this by no means precluded the employment on other occasions of a very different class and that the former‑although, even in this instance, often with exceptionsmay have been more constantly in requisition in one time and place than in another.


The medixval builders and designers whether called magistri, maestri, maistres ; whether priests or laymen; or whether a combination of both, i.e. of the highly cultured and more or less practical amateur and the more or less refined and en lightened master workman, were evidently of a class very different from those whom we are now accustomed to style architects autres temps, autres maurs‑the clergy, or at least some of that body, instead of being mere dilettanti, were earnest students and workers ; the architects were very closely connected with and, indeed, often sprang from, the ranks of their workmen. It must never be forgotten that in the Middle Ages, more especially in the earlier portion of them, matters were not as they are now, for two things are especially characteristic of social progressone the continued subdivision of labour, the other the increasing power of capital; hence, while at the one end of the scale, the operative was not so very different from the master, so, at the other, the architect was not so very distinct from the artificer.


The fact must not be lost sight of that the primary meaning of architect is " master workman " ; and it would appear that architects were formerly such in the original sense of the word, i.e. the artificers arranged their materials according to their needs, giving the forms into which they cast them such beauty, adding such embellishments as lay in their power. Hence architects embodied as a rule the particular tendencies of their race and age. The Greek architects of the best period were sculptors and their art was, more or less, plastic; those of the Romans, when they were not Greek architects, in the modern and received sense of the term (rhetoricians in stone), were, in all probability, civil engineers ; and those of the Middle Ages were probably a combination of priest or monk and mechanic, or, to speak more accurately, a partnership between the two, worked for a common end. At the Renaissance, however, Italian or modern architecture took its rise and, in Italy, architects seem to have been, at least many of the greatest of their number, painters. Hence arose the school of designers, as opposed to that of constructors, i.e. men who sketch out a building on a drawing‑board as they would the outline of a picture on a canvas, instead of constructing it, i.e. putting it together, piece by piece, in the most beautiful form, as necessity required. The two methods are totally different and the latter will be found very much simpler and easier, besides being very much more effective, than the former. Many architects are equally pattern designers, e.g. Matthew Wyatt designed carpets for an eminent firm; and one of the greatest of our modern architects, if not the greatest, used to design lace and embroidery patterns for the late Duchess of Sutherland and her daughters. But the great truth should never be forgotten that true architecture is decorated construction, as opposed to constructed decoration. This is the real secret and keystone of the whole matter. Medixval architecture was the first, modern architecture the second‑hence the difference and the comparative failure of the latter. The medixval builders thought in stone and the result is obvious, inasmuch as most, if MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY 137 not all, modern buildings betray their origin, i.e. having been conceived on paper or a flat surface and then translated into solid material. This does not necessarily demand that skill in drawing which is supposed to be essential to the modern architect, nor does it by any means always require professional training. Inigo Jones was an artist and a designer of Masques ; his works betray his scenic taste and training, especially the kind of cloister under Lincoln's Inn Chapel ; Wren may be best qualified as an F.R.S., though he had certainly travelled and studied in France ; Perrault, the designer of the magnificent eastern colonnade of the Louvre, was a physician; Vanburgh was at least as much a play writer as an architect; and both Lord Burlington and Aldridge, dean of Christ Church, were, in the last century, competent to erect beautiful buildings by their own unaided talents. To turn to the kindred profession of engineering, Rudgerd and Winstanley, the builders of the first two Eddystones, were both silk mercers ; Brindley was a blacksmith ; Smeaton, a watch and mathematical instrument maker; Telford, a mason; Stephenson rose from the lowest ranks. To Horne Tooke belongs the original credit of the great cast‑iron bridge over the Wear, at Sunderland, a single span, at great height, of z.38 feet. The only one of the great early engineers who was an engineer from his youth up, was Rennie ; and he taught himself; he certainly, as far as is known, could not draw; his son, Sir John Rennie, very little, yet they designed the finest series of bridges ever imagined or erected ; and the Victualling Yard at Plymouth, the combined work of Sir John and his brother, is a building which, for simple grandeur and appropriateness, leaves far behind the works of most professional architects.


It has often been lamented that the names of so many of these medixval builders should have perished; and it has been asserted that they were content to merge their identity from a pious humility which forbade them to exalt their own indivi duality and made them content with the furtherance of the divine glory. But a moment's reflection will convince us that, for some reason or another, the names of both architects and engineers are and always have been, doomed to popular oblivion. The Greek artists are infinitely better known by their sculptures than by their temples, though the evidences of the latter are far more manifest than those of the former. Only one Roman architect, Vitruvius, is really famous and he owes his celebrity to the fact that, having apparently failed in his profession, he consoled himself, like many more of his brotherhood, by writing a book. Their successors, the great architects of Italy, are, like the Greeks in sculpture, known more for their paintings than their buildings ; even Michael Angelo is more associated with the Sistine Chapel than with St. Peter's. Palladio is the only pure Italian architect whose " name is in everybody's mouth." So it is with France and Germany. In England, beyond Inigo Jones and Wren, Chambers and Barry are the sole popular names. Vanburgh is remembered more for his comedies than for the magnificent palaces of Blenheim and Castle Howard; while, if a man can enumerate any of the works of Hawksmoor and Gibbs, of Soane, of Smirke and of Wyatt, he passes for more than ordinarily instructed in the history of English art.


138 MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY But of all the works with which our country is covered, how few perpetuate their designers' names and how difficult it is to recover them, except by a search in obscure guide‑books and county histories 1 Apparently, the " upper ten," so to speak, among the building trades gathered themselves together in more regular and elaborately constituted bodies about the close of the fourteenth and beginning of the fifteenth centuries in both Germany and England and, at the same time, began, in the latter country, to be called Freemasons, though from what that name is derived and how far the new name was connected with the new organization, we shall be in a better position to determine when the statutes relating to the building trades and the circumstances immediately preceding what, in Masonic annals, is termed the " Revival " (1717), have passed under review. Mason's work seems to have become more. scientific, as is seen from the fan vaulting in England; and Fergusson asserts that the manipulation of stone by the German Freemasons is marvellous, while he inveighs against the ill effects produced upon art by the supremacy of this body, like the injurious influence which academies have been often asserted to have had upon literature. (See History of Architecture in All Countries, 1865, vol. i, p. 48o.) Digby Wyatt has expressed an opinion that working masons formerly wandered about in search of work, depending upon the protection which their lodge, grips and passwords afforded them; that this custom, after having decayed, was revived again under a somewhat different form by the Freemasons in the fifteenth century; in this Fergusson agrees with him. The functions of the maistre de Pauvre in the thirteenth century are difficult to define. There is no document before the fourteenth century and here Parchitecte n'est appele que comme un homme de Part que l'on indemnise de son travail personnel. Materials, labour, etc., were found by those at whose expense the work was done, i.e. he was not a contractor. " After the fourteenth century," Viollet le Duc continues, " the architect lost his importance and every kind of tradesman was called in to do his share, without one controlling head; hence deterioration followed as a matter of course." Medixval architecture fell from natural causes, like the fall of monasticism and all things medixval and the one followed suit on the other. No more churches were built, hence the builders died out; and, with them, to a great extent, appears to have died the skill in arch and vault building which was, perhaps, the great characteristic of the builders of the Middle Ages. Scarcely a single stone vault was constructed in the long period between the Reformation and Wren; those of Lincoln's Inn Chapel are plaster; the ceiling of the great gallery of Lanhydrock, near Bodmin, in Cornwall, is a plaster vault, with elaborate plaster pendants in the centre. Add to this the great influx of foreign architects, in the modern sense of the word‑and, it may be, of foreign masons as well, also the possibility that the Reformation was a much greater revolution than people are aware of‑enough has been said to account for the complete and rapid disappearance of medixval operative masonry, at least in England. Gothic, however, never quite died out; there was an attempt at revival, temp. James I and Charles I, especially MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY 139 at Oxford, while it still lingered in remote country districts till the dawn of the revival under Walpole and Batty Langley. Besides Wren's professedly Gothic imitations at Westminster Abbey, St. Michael's, Cornhill and St. Dunstan's in the West, there are traces of Gothic mullions in the tower windows of St. Clement Danes. It is curious that the art which fell in England with the fall of Roman Catholicism should have, after lingering with it here and there, commenced to revive almost simultaneously with the dawn of toleration and have proceeded since pari passu.


The review of medixval operative masonry here terminates. The subject has been examined in the buildings themselves, rather than by an exclusive dependence upon books, which, as the literature of Freemasonry may well remind us, is in every way unreliable. Undoubtedly the operative masons had a much larger share in the construction of these buildings than is usually supposed, inasmuch as they were to a very large extent the actual designers of the edifices on which they worked, not the mere servants of the ecclesiastics. Some isolated unions of these men, in their later development, which, from causes we cannot trace, contrived to escape the great cataclysm of the Reformation, may have survived in the Four Old Lodges, the parents of modern Freemasonry ; and, if this supposition is well founded, their descent from the medixval builders being legitimate, their pride is equally so.


There is in existence to‑day a very keen body of Freemasons, including several well‑known Grand Lodge officers, who employ a ritual which they claim they have every reason to believe is identical with that which was worked by the members of, at least, one of the four Lodges which formed the Grand Lodge of England in 1717. Two interesting articles on the subject, from the pen of Bernard H. Springett, appeared in The Freemason, March z8 and April 4, 1925. He points out that, in Scotland, all the older Lodges show distinct traces in their Minute Books of having gradually changed over from Operative to Speculative and that, in 17o8, no fewer than fifty members of No. i Lodge of Edinburgh, known, generally, as St. Mary Chapel, seceded from their Mother Lodge on account of the increasing number of admissions of men who were not craftsmen; they formed a Lodge of their ownthe Lodge of Journeymen, No. 8. Until 1840, this new Lodge insisted on one‑tenth only of its members being non‑craftsmen. Candidates for initiation, as in all Operative Lodges, had to undergo a rigorous examination as to their physical capacity, for which purpose they were stripped completely and then were clothed in a long, white garment, a practice still observed in some countries, England excepted.


As the result of a lengthy and painstaking investigation, B. H. Springett is able to state that even to this day Operative Stonemasons are quietly working a ritual, greatly abbreviated from that in vogue in days gone by, which they clearly derived by oral transmission from medixval times and that, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, many such Lodges were in existence. He has traced records of 191 of these Lodges in England and Wales and 17 in Ireland, all of which were subject to a Grand Lodge, while there were certain intermediary District Lodges.


140 MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY These latter met quarterly, while the Grand Lodge met twice a year, for many years at Huddersfield, afterwards at Manchester, always with the greatest possible secrecy. In support of his claim, Springett quotes from R. W. Postgate's work, The Builders' History, as follows The various Acts passed between 1799 and 181 o, under which all combinations were forbidden and heavy penalties for infraction from time to time enforced, drove those trades whose organizations did not disappear, to more secret organiza tion. Some, such as the London tailors, went in for a semi‑military system. The Building Unions practised the oaths and initiations, which played such a large part in their later history. Without, like some trades, seeking to extend their clubs beyond the limits of a small town, they confined themselves to the little local clubs, which were the predecessors of the modern Trade Union movements. These did not disappear. All over England and Scotland the skilled craftsman continued to hold the fortnightly meetings of his trade club at the public‑house and the records and rules of some of these clubs have survived. The old traditions were very strong and the desire for mutual improvement, as men and as craftsmen, was very marked. The Falkirk Society excluded all lewd, disorderly and fractious persons and drunkards, swearers and Sabbath‑breakers. Other societies, such as the Newcastle Operative Masons, stressed the improvement effected in man's nature by association. In some cases there was also a rule against the introduction of politics as destructive of harmony.


The festive nature of these gatherings must not be forgotten. The Masons' Society and the two Carpenters' Societies, which existed at Newcastle, had rules to the effect that two pence per night must be spent on beer by every member, while the first entries in the Preston Joiners' Cash‑book, 18o7‑perhaps the oldest remaining Trade Union document‑relate to the purchase of beer.


There is also the following quotation from Sidney Webb's History of Trade Unionism The Operative Builders did not rest content with an elaborate constitution and code. There was also a ritual. The Stonemasons' Society has preserved amongst its records a manuscript copy of a " Making Parts Book," ordered to be used by all Lodges of the Builders' Union on the admission of members. Under the Combination Laws, oaths of secrecy and obedience were customary in the more secret and turbulent Trade Unions, notably that of the Glasgow Cotton Spinners and the Northumbrian Miners. The custom survived the repeal and admission to the Builders' Union involved a very lengthy ceremony, conducted by the officers of the Lodge: the outside and inside Tylers, the Warden, the President, the Secretary and the Principal Conductor and taken part in by the candidates and the mem bers of the Lodge. Besides the opening prayer and the religious hymns sung at intervals, these " Initiation parts " consisted of questions and answers by the dramatic personae, in quaint doggerel and were brought to a close by the new members taking an oath of secrecy. Officers clothed in surplices, inner chambers into which the candidates were admitted blindfolded, a skeleton, drawn sword, battle‑axes and other mystic properties enhanced the sensational solemnity of this fantastic performance. Ceremonies of this kind, including what were described, in Home MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY Office Papers of 1834, as " oaths of an execrable character" were adopted by all the national and general unions of the time. Thus, we find items "I for washing surplices " appearing in the accounts of various Lodges of contemporary societies.


Webb, referring to a printed edition of The Initiating Parts of the Friendly Society of Operative Masons, issued from Birmingham, in 1834, in which the name of Solomon is substituted for that of King Edward the Third, says The actual origin of this initiation ceremony is unknown. John Tester, who had been a leader of the Bradford Woolcombers, in 1825, afterwards turned against the Unions and published, in the Leeds Mercury of June and July, 1834, a series of letters denouncing the Leeds Clothiers' Union. In these he states " the mode of initiation was the same as practised for years before by the flannel‑weavers of Rochdale, with a party, of whom the thing, in the shape it then wore, had at first originated. A great part of the ceremony, particularly the death scene, was taken from the Oddfellows, who were flannel‑weavers at Rochdale, in Lancashire and all that could be well turned from the rules and lectures of the one society into the regulations of the others was so turned, with some trifling verbal alterations." Springett gives lengthy extracts from the MS. Ritual of the Stonemasons, of the " Form of Making " adopted and the facsimiles of two pages of the Accountbook of the Warrington Stone Masons' Lodge, 183 z ; and he remarks : " It is an interesting coincidence that one of the first initiations recorded, that of Elias Ashmole, took place in an Operative Masons Lodge at Warrington, in 1645." But was that an Operative Lodge ? All the names made public by Ashmole are those of landed gentry and county people.


MASONS' MARKS GEORGE GODWIN, F.R.S., F.S.A., editor of the Builder, has justly claimed that, in early days, he noticed the fact, now well known, but not so then, that the stones of many old churches bore peculiar marks, the work of the original builders ; and that, so long ago as 1841, he submitted a communication on the subject to the Society of Antiquaries, which, with a second memoir on the same subject and transcripts of 158 of the marks from England, France and Germany, was printed in the Archaologia (Transactions R.LB.A., 1868‑9, pp. 135‑44). Godwin's letters brought these signs under public observation and, in the interval between the dates upon which they were written‑December 16, 1841 and February z, 1843‑M. Didron of Paris communicated a series of observations on marks to the Comite historique des Arts et Monuments, which Godwin notices in his second letter to Sir H. Ellis, F.R.S. (Archaologia, 1844, vol. xxx, pp. I I3‑zO). The marks collected by M. Didron divide themselves, according to his opinion, into two classes‑those of the overseers and those of the men who worked the stones. The marks of the first class consist generally of monogrammatic characters and are placed separately on the stones ; those of the second class partake more of the nature of symbols, such as shoes, trowels, mallets, etc. It is stated that at Rheims, in one of the portals, the lowest of the stones forming one of the arcades is marked with a kind of monogrammatic character and the outline of a sole of a shoe. The stone above it has the same character and two soles of shoes ; the third the same character and three soles ; and so on, all round the arcade. The shoe mark he found also at Strasburg and nowhere else; he accounts for this by the fact that parts of the cathedral of Rheims were executed by masons brought from Strasburg.


The marks on both English and French buildings, for the most part, vary in length from z to 7 inches, those found at Cologne from il‑ to z inches ; and were chiefly made, Godwin believes, to distinguish the work of different individuals. At the present time the man who works a stone (being different from the man who sets it) makes his mark on the bed or other internal face of it, so that it may be identified. The fact, however, that in the ancient buildings it is only a certain number of the stones which bear symbols‑that the marks found in different countries (although the variety is great) are in many cases identical ; and, in all, have a singular accordance in character, in the opinion of the same writer‑seems to show that the men who employed them did so by system and that the system, if not the same in England, Germany and France, was closely 14z MASONS' MARKS 143 analogous in one country to that of the others. Moreover, adds Godwin, many of the signs are evidently religious and symbolical and agree fully with our notions of the body of men known as the Freemasons. In a paper, read at the Institute of British Architects, March 14, A36, published in the Architectural Magazine, vol. iii, p. 193 (on the " Institution of Free‑Masonry," by George Godwin, architect), the author quotes extensively from the Parentalia, Pownall and Hope's Essays and Dallaway's Discourses and was evidently deeply imbued with the erroneous teaching which reached its culminating point in the attractive pages of Hope.


Godwin's communications gave a great impetus to the study of this branch of archxological research: he remarks with good reason, in 1869, " It is curious how long a thing may remain unseen until it has been pointed out " ; and records the observation of an old French priest, to whom he had shown the marks with which the walls of his church in Poictiers were literally strewn : " I have walked through this church four times a day, twenty‑eight times a week, for nearly forty years and never noticed one of them; now I cannot look anywhere but they flit into my eyes." Chalmers (A50) thought that mason's marks had, if they have not now, a mystical meaning, their primary use being to denote the work of each mason employed in hewing or preparing stones for any building: first, that, if paid by the piece, each man may have his work measured without dispute; second, that if work be badly done, or an error made, it may at once be seen on whom to throw the blame and by whom, or at whose expense, the fault is to be amended.


It was a law in St. Ninian's Lodge at Brechin that every mason should register his mark in a book and he could not change that mark at pleasure. The marks differ in no respect in character from those which were brought into notice by Godwin. To the inquiry, on what principle, or according to what rule, these marks were formed, Scottish masons generally replied, " That they probably had in early times a meaning now unknown and are still regarded with a sort of reverence ; that the only rule for their formation is, that they shall have at least one angle; that the circle must be avoided and cannot be a true mason's mark unless in combination with some line that shall form an angle with it [Fallon asserts that the apprentice Steinmetzen, at the conclusion of his term, received a mark, which always contained one right angle or square‑Mysterien der Freimaurer, p. 68] ; that there is no distinction of ranks‑that is, that there is no particular class of marks set apart for and assigned to master masons as distinguished from their workmen ; and if it should happen that two masons meeting at the same work from distant parts should have the same mark, then one must for a time assume a distinction, or, as heralds say, ` a difference' " (Patrick Chalmers, F.S.A., " On the Use of Mason Marks in Scotland," Archaologia, 18 S z, vol. xxxiv, pp. 3 3‑6). An intelligent English stonemason once stated to G. W. Speth, " We choose a mark and then, if on our travels, we find that some other mason uses a similar one, we alter ours in some slight particular." 144 MASONS' MARKS The Irish craftsmen and masons of the Middle Ages, it is said, not only had private marks, but also a dialect called Bearlagair‑na‑Sair, which was unknown to any but the initiated of their own callings ; and the writer who is responsible for this statement asserts that this dialect is still in use among masons (though not exclusively confined to them) in the counties of Limerick, Clare, Waterford and Cork (E. Fitzgerald, architect, On Ancient Mason Marks at Youghal and Elsemhere ; and the Secret Language of the Craftsmen of the Middle Ages in Ireland (Transactions, Kilkenny Archxological Society, vol. ii, new series, p. 67).


Upon the question as to whether or not marks were heritable by descent from father to son, the highest authority on Scottish Masonry says, " We have been able to discover in the Mary Chapel records only one instance of a craftsman having adopted his deceased father's mark " (Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, pp. 68, 69).


Lyon continues, " Whatever may have been their original signification as exponents of a secret language‑a position which is assigned to them by some writers‑there is no ground for believing that in the choice of these marks the sixteenth‑century masons were guided by any consideration of their symbolical quality, or of their relation to the propositions of Euclid." A view which has been very generally received is that the shorthand signatures or markings which masons have for centuries been in the habit of cutting on the stones wrought or hewn by them, may be all included in two classes : the false or blind mark of the apprentice, displaying an equal number of points and the true mark of the fellow‑craft or passed mason, consisting of an unequal number of points (Proceedings Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 1863, vol. iv, p. 548). Indeed, the late E. W. Shaw, who had made a collection of i i,ooo marks, professed his ability to discriminate between the marks of the master masons, fellow‑crafts and apprentices and the " blind marks," as he termed them, of those hired to work, but who were not members of the guild. Two marks not infrequently occur on the same stone, showing, according to one view, that it had been hewn by the apprentice and finished or passed as correct by the mason; and, in the opinion of other authorities, that the second mark belonged to the overseer (Didron, Godwin and Papworth). The Chevalier da Silva, in a memoir presented at a meeting of the Institute of British Architects (Transactions R.LB.A., 1868‑9, p. 139), gave 522 marks from ancient buildings in Portugal and the design of his paper was to show that the opinion of those who have believed that these marks have a Masonic signification cannot for a moment be entertained. The Chevalier's strongest reason for this belief‑although, as Godwin well puts it, English archxologists hardly need any argument to convince them that the marks are not symbolical ‑is thus expressed Adepts were summoned from all parts to work at the buildings in Portugal; and as the works progressed but slowly, not only on account of the enormous size of the edifices, but more especially because cut stones of small dimensions were employed and, all buildings being constructed with stones faced on every side, the MASONS' MARKS 145 hand labour was greatly increased; the only means available to avoid this inconvenience and hasten the works and, at the same time, to benefit the workmen, was to make them cut the stones as piecework, according to the dimensions given and designs drawn by the architect. To enable payments to be made to so large a number of workmen without mistake, to know exactly those who had done the various duties assigned to them, the workmen shaped their blocks one after another; and, to avoid confusion in their work, were in the habit of marking each block with a given sign, as representing their signature, so as to show how much was due to them.


If, however, we admit the probability, or, as Godwin expresses it, the fact, that the guilds adopted existing forms and symbols without considering the marks symbolical, we may yet believe that they owe their wide diffusion to the existence of associated guilds. " The general similarity which they present all over Europe, from, at any rate, the eleventh century to the sixteenth and, indeed, to the present day," points, as Godwin well observes, " to a common origin and continued transmission." Inasmuch, indeed, as monograms or symbols were adopted in all countries from very early times as distinctive devices or " trade marks," whereby the work or goods of the owners or makers could be identified, it is fairly inferential that masons' marks have been brought more prominently under notice from the simple fact of their having been impressed upon more durable material than was the case with the members of other trades.


Merchants, ecclesiastics and other persons of respectability, not entitled to bear arms, adopted " marks or notes of those trades and professions which they used and merchants (for their more honour) were allowed to bear the first letters of their names and surnames interlaced with a cross " (Favyn, Le Thedtre d'Honneur, Paris, 1623).


In the yard or'garden of the convent of the Franciscans or Greyfriars, now called the Hosvf (" a place of frequent resort," Jamieson's Scottish Dictionary) of Dundee, may still be seen many tombstones ornamented with both armorial and mercantile emblems and monograms, those of burgesses bearing, in many instances, carvings of objects illustrative of their crafts or trades. Thus, the scissors or goose is found on the tomb of the tailor; the glove, on that of the skinner ; the hammer and crown or anvil, on that of the blacksmith; the loom or shuttle, on that of the weaver; the compasses and square, on that of the mason; the expanded compasses or saw, on that of the wright, etc.


Some of the older monuments present the more interesting figures known as monograms or merchants' marks. Both are objects of high antiquity, particularly the monogram or cypher, which is formed of interlaced letters. Soon after the introduction of printing into England, both monograms and merchants' marks were pretty generally adopted and placed by artists in the corners of paintings and engravings ; by printers and publishers, on the first and last pages of the books they issued; and tradesmen in general used them, not only as signs or distinguishing 146 MASONS' MARKS marks over the doors of their shops, but as stamps and labels on the cloth or other goods in which they dealt. (See A. Jervise, Memorials of An gus and the Mearns, 1864, pp. 193, 195‑7‑) In two statutes of uncertain date, one of which has been variously ascribed to the fifty‑first year of Henry 111 (1266) and the thirteenth of Edward I (1285) while the other is stated, in some copies, to have been enacted in the fourteenth of Edward I (iz86), occur very early allusions to the custom or requirement of affixing a mark. The former of these laws ordains, that " every baker shall have a mark (signum) of his own for each sort of his bread " ; and the latter, which, on a deficiency of freemen, allows " the best and most discreet bondsmen " to serve on an inquest, stipulates that " each shall have a seal " (e ke checun eyt seal). In 1363, it was enacted, that every master goldsmith " shall have a mark by himself " (un merche a par lui) and set it to his work; in 1389‑go, "that the workers, weavers, and fullers shall put their seals (lour signer) to every cloth that they shall work " ; and in 1444‑5, that no worsted weaver shall make any worsted, " except he put upon the same his sign." A similar duty was imposed upon workers in the precious metals, by the statutes of Edward IV and Henry VII respectively. In 1477‑8, it was ordained, " that things wrought of silver were to be marked with the Leopard's Head and the workman's mark or sign (marke ou signe) " ; and in 1488‑9, that " every fyner of golde and sylver put his severall merke upon such, to bere witnes the same to be true." In 1491, " the chief officer for the tyme beying in every cite towne, or borough," was required to have " a speciall marke or seal, to marke every weight and mesure to be reformed." The last enactment in the reign of Henry VII, bearing upon this subject, has the singular title of " Pewtrer's Walkying " and is levelled against travelling tinkers and traffickers in metal, the prototypes in fact of our modern " Marine‑store Dealer." They are described as " possessing deceivable and untrue beams and scales, whereof one of them would stand even with twelve pounds weight at one end against a quarter of a pound at the other end " and the law requires, " that the makers of all hollow wares of pewter, shall marke the same with [the] severall marks of their owne." The last statute to be quoted is of date 15 31 and by it brewers were restrained from " occupying the mystery of a cooper," or making any vessel for the sale of beer, which, in all cases, were to be made " by the common artificers of coopers " ; it being further enacted, " that every cooper mark his vessell with his owne marke." In the City of London, by various ordinances, confirmed by the civic authorities, the blacksmiths (1372), bladesmiths (14o8) and braziers (1416), of London, were required " to use and put their own mark upon their own work." I. Although the first two sets of marks on the accompanying plate are taken from English buildings, with scarcely an exception, the same may be found in all parts of the world. The seven earliest numbers have been selected by Godwin as the marks most widely used, which are to be met with in different countries. The hour‑glass form (1) is perhaps the most common of all types and, whilst employed in nearly every land as a cypher by operative workmen, appears never‑ MASONS' MARKS 147 theless in a large proportion of the ancient inscriptions and alphabets that have come down to us (Arcbaologia, vol. xxx, pl. iii). Many examples of this mark are given in these plates, of which perhaps the most curious is No. ioo (opposite page 150).


The letter N symbol which appears on the coins of the Ariarathes, a series of Persian kings who lived before Christ, is infinitely diversified. Of this an instance is presented in No. 44, a mark also found at Kilwinning Abbey, Canterbury and other places, as well as amongst the Arab " Wasm " and upon gnostic gems. In this figure or letter Dove thinks we have something like an equivalent for the sexual union of the V and the A on the feminine and masculine symbols of the Egyptians (Builder, June 6, 1863).


The Vesica Piscis, which has already been referred to, was constantly used as a builder's emblem. Fort suggests that the fish was typified by ancient notions and appropriated by the Christians with other Pagan symbols (Early History of Free masonry, p. 3 5 7), but the origin of this emblem must be looked for in the Hindu sectarial marks, denoting the followers of Siva and Parvati (93), which, in their general form, symbolize the female principle of nature. The trident is one of the attributes of Parvati and this form (io) is of very frequent appearance in the East; two varieties are shown in the examples of Arab Wasm (105, 107) and others are to be found amongst the marks collected by Sir W. Ouseley and W. T. Creed (Transactions, Cumberland and Ilestmorland Antiquarian and Archeological Society, 1880).


II. The second set of marks is from Carlisle Abbey, selected from the 316 specimens published in the paper last cited. The fourth in this row (14) is a curious form, unlike any other English mark that has come under notice, though it possesses some affinity with Nos. 33 and ioi, also with a mark of the Kilwinning Lodge, given by Lyon at p. 67 of his history and, to a greater extent, with one of the specimens from Jedburgh Abbey, published by Dr. Smith. In a closely analogous formed out of lines set at various angles to each othe7,r intermingled with dots, which is frequently met with on gnostic gems, Bellermann professes to trace the sacred divining‑lots‑figures produced by the accidental juxtaposition of little sticks and balls.


III. This series exhibits some curious varieties of the hour‑glass or " lama " form. No. 23, which also occurs at St. Giles's Church, Edinburgh, Furness Abbey and elsewhere, is identical with No. 88. (See Arcbaologia, vol. xxxiv, pl. iii.) IV. The Irish specimens present some novel features. The three first (31‑3) in their general character resemble the Arab Wasm (XI). No. 37 constitutes a type of itself and the last three figures (38‑4o) are singularly unlike any thing to be found in the collections' (Transactions, Kilkenny Archaological Society, vol. ii, new series, p. 67).


V. The French examples are taken from the Annales Archeologiques, but ampler varieties have been reproduced by Godwin in the publications already mentioned.


148 MASONS' MARKS VI. The German types (ArcbTologia, vol. xxx, pl. x) are abundantly illustrated by the collector drawn upon for the specimens annexed (5 i‑6o) (Transactions R.LB.A., 1868‑9). The fifth mark (55) in this row‑a form of the figure 4‑may be traced throughout many ramifications in the collections from which quoted. No. 56, a cross cramponnee, or two intersecting straight lines with angled arms, is a noted Hindu symbol (98). It is also known as the Swastika and Fylfot and a specimen appearing on a Roman altar in Alnwick Castle has been described by Lord Broughton as denoting the hammer or mace of the Scandinavian god Thor. It is seen with Thor on various medals and on Runic monuments and also occurs in the minster at Basle. With reference to the connexion of the Scandinavians with Italy, Sir William Betham (Etrurio Celtica) shows an Etruscan coin with this symbol on it. Besides the Roman stones worked in rude patterns with the pick, either in straight lines, diamond pattern, or basket‑work, as occasionally found on Hadrian's Wall, some are marked with a plain St. Andrew's Cross (J. Collingwood Bruce, The Roman Ball, 1867, p. 83). Bruce, when figuring some of the marks on Roman stones, thus remarks on those taken by Horsley to be numeral letters, denoting the number of the cohorts In all probability, the marks in question are the result of the caprice of the stonemasons. The editor has seen many examples of stones scored in the way which Horsley represents (some of which are shown in the woodcuts), but which he thinks partake more of the nature of masons' marks than of Roman numerals. Sometimes a simple cross will be observed, sometimes two parallel strokes, occasionally, as in Horsley's No. XVII, a " broad arrow." One of the examples which our great antiquary gives under No. XVI is what masons call diamond broaching and is very common. Stones thus scored occur chiefly in the separations of the wall and the stations. The stones used in Hadrian's original erection are severely plain.


The late Thomas Wright, M.A. (The Celt, the Roman and the Saxon, 1875,p'. 183), mentions that the " masons' marks are often found on Roman buildings and resemble most closely those of the masons of the Middle Ages. Sometimes they consist of a letter, perhaps the initial of the mason's name, but they are more usually crosses, triangles and other geometrical figures." Though enough has been said to show that such were in use by the Romans in Britain, one more example may be quoted, if indeed it be a mason's mark. It is found on an altar at Habitancum and dedicated to the goddess Fortuna by Julius Severinus, on the completion of a bath (Bruce, The Roman Wall, 1867, p. 335). The incised figure or mark resembles a cross potent fitchde, as a herald would call it, except that the crutch ends are only on the side‑arms, the uppermost arms being a distinct cross, thus, The Romans also marked their building tiles, but for the most part with an inscription indicating the troops or officials by whom or under whose directions the buildings were erected.


MASONS' MARKS 149 VII. These (ArcbTologia, vol. xxxiv, pl. iv) are the marks of a Lodge of Freemasons. Numerous examples of this class of cypher are given by Lyon in his noted work. An early instance of a "mason" who was not an operative being elected to rule over his Brethren, is afforded by the records of the Lodge of Aberdeen, 1670, under which year appears the mark of Harry Elphingston, " Tutor of Airth and Collector of the Kinges Customes," master, or a past master, of the Lodge. At the same date is found also the cypher of Maister Georg Liddell, " Professor of Mathematickes." VIII. The marks of the Strasburg architects are taken from the Annales Archeologiques. The seal from which figure No. 71 is extracted is described as that of " Pierre Bischof d'Algesheim, one of the master stone‑cutters (maitres tailleurs de Pierre) who were received into the new brotherhood (confrerie) of the year 1464. Bischof, one of the chief promoters of this association, was afterwards master of the works (maitre‑d'oeuvre) of the city " (Strasburg). The two following marks are those respectively of Masters Mark Wendlind and Laurent de Vedenheim. Nos. 75‑9 are from monograms and emblems on tombstones at the Hozvf of Dundee. No. 75, which appears on a monument referring to the Mudie family, is identical with the craft cyphers of Scottish and German stonemasons (24, 83) ; and the anchor (76) fitly marks the last resting‑place of a sailor. The 4 mark (77), differing but slightly from a cypher in St. Giles's Cathedral, Edinburgh (Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, photo facing p. 67, fig. 3), is of date 15 82. The marks of John and James Goldman, father and son, A.D. 1607, are represented in figure 78. Next follows the monogram of William Chaplane (79), from a monument erected in memory of his wife (1603).


The last of this series is the cypher of Telford, the celebrated engineer, of whom Smiles records, that " many of the stones composing the bridge over the Esk, at Langholm, were hewn by his hand and, on several of the blocks forming the land‑breast, his tool‑mark is still to be seen " (Life of Thomas Telford, 1867, p. 116). Telford's mark is almost exactly presented in one of the alphabets, which the erudite Von Hammer claims to have rescued from oblivion (Von Hammer, The Alphabets of the Seven Planets, sec. v, pp. 10, 51) t . Yet probably no one would be more astonished than the worthy engineer, were he still amongst us, to hear of the similarity.


IX. The fourth mark of the SteinmetZen is taken from Heimsch (Masonic Monthly, July 188z), the preceding ones from Stieglitz (Ober die Kirche der Heiligen Kunigunde, Leipzig, 1829, Appendix iii). For those of the carpenters No. 85 is the mark of John Fitzjohn, master, 1573, from a book of that date ; the others from a handsomely carved mantelpiece, of 1579, erected during the mastership of Thomas Harper (86) and the wardenship of Anthonie Bear (87). The marks of the tylers and bricklayers are from Godwin's collection.


X. The Hindu symbols (Moor, Hindu Pantheon, pl. ii) present many forms with which Freemasons are familiar. The U figure (92) occurs very frequently 150 MASONS' MARKS in Spain and has also been copied by Sir W. Ouseley from an ancient palace near Ispahan (Travels in Various Countries of the East, 1823, pl. lxxxii). In others the sexual origin of all things is indicated (93‑7), the most prevalent being the equi lateral triangle. The Hexalpha (95) represents the two elements in conjunction; and with a right angle bisected by a line (97), worshippers of Sacti, the female principle, mark their sacred jars, as in like manner the votaries of Isis inscribed the sacred vase of their goddess before using it at her rites (Transactions R.LB.A., 1859‑6o, p. 97). The latter symbol, which is to be found in the Lycian and other alphabets, also corresponds with the broad arrow, used to denote Crownproperty, formed one of the apprentice " marks " in the Lodge of Aberdeen, 167o and occurs in all countries where masons' marks are perceptible.


The Rose (99) is uncommon, yet amongst the weapons belonging to the stone period found in Denmark are many flint mallets, cross‑shaped, presenting this appearance, with a hole at the intersection for the haft to be inserted. An exact counterpart of the Hindu symbol was found by Hughan in the crypt of Canterbury Cathedral; but with these two exceptions, the mark under examination is unknown to Western collectors. The last three specimens in this series (98‑loo) are rare forms of the Hindu sectarial marks and belong rather to certain great families than to religious sects.


XI. These graffitti, or scratchings, are characters adopted by Arabs to distinguish one tribe from another, commonly used for branding the camels on the shoulders and haunches, by which means the animals may be recovered, if straying and found by Arabs not hostile to the owners. They are found also scratched upon the walls in many places frequented by Bedawin, as, for instance, in the ruined convents, churches, etc., on the plain of the Jordan ; occasionally, as at Amman, several such cyphers are united into one complex character (James Finn, Byways in Palestine, 1868, Appendix A, pp. 453, 454). The custom, however, has many interpretations. According to some, it denotes the terminus of a successful raid ; others make it show where a dispute was settled without bloodshed; but as a rule it may be regarded as an expression of gratitude (R. F. Burton, The Land of Midian, 1879, vol. i, p. 320 ; vol. ii, p. 156). Burton says, " that the Wasm in most cases showed some form of a cross, which is held to be a potent charm by the Sinaitic Bedawin " and is further of opinion that the custom is dying out.


Describing the ruins of Al Hadhr, W. F. A. Ainsworth observes Every stone, not only in the chief buildings, but in the walls and bastions and other public monuments, when not defaced by time, is marked with a character, amongst which were very common the ancient mirror and handle, 9 (io2, io8), emblematical of Venus, the Mylitta of the Assyrians and Alitta of the Arabians, according to Herodotus ; and the Nani of the Syrians (Travels and Researches in Asia Minor, etc., 1842, vo1. ii, p. 167).


The last cypher (iio) is styled by Burton the "Camel stick." XII. The examples of compound marks are mainly taken from Godwin's collection (Transactions R.LB.A., 1868‑9, pp. 135‑44) ; the Scottish specimen MASONS' MARKS 151 is from the plate attached to Dr. Smith's paper, already referred to ; and the three last figures, from East of the Jordan, by Selah Merrill (1881), pp. 5 5, 151. M. da Silva thought, " that the second mark, added to the special sign used by them, was always the same for an entire family, these marks being usually a zero, p ; a triangle, a disc, o ; or a small cross, +." In the examples given from Portugal and Spain the second mark is chiefly a circle, but in England the N form and the acute angle, <, have by Godwin been generally found to be so used. This careful observer has met with four stones in one wall, nearly close together, each bearing two marks, wh ilst no two of the eigh marks were alike.


Ainsworth says that the marks at Al Hadhr were carefully sculptured, one in the centre of every stone but, as a general rule, the cyphers are traced without any regard to uniformity or position. At the mosque and reservoir at Bozrah Merrill noticed many stones with marks upon them, but there were only four varieties : (i) r was on those of the north wall; (z) % on those of the east wall; (3) O on those of the south wall; (4) f on those of the west wall. In the west wall he counted upwards of one hundred and sixty stones which had this mark. It is singular and noteworthy that many of the stones, however, bore no mark at all.


That workmen have been accustomed to mark the product of their labour from very early times is indisputable. In default of stone, the Chaldeans used bricks, sometimes of unbaked clay hardened by the heat of the sun. The curious archaic characters, with which they stamped on the bricks the name of the king who built the temple, the name of the god or goddess to whom it was dedicated, taken separately, might very well pass for masons' marks of a later age. Like the Chaldeans, the Assyrians, in all probability, stamped the inscription upon their bricks with a solid stamp. But, unlike the Chaldeans, who impressed the characters on a small square near the centre of the broad faces of the bricks, the writing of the Assyrians either covered the whole face or else ran along the edge.


The Babylonians, like the early Chaldeans, seem to have used almost entirely bricks in their constructions and, like them, impressed the inscription on the broad face of the brick, in a square, with a solid stamp.


The Egyptians stamped their bricks with the cartouche of the king, or with the name and titles of a priest or other influential person (Voyage en 1gyyte, 1830‑6, Paris, pls. lxxxviii‑xci). A number of these marks are figured by Rifaud and represent hieroglyphic characters, numerals, etc. They are supposed to date from about the fourth dynasty and the marks were traced upon the bricks with the finger. The bricks bearing cartouches impressed with a stamp date from the eighteenth dynasty ; but we must not forget the masons' marks, scrawled in red pigment, within the great pyramid, the cartouche of King Cheops, etc., etc.


In the fifth dynasty, the porcelain tiles were marked on the back with numerals, 152 MASONS' MARKS to facilitate their arrangement; those found at Tel‑el‑Yahoudeh bear on the back both hieroglyphics and, in some instances, Greek letters.


Each Roman brickmaker had his mark, such as the figure of a god, a plant, or an animal, encircled by his own name, often with the name of the place, of the consulate, or the owner of the kiln or brickfield (Seroux d'Agincourt, Rec. de Fragmens, pp. 8z‑8). No marks of this kind have been observed on any brick or tile found at York, though many of these have the inscription, Leg. vi, or Vic., or Leg. ix, His. or Hisp., stamped upon them. In the same city, however, several fragments of amphorx have been discovered, from which it appears that the name of the potter was commonly stamped on one of the handles or the neck. This vessel was used for holding olives, oil, or honey, but especially wine (Wellbeloved, Eboracum, pp. 118, 121).


An eloquent writer has described the finding of masons' marks at Jerusalem as one of their " capital discoveries," coming upon the explorers " like flashes of morning light " (Hepworth Dixon, Gentleman's Magazine, October 1876). Emanuel Deutsch arrived in Jerusalem while the shaft was open and went down it to inspect this record of his race. In the port of Sidon he afterwards found marks of the same kind and, after careful weighing of the evidence, came to the following conclusions : (i) The marks on the temple stones are Phcenician ; (z) they are quarry‑signs, not writings or inscriptions.


As Herod employed Greek artisans, who knew nothing of Phcenician letters and numerals, Hepworth Dixon is probably right in alluding to the " masons' marks " as " one of their capital discoveries," because, as he contends, in the first place, they settle the question of whether the work was Solomonic or Herodean ; and, in the second place, they prove the literary accuracy of the text in Kings, that workmen from Tyre were employed in quarrying these stones for the Temple wall. Josephus gives two accounts of Solomon's buildings on the Temple hill and these accounts unhappily disagree, which has led Lewin to the charitable conclusion that the Jewish historian made his first statement before he had studied his subject with much care. A difficulty is admitted, but our discovery removes suspicion from the sacred text, " Solomon's builders and Hiram's builders did hew them." In the presence of our Phoenician marks, it is impossible to doubt that Hiram's builders did also help to hew these stones (Gentleman's Magazine, October 1876, p. 491).


In inquiries of this character one cannot be too careful not to confound what may be the effect of chance or idle amusement, with letters or syllabic characters. Truter relates, that in the southern extremity of Africa, among the Betjuanas, he saw children busy in tracing on a rock, with some sharp instrument, characters, which bore the most perfect resemblance to the P and the M of the Roman alphabet ; notwithstanding which, these rude tribes were perfectly ignorant of writing (cited in Humboldt's Researches, vol. i, p. 154). Probably nothing would have more astonished the workmen of past ages, than the interpretation which has been placed on their ancient signatures. For any practicable purpose, collections of marks MASONS' MARKS 153 are alone valuable in determining whether the same workmen were employed, to any great extent, upon buildings in the same countries. To settle this point, the resemblance between the most frequently recurring marks should be carefully noted. To do this effectually, however, many thousand specimens would have to be collated and it seems more than probable that until a successor to the late Mr. Shaw, in zeal and assiduity, arises, no comprehensive study of " Masons' Marks," or, as King styles them, " enigmatical symbols," will be either practicable or desirable. Many communications on this subject, accompanied in some instances by tracings or copies of marks, have been published in the Builder and in the Masonic journals ; of these, the disquisition by Dove in the former (1863) and the papers of the late Dr. Somerville (Freemason's Quarterly Magazine, 1851, p. 450 ; 1852, p. 316) in the latter, will well repay perusal. In the Keystone (Philadelphia) of January ig, 1878, reference is made to Dr. Back's collection of stone marks copied by him from German churches and other edifices, but of this work there is no copy in the British Museum or other libraries to which access is easy.


THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS HE only evidence of the existence of Freemasonry in England before the initiation or admission of Elias Ashmole in 1646, lies scattered in the Old Charges, or Constitutions, the records of the building trades and the statutes of the realm.


In preceding chapters all the manuscripts with which Freemasons have any direct concern have been examined and an effort has been made to trace the actual designers of those marvels of operative masonry that have come down, by means of the mute yet eloquent testimony of the structures themselves, which amply attest the ingenuity, if not in all cases the individuality, of the skilled workmen by whom they were designed.


Since the year 1686, when Dr. Plot, in his History of Staffordshire, cited the stat. 3 Hen. VI, c. i, no Masonic work which has appeared is without this reference Yet there is scarcely an instance of the research having extended beyond this par ticular statute, even to those relating to the same subject‑matter. The law of 1425 was one of the long series familiarly known as the Statutes of Labourers, which, originating with the Plantagenets, continued in operation until the present century.


The great plague of 1348 and the consequent depopulation gave origin to the Ordinance of Labourers, A.D. 1349, afterwards by stat. 3 Rich. II, st. I, c. viii, made an Act of Parliament or statute and described as stat. 23 Edw. III.


In the twenty‑fifth year of the king, the Commons complained in Parliament that this ordinance was not observed; wherefore a statute was made ordaining further regulations on the subject. It has been asserted that the laws now under consideration were passed in punishment of the contumacious masons at Windsor Castle, assembled there by Edward III under the direction of William of Wykeham, the comptroller of the royal works, who refused their wages, and withdrew from their engagements (see Dallaway, Discourses upon Architecture, p. 425). The king's method of conducting the work has been referred to by Hume (History of England, 1822, vol. ii, p. 472) as a specimen of the condition of the people in that age. Instead of engaging workmen by contracts and wages, he assessed every county in England to send him a certain number of masons, tilers and carpenters, as if he had been levying an army (see Ashmole's History of the Garter, p. 12q, and Stow's London, 1720, vol. i, p. 79). There were, however, many influences combining to bring into play the full machinery of the legislation it is proposed to examine. Between the Conquest and the reign of Edward III there had sprung up a middle class of men, who, although they did not immediately acquire the full 154 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 155 power of selling their labour to the best bidder, nevertheless were exempt from the imperious caprices of a master and the unconditional services of personal bondage (Eldon, State of the Poor, 1797, vol. i, p. 12). From a dialogue, written by Thynne, Lancaster Herald, dedicated to James I, in which the point is discussed, whether the king can confer knighthood on a villein, it would appear that some few of these bondmen still continued after the reign of Queen Elizabeth (Daines Barrington, Observations on the more Ancient Statutes, 1796, p. 309). Still the process of manumission had been very general from the twelfth year of Edward III, whose long wars in France obliged him to confer freedom upon many of his villeins, in order to recruit his exhausted armies and, if a bondman could escape the pursuit of his lord for a year, he became free for ever. With the liberation of the bond handicraftsmen from bondage proper, many of the companies into which they had been ranged passed gradually over into the number of free craft guilds. The freemen of rank and large possessions, who felt themselves powerful enough to secure their own protection, found, as the strong are ever wont to do, their interest to be more in a system of mutual feuds, that is, of free competition among themselves, than in associations and mutual pledges. But the less powerful, the small freemen, sought, as the weak always do, protection for themselves in confederating into close unions and formed the guilds for that purpose (Brentano, On the History and Development of Gilds, p. 5 3). The struggle between the rising craft‑guilds of London and the body of the citizens has been carefully narrated by Brentano, by whom the triumph of the former over the latter is stated to have been fully achieved in the reign of Edward III.


The privileges which they had till then exercised only on sufferance, or on payment of their fermes (dues), were now for the first time generally confirmed to them by a charter of Edward III. The authorities of the city of London, who had in former times contended with all their might against the craft guilds, now approved of their statutes; and, in the fourteenth century, a large majority of the trades appeared before the mayor and aldermen to get their ordinances enrolled. At the same time they adopted a particular livery and were hence called Livery Companies. Edward III himself actually became a member of one of them‑that of the Linen‑armourers‑and his example found numerous imitators amongst his successors and the nobility of the kingdom " (cf. Herbert, Companies of London, vol. i, pp. 28‑9).


The visitation of the Black Death, a dreadful pestilence which first appeared in Asia and, thence, spread throughout the world, brought the opposition between the interests of the working‑class and the employers for the first time on a large scale to a crisis. Of the three or four millions who then formed the population of England, more than one‑half were swept away. The whole organiza tion of labour was thrown out of gear. There was a great rise of wages ; the farmers of the country, as well as the wealthier craftsmen of the towns, saw themselves threatened with ruin by what seemed to their age the extravagant demands of the labour class. But sterner measures were soon found to be necessary. Not 156 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS only was the price of labour fixed by the Parliament of 13 5 o, but the labour class was once more tied to the soil (Green, History of the English People, 1877, pp. 4z9‑3I). Even before the reign of Edward I, says Sir F. Eden (Eden, State of the Poor, vol. i, pp. i z‑i 5 ), the condition of the villein was greatly meliorated. He was indeed bound to perform certain stipulated work for his lord, generally at sowing time and harvest; but, at other times of the year, he was at liberty to exercise his industry for his own benefit. As early as the year 1257, a servile tenant, if employed before midsummer, received wages ; and, in Edward I's reign, he was permitted, instead of working himself, to provide a labourer for the lord; from which it is obvious, that he must have sometimes possessed the means of hiring one; and it is natural to suppose that the labourers so hired were not pure villeins, but rather tenants by villeinage, who could assist their neighbours on their spare days, or free labourers, who existed‑although, perhaps, not in great numbers‑long before the parliamentary notice taken of them in the Statute of Labourers, passed in 1350.


We thus see that, already fully occupied with foreign conquest and Scottish incursions, the depopulation of the country from the ravages of the " Black Death " cast upon Edward the attempted solution of many problems, at once social and political, which it is no disparagement to that great monarch to say that he utterly failed in comprehending.


The regulation of wages has been very generally viewed as a device confessedly framed by the nobility and, if not intended, certainly tending to cramp the exertions of industry (Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, vol. ii, p. 27; Hume, History of England, vol. ii, p. 479). Sir Fortunatus Dwarris (A Treatise on the Statutes, pp. 866‑7) aptly remarks " It was easier to enact than to enforce such laws " ; and he stigmatizes, in terms of much severity, " the machinery employed, to carry into effect an obnoxious, unjust and impossible law." On the other hand, however, Brentano maintains (On the History and Development of Gilds, p. 78) it had become the fashion to represent these wage‑regulations as a policy contrived for the oppression of the labourer.


To give such a character to these statutes is, however, in my judgment, a complete misrepresentation of the real state of the case. These regulations of wages were but the expression of the general policy of the Middle Ages, which considered that the first duty of the State was to protect the weak against the strong, which not only knew of rights, but also of duties of the individual towards society and condemned as usury every attempt to take unseemly advantage of the temporary distress of one's neighbour.


The Cottarii, or Coterelli, according to Spelman (Glossarium Archaologicum), appear to have been much on the same footing with villeins regardant, being employed in the trades of smith, carpenter and other handicraft arts necessary in the country, in which they had been instructed at the expense of their masters, for whose benefit they pursued their several occupations.


It is reasonable to conclude, that the new system of working for hire, being more profitable to the great proprietors than the labour of slaves, had, to a great THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 157 extent, superseded the absolute dependence of workmen upon their employers, at about the period which followed the Great Plague. Yet it is doubted by Eden, whether the owners of the soil fully comprehended the beneficial effects of this important revolution and he considers it not unnatural that they should have striven to preserve some affinity between the new class of labourers and the old class of villeins, by limiting their earnings, as they had before controlled their persons (State of the Poor, vol. i, p. 40).


Evasions of the statutes were very numerous, as indeed might be expected, for, had the wages fixed by law been adhered to, the pay of a labourer or artificer must have been the same from 13 S o to 13 70 ; yet, in the course of that period, the price of wheat per quarter varied from zs. to i 6s. 8d.


" In spite of fines, imprisonment and the pillory," says Green (History of the English People, p. 15 7), " the ingenuity and avarice of the labourers contrived to elude the provisions of the proclamation ; during the harvest the most exorbitant wages were demanded and given." The statutes hereafter quoted appear in the first version of these enactments, published by the authority of Parliament, of which vol. i, extending to stat. 50, Edw. III, was printed in 18io.


Amongst the numerous difficulties which are encountered in a study of our statute law, its prodigious and increasing development first arrests our attention. " There is such an accumulation of statutes," complains Lord Bacon, " concerning one matter and they so cross and intricate, that the certainty is lost in the heap." Yet when this complaint was uttered the whole of the statutes of the realm occupied less than three volumes, within which compass it would now be difficult to compress the enormous bulk of legislation which has, in the present day, collected round many special departments of our law. Happily, indeed, with the legislation of comparatively recent times we are only indirectly concerned, but the more ancient statutes present some peculiar features of their own, in which, though differing widely from the puzzles that confront us when we essay an interpretation of their modern counterparts, are found sources of equal difficulty and obscurity. The language in which they were enacted or proclaimed varies continually, whilst, if we turn for assistance to the commentaries of sages of the law, these prove for the most part to have been written on imperfect data, before any version of the statutes was published by authority.


Many of the old statutes do not at all express by what authority they were enacted, so that it seems as if the business of making laws was left principally in the hands of the king, unless in instances where the lords or commons felt an interest in promoting a law, or the king an advantage in procuring their concurrence; and, in such cases, probably it was that their assent was specially expressed (Reeves, History of the English Law, Finlayson, vol. ii, p. zz8).


The statutes appear actually to have been made by the king, with a council of judges and others who were summoned to assist him. " The usual time for making a statute was after the end of every parliament and after the parliament 158 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS roll was engrossed, except on some extraordinary occasions. The statute was drawn out of the petition and answer and penned in the form of a law into several chapters, or articles, as they were originally termed. The statute being thus drawn up into divers heads or articles, now called chapters, it was shown to the king ; and upon His Majesty's approbation thereof, it was engrossed‑sometimes with a preamble to it and a clause of observari volumus at the conclusion and sometimes without any preamble at all‑and then by writs sent into every county to be proclaimed." (From a treatise in the British Museum, intituled Ex peditionis Billarum Antiquitas, attributed to Elsyng, Deputy Clerk of the Parliaments, 1620 and later.) It is evident from the Mirror of Justice (La Somme, Appelle Mirrori des Justices, factum per Andrean Horne‑of whom it is said in the preface that he wrote the book before 17 Edw. II‑ ch. v) that laws were often made in this way; for the author of that book complains that ordinances are only made by the king and his clerks and by aliens and others who dare not contradict the king, but study to please him (see Reeves, History of the English Law, Finlayson, 1869, vol. ii, p. 227). " Many inconveniences happened to the subject by the antient form, in framing and publishing of the statutes‑viz., sometimes no statute hath been made, though agreed on; many things have been omitted; many things have been added in the statute; a statute hath been made, to which the Commons did not assent, and even to which neither Lords nor Commons assented." (See i Hale, P. C., 394 ; 3 Inst., 4o‑1 ; i z Rep., 57 ; and Introduction to the Statutes (18 i o), p. xxxv.) The chapters were short and the manner of expression very often too general and undefined. Offenders were generally directed to be punished " at the king's pleasure, to make grievous ransom to the king, to be heavily amerced " and the like ; whilst sometimes‑as will presently be seen‑the acts are merely admonitory or prohibitory, without affixing any penalties, or prescribing any course of process for prosecuting, hearing and determining the offences (ibid., vol. ii, p. 2z8 ; Dwarris, A General Treatise on Statutes, 1830‑1, p. 26).


Down to the accession of Edward I the statutes are in Latin, but in the third year of the king they began to be in French also ; and, from this period to the beginning of the reign of Henry VII, are sometimes in Latin and sometimes in French. From that time the language employed has been uniformly English. Occasionally there occurs a chapter in one language, in the midst of a statute in another; and there is one instance of an article or chapter partly in French and partly in Latin. Attempts have been made by many learned persons to explain this variety of languages in the earlier periods of our legislation. Nothing, however, is known with certainty on this subject and, at the present day, it is utterly impossible to account in each instance for the appearance of the statute in French or in Latin. It has been suggested that many of the Latin statutes were first made in French, thence translated into Latin (A. Luders, Essay on the use of the French Language in our Ancient Laws and Acts of State, tract vi, 18io), whilst by Daines Barrington (op. cit., p. 6z) the continuance of our laws in French from the third year of Edward I has been attributed to there being a standing committee THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 159 in parliament to receive petitions from the provinces of France, which formerly belonged to England; and as these petitions, therefore, were in French and the answers likewise in the same language, a reason was afforded why all the parliamentary transactions should be in French by way of uniformity. The same commentator perceives a further cause for the statutes being in French, in the general affectation which prevailed at this time of speaking that language, insomuch that it became a proverb, "that Jack would be a gentleman if he could speak French." But the strongest reason of all for permitting our laws to be in the French language, Barrington finds in the habit of the English and the inhabitants of the French provinces under our dominion considering themselves in a great measure as the same people. In the opinion of the same authority, " the best general rule which can be given with regard to an act of parliament being in Latin or French is, that when the interests of the clergy are particularly concerned, the statute is in Latin " (op. cit., pp. 6z‑5). But, as was justly observed by one great legal writer and adopted by another, this theory would require so many exceptions as almost to destroy the rule (Reeves, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 228 ; Dwarris, A Treatise on the Statutes, p. 627). " Perhaps," says Reeves, " the legislature was governed by no general principle in choosing the languages of their statutes ; both the Latin and the French were the language of the law and probably were adopted according to the whim of the clerk or other person who drew up the statute." On the whole, it may, perhaps, safely be concluded that, for a long period of time, charters, statutes and other public instruments were drawn up indiscriminately in French or Latin and generally translated from one of those languages into the other before the promulgation of them, which, in many instances, appears to have been made at the same time in both languages (see Statutes of the Realm, Introduction, p. xlii).


It is a curious circumstance that, though the ancient laws of some other European nations are indeed in the Latin language‑in which there was a peculiar convenience from the frequent appeals to the Pope‑there is no other instance of any country in Europe permitting their laws to be enacted in a modern European language and that not their own (Barrington, Observations on the IvIore Ancient Statutes, p. 6o). " The laws of Sweden and Denmark were originally in their own languages, but have within the last century been translated into Latin. The ordinances of Spain are in Spanish. The ancient laws of Sicily are in Latin; as were also those of the other Italian States " (ibid., p. 61). The ancient ordinances of Scotland are in Latin ; those of the Saxons in the Saxon tongue ; and the ancient statutes of the Irish Parliament, which began with the Statute of Kilkenny in the reign of Edward II, are in English ; while those of England continued to be in French. Curiously enough, having been subsequently adopted, the use of the French language in statutes was preserved rather longer in Ireland than in England. The statute‑roll of the Irish Parliament, 8 Hen. VII, is in French; in those of the 16 and 23 Hen. VII, the introductory paragraphs are in Latin ; after which follows an act or chapter in French ; and all the other acts of the session are in English (Introduction to the Statutes, p. xlii).


16o THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS The distinction between statutes and ordinances, which in unsettled times were frequently confounded, is, that the latter want the consent of some one or more of the constituent parts of a parliament. These are the king, lords and commons (Dwarris, op. cit., P. 3). " Whatever is enacted for law by one, or by two only of the three, is no statute." But though no statute, this is the exact description of an ordinance, which, as Lord Coke expresses it, " wanteth the threefold consent and is ordained by only one or two of them" (4 Inst., 24). According to the manuscript treatise already cited, an ordinance could not make new or permanent law, nor repeal any statute; but temporary provisions, consistent with the law in force, might be made by way of ordinance and one ordinance could be repealed by another without a statute (Expeditionis Billarum Antiquitas ; see also Harleian MSS., 305, 4273, 6585). It has been well observed, that when statutes were framed so long after the petition and answer, it is not to be wondered at that they did not always correspond with the wishes of the petitioners, but were modified according to some after‑thought of the king's officers who had the care of penning statutes. The commons often complained of this. It would appear that the parliament, upon the petitions of the commons, exercised two branches of authority, by one of which it legislated or made new laws ; by the other, it interpreted the then existing law. It is in this way that the following words of stat. 15, Edw. III, c. vii, are to be understood : " That the petitions showed by the great men and the commons be affrrmed according as they were granted by the king ; that is to say, some by statute (les pointZ adurer par estatut) ; and the others by charter or patent and delivered to the knights of the shires, without paying anything." This clearly indicates that there was another way of settling the law than by statutes and that way must have been by means of the charters and patents mentioned in the above act. Laws of this sort had no other sanction than the parliament roll, where the answer was written; and these were probably what were called ordinances, being of equal force and validity with statutes, but less solemn and public, because they were only a declaration and not an alteration of the law (Reeves, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 436). Ordinances were never proclaimed by the sheriff, as in the case of statutes, but it was sometimes recommended by the king to the commons‑probably by a charter or patent‑to publish them in their county) (see Introduction to Statutes of the Realm, p. xxxii ; Reeves, History of the English Law, W. F. Finlayson, 1869, vol. ii, p. 436 ; and Dwarris, A Treatise on the Statutes, p. i4). According to Lord Coke, " Acts of Parliament are many times in form of charters or letters‑patent " ; and many such have been inserted in all editions of the statutes. This great lawyer also observes, " There are many Acts of Parliament that be in the rolls of Parliament and neveryetprinted" (2 Inst., 525 ; 4 Inst., 50). The method in which the various laws‑statutes or ordinances‑were proclaimed and notified will again claim attention, in connexion with some remarks by Kloss and other German writers, which latter, as will be shown, are based upon a total misapprehension of the tenor and import of our Acts of Parliament. A statute was an ordinance and something more; therefore, though statutes may sometimes be called ordinances, yet no in‑ THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 161 attention to language would excuse the converse of the proposition. Though an ordinance could be altered by a statute, yet a statute could not be altered by an ordinance. After all, perhaps, the principal mark of a statute was its being entered on the statute‑roll (Reeves, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 437) The earliest of the printed editions or collections of the statutes is supposed to have been published before 1481 ; but it is believed that no complete chronological series, either in their original language or in English, nor any translation of the statutes from i Edward III to 1 Henry VII, appeared before the publication by Berthelet in 1543, of " the statutes in English, from the time of Henry III to 1 g Henry VII inclusive." No authorized version of the statutes was published until 181 o, in which year the first volume of a new edition, drawn up from original records and authentic manuscripts, was printed by command of George III at the request of the House of Commons.


In the introduction to this work it is stated, that prior to its appearance no complete collection had ever been printed, containing all the matters, which, at different times and by different editors, were published as statutes. The earliest editions of entire statutes were printed at the latter end of the fifteenth century. The statutes of Henry III, Edward I and Edward II were not printed entire until the beginning of the sixteenth century and then in small collections by themselves in their original language. Later editions, which combine the period previous to Edward III, with that of this and subsequent kings, omit the original text of the statutes previous to Henry VII, of which they give translations only. Even the more modern editions‑still used in private libraries and generally consulted by non‑legal writers‑which, in some instances, insert the original text of the statutes previous to Richard III, from the statute roll and ancient manuscripts, omit the translation of many parts of them ; and, in other instances, give a translation without the text, also omit many acts in the period subsequent to Henry VII.


In the words of the learned editors of The Statutes of the Realm‑" Many errors and inconsistencies occur in all the translations, resulting either from misinterpretation, or from improper omissions or insertions ; and there are many antient statutes of which no translation has ever yet been printed." The authorized version of the statutes, besides containing many charters not previously printed, affords, in every instance, a faithful transcript from originals or entries thereof, in characters representing the manuscript with its contractions or abbreviations, so far indeed as these could be accomplished by printing types. The translation in each case appears side by side with the words of the original and all quotations from the statutes which appear in this chapter are made from the text of the authorized version.


The first enactment which will come under notice is the law of 1349. As already observed, a great public calamity having thinned the lower class of people, servants and labourers took occasion to demand very extravagant wages ; rather 162 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS than submit to work upon reasonable terms they became vagabonds and idle beggars. Their number, it is probable, being largely augmented by the gradual emancipation of the villeins, which had been proceeding ever since the Conquest ; and who, before the end of Edward III's reign, were sufficiently powerful to protect one another and to withhold their ancient and accustomed services from their lord (Reeves, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 272 ; Eden, op. cit., vol, i, p. 30). It was found necessary to take some compulsory method in order to reduce the poorer classes to subordination ; and an ordinance was therefore made by the king and council, to whom it was thought properly to belong as an article of police and internal regulation, especially as the parliament were prevented from sitting by the violence of the plague (Barrington, op. cit., p. 264).


Having regard to the importance of the ordinance of 1349 and the statute of the following year‑comprehensively described as the " Statutes of Labourers " ‑each chapter or section will be noticed; two only, however, chapters S in the earlier and 3 in the later act, being given in their entirety. Each statute, of which a summary is given in the text, will be distinguished by a number, to which subsequent reference will be made by a parenthesis.


I. THE ORDINANCE OF LABOURERS, A.D. 1349 (23 EDW. III) The necessity of the regulations embodied in this Ordinance is thus vindicated in the preamble: " Because a great part of the people and, especially of workmen and servants, late died of the pestilence, many seeing the necessity of masters and great scarcity of servants, will not serve unless they may receive excessive wages and some rather willing to beg in idleness than by labour to get their living." i. Every man and woman, free or bond, able in body and within the age of threescore years, not living in merchandise, nor exercising any craft, nor having of his own whereof he may live, shall be bound to serve for the wages accustomed to be given in the twentieth year of our reign, or five or six common years before. The Lords to be preferred before other in their bondmen or land tenants, but to retain no more than may be necessary for them; and if any such man or woman will not serve, that proved by two true men before the sheriff, bailiff, lord, or constable of the town where the same shall happen to be done, he shall be committed to the next gaol.


2. If any reaper, mower, or other workman or servant, do depart from service without reasonable cause or licence before the term agreed, he shall have pain of imprisonment and that none under the same pain presume to receive or to retain any such in his service.


3. That no man pay, or promise to pay, any servant any more wages than was wont.


4. If the lords of the towns or manors presume in any point to come against this ordinance, then pursuit shall be made against them for the treble pain paid or promised by them.


THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 163 S . "Item, that sadlers, skinners, whitetawers, cordwainers, taylors, smiths, carpenters, masons (cementarii), tilers, boatmen, carters and all other artificers and workmen, shall not take for their labour and workmanship above the same that was wont to be paid to such persons the said twentieth year and other common years next before, as afore is said, in the place where they shall happen to work ; and if any man take more, he shall be committed to the next gaol, in manner as afore is said." 6. Butchers, fishmongers, hostelers, brewers, bakers, pulters and all other sellers of all manner of victual, shall be bound to sell the same for a reasonable price.


7. Because that many valiant beggars refuse to labour, none, upon the said pain of imprisonment, shall give anything to such.


The conclusion of this ordinance, styled by Barrington " the last chapter," but not numbered in the copy quoted, disposes in a somewhat unusual manner of the penalties imposed by a preceding part of the law ; they are not given to the informer, as in more modern times, to enforce the execution of a statute, but in aid of dismes and quinZimes granted to the king by the commons.


Whether the neglect of this ordinance arose from this improper distribution of the penalty, or more probably from the severity of the law, the parliament, two years afterwards, attempted to carry it into more rigorous execution and, likewise, added some new regulations, fixing the price of not only the wages of the labourer, but almost every class of artisan.


II. THE STATUTE OF LABOURERS, A.D. 1350 (25 EDW. III) i. That carters, ploughmen, shepherds, swineherds, deies (the lowest class of servants in husbandry) and all other servants, shall take liveries and wages accus tomed in the said twentieth year, or four years before; and that they be allowed j to serve by a whole year and not by the day ; and that none pay in the time of sarcling or haymaking but a penny the day; and that such workmen bring openly in their hands to the merchant towns their instruments and these shall be hired in a common place and not privy.


2. That none take for the threshing of a quarter of wheat or rye over ii d. ob. ; and that the same servants be sworn two times in the year before lords, stewards, bailiffs and constables of every town, to hold and do these ordinances ; and that none o them go out of the town, where he dwelleth in the winter, to serve the summer, if he may serve in the same town ; and that those who refuse to make such oaths, or to perform that they be sworn to or have taken upon them, shall be put in the stocks by the said lords, stewards, bailiffs and constables of towns, or sent to the next gaol.


3. " Item, that carpenters, masons, and tilers and other workmen of houses, shall not take by the day for their work, but in such manner as they were wont ; that is to say, a master carpenter iii. d., and another ii. d. ; a master freestone mason (mestre mason de franche pere) iiii., and other masons iii. d., and their servants i. d., ob. ; 164 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS tylers iii. d., and their knaves (garceons) i.d., ob. ; plasterers and others workers of mud walls and their knaves, by the same manner, without meat and drink, i. s. from Easter to Saint Michael and from that time less, according to the rate and discretion of the justices, which should be thereto assigned; and that they that make carriage by land or water shall take no more for such carriage to be made than they were wont the said xx year and iiii. years before." 4. That cordwainers and shoemakers shall not sell boots and shoes, nor none other thing touching their mystery, in any other manner than they were wont; that goldsmiths, sadlers, horse‑smiths, sporriers, tanners, corriers, tawers of leather, taylors and other workmen, artificers and labourers and all other servants here not specified, shall be sworn before the justices, to do and use their crafts and offices in the manner they were wont to do the said xx year and in the time before, without refusing the same because of this ordinance ; and if any of the said servants, labourers, workmen, or artificers, after such oath made, come against this ordinance, he shall be punished by fine and ransom and imprisonment, after the discretion of the justices.


S. That the said stewards, bailiffs and constables of towns be sworn to inquire of all them that come against this ordinance and to certify the justices of their names, so that they make fine and ransom to the king and, moreover, be commanded to prison, there to remain till they have found surety to serve and do their work and to sell things vendible in the manner aforesaid. And that the same justices have power to inquire and make due punishment of the said ministers, labourers, workmen and other servants ; and also of hostlers, harbergers and of those that sell victual by retail, or other things here not specified.


6. That no sheriffs, constables, bailiffs and gaolers, the clerks of the justices, or of the sheriffs, nor other ministers whatsoever, take anything for the cause of their office of the same servants for fees, suit of prison, nor in other manner.


7. That the said justices make their sessions in all the counties of England at the least four times a year‑that is to say, at the feast of the Annunciation of our Lady, Saint Margaret, Saint Michael and Saint Nicholas ; and also at all times that shall need, according to the discretion of the said justices ; and if any of the said servants, labourers, or artificers do flee from one county to another, the sheriffs of the county where such fugitive persons shall be found shall do them to be taken at the commandment of the justices of the counties from whence they shall flee ; and that this ordinance be holden and kept, as well in the city of London as in other cities and boroughs and other places throughout the land, as well within franchise as without.


This statute was always held to apply only to those who worked with their hands (Reeves, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 274). It is somewhat singular that a large number of the cases preserved in the year books had reference to chaplains. In an action against one of this class, it was contended that, though retained for a year to do divine service, the defendant had departed within the year and it was held that the writ was not maintainable by the statute, " for you cannot compel a chaplain to THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 165 sing at Mass, for at one time he is disposed to sing and another not; wherefore you cannot compel him by the statute." In another case the defendant pleaded that he was retained to collect rents and so was not a labourer, which was held to be a good plea.


The commission to execute the statute of labourers was usually directed to the same persons who were in the commission of the peace; the due ordering of such persons as were the objects of this statute being one of the most important articles in the police of the county.


" From the 25th of Edward the Third," says Sir F. Eden, " the laws concerning wages and other visionary regulations, which, however impracticable, were perseveringly adhered to by successive legislatures, afford us the means of tracing, with chronological exactness, the variations either of improvement or of deterioration in the condition of labourers for hire, who may now be considered as the persons composing that class by which the works of agriculture, of handicraft trades, or of manufacture were carried on." III. In 136o the Statute of Labourers received parliamentary confirmation and its observance was enforced under stronger penalties. Labourers were declared no longer punishable by " fine and ransom " and the Lords of Towns were em powered "to take and imprison them for fifteen days" (34 Edw. 111, c. .ix). Fugitive labourers and artificers absent either from their work or their places of abode, were " to be burnt in the forehead with the letter F in token of Falsity," i.e. of having broken the oath they were compelled to take under the previous statute; and magistrates were directed, in case they fled into towns, to deliver them up, under penalty of ~io to the king and C5 to the masters who should reclaim them. Wages were again regulated. None whatever were to be taken on the festival days, and it was declared, " That as well carpenters and masons (Maceons) be comprised in this ordinance, as all other labourers, servants and artificers ; and that the carpenters and the masons take from henceforth wages by the day, not by the week, nor in other manner ; and that the chief masters (chiefs mestres) of carpenters and masons take fourpence by the day and the other threepence or twopence, according as they be worth; and that all alliances and covines of masons and carpenters and congregations, chapters, ordinances and oaths betwixt them made, or to be made, shall be from henceforth void and wholly annulled; so that every mason and carpenter, of what condition that he be, shall be compelled by his master to whom he serveth to do every work that to him pertaining to do, or of free stone, or of rough stone; and also every carpenter in his degree; but it shall be lawful to every Lord or other, to make bargain or covenant of their work in gross, with such labourers and artificers when please them, so that they perform such works well and lawfully according to the bargain or covenant with them thereof made." In this statute (and not before) a standing authority to hear and determine and to take sureties for good behaviour, was given to " the keepers of the peace " ; 166 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS but it is afterwards in the stat. 36 Edw. III, stat. I, c. xii, that they are styled justices. The last‑mentioned statute enacts that in the commissions of justices of the peace and of labourers, express mention should be made that they hold their sessions four times in the year ; but it was expressly and properly declared in the 34 Edward III, that besides the most worthy persons in the county (des meullz vaueZ) the commission should include " some learned in the law." With the exception of Dr. George Kloss, this statute has been singularly neglected by Masonic writers and yet, as Papworth long since pointed out, it presents very instructive features (Transactions R.LB.A., 1861‑2). The " alliances, covines and chapters " will be passed over for the time being, as they can be more conveniently discussed in connexion with the subsequent legislation of the year 1425. The object of this statute seems to have been to benefit the master, rather than the servant, by fixing a maximum for wages; and, although it pointed out a mode by which its provisions might be avoided, by making it lawful " to every lord or other to make bargain or covenant of their work in gross with such labourers and artificers when please them," it has been conceived that it was only optional in the master to adopt this mode of hiring and that the labourer or artificer was obliged to work for the statute wages, by the day or the year, unless his employer could persuade him to work by the piece for less (Eden, op. cit., vol. i, p. 37).


At this point, it may conveniently be observed, that, in the building trades of the Middle Ages, there were fewer persons who carried on the industry on their own account and a greater number of dependent workmen, than in the other trades. The ordinances of the London masons point to relations such as are still greatly abhorred by workmen of the present day ; and naturally, those relations led then to the same differences between workmen and their employers as they lead now (Brentano, On the History and Development of Gilds, p. 81). " Thus," says Brentano, " in England the royal mandate as to the workmen who had withdrawn from the works at the Palace of Westminster tells us of a strike amongst the workmen in the building trades ; and the two laws enacted there in the Middle Ages against combinations, congregations and chapters of workmen‑the 34th Edw. III, c. ix (III) and 3rd Henry VI, c. i (XVI), were directed against workmen in the building trades only " (ibid., and Riley, p. 271).


IV. REGULATIONS FOR THE TRADE OF MASONS, 3o EDW. III, A.D. 1356 (Riley, Memorials of London and London Life, 1868, pp. z8o‑2) " At a congregation of mayor and aldermen, holden on the Monday next before the purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary (znd February), in the thirtieth year of the reign of King Edward III, etc., there being present Simon Fraunceys, the mayor, John Lovekyn and other aldermen, the sheriffs and John Little, Symon de Benyngtone and William de Holbeche, commoners, certain articles were ordained touching the trade of masons, in these words I. " Whereas Simon Fraunceys, Mayor of the City of London, has been given to understand that divers dissensions and disputes have been moved in the said THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 167 city, between the masons who are hewers, on the one hand and the light masons and setters on the other: because that their trade has not been regulated in due manner by the government of folks of their trade in such form as other trades are ; therefore the said mayor, for maintaining the peace of our Lord the King and for allaying such manner of dissensions and disputes and for nurturing love among all manner of folks, in honour of the said city and for the profit of the common people, by assent and counsel of the aldermen and sheriffs, caused all the good folks of the said trade to be summoned before him to have from them good and due information hove their trade might be best ordered and ruled, for the profit of the common people.


2. " Whereupon the good folks of the said trade, chose from among themselves twelve of the most skilful men of their trade, to inform the mayor, aldermen and sheriffs, as to the acts and articles touching their said trade,‑that is to say, Walter de Sallynge, Richard de Sallynge, Thomas de Bredone, John de Tyryngtone, Thomas de Gloucestre and Henry de Yeevelee, on behalf of the masons' hewers ; Richard Joye, Simon de Bartone, John de Estone, John Wylot, Thomas Hardegray and Richard de Cornewaylle, on behalf of the light masons and setters ; the which folks were sworn before the aforesaid mayor, aldermen and sheriffs, in manner as follows 3. " In the first place, that every man of the trade may work at any work touching the trade, if he be perfectly skilled and knowing in the same.


4. " Also, that good folks of the said trade shall be chosen and sworn every time that need shall be, to oversee that no one of the trade takes work to complete if he does not well and perfectly know how to perform such work, on pain of losing, to the use of the commonalty, the first time that he shall, by the persons so sworn, be convicted thereof, one mark; and the second time, two marks ; and the third time, he shall forswear the trade for ever.


5. " Also, that no one shall take work in gross [wholesale, or by contract] if he be not of ability in a proper manner to complete such work ; and he who wishes to undertake such work in gross, shall come to the good man of whom he has taken such work to do and complete and shall bring with him six or four ancient men of his trade, sworn thereunto, if they are prepared to testify unto the good man of whom he has taken such work to do, that he is skilful and of ability to perform such work and that if he shall fail to complete such work in due manner, or not be of ability to do the same, they themselves, who so testify that he is skilful and of ability to finish the work, are bound to complete the same work well and properly at their own charges, in such manner as he undertook; in case the employer who owns the work shall have fully paid the workman [meaning the contractor]. And if the employer shall then owe him anything, let him pay it to the persons who have so undertaken for him to complete such work.


6. " Also, that no one shall set an apprentice or journeyman to work, except in presence of his master, before he has been perfectly instructed in his calling and he who shall do the contrary and by the person so sworn be convicted thereof, 168 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS let him pay, the first time to the use of the commonalty, half a mark; and the second time one mark; and the third time zo shillings; and so let him pay zo shillings every time that he shall be convicted thereof.


7. " Also, that no one of the said trade shall take an apprentice for a less time than seven years, according to the usage of the city ; and he who shall do to the contrary thereof, shall be punished in the same manner.


8. " Also, that the said masters so chosen, shall oversee that all those who work by the day shall take for their hire according as they are skilled and may deserve for their work, and not outrageously.


9. " Also, if any one of the said trade will not be ruled or directed in due manner by the persons of his trade sworn thereunto, such sworn persons are to make known his name unto the mayor; and the mayor, by assent of the aldermen and sheriffs, shall cause him to be chastised by imprisonment and other punishment, that so other rebels may take example by him, to be ruled by the good folks of their trade. io. " Also, that no one of the said trade shall take the apprentice of another, to the prejudice or damage of his master, until his term shall have fully expired, on pain of paying, to the use of the commonalty, half a mark each time that he shall be convicted thereof." V. Reverting to the parliamentary statutes, we find that the Legislature, having failed in controlling the wages of industry, next attempted, by statutes equally impracticable, to restrict the workman in the disposition of his slender earnings (Eden, op. cit., vol, i., p. 37). In the year 1363 (37 Edw. III) several laws were passed for the regulation of the diet and apparel of servants, artificers and yeomen (yomen) and it was enacted that merchants should deal in one sort only of merchandise and that handicraftsmen should use only one trade, which they were to choose before the next Candlemas. (The restriction placed on the merchants was removed in the following year.) " This," says Brentano, " was a legal recognition of the principle of the trade policy of the craftsmen, namely, that provision should be made to enable every one, with a small capital and his labour, to earn his daily bread in his trade freely and independently, in opposition to the principle of the rich, freedom of trade " (Brentano, op. cit., p. 6o).


VI. The Statute of Labourers was again confirmed in 1368 (4z Edw. III, c. vi) ; and the jealousy with which the increasing efforts of the handicraftsmen to free themselves from the restrictive fetters imposed upon them by the Legislature was regarded, is curiously illustrated by an enactment of the following year, wherein, at the request of the " Black Prince," whose revenue in his principality of Guion had been diminished by a law limiting the exportation of wines into England to aliens, it was decreed " that all Englishmen, Irishmen and Welshmen, that be not artificers, may pass freely into Gascoigne, to fetch wines there" (43 Edw. III, c. ii).


VII. Richard II was but eleven years old when he became King of England, THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 169 on the death of his grandfather. The first statute of this reign recites that the villeins (viileyns) and land‑tenants in villeinage had assembled riotously in considerable bodies, endeavouring, by the advice of certain evil counsellors and abettors, to withdraw their services from their lords, not alone those which they owed to them by tenure of their lands, but also the services of their bodies ; that they chiefly attempted to evade these services under colour of certain exemplifications from Domesday‑Book, with relation to the manors and towns in which they lived ; and that, by false interpretation of these transcripts, they claimed to be entirely free. The statute, therefore, enacts that commissions shall issue under the Great Seal, upon application of any lord (seigneur), to inquire into the offences of these refractory villeins ; and that they shall be immediately committed to prison, without bail or main‑prize, if their lords shall so insist. With regard to the exemplifications from Domesday, it is likewise declared that the offering them in evidence shall not be of any advantage to him who shall so produce them. Nothing could be more severe than this law in every part of it ; and we find, by different records in Rymer, that this oppression was in reality the occasion of the famous insurrection under Wat Tyler and Jack Straw, as well as the great opposition to John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster; aided, it may well have been, by the poll‑tax of three groats imposed in 138o upon both sexes above the age of fifteen. This assessment was a heavy exaction upon the poor, many of whom were ill‑used bondmen ; and the harsh and brutal manner in which it was collected made it still more hateful. Many of the serfs or villeins had already been made free by becoming copyholders, or even by escaping from thraldom and living a year and a day within the walls of a town; but this only served to excite the envy of the rest (Chepmell, Short Course of History, p. 183). The city records, under date z5th April iz88, contain a claim by the Earl of Cornwall and another, upon five persons as their bondmen born, of whom they were seized until one month before the day of St. Michael (zgth September) 12.87, when they ran away. And they ask that they be not admitted to the freedom of the city (Riley, Memorials of London, p. 2.4).


If we follow Barrington, the minor king had been advised, by one part of his Council, to increase the power of the lower people (in the fifteenth year of this king, the barons petitioned that no villein should send his son to school ; to which the king gave the proper and dignified answer : Le roy s'avisera (Barrington, Observations on the More Ancient Statutes, p. 300 ; Dwarris, A Treatise on the Statutes, p. 878)) and to lessen that of the barons ; in consequence of this a proclamation was issued, which among other things directed, " quod nulla acra terra qua in bondagio vel servagio tenetur, altus quam ad quatuor denarios haberetur ; et si qua ad minus antea tenta fuisset, in posterum non exaltaretur" (Barrington, op. cit., P‑300). John of Gaunt put himself at the head of the barons' faction and procured a repeal of this proclamation in the year following (Rymer, Fadera, vol. iii, p. 12.4).


The tenure of villeinage, which the insurrection of 13 81 operated powerfully in diminishing, though extremely burdensome to the villein, was of little advantage to the master. The produce of a large estate was much more conveniently disposed 170 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS of by the peasants themselves who raised it, than by the landlord or his bailiff, who was formerly accustomed to receive it. A commutation was therefore made of rents for services and of money‑rents for those in kind ; and as men in a subsequent age discovered that farms were better cultivated where the farmer enjoyed a security in his possession, the practice of granting leases to the peasants began to prevail, which entirely broke the bonds of servitude, already much relaxed from the former practices (Hume, History of England, vol. iii, p. 295).


As half the lands in England were anciently held by the tenure of villeinage, it is not more remarkable as a fact, that this tenure (and status) should have entirely passed away, without being abolished by any statute, than that its decline should have been so insensible, that historians and antiquaries, with the utmost diligence, can very faintly trace its declension to that period, when it suited the mutual convenience of the lord and the vassal to drop the servile tenure (Barrington, p. 301 ; Dwarris, p. 878 ; Eden, vol. i, pp. 3o, 6o).


These considerations are of some importance, as there can be little doubt that the earliest laws as to artificers, labourers and vagrants had reference to the state of villeinage or serfdom and the efforts of the villeins to escape from it (Reeves, vol. iii, p. 587). The earliest vagrants were villeins ; and the villeins were constantly wandering away from their lords in order to escape the bondage of forced labour, which brought no profit to themselves, for even property, the result of their own labour, could be seized by their lords; hence it was not to be wondered at that they should in various ways try to escape so hard a thraldom and that many of them should lapse into a state of vagrancy. Vagabondage, in short, grew out of villeinage and these laws arose out of vagabondage. The result of it was, that the lords found their own villeins, to whose labour they had a right, constantly lost, while they were surrounded by numbers of vagrants, most of whom, there could be little doubt, were villeins of other lords. The process of seeking for and reclaiming the villeins was troublesome and costly ; and instead of it parliament passed these acts as to labourers and others, the effect of which was to enable the lords to put vagrants to labour, as a substitute for the loss of the labour of their villeins.


The conditions of the times and the turn of manners which prevailed towards the close of the fourteenth century, made it desirable and necessary for great lords to supply the defection in their villeins and land‑tenants by other expedients. It accordingly had become the custom to retain persons in their service to be at call when their lord's affairs needed their support; and, in order to distinguish different partisans, as well as to give a splendour to such retinue, they used to dress them in liveries and hats of a particular make or colour. Men openly associated themselves, under the patronage of some great baron, for their mutual defence. They wore public badges, by which their confederacy was distinguished. They supported each other in all quarrels, iniquities, extortions, murders, robberies and other crimes (Hume, History of England, vol. iii, p. 5 9). Besides those who were retained by great men, fraternities used to be formed of persons concurring in the THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 171 same sentiments and views, who bound themselves to support each other on all occasions and denoted their union by similarity of dress (Reeves, History of the English Law, 1869, vol. ii, p. 444). These confederacies became a terror to the government and were the occasion of the statutes of liveries passed in this and the following reigns. The first of these is stat. i, Rich. II, c. vii, which ordains that no livery be given by any man for maintenance of quarrels and other confederacies upon pain of imprisonment and grievous forfeiture to the king. Some immaterial alterations were made in this statute both by Richard and his successors ; but in substance it remained as now enacted. The successive acts were very little enforced in this reign, or that of Henry VI ; and it was reserved for the stricter and sterner rule of Henry VII really to put them into execution. For this reason, and also because the laws relating to liveries, passed in the reign of the first Tudor king (.


III), have been strangely misinterpreted by our most trustworthy Masonic teachers, the examination of this series of statutes is postponed until the legislation of the reign of Henry VII passes under review.


VIII. In the year 1378 the commons complained that the statutes of labourers were not attended to, but that persons employed in husbandry fled into cities and became artificers, mariners, or clerks, to the great detriment of agriculture ; and, in consequence of these representations, it was enacted that the statutes passed in the preceding reign should be firmly kept and put in due execution (z. Rich. II, stat. I, c. viii).


IX. In 1388 these statutes were again confirmed and it was further directed that no servant or labourer should depart at the end of his term to serve or dwell elsewhere, or under pretence of going a pilgrimage, without a letter patent speci fying the cause of his departure and the time of his return, which might be granted at the discretion of a justice of the peace ; and that " as well artificers and people of mystery (gent.Z de ivistier) as servants and apprentices, which be of no great avoyr (avoir), and of which craft or mystery a man hath no great need in harvest time, shall be compelled to serve in harvest to cut, gather and bring in the corn." The wages of servants in husbandry were fixed by the same statute, after reciting " that the hires of servants and labourers had not been put in certainty before this time." And it was decreed that " no servant of artificer nor victualler within city shall take more than the servants and labourers above named after their estate." Penalties were imposed on those giving or taking higher wages ; and for a third offence, treble the value of the excess given or taken, or forty days' imprisonment. Persons having served in husbandry until the age of twelve years were declared incapable of " being put to any mystery or handicraft " and all covenants of apprenticeship to the contrary were declared void.


To prevent disorders, it was ordained that no servant, labourer, nor artificer should carry a sword, buckler, or dagger, except in time of war or when travelling with their masters ; but they might have bows and arrows, and use them on Sundays 172 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS and holidays. They were required to leave off playing at tennis or football and to refrain from quoits, dice, skittles and other such importune games. This is noticeable for being the first statute that prohibited any sort of games and diversions (Reeves, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 455) X. In the following year, at the request of the Commons that the Statutes of Labourers should be enforced, it was enacted, that " forasmuch as a man cannot put the price of corn and other victuals in certain," the justices should, at Easter and Michaelmas, make proclamation according to the dearth of victuals, how much every mason, carpenter, tiler and other craftsmen, workmen and other labourers should take by the day with meat and drink, or without meat and drink, between the two seasons and " that every man obey to such proclamations from time to time as a thing done by statute." Shoemakers and cordwainers were prohibited from being tanners and vice versa ; artificers and others were restrained from keeping dogs or using ferrets.


In the twelfth year of Richard II, writs were sent to all the sheriffs in England to make proclamation for the sending up of the returns from guilds and crafts, called for by the Parliament of Cambridge. The masters and wardens of " guilds and brotherhoods " were required to furnish full information " as to the manner and form of the oaths, gatherings, feasts and general meetings [" the distinction between the `gatherings ' (con gregationes) and ` general meetings ' (assemblies) is seen at a glance in most of the ordinances. The guild brethren were bound to gather together, at unfixed times, on the summons of the dean, for special purposes ; but, besides these gatherings upon special summons, general meetings of the guilds were held on fixed days in every year, for election of officers, holding their feasts," etc. (Toulmin Smith, English Gilds, p. i28)] of the brethren and sistreen " ; also, as to their liberties, privileges, statutes, ordinances, usages and customs ; and to lay before the king and his council their charters and letters patent, where such existed. The words si quas babent (in original) are conclusive, as Smith observes, upon the point, " that no licence nor charter of the crown was necessary to the beginning of any of the social guilds. Any guild might, or it might not, have such charters " (Smith, English Gilds, p. 128).


The masters, wardens and overlookers of the mysteries and crafts, who held any charters or letters patent, were in like manner required to exhibit them.


XI. In the fourth year of Henry IV, an act was passed prohibiting carpenters, masons (cementers), tilers and other labourers from being hired by the week and forbidding them to receive any wages on feast‑days, or more than half a day's wages when they only worked on the eve of a festival " till the hour of 1Vone " (al beurede None). It is probable that in taking service by the week and receiving wages at the rate of seven days' work, although, from the intervention of the Sabbath and the frequency of festivals, they only worked four or five days in the week, the provisions of former statutes had been effectually frustrated by the labourers.


THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 173 XII. Henry IV, in the seventh year of his reign, 1405‑6, confirmed the Statutes of Labourers ; and the law of 1388, which he made more stringent, by ordering that no one should put his child to serve as apprentice to any craft or other labour within a city or borough, unless he possessed an annual income of zos. from land or rent. Labourers and artificers were to be sworn in their respective leets, once in each year, " to serve and take for their service after the form of the statutes " and any refusing so to do were to be put in the stocks. To facilitate this it was provided that every town or seignory not having stocks should be fined a hundred shillings.


XIII. Two statutes, enacted in the reign of Henry V, demand notice. The act of 1414 extended the authority of justices of the peace, by empowering them to send their writs to take fugitive labourers in any county. All the Statutes of Labourers were to be exemplified under the Great Seal; an exemplification was to be sent to every sheriff to make proclamation in full county and deliver it to the justices of the peace named of the quorum, to remain with them for the better execu tion thereof. These justices were to hold their sessions four times a year, and were authorized to examine labourers, servants and artificers, with their masters, upon their oaths.


XIV. In 1416, an act was passed limiting the penalties of the 12 Rich. II, c. iv, for excessive wages to the takers only, it being somewhat humorously recited " that the givers, when they have been sworn before the justices of the peace, will in no wise present such excesses to eschew their own punishments." XV. Matters, however, were replaced on the old footing in 1423 and the justices once more empowered to proceed against the masters as well as the servants. They were also authorized " to call before them by attachment masons, carpenters, tilers, thatchers, daubers and all other labourers and to examine them " ; and any of these found to have taken contrary to the laws and ordinances were " to have imprisonment of a month." The same authorities had power to call before them in a similar manner tailors, cordwainers, tanners, bochers, fishers, hostilers and " all other artificers and victuallers " and to assess them under penalties, " to sell and take after the discretions of the justices." This ordinance extended to cities and boroughs as well as counties and was " to endure until the parliament next to come." The preceding chapter or article, which is of considerable importance in this inquiry, was first printed from the Statute Roll in Hawkins' edition, 1734‑5 and, no translation having appeared until 1816, it has not been noticed by the numerous commentators upon the subsequent law of 1425.


" The legislature, in the reign of Henry VI," says Reeves (op. cit., vol. ii, p. 5 z8), " as in the time of his two predecessors, was rather employed in furthering and improving the policy of some statutes made in the preceding period, than in intro ducing any novelties." Although legal writers are all of the same opinion as Reeves and, indeed, only notice the statute of 1425, from the fact of its having added to the list of offences punishable as felony ; at the hands of Masonic 174 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS historians it has experienced very different treatment and the speculations to which it has given rise will next claim attention.


Before, however, proceeding to examine the glosses of the innumerable commentators who have professed to explain this enactment, it will be convenient to consider a little more closely than hitherto the circumstances of the previous reign, together with any collateral facts that may aid in illustrating the subject of our investigation.


The wars of Henry V, however glorious to his arms, placed only a " fruitless crown " upon his head ; and, as it has been well expressed, " the lilies of France were purchased too dearly with the harvests of England." A convincing proof of the devastation made by the sword amongst the gentry is afforded by the language of a statute passed in 142.1 : it states, " that at the making of the act of the 14th of Edward 1110340), there were sufficient of proper men in each county to execute every office ; but that, owing to pestilence and wars, there are not now a sufficiency of responsible persons to act as sheriffs, coroners, and escheators." There cannot be a doubt but that greater numbers of the lower classes perished from the operation of similar causes. Indeed, it has been advanced, that the great drain of men occasioned by Henry V's wars and the subsequent bloody contest between the houses of York and Lancaster, materially contributed to render the whole nation free (Eden, op. cit., vol. i, p. 66).


The condition of the realm, at the period of Henry VI's accession, himself an infant, will be best understood by a brief reference to the military operations of the previous reign. Henry V, in 1415, landed near Honfleur at the head of 6,ooo men‑at‑arms and z4,ooo foot, mostly archers and, putting the casualties of war on one side, had lost half his force by disease before the memorable battle of Agincourt. Two years later he was again in France with z5,0oo men and, in 142.1, he levied a new army of z4,ooo archers and 4,ooo horsemen (Hume, vol. iii, pp. 99, 104, 111). The withdrawal of so many men from the kingdom, especially when we consider the sparseness of the population at that period, must have rendered labour even more scarce than it had hitherto been ; and the return to peaceful avocations of any of the soldiery could not have been an unmixed advantage, since the high rate of wages paid by Henry V to his troops (Hume, p. 118; Rymer, Fcdera, vol. ix, p. z58) must have for ever dissatisfied them with the paltry remuneration assessed by the justices, whose scale of payments, indeed, cannot have been one whit more acceptable to the artisans who plied their crafts unmolested by the king's levies.


But the drain upon the population of England for soldiers did not cease with the life of Henry V. His brother, the Duke of Bedford, the most accomplished prince of his time, remained in France. The whole power of England was at his command ; he was at the head of armies inured to victory and was seconded by the most renowned generals of his age.


At the battle of Verneuil there fell about 4,000 of the French and i,6oo of the English‑a loss esteemed at that time so unusual on the side of the victors, that the Duke of Bedford forbade all rejoicings for his success (Hume, vol. iii, p. 12.0.


THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 175 In the same year, 1424, further levies were drawn from England, though, much to the chagrin of the Duke of Bedford, the succours which he expected from his native land were intercepted by his brother, the Duke of Gloucester and employed in Holland and Hainault.


About this period gunpowder had passed into constant use, both in the attack and defence of places. The pieces were called guns and culverins. The first threw stone balls, sometimes 26 inches in diameter ; the second threw plummets or balls of lead. The powder was of a different sort for each. The guns were worked by a master gunner, with varlets under him. Masons and carpenters were attached to them (Lingard, History of England, 184, vol. iv, p. 24).


It is noteworthy that the two laws enacted in the Middle Ages against combinations, congregations and chapters of workmen, the 34 Edw. III, c. ix (III) and the 3 Hen. VI, c. i (XVI), were directed against the craftsmen above named and, as a factor at least in our final judgment upon these statutes, must be assumed the possibility of both masons and carpenters having, to some extent, acquired by military service abroad a higher opinion of the rights of labour and of the inherent freedom of every class of artisan to barter the product of their skill or industry for its full money value.


XVI. 3 HENRY VI, C. 1, A.D. 1425 Eu primes come par les annuelx con‑ FIRST, Whereas by the yearly Con gregacions et confederacies faitz par les gregacions and Confederacies made by Masons en lour generalx Chapitres as‑ the Masons in their general Chapiters semblez, le bon cours et effect des assembled, the good Course and Effect estatutz de Laborers sont publiquement of the Statutes of Labourers be openly violez et disrumpez en subversion de la violated and broken, in Subversion o leye et grevouse damage of tout le the Law, and to the great Damage of all commune; nostre Seigneur le Roi the Commons: Our said Lord the King viollant en ces cas purvoir de remedie, willing in this Case to provide Remedy par advis et assent suisditz et a la by the Advice and Assent aforesaid and, especial request des ditz Communes ad at the special Request of the said Comordinez et establiz que tieux Chapitres mons, hath ordained and established, et Congregacions ne soient desore tenuz ; that such Chapiters and Congregations et si ascuns tielx soient faitz soient ceux shall not be hereafter holden ; and, if qi fount faire assembler et tenir iceux any such be made, they that cause such Chapitres et congregacions sils ent soient Chapiters and Congregations to be as convictz adjuggez pur felons ; et que sembled and holden, if they thereof be toutz les autres Masons qi viegnent as convict, shall be judged for Felons ; tielx Chapitres et congregacions soient and that all the other Masons that come puniz par emprisonement de lour corps to such Chapiters and Congregations, et facent fyn et raunceon a la volunte du be punished by Imprisonment of their Roi. Bodies, and make Fine and Ransom at the King's Will.


176 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS The first writer who associated this statute with the Freemasons was Dr. Plot, who, in his Natural History of Staffordshire, ridicules the idea of the charges of the Society having been approved by King Henry VI, observing Yet more improbable is it still, that Hen. the 6 and his Council should ever peruse or approve their charges and manners and so confirm these right Worshipfull Masters and Fellows as they are call'd in the Scrole : for in the third of his reigne (when he could not be 4 years old) I find an act of Parliament quite abolishing this Society. Which Statute though repealed by a subsequent act in the 5 of Eliz. (.


XIII), 'tis still to be feared these Chapters of Free‑Masons do as much mischief as before, which, if one may estimate by the penalty, was anciently so great, that perhaps it might be usefull to examin them now.


The next commentary upon the statute will be that of Dr. James Anderson, who, in 17z', " fault having been found with the old Gothic Constitutions," was ordered by the Grand Lodge " to digest the same in a new and better method." On the performance of his task, " fourteen learned brothers were appointed to examine the MS. and to make report," which proving favourable, the Grand Lodge desired the Grand Master to have it printed ; and, on the 17th January 1723, it is recorded that " Grand Warden Anderson produced the new book of Constitutions, which was again approved." With the book itself is bound up the printed " approbation " of the Duke of Wharton, Grand Master, as well as of the Masters and Wardens of twenty Lodges; whilst, in a graceful dedication to the Duke of Montagu from the pen of Dr. Desaguliers, the learned natural philosopher, the erudition and accuracy of the compiler are especially borne witness to.


Dr. Anderson says: "Now, though in the third year of King Henry VI, while an Infant of about four years old, the Parliament made an Act, that affected only the working Masons, who had, contrary to the Statutes for Labourers, con federated not to work but at their own Price and Wages ; and because such Agreements were suppos'd to be made at the General Lodges, call'd in the Act Chapters and Congregations of Masons, it was then thought expedient to level the said Act against the said Congregations : yet, when the said King Henry VI arriv'd to Man's Estate, the Masons laid before him and his Lords the above‑mention'd Records and Charges, who, 'tis plain, review'd them and solemnly approved of them as good and reasonable to be holden : Nay, the said King and his Lords must have been incorporated with the Free‑Alasons, before they could make such Review of the Records ; and, in this Reign, before King Henry's Troubles, Masons were much encourag'd. Nor is there any Instance of executing that Act in that, or in any other Reign since and the Masons never neglected their Lodges for it, not even thought it worth while to employ their noble and eminent Brethren to have it repeal'd ; because the working Masons, that are free of the Lodge, scorn to be guilty of such Combinations ; and the free Masons have no concern in trespasses against the Statutes for Labourers " (Anderson, Constitutions, 1723, pp. 34, 35).


The author, or compiler, of the Constitutions adds, in a footnote, that " by THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 177 tradition it is believ'd that the Parliament‑Men were then too much influenc'd by the illiterate clergy, who were not accepted Masons, nor understood Architecture (as the clergy of some former Ages), yet thinking they had an indefeasible Right to know all Secrets, by vertue of auricular Confession and the Masons, never confessing anything thereof, the said Clergy were highly offended and represented them as dangerous to the State." Dr. Anderson then gives in full the words of the statute‑or rather of its translation‑which he takes from Coke; speaks of the " Congregations and Confederacies made by the Masons in their General Assemblies " ; and cites the opinion of the learned Chief justice, that all the Statutes of Labourers were repealed by the statute of 5 Elizabeth, chapter 4.


As Preston and all other Masonic writers, with the solitary exception of Dr. George Kloss (1848), have followed Anderson in their interpretation of this statute, it is unnecessary to repeat the arguments already quoted, but some of the con clusions which have been advanced by independent authorities, whose speculations, though equally erroneous, are less open to suspicion, as being uninfluenced to any appreciable extent by writers of the Craft, may be adduced.


Governor Pownall says: " These Statutes of Labourers were repeatedly renewed through several reigns down to Henry VI and as repeatedly disobeyed by the Freemasons, until in the 3 rd of Henry VI an ordinance was, by the advice of the Lords, on the petition of the Commons, made. This statute ascertains these facts : first, that this corporation held chapters and congregations, assuming, as to the regulating of their work and wages, to have a right to settle these matters by their own bye‑laws. The statute declares this to be a subversion of the law of the land and grievous damage to the community; secondly, it ascertains that this body of masons were a set of artists and mechanicks, the price of whose labour and work ought to be regulated by those Statutes of Labourers ; thirdly, instead of dissolving this corporation, which would in effect have acknowledged it as legal prior to such dissolution, it forbids all their chapters and other congregations to be held and declares all persons assembling or holding such to be felons.


" This statute put an end to this body and all its illegal chapters and pretences. It should seem, however, that societies of these masons met in mere clubs, wherein continuing to observe and practise some of their ceremonies which once had a reference to their constitutions and to the foundation of powers which no longer existed and were scarcely understood, they only made sport to mock themselves, and by degrees their clubs or lodges sunk into a mere foolish, harmless mummery " (Archaologia, vol. ix, pp. 118, 119).


It is greatly to be regretted that this diligent antiquary should have regarded the law of 1425 so decisive of the position he took up, as to render unnecessary a publication of the historical proofs with which he avowed himself prepared. It has been already shown that in the opinion both of Governor Pownall and Hope, the Freemasons were a close corporation under the protection of the Pope, thereby claiming exemption from the Statutes of Labourers, became the subject 178 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS of special legislation in the third year of Henry VI. Indeed, the latter of these authorities maintains that " as soon as, in different countries, a general increase of learning, of industry, or skill, of jealousy in the native sovereigns, of the intrusion of foreigners, to the disparagement of their authority and the detriment of their subjects ; a general corresponding diminution of the papal influence and of the support given by it to Freemasonry, caused the bodies of Freemasons everywhere successively to dissolve, or to be expelled, until they at last ceased to exercise their original profession ; nothing remained of them but an empty name and organization and formulary, which other men laid hold of and appropriated to themselves to carry on and conceal other purposes ; no trace or tradition of their peculiar principles or method continued to be observed " (Hope, Essay on Architecture, PP. 243, 244) By other writers stress has been laid on the terms " congregations, confederacies and general chapiters " and, from their employment in the statute, it has been deduced that the body of Freemasons met in one general assembly, which was convoked " after the manner of a chapter." Though, as a sceptical‑or perhaps a less uncritical‑commentator well observes, " if the chapters or assembling of Freemasons had been injurious to the State by fomenting insurrections, it is scarcely probable that such fact would have been totally overlooked, not only by the English historians, but in the statutes " (Dallaway, Discourses on Architecture, p. 427).


With regard to the tenor of the series of enactments, of which the law under examination is but an intermediate manifestation, the general meaning and intention of the various regulations comprehensively classed as the " Statutes of Labourers," will have been fairly disclosed by the summary already given. They were designed to repress extortion, to keep down the prices of provisions and restrain the wageearning classes from profiting unduly by the dearth of labour and the necessities of a nascent civilization. That the legislature failed in its laudable aim we can. now perceive, but we should bear in mind that political economy, as at this day we understand it, has only been evolved after a long experience of legislative and economical experiments, amply illustrated in the early history of Great Britain, which in part the statutes under review put very plainly before us. The fanciful interpretation placed upon the law of 1425 by Governor Pownall and Hope will be passed over without further comment but, in the terminology of this statute, there are a few expressions which are worthy of more detailed examination.


In the first instance let us consider the phrase, en lour general chapiters assemble! ; in their general chapters assembled‑which, until the authorized edition of the statutes in 18 i o, was almost invariably translated, " in their general chapters and assemblies." Few commentators troubled themselves to consult the original Norman‑French and, as a natural consequence‑even when one did not copy directly from another, as was probably the case in the majority of instances‑the commentary, or annotation, was applied to a garbled or falsified version of the record it professed to explain. Doctors Plot and Anderson, Preston, Dallaway, THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 179 Findel and, even Kloss, cite the statute and, in each instance, the word assemblies appears. Not to pursue this point to an unnecessary length, it may be observed that perhaps about one‑half of the erroneous conclusions that have been drawn from the verbiage of this enactment, arise out of the substitution of a noun for a participle and it has been too hastily concluded that the language of the " Old Charges " is here reproduced, and that the masons, whose illegal conventions it was the object of the statute to repress, met in precisely the same kind of " general assemblies " as those alluded to in our manuscript constitutions. Whilst, indeed, it is very possible that they did, still the enactment will not bear this construction, except inferentially, and, as it has been already overweighted with the conceits of the learned, it will be best to prefer evidence to conjecture and to content ourselves with an examination of the terms actually employed, rather than waste time in vainly speculating upon the meaning and significance of a form of expression which had its origin in the imagination of the translator.


The word " chapters," which occurs in two statutes (III, XVI), describes what in the vernacular were termed conventicles. The latter expression occurs in 1383, in a proclamation of the mayor, sheriffs, and aldermen of the city of London (Riley, Memorials of London, p. 48o) ; again, in 1415, in an ordinance published by the same corporate body ; and, still later, in the fifteenth century, appears in a petition to parliament against an Exeter guild in the twenty‑second year of Edward IV (Smith, English Gilds, p. 3 1 i).


" The commission " (of a justice), says Lambard, " gives power to enquire of Conuenticles. Yet unlawful Conuenticles be not all of one sort ; for sometimes those are called Conuenticles wheerin many do impart with others their meaning to kill a man, or to take one another's part in all things, or suchlike " (Eirenaneba, or The Offrces of the Justices of the Peace, edit. 161 o, p. i73).


Shakespeare would appear to have had this definition present to his mind, when in Part II of his play, Henry VI, he makes Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, the king's uncle‑on being arrested for treason in the presence of Cardinal Beaufort and other noblemen‑utter the following complaint Ay, all of you have laid your heads together. Myself had notice of your conventicle r And all to make away my guiltless life.


The word, in the sense of an " assembly for worship," does not appear in the statutes until 1592‑3, when by the 3 5 Eliz., c. i, persons above the age of sixteen were forbidden to be present " at anye unlaufull assemblies, conventicles, or meetings, under colour or pretence of any exercise of Religion." The view presented is strengthened by the language of two statutes, enacted in 14oo and i 5 zg respectively. The earlier of these (in Latin) is directed against the Lollards, who are charged with making unlawful conventicles (conventicula) and confederacies ; and the other (in English) forbids " artyficers or handycraftes men " from assembling " in any company, felowship, congregacion, or conventycle." 18o THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS Kloss mentions, that by the Golden Bull of the Emperor Charles IV, promulgated in 1371, `.` conspirationes," " conventicula " and kindred associations were forbidden. From the evidence adduced it will become quite clear, that, in 1425, there was an English word in common use‑conventicle‑denoting precisely the same kind of clandestine meeting as those which the statute was enacted to suppress and readers may form their own conclusions, upon the point whether the persons, to whom the phraseology of the statute was entrusted, had in their minds the seditious assemblies of which examples have been given, or whether the term they used had reference to societies, meeting " after the manner of a chapter," which, indeed, are not otherwise mentioned in the statute‑book.


The interest pertaining to this statute has been heightened by the common assertion that Henry VI was himself a Freemason. Indeed, Preston carefully records the year of his initiation (Illustrations of Alasonry, 1792, p. 19q) and, in nearly every Masonic work may be seen a singular catechism " concerning the mysterie of ma5onrye, writtene by the hande of Kinge Henrye, the sixthe of the name." Of any real connexion, however, between this Prince and the Freemasons, no trace exists except in the catechism alluded to, which will presently be examined. We are apt to attach an imaginary value to MSS. which have been destroyed, as we are precluded from making a collation of the copy with the original. Most of the documents of the Freemasons are in this melancholy category and, upon the alleged destruction, by Nicholas Stone, of many valuable manuscripts belonging to the society, it has been remarked, " perhaps his master, Inigo Jones, thought that the new mode, though dependent on taste, was independent of science; and, like the Caliph Omar, held what was agreeable to the new faith useless and what was not ought to be destroyed 1 " (Archaologia, vol. xvii, p. 83).


Henry's long minority and weakness of understanding when he arrived at more mature years, made him incapable of any character whatsoever, in any relation of life. " Such a King," in the opinion of Daines Barrington, " could possibly be of no other use than that of the Roman Consuls, in the fall of the empire‑to mark the year " (Barrington, Observations on the More Ancient Statutes, p. 416). It has been stated that he was an adept in the science of alchemy (Rymer, Fadera, vol. ii, pt. iii, p. 24) and Sir John Davis says, it was conceived that he had purchased the secret from the famous Raymond Lully (Barrington, op. cit., p. 416). Miracles, indeed, are alleged to have been performed at the tomb of Henry VI, though Widmore says, " that the Court of Rome asked too much for his canonization, so that he never became a complete saint." XVII. In 1427, the Statutes of the twelfth and thirteenth years of Richard II (IX, X) having been pronounced ineffectual, the former as being " too hard upon the masters " and the latter, from the absence of any penalty for wrong‑doing, it was ordained " that the justices of the peace in every county, the mayor of the City of London and the mayors and bailiffs in every city, borough, or town, having such power and authority as justices of the peace have, shall, henceforth, have power and THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 181 authority to make proclamation in their full sessions, once a year, how much every servant of husbandry shall take for the year next following and that they make two times (deux foit~) proclamation in two sessions, to be holden betwixt the feasts of Easter and St. Michael and in every borough and market town, how much every artificer and workman shall take by the day and by the week : and that every proclamation so to be made, be holden as a thing ordained by statute." Infractions of the law were declared punishable by fine or imprisonment and the justices, mayors, and bailiffs were authorized " to hear and determine such offences and to examine by their discretion, as well such servants, artificers, and workmen, as their masters," to punish offenders, to direct sheriffs to imprison them : " and that all the mayors and bailiffs which be keepers of the peace (queux count Gardeins du pees) in any cities, towns, or boroughs, shall have like power, correction and execution of the [Statute] and of all Statutes of Labourers within the said towns, cities and boroughs, as the justices of the peace have in their counties." This statute has been minutely criticized by Dr. Kloss, who considers that, from its phraseology, certain obscure passages in the Halliwell poem " acquire sense and confirmation." This writer observes, that the justices of the peace had hitherto been the sole assessors of the rate of wages and judges of all offences against the respective statutes‑the sheriffs, bailiffs and their subordinates, the keepers of gaols, being only mentioned as having to execute the warrants, orders, and resolutions of the justices. But, by this new law, besides the justices, the mayor of the city of London, the mayors and bailiffs of every chief city, borough, or county town, all persons of position and rank, are for the first time, empowered to participate in the settlement of the rate of wages and to make proclamation thereof twice a year. Conjointly they are charged to hear and decide all infractions and to issue and grant warrants of arrest, which were to be executed by the sheriff.


" At last," says Kloss, " we glean why the Masons were to appear at the general assembly at a certain place once a year, to hear the rate of wages, on account of gret ryolte‑that is, by royal command. We learn the meaning of the presence at the session of the grete lordes, knyghtes, sgwyers and other aldermen, of the meyr of that syte and also of the scheref of that contre, as administrators of the law and what is meant by ruche ordynances as they maken there " (Findel, History of Freemasonry, p. 30).


Upon the evidence of this statute, therefore, Kloss contends that the Halliwell poem could not have been written before 1427, nor‑from the testimony presented by a later enactment, presently to be examined‑after 1444‑5.


It is no reflection upon Kloss's learning or ability to say that he has altogether failed to grasp the true meaning of this enactment and, thereby, to comprehend the intention of the legislature. The range of his inquiry could hardly be expected to extend over the whole field of English law.


The rules by which the sages of the law, according to Plowden, have ever been guided in seeking for the intention of the legislature are maxims of sound interpretation, which have been accumulated by the experience, and ratified by the approbation, of ages.


18z THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS First in importance is the consideration, what was the rule at the common law ? " To know what the common law was, before the making of a statute, whereby it may be seen whether the statute be introductory of a new law, or only affirmative of the common law, is the very lock and key to set open the windows of the statute" (z Inst., 301 ; 3 Rep., 13 ; Hob., 83).


The language of the enactment under review (XVII) clearly shows that the officials associated with the justices already possessed equal powers with the latter. But who were the justices of the peace ? The peace, in the most extensive sense of the word, took in, perhaps, the whole of the criminal law; and, as most offences were said to be against the peace, all those magistrates who had authority to take cognizance of such offences, might be considered as a sort of guardians of the peace ex officio : such were the king's justices, inferior judges and ministers of justice, as sheriffs, constables, tythingmen, head boroughs and the like (Reeve, History of the English Law, 1869, vol. ii, p. 3z8). Others were conservators of the peace by tenure or prescription. Besides these, extraordinary ones were appointed occasionally by commission from the king. In the first year of Edward III certain conservators of the peace were nominated by the Crown, as auxiliary to those who were such by the titles above mentioned.


So beneficial was the establishment of " keepers of the peace " considered by the people, that it became a favourite in the country and was exalted in preference to some institutions that were more ancient (Reeve, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 330).


In conformity with many statutes and petitions, commissions were at various times framed, assigning certain persons to execute the powers which the statutes authorized the king to confer. " In the twenty‑fifth of Edward the Third," says Reeves, " by the statute called the statute of labourers, we find that justices were to be assigned for the execution of that act. It is most probable the persons assigned justices to execute this statute were the keepers of the peace " (III). Thus we find, that the justices and their coadjutors in the statute under review, were virtually one and the same class‑that is to say, the former, eo nomine, specially assigned by the king, the latter‑long since keepers, now justices of the peace, virtute officio, being specially reminded of responsibilities, gradually increasing, from the natural tendency of recalcitrant labourers and workmen to seek refuge in the towns. The language of the earlier statutes fully bears out this view ; and, indeed, these, in a definite shape, seem to amount to this‑That the repeated mention of the sheriff, the mayors, the bailiffs, constables, etc., must, by means of the numerous proclamations, have made the lower classes far more familiar with the names of these officials than with those of the new‑fangled " justices " (I, II, IX). The view presented is supported by the absence, in the Halliwell poem, of any reference to the latter. From this fact alone an inference may be deduced the opposite of that drawn by Dr. Kloss, namely, that the presence of " great lords, mayors and sheriffs " points to a fourteenth‑century origin of the poem, as claimed for it by the antiquary who made known its existence.


It seems that the " father " of Masonic criticism has here gone wholly off the THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 183 track. The Halliwell poem, we must assume, was intended for the instruction and guidance of town or of country masons. The entire tenor of this production, the class of persons to whom it was addressed‑far superior in their way to the villeins, the labourers in husbandry and the rude artificers of the shires, the regulations for behaviour at the common meal, all seem to point to its connexion with some urban craft. If this view be accepted, the Statutes of Labourers have very little bearing upon the question at issue. These enactments were especially framed with regard to the powers and wants of the landed proprietors (Brentano, p. xii). In towns, labour was generally regulated by municipal ordinances (IV). Thus in 1350, contemporaneously with the Parliamentary Statute of that year, were ordained by the mayor, aldermen and commonalty of London, various regulations as to wages and prices in the city, " to amend and redress," in the words of the preamble, " the damages and grievances which the good folks of the city, rich and poor, have suffered and received within the past year, by reason of masons, carpenters, plasterers, tilers and all manner of labourers, who take immeasurably more than they have been wont to take" (Riley, Memorials of London, p. 253).


A word is necessary as to the position of sherif. Dr. Kloss appears to think that this official received an accession of authority by the law of 1427. Such was not the case. The tourn, the great criminal court of the Saxons, was still presided over by each sheriff in his county; and it was not until 1461, that from what Reeves calls " a revolution in an ancient branch of our judicial establishment," his jurisdiction was restrained (Reeves, op. cit., vol. iii, p. 5).


It is possible, indeed, that by some the opinion may be held, that the most ancient of our manuscript charges or constitutions, referred either partly or wholly to country Masons. Taking their view of the case, we are, however, faced by the conclusion of an eminent authority, who believes the " artificers," whom the 25th Edward III and later statutes " expects to flee from one county to another," to have been workmen employed on the country manors of lords. " Each country manor," says Brentano, " had in the Middle Ages its own artificers, who supplied the common wants of their lords, whilst the latter resorted only for their more refined wants to the craftsmen of the towns " (op. cit., Introduction, p. xii).


It can scarcely be believed that the masons who plied their trade in remote villages and hamlets at about the early part of the fifteenth century were, either by education or intelligence, capable of comprehending the Halliwell poem had it been rehearsed to them. But, putting conjecture wholly aside and, contenting ourselves with the actual expressions to be met with in that ancient manuscript, one would have expected to find in a document of this character relating to artificers of the counties written between 1427 and 1444‑some reference or allusion to the justices of the peace, whose authority was gradually being extended, by whom, no doubt, many regulations were made which have not survived and who, by charters, letters patent and ordinances of the reigning king‑not entered on the Statute Roll‑must have been constantly charged with the proper execution of the Statutes of Labourers in particular counties where their provisions had been evaded.


184 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS XVIII. Although following a common practice, the operation of the enactment just reviewed (XVII) was limited to the end of the next parliament, in the very next statute of this reign it was made permanent. This capitulary consists of twenty nine chapters, which have little connexion with each other‑one only besides that already cited demands our attention. On the complaint of the civic authorities that they had been " grievously vexed and inquieted by colour of an article in the statute of 14o6 " (XII), it was ordained in 1429 " that the ancient manner, form, and custom of putting and taking of apprentices, used and continued in the city of London, be from henceforth kept and observed." Upon this, Dr. Kloss observes, " it justifies the conclusion that the usages and customs of London, as the capital, were either adopted and followed by the rest of the kingdom, or that the Halliwell poem was about this period composed expressly by and for the Londoners " and adds, " that the first assumption obtains increased probability by the law of 15 6z," which definitely fixes a seven years' apprenticeship for the whole kingdom, " according to the custom and usage of the capitalLondon." XIX. In 1437 the king and his parliament applied themselves still more vigorously to mitigate the growing abuses of the craft guilds ; yet, in the very course adopted, we may perceive that the sweeping condemnation of the right of the crafts men to govern their trades by regulations of their own devising (III, XVI) had been ineffectual, as it was now sought to control a system which the legislature was powerless to suppress. Accordingly, on the ground that " the masters, wardens and people of many guilds, fraternities and other companies, make among themselves many unlawful and unreasonable ordinances " of things (inter alia), " which sound in confederacy (sonnent en confederacie) for their singular profit and common damage to the people." All letters patent and charters were required to be exhibited to the justices in counties, or the chief governors of cities, boroughs and towns, without whose sanction no new ordinances were to be made or used and by whom the same could be at any time revoked or repealed (.


V). The cumulative effect of these restrictions, at a time‑the middle of the fourteenth century‑when the villeins were rushing in great numbers into the towns, to take up trades, must have prevented a great number‑and in several trades the majority ‑of workmen from themselves becoming independent masters ; thus there arose a real working‑class, with separate views and interests (Brentano, p. 76). In England, the craft guilds gradually hardened into the same narrow‑mindedness as in Germany and France, with the same favours to the sons of masters as regards the term of apprenticeship, entrance fees and, in some cases, of masterpieces (Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. zo).


Ludlow, in what a high authority terms " one of the best papers ever written on trade unions " (Brentano, p. 1oi), has well stated, that " from the moment that to establish a given business more capital is required than a journeyman can easily accumulate within a few years, guildmastership‑the mastership of the masterpiece‑ THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 185 becomes little more than a name. The attempt to keep up the strictness of its conditions becomes only an additional weight on the poorer members of the trade; skill alone is valueless and is soon compelled to hire itself out to capital." The same writer‑and his commentary is the more valuable, because the masons could no more have been present to his mind's eye than any other class of workmen to which his essay refers‑cites the Act of 136o (III), the earlier of the two enactments mentioning the chapters of the masons and observes : " This statute is remarkable as showing the co‑existence of the two masterships‑that of skill and capital; thus, the ` chief masters ' of carpenters and masons are to receive fourpence a day and the others threepence or twopence, according as they be worth; but every mason and carpenter, ` of whatever condition he be,' is to be compelled by ` his master whom he serves ' to do every work that pertains to him." " Where," continues Ludlow, " as it seems to me, the guild‑masters are designated by the former expression, and the capitalist‑masters by the latter" (Macmillan's Magazine, vol. iii, 1861, p. 315).




. The increasing opulence of the towns, by withdrawing both workmen and labourers from the country, led to further legislation in 1444‑5, when the wages of labourers and artificers were again assessed, those of a " free mason " (,frank mason) or master carpenter being limited to 4d. a day, with meat and drink, and 5d. without and their winter wages to 3d. and 4d. respectively. It is, however, expressed that the same form shall be observed of wages of servants being with hostlers, victuallers and artificers in citees, burghs and elsewhere ; and such as deserve less shall take less and also, in places where less is used to be given, less shall be given from henceforth.


The enforcement of this statute was left to the justices of the peace in their counties, who were to hear and determine all offences, to proclaim twice a year all unrepealed Acts of Parliament relating to labourers, artificers, etc. and to punish by fine or imprisonment.


Dr. Kloss lays great stress on the circumstance of the execution of this law being solely confided to the justices and considers that the presence of the mayors of cities and other officials named by the Act of 1427 (XVII), having been " silently dispensed with," we are thereby enabled to fix more accurately the period at which the Halliwell poem was written and, as the attendance of these authorities, along with the justices, would, he thinks, have been, to say the least, superfluous, it is assumed, that the words of the manuscript point to an earlier date and that, consequently, it could not have been written after 1444‑5.


During the reign of Edward IV very little notice was taken by the legislature of the labouring classes of the community, except by the statutes for regulating apparel. Servants in husbandry, common labourers and artificers, were forbidden to wear any cloth, whereof the broad yard exceeded the price of 2s. The solitary parliament which assembled at the bidding of his brother and successor, enacted that no alien should be a handicraftsman (artificer ou handcraftiman) unless as a servant to the king's subjects.


186 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS The accession of Henry VII to the throne may be considered as the commencement of an era of internal tranquillity and industry. The statutes enacted in the reigns of his immediate predecessors, sent in each county to the justices of the peace, for them to proclaim and execute, including those against signs and liveries, routs and forcible entries and, for the regulation of the lower classes, were adequate to their intended purpose and only required to be firmly put into execution. To effect this object, Henry, feeling the futility of merely enacting that the laws should be enforced, without providing a power to compel their enforcement, began by raising the formidable power of the Star Chamber and then proceeded to call upon the local magistracy, under terror of that power, to enforce the laws. The utility of this court is extolled by Lord Bacon and, although even during the age of that historian, men began to feel that so arbitrary a jurisdiction was incompatible with liberty and, as the spirit of independence still rose higher in the nation, the aversion to it increased ; still it is tolerably clear that the establishment of the Star Chamber, or the enlargement of its power in the reign of Henry VII, might have been as prudent as the abolition of it in that of Charles 'I (Reeves, op. cit., vOl. iii, p. 124).


The local magistracy were thus strengthened and stimulated to put the laws in execution, more especially those directed against that which was the main mischief of those times, offences of force and violence and combinations or retainers of men for unlawful purposes. The principal of these laws were, first, the statutes against liveries and retainers and, next, those relating to forcible entry. These statutes were enacted prior to Henry's accession and, when Hume says, " there scarcely passed any session during this reign without some statute against engaging retainers and giving them badges or liveries, a practice by which they were in a manner enlisted under some great lord and were kept in readiness to assist him in all wars, insurrections, riots, violences and even in bearing evidence for him in courts of justice," he apparently forgets that they were only in pursuance of older statutes passed in earlier reigns.


The subject of liveries has already been noticed and its further examination will now be proceeded with.




I. The stat. i Rich. II, c. vii, recites‑" Because that divers people of small revenue do make great retinue of people, giving to them hats (chaperons) and other liveries, of one suit by year, taking of them the value, or the double value of the same livery, by such covenant and assurance that every of them shall maintain other in all quarrels, be they reasonable or unreasonable." It confirms the statutes against maintenance; forbids, under pain of imprisonment, the giving of liveries for the maintenance of quarrels or other confederacies and directs the justices of assize " to diligently enquire of all them that gather them together in fraternities (en fraterniteZ) by such livery, to do maintenance; and that they which thereof shall be found guilty, shall be duly punished, every man after the quantity of his desert." THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 187 In 1392‑3 it was further enacted that " no yeoman (yoman) nor other of lower estate than an Esquire, from henceforth shall use nor bear no livery, called livery of company (livere de compaignie), of any lord within the realm, if he be not continually dwelling in the house of the said lord." The earliest of this series, the statute of " Liveries of Hats " (1377), was confirmed in 1396, chapter ii of the Confirmatory Act, ordering‑" Item, that no varlets called yeomen (vadletZ appelle!Z yomen), nor none other of less estate than Esquire, shall use or bear no badge or livery, called livery of company of any Lord within the realm, unless he be menial or continual officer of his said Lord." In the first year of King Henry IV, lords of whatever estate or condition were forbidden to " use nor give any livery of Sign of Company (Signe de Compaigne), to no Knight, Esquire, nor Yeoman, within the Realm and that no valet called yeoman (vadlet appelle_yoman) take nor wear any livery of the King." In the following year this statute was confirmed and certain privileges were conceded to knights, esquires and all above those ranks ; and the Prince of Wales was permitted to " give his honourable livery of the Swan to lords and his menial gentlemen." In 1405‑6 the statutes of 1377 (Livery of Hats) and 1399 were confirmed and f a fine of C5 imposed upon any knight or person of less estate " who gives a livery i of Cloth or Hats " and of 40s. upon the recipient. It also forbids congregations and companies from using any such liveries, " the guilds and fraternities, also the II people of mysteries (gentZ de mestere), of cities and boroughs within the realm " alone excepted.


Liveries are once again mentioned in this reign, namely, in 1411, when the statutes passed respectively in the first and seventh years of this King and in the first of Richard II are confirmed.


All the statutes in force are recited in a very long enactment, passed early in the reign of Henry VI ; further powers are given to the justices of assize and of the peace; and persons are prohibited from wearing, even at their own cost, liveries for maintenance in quarrels.


In 1468 the existing statutes were once more confirmed and every person restrained from giving livery or badge (livre ou signe) to other than his menial servant, officer, or man learned in the one law or the other; and the mayors, sheriffs, bailiffs, or chief officers, who, in particular cities, boroughs, towns, or ports, have authority " to hear and determine pleas personal, are empowered to hear and determine, as well by examination as by trial, all things done " and to put the ordinance in execution. By a subsequent Act of this reign, Edward, Prince of Wales, was empowered to give his livery and sign.




II. The preamble of the act of parliament, by which Henry VII enlarged the power of the Star Chamber, is remarkable and presents a clear picture of the condition of the nation at that period. " The king, our sovereign lord, remembereth how by unlawful maintenances, giving of liveries, signs and tokens, retainers by 188 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS indentures, promises, oaths, writings and other embraceries of his subjects, untrue demeanings of sheriffs in making panels and untrue returns by taking money by juries, by great riots and unlawful assemblies, the policy and good rule of this realm is almost subdued." It will be seen that Henry, so early as the third year of his reign, fully recognized the comparative anarchy of his kingdom. His great object was to enforce the existing laws and put down all power of resistance to the royal authority. This object was steadily pursued throughout the reign.


A story of the king's severity is related by Hume (vol. iii, p. 390) which seems to merit praise, though commonly cited as an instance of his avarice and rapacity. The Earl of Oxford, having splendidly entertained him at his castle at Henningham, with all his servants and retainers wearing liveries and badges, Henry thanked him for his good cheer, but said, " I cannot allow my laws to be broken in my sight, my attorney must speak with you." His regard for the laws tended, in this instance, to what Blackstone holds to have been the great and immediate object of all his regulations‑namely, to the emolument of the exchequer, as it is said the Earl paid a composition of 15,000 marks for his offence.




III. The statute enacted in the eleventh year of the king (1495) was a veritable capitulary, consisting of sixty‑five chapters or laws, ranging through sixty‑eight folio pages of the Statutes of the Realm, in which we obtain a foretaste of the appetite for legislation which our ancestors gradually acquired with increasing freedom. Chapter III in the series of 1495 deals with the evils complained of in the preamble of the law of 1487 and speaks of " gevyng and receyvyng of lyverees, signees and tokyns, unlaufully." The preamble of the statute of 1487 (.


II) appears to have escaped the research of Masonic historians, but upon identical phraseology, which occurs in the subsequent legislation of 1495, a very singular interpretation has been placed. The signs and tokens have been regarded as signs of recognition and grips of salutation! Even Kloss falls into this error, though, as he himself does not fail to perceive, these essential features of a secret society " must in such case have been usual with many trades." He might, indeed, have gone even further, for it is quite clear that the persons who received the liveries, signs and tokens, mentioned in the statute, were people of all classes, even the lowest ; consequently, therefore, if these expressions were capable of the meaning ascribed to them, secret modes of recognition, by operation of gesture and hand‑shaking, must have been common throughout England in the Middle Ages. English Masonic writers, except of late years, when they have been content to follow the German school, even in the interpretation of their own history, much as they have erred, never got quite so far as this.


In the pursuit of Masonic antiquity, possibility rather than probability was their watchword; yet there is such a thing as proving too much and, in the present instance, the identity of the signs and tokens of the Freemasons, with the signs and tokens which it was the object of these early statutes to repress, instead of confirming THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 189 the Masonic body in the position of superiority it has arrogated to itself, would necessarily drag it down to the level of the meanest persons by whom these modes of recognition were commonly possessed.


In his History of Freemasonry‑wherein Findel may be said to have popularized Kloss, although he has lessened the authority of that eminent writer, by intermingling his remarks with those of less critical historians‑the author says, " as in the case of the German stonemasons, so did the English masons at an early period form fraternities or associations, the members of which recognized each other by secret signs and tokens. . . . In 1495, all artisans and workmen were again forbidden to use liveries, signs and tokens " (History of Freemasonry, pp. 78, 80).


Of the Tudor policy against liveries, retainers, etc., it has been observed by a learned writer, " nothing indicated more clearly that the elements of society were about to be thrown into new combinations, than the perseverance with which previous statutes against giving liveries and tokens were enforced and with which their deficiencies were made good by new enactments. All the considerable landholders still regarded themselves as chieftains. All their inferiors in their neighbourhood were their retainers, to whom they gave liveries and tokens and who, in other words, wore their uniform and rallied to their standard. A common gift from chief to retainer seems to have been a badge [sign] to be worn in the cap. Thus one of the Stanleys was in the habit of giving to his followers ` the eagle's foot' and one of the Darcies `the buck's head.' These tokens were sometimes of silver and sometimes gilt and were, no doubt, highly prized by those who received them " (L. O. Pike, History of Crime in England, vol. i, p. 7 ; ii, 604).


The badge, cognizance, or sign of company, as it was variously termed, served as a recognition and distinction of party, of feudal allegiance and dependency, to both friends and foes. It was worn on the arm or cap. The signs and tokens mentioned in the statute (.


III) were badges and cognizances ; badges were the masters' device, crest, or arms, on a separate piece of cloth‑or, in the time of Queen Elizabeth, on silver, in the form of a shield, worn on the left sleeve by domestics and retainers and even by younger brothers, who wore the badge of the elder. This was generally continued till the time of James I, after which it was only worn by watermen and servants of persons of distinction. The royal watermen still wear it. " Cognizanes " were sometimes knots or devices worn in the caps or on the chest, some of the royal servants wore the king's arms both on the breast and on the back. " Reteyndres " appear to have been the agreements, verbal or written, by which the retainers, sometimes called " Retinue," were engaged or retained.




IV. We now approach what is virtually the last in the long series of enactments regulating with extreme precision the wages of labourers and artificers, which presents any features of originality, before the successive laws on this subject were codified by the 5 Elizabeth, c. iv.


The wages of artificers were again fixed,‑ a free mason, master carpenter and 1cgo THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS rough mason were to take per day 4d. with diet and 6d. without, between Easter and Michaelmas and, during the rest of the year, 3d. and 5d. respectively. Master masons and master carpenters, taking charge of work and having under them six men, were to receive 5d. with diet and 7d. without. The penalty for taking more was 2os. ; and for giving more, 40S. During the summer half‑year, each workman and labourer was to be at work before 5 a.m., to have half an hour for his breakfast, an hour and a half for his dinner, at such time as sleeping was permitted him; but at other times, then but one hour for his dinner and half an hour for his " none .,neat " (XI). Bricklayers and glaziers are mentioned for the first time.


From the words, that " if any of theym offende in any of theis articles, that then their defautes be marked by hym, or his deputie, that shall pay their wages," Kloss infers that we have here officials corresponding with our present foremen and wardens. It may be so ; but whether or not any complete analogy can be established between the two sets of persons, the observation is so illustrative of the commentator's microscopic examination of these, now, happily, obsolete laws, that I have much pleasure in quoting it.




V. In the nineteenth year of the king, on the petition of the commons, that the stat. 15 Henry VI, c. vi (XIX) had expired, it was ordained that masters, wardens and fellowships of crafts or mysteries and the rulers of guilds and fraterni ties, should make or enforce no new ordinances without the approval of the chancellor, a chief justice, three judges of the land, or before both the justices of assize in their circuit.


At this point it will be convenient to cast a backward glance upon the two chief statutes aimed at the working masons, viz. the laws of 136o and 1425 (III, XVI) and the later Act of 1437 (XIX). Throughout these there is one common feature‑the desire of the legislature to curb the increasing independence of the craft guilds and to restrain them from passing articles or regulations for their internal government, which were at variance with the course of policy steadily pursued from the reign of Edward III down to that of Queen Elizabeth. It may be convenient, however, at this stage of our inquiry, to consider a little more closely the class, or classes, of persons whose earnings and liberty of action were chiefly affected by the provisions of the long series of laws known as the Statutes of Labourers.


These enactments‑though all launched in the furtherance of a common object, the repression of extortion partook, nevertheless, of a mixed character. In general, they seem to have been dictated by the wants of the country districts, whilst those specially referring to practices‑the making of ordinances, the holding of conventicles, and the like‑only possible in towns, or in places where many workmen were assembled, must have been evoked, either by a persistence in these forbidden customs, or by complaints that country artificers, fugitives from their counties, were harboured in the cities, and there admitted to the freedom of their trades. Even in London, where the rules respecting the freedom of the city were very THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 191 rigid, workmen and labourers, who, in 13 5 3, had left the king's palace at Westminster without leave, were allowed to follow their occupations and this licence was only withdrawn in obedience to a peremptory mandate of the king. In other cities and towns, we may infer that fugitives were similarly received ; and it is, therefore, in the highest degree probable that, wherever a statutory obligation is cast upon the mayors or chief governors of towns to see the laws relating to labourers duly executed ‑except in the few instances to which attention has already been called‑these officials were only required to supplement the duties of the justices in counties, by promptly arresting fugitives and delivering them up for punishment.


In the words of a famed historian (Hume, vol. iv, p. z43), " If there were really a decay of commerce and industry and populousness in England, the statutes passed in the reign of Henry VIII, except by abolishing monasteries and retrenching holidays, circumstances of considerable moment, were not in other respects well calculated to remedy the evil." The fixing of the rate of wages was attempted; luxury in apparel was prohibited by repeated statutes ; and probably without effect. The chancellor and other ministers were empowered to fix the price of poultry, cheese and butter. A statute was even passed to fix the price of beef, pork, mutton and veal. Beef and pork were ordered to be sold at a halfpenny a pound, mutton and veal at a halfpenny half a farthing, money of that age (Hume, vol. iv, p. z43) .


VI. The first law of this reign with which we are concerned was passed in 1514 and is a re‑enactment verbatim of the Act of 1495 (.


III), which we have seen was only in force one year; miners, diggers for coal and makers of glass, alone were exempted from its provisions.


Sir George Nicholls says, " The twenty years which had since elapsed seem to have called for no change in the rate of wages then fixed and which differed little from those prescribed in 1444 by the z3 Hen. VI (.


) ; so that, after an interval of seventy years, we find no material difference in the rates of remuneration prescribed for labour " (History of the English Poor Law, 1854, vol. i, p. 110).




VII. In the following year, however, " on the humble petycyon of the freemasons, rough masons, carpenters " and other artificers " wythin the Cytie of London " and, in consideration of the heavy expenses to which they were subject, it was enacted that, except when employed on the king's works, the artificers, labourers and their apprentices, working within the city or the liberty of the same, might take the same wages which they had been in the habit of doing prior to the statute of 1514. By the last clause of this Act, the penalty imposed upon the giver of excessive wages by the previous law was repealed.


Although the remaining laws enacted in this reign, relating to journeymen, apprentices and artificers, were rather calculated for particular trades and employments, under particular circumstances, some few were of more general import and, therefore, demand attention.




VIII. The exaction of high fees for the admission of apprentices to their freedom was guarded against. No master was to compel his apprentice to engage by oath or bond not to open a shop ; and, in this, as well as in the previous statute (.


VII), the practice of guilds, crafts and fraternities in making " actes and ordynannces," without submitting them for confirmation, is denounced and forbidden.


The laws just cited prove that the custom of travelling, or as Dr. Kloss expresses it, " the wandering years of the finished apprentice," was not usual in this country, yet we should go too far were we to assume, from the absence of this distinctive feature in the career of the young craftsman, that, with ceremonies at all resembling those of the French and German journeymen, he must have been necessarily unfamiliar. Journeymen fraternities sprang up in England as in other countries and, though the evidence is not conclusive as to the perpetuation of these societies, the balance of probability seems to affirm it. Dugdale, in his account of Coventry, observes that, in the reign of Henry V, " the young people, viz., journeymen of several trades,‑observing what merry meetings and feasts their masters had by belonging to fraternities and wanting themselves the like pleasure, did of their own accord assemble together in several places of the city, which occasioned the mayor and his brethren in 3 Hen. VI (XVI) to complain thereof to the king, alleging that the said journeymen, in these their unlawful meetings, called themselves St. George his gild, to the intent that they might maintain and abet one another in quarrels, etc. ; had made choyce of a master, etc., to the prejudice of the other gilds " (Antiquities of IYarzvicksbire, 1675, p. 130).


In London these organizations met with little favour from the authorities and when, in 1387, three journeymen cordwainers endeavoured to establish a fraternity they were committed to Newgate, having confessed " that a certain friar preacher, `Brother William Bartone 'by name, had made an agreement with their companions and had given security to them, that he would make suit in the court of Rome for confirmation of that fraternity by the Pope ; so that, on pain of excommunication and of still more grievous sentence afterwards to be fulminated, no man should dare to interfere with the well‑being of the fraternity. For doing the which he had received a certain sum of money which had been collected among their said companions " (Riley, Memorials of London, p. 495).


In 1396, the serving men oryomen of the trade of saddlers were charged by the masters with having " under a certain feigned colour of sanctity " influenced the journeymen among them and formed covins with the object of raising their wages greatly in excess. Although this fraternity possessed its own livery and had existed for thirteen years, it was suppressed (ibid., p. 542).


The same fate befell, in 1415, the brotherhood oryomen taillours, charged with holding assemblies and conventicles (XVI), who were forbidden " to live together in companies by themselves," or to wear an especial suit or livery without permission of the masters and wardens of the trade (ibid., p. 6og).


Two years later, however, the brotherhood was still in existence, as they then THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 193 petitioned the city authorities that the " fellows of that fraternity of yomen " might be allowed to hold annual religious services for the souls of the brethren and sisters deceased and " to do other things which theretofore they had been wont to do." The entry in the records here abruptly ceases, so that the result of this petition does not appear, but it is probable that it was refused.


In deciding the question whether there existed special organizations of the journeymen within the crafts, an ordinance of the clothworkers' company is worthy of consideration: " The master, wardens and assistants shall choose the warden of the yeomandry, they shall governe the yeomandry and journymen in such sort as in former times hath been used." Commenting upon this ordinance, Brentano observes : " Were these wardens of the yeomanry the same as the masters who, as in the German gilds, were delegated to the fraternities of journeymen ? And may we therefrom form a conclusion as to the existence of fraternities of like nature in England ? The ceremonies which were customary among the trade unions in the woollen manufacture down to the thirtieth year of the present century, show such a striking similarity to those of the German fraternities of journeymen, that the supposition suggests itself of a derivation of those trade unions from the old journeymen fraternities " (Brentano, p. 95).


As militating, however, against this hypothesis, it is contended that, in England, the journeymen were never obliged by the guild ordinances to travel for a certain number of years, whilst, in Germany, and France all journeymen's associations owed their origin to this system of travelling. But, in the first place, there is some evidence that the practice of travelling in search of work was, to say the least, not unknown in England (IX). In 11794 there was a club among the woolcombers and, out of a hundred workmen, there was not one to be found who did not belong to it. Every member had to pay contributions according to the wants of the society and its object was to assist journeymen travelling in search of work when work was scarce, to relieve the sick and to bury the dead members (Brentano, p. 96, note i).


" It will be seen," says Brentano, " that the objects of this club were the same as those of the German Gesellenladen and the French compagnons. If we add to this that the just quoted records of ceremonies among trade unions refer to woolcombers also, the suggestion already made seems greatly corroborated ; and the fact that the modern trade unions call the assistance given to members out of work simply donation, the translation of the Geschenk of the German journeymen's fraternities, seems also worth noticing " (Brentano, p. 99).


Secondly, the term of apprenticeship extended over a longer period in England than in either France or Germany and, in point of duration, corresponded pretty closely with the stages or gradations through which the foreign craftsman worked his way towards the common goal. Thus the English workman found his preliminary servitude in no respect abridged by the absence of any trade regulation compelling him to travel and whilst, as we have seen (XIX, .


VIII), the number of masters was rigorously kept down and the obstacles to attaining freedom of the trade at least as great in the case of English as of foreign artisans (Brentano, p. 86), 194 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS the former, from the very circumstances of their position, that is to say, by the mere fact of a more extended probation, would be induced to form local fraternities for social and trade purposes. That they did so, is matter of history and Stow records the rising of the London apprentices because some of their brotherhood had been unjustly, as they averred, cast into prison and punished (Strype's Stow, 1720, PP‑ 332, 333).


During this reign, so great was the number of foreign artisans in the city, that, at least, fifteen thousand Flemings alone were at one time obliged to leave it, by an order of Council. Whatever trade societies or fraternities were in general use on the Continent, must have passed over to this country about the period of the Reformation. It might be imagined, that the foreign artificers who settled in England were least affected by the usages of the trades and preserved greater freedom of action between the period following the abolition of guilds, preceding the enactment of the stat. 4 Eliz., c. v. Inasmuch as, with the exception of the London companies, who purchased exemption from the statutes of spoliation (Herbert, Companies of London, i, p. 114) and, moreover, were at all times specially legislated for (.


XII), the ordinances of the craft‑guilds‑invariably directed against the competition of non‑freemen‑were inoperative. Yet such was not the case and, even in London, where the jealousy of foreign workmen was at its height, we find that, owing, no doubt, to their surpassing the English in dexterity, industry and frugality, they were not only tolerated, but, in spite of vexatious laws, attained such a pitch of prosperity as to incur the most violent animosity of their English rivals. There were serious insurrections in 1517 and 1586 and, in 1641, the feeling of exasperation which had been engendered gave rise to a petition to parliament from the London apprentices, complaining of the intolerable hardships to which they were subject, " where we, by coercion, are necessarily compelled to serve seven or eight years at least before we can have the immunity and freedom of this city to trade in those which are mere strangers do snatch this freedom from us and pull the trades out of our hands, so that by these means, when our times are fully expired, we do then begin in a manner to suffer a second apprenticeship to them, who do thus domineer over us in our own trades." A remarkable circumstance of the statutes of Henry VIII is the prodigious length to which they run. " The sense," says Reeves, " involved in repetitions, is pursued with pain and almost escapes the reader; while he is retarded and made giddy by a continual recurrence of the same form of words in the same endless period " (History of the English Lazv, vol. iv, p. 428). Happily, we are but slightly concerned with the further legislation of this reign, which, though of surpassing interest to the general student, bears only indirectly upon the subject of our investigation.




IX. The " small abbeys, priories and other religious houses of monks, canons and nuns " were suppressed in 15 36 ; and, three years afterwards, the dissolution of the larger abbeys and monasteries was decreed by the 31 Hen. VIII, THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 195 c. xiii, which, as Barrington expresses it, " laid the axe to the root of popery " (Barrington, Observations on the Most Ancient Statutes, p. 507). The preamble of this statute recites a voluntary and free surrender by the ecclesiastical houses and the enactment is, in consequence, added by the same commentator, " without hesitation, to the list of statutes which recite falsehoods " (see Pike, History of Crime in England, vol. ii, p. 68).


It is calculated that about fifty thousand persons were wont to lead an idle and useless life in the English monastic institutions and that, by the dissolution of these establishments and the abrogation of clerical celibacy together, about a hundred and fifty thousand persons of both sexes heretofore withdrawn from marriage, were added to the force by which the population is kept up (Nicholl, History of the English Poor Lazy, vol. i, p. i zq).




X. The last remains of superstitious establishments were destroyed by the first statute of the following reign. The i Edw. VI, c. xiv, gave to the king all chantries, colleges and free chapels, all lands given for the finding of a priest for ever, or for the maintenance of any anniversary, obit, light or lamp in any church or chapel, or the like ; all fraternities, brotherhoods and guilds (except those for mysteries and crafts), with all their lands and possessions (Reeves, op. cit., vol. iv, p. 45 6).


In support of the position, that the working class in England, as in Germany and France, was completely organized and, even to a certain extent governed itself under the superintendence of the masters, the following statute of this reign, passed in 15 48, has been much relied on .


XI. 2 AND 3 EDWARD VI, CHAPTER XV, A.D. 1548 An Acte tozvchinge Victuallers and Hand ycraftes men FORASMUCHE as of late dayes diverse sellers of vittayles, not contented withe moderate and reasonable gayne but myndinge to have and to take for their vittayles so muche as lyste them, have conspyred and covenanted together to sell their vittells at unreasonable price ; and lykwise Artyficers handycraftsmen and laborers have made confederacyes and pmyses [promises], and have sworn mutuall othes, not onlye that they shoulde not meddle one withe an others worke, and pforme [perform] and fynishe that an other hathe begone, but also to constitute and appoynt howe muche worke they Shoulde doe in a daye, and what howers and tymes they shall worke, contrarie to the Lawes and Statutes of this Realme, to the greate hurte and ympoverishement of the Kinges Majesties Subjectes.


i. For Reformacon thereof it is ordeyned and enacted by the Kinge our Soveraigne Lorde the Lords & Comons in this present Parliament assembled, and by thauctoritie of the same, that yf any Bochers, Bruers, Bakers, Poulters, Cooks, Costerdmongers, or Frewterers, shall at any tyme from and after the first daye of Marche next comynge, conspire coven ante promyse or make any othes that they shall not sell their vittelles but at certan prices ; or yf any. Artificers Workemen 196 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS or Laborers doe conspire covenante or promyse together or make any othes that they shall not make or doe their workes but at a certeyne price and rate, or shall not enterprice or take upon them to fynishe that another hathe begonne, or shall doe but a certen worke in a daye, or shall not worke but at certen howers and tymes, that then everie person so conspiring cavenantinge swearinge or offendinge beinge laufullye convicte thereof by witnes confession or otherwise, shall forfeyt for the first offence tenne pounds to the King's Highness, and yf he have sufficient to paye the same and doe also paye the same within sixe dayes next after his conviccion, or ells shall suffer for the firste offence twentie dayes ymprisonment, and shall onely have bread and water for his sustenance ; and for the seconde offence shall forfeyt twentie poundes to the Kinge, yf he have sufficient to paye the same and doe pay the same within sixe dayes next after his conviccion, or ells shall suffer for the seconde offence punyshement of the pillorye ; and for the third offence shall forfeyt fourtye pounds to the Kinge, yf he have sufficient to paye the same and also doe paye the same within sixe dayes next after his conviccion, or ells shall sytt on the pillorye and lose one of his eares, and also shall at all tymes after that be taken as a man infamous and his sayinges, deposicons or othe, not to be credyted at anye tyme in any matters of judgement.


And yf it fortune any suche conspiracye covenante or promyse to be had and made by any socyetie brotherhed or companye, of any crafte mysterie or occupacion of the vyttellers above menconed, withe the presence or consent of the more parte of them, that then ymediatly upon suche acte of conspiracy covenante or promise had or made, over and besides the particular punyshment before bythisacteappoynted for the offendor, their corporacion shalbe dissolved to all intents construccions and purposes.


2. And it is further ordeyned and enacted by the authoritie aforesaide, that all and singuler justices of Assise Justices of Peace Maiors Bayllies and Stewards of Leets at all and everye their Sessions Leets and Courts, shall have full power and auctoritie to enquyre heare and determyne all and singuler offences comytted againste this Statute, and to punyshe or cause to be punyshed the offendor accordinge to the tenor of this Estatute.


3. And it is ordeyned and enacted by thauctorite aforesaid, that noe pson or psons shall at anye tyme after the firste daye of Aprill next comynge, interrupte denye lett or disturb any Fremason roughmason carpenter bricklayer playsterer joyner hardhewer sawyer tyler pavyer glasyer lymeburner brickmaker tylemaker plumber or laborer, borne in this Realme or made Denizon, to worke in anye of the saide Crafts in anye cittie Boroughe or Towne corporate withe anye pson or psons that will retain him or them ; albeit the sayde pson and psons so reteyned or any of them doe not inhabyte or dwell in the Cittie Boroughe or Towne corporate where he or they shall worke, nor be free of the same Cittie Boroughe or Towne ; any Statute, Lawe, Ordeynaunce, or other thinge whatsoever, had or made to the contrarie in any wise notwithstandinge ; and that uppon payne of forfeyture of fyve pounde for everie interrupcion or disturbaunce done contrarie to this estatute, THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 197 the one moytie of everye suche forfeyture to be to the Kinge, and thother moytie therof to be to him or them that will sue for the same in anye of the Kings Courts of Recorde by bill pleint accion of dett or informacion wherin noe wager of lawe essoyne not protection shal be allowed.


This enactment forms the last link in the chain of statutes relating to combinations and confederacies to enhance the wages of labour, which it is the purpose to review (III, XVI, XIX, .


V). In the opinion of Sir George Nicholl, the restric tions which the legislature endeavoured to put down " were imposed on workmen by the artisans themselves, prescribing who should and who should not work, the quantity of work which each man should perform and the particular times he should be employed " (Nicholl, op. cit., vol. i, p. 13 8). A contrary interpretation is, however, placed on the act by Brentano, who contends that as all regulations forbidden in the statute recur frequently in the by‑laws of companies, they origin ated quite as much in agreements of masters as of workmen. " Moreover," he continues, " whilst the word labourer certainly does not refer to the skilled workmen of the crafts and, probably, to servants in husbandry only, the prohibition of confederacies of artificers and handicraftsmen is directed as much against the masters as against the workmen of the crafts. And the Act forbids, in the same breath with the confederacies of the craftsmen in general, all conspiracies of ` divers sellers of victuals ' for raising prices. The act, therefore, does not refer at all to combinations similar to those of our working men of the present day, but is simply an attempt to check the increasing abuses of the craft gilds and this especially in the trades providing for men's daily wants, where such abuses would be felt most keenly " (Brentano, p. 94).




XII. The fourth clause of this statute (.


XI) was repealed in the following year, on the ground that it bore with undue severity upon the artificers and craftsmen of the city of London, whence it has been erroneously concluded that the legislation of 1549 referred solely to the metropolis. The stat. 3 and 4 Edw. VI, c. xx, first recites in full the particular section of the earlier enactment which it is intended to repeal, and continues And Forasmuche as in the Cittie of London beinge the Kinges chambre and most auncyent Cittie of this Realme, the Artificers and Crafts men of the Artes crafts and mysteries aforesaide are at greate costs and charges, as well in bearinge and payinge of Taxes tallages subsidyes Scott lott and other charges, as well to the Kings Majestie as to the saide Cittie, and at manye and sondrye tryumphes and other tymes for the Kings honor, and that yf forrens sholde come and worke amongst them within the libtyes of the said Cittie contrarye to their auncyent priveleges, that the same shoulde be a great decay of conynge, and an ympoverishment and drivinge awaye of the free men being Artificers of the Crafts artes and mysteries aforesaide within the saide Cittie of London, to the great hurte or destructyon of the saide Cittie : For reformacion whereof the Kings Majestie ys pleased and contented that it be enacted by thauctoritye of this present parlia‑ 198 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS ment withe the assent of the Lords Spirituall and temporall and of the Comons of this present parliament assembled, that the saide Acte, onely touchinge the article and clause aforesaide and all and everie sentence and braunche conteyned in the .side Acte concemynge the same Article, shall from henceforthe be resumed repealed adnulled revoked adnichilated and utterlye made voyde for ever: Anye thinge conteyned in the saide former Acte towchinge the Clawse or Article aforesaide to the contrarie notwithstandinge.


A later chapter of the same statute requires every person who has three apprentices in the crafts of clothmen, weavers, tailors and shoemakers, to keep one journeyman.




XIII. The Statutes of Labourers, which had been accumulating from the time of Edward III, but had been in general too oppressive to be executed, were codified by the 5 Eliz., c. iv and made applicable to all the trades then existing. It is, in fact, a selection from all the preceding enactments on the subject of labour ; those provisions deemed useful being retained, others modified and the rest repealed (Nicholl, op. cit., vol. i, p. 157).


The persons affected by it may be divided into four classes‑artificers, menial, servants, labourers and apprentices. The following is an abstract of its provisions 3, 4. No one shall be retained for less than a year in certain trades (Scyences, Craftes, Mysteries, or Artes) and every person unmarried and every married person under thirty years of age, brought up in the said trades, or having exercised them for three years, not having lands of clear 40s. per annum, nor goods to the value of io and so allowed by two justices, or the mayor or head officer of the peace where he last dwelt for a year; nor being retained already in husbandry, or the above trades, nor in any other; nor in service of any nobleman, gentleman, or other; not having a farm whereon to employ himself in tillage; such person shall serve in the trade he has been brought up in, if required.


5. No person shall put away such servant, nor shall the servant depart unless for reasonable cause to be allowed before two justices, the Mayor, or other chief officer.


12, 13. Respecting artificers and labourers being hired for wages by the day or week, certain orders are made about their time of work and rest ; and as to those " retained in and for the building or repairing of any church, house, ship, mill, or every other piece of work taken in great, in task, or in gross, or that shall hereafter take upon him to make or finish any such thing or work, shall continue and not depart from the same, unless it be for not paying their wages," or without licence of the master or owner of the work, or of the person having charge thereof, before finishing, under pain of a month's imprisonment, and forfeiture of 'C5.


I5‑19. As to the wages, whether of servants, labourers, or artificers, either working by the year, day, or otherwise, they are to be settled yearly at the Easter sessions, by the Justices of the Peace, within the limits of their several commissions, " the Sheriff of that county, if he conveniently may, and every Mayor, Bailiff, or other THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 199 head officer within any city or town corporate, wherein is any justice of the Peace " (XVII, .


), to be certified on parchment to the chancellor and afterwards proclaimed on market‑day and fixed up in some open place. Persons giving more wages than allowed by the proclamation are to be imprisoned ten days ; and those taking more, twenty‑one days.


Zz. The justices, also the Constable, upon request, may compel such artificers and persons " as be meet to labour," to serve in harvest of hay or corn, in mowing and reaping ; and if any refuse, he is to be put in the stocks for two days and one night.


z6. Every householder, being twenty‑four years of age, living in a city or town corporate and exercising any art, mystery, or manual occupation, may have the son of any freeman, not occupying husbandry, nor being a labourer and living in that or some other city or town corporate, as an apprentice, after the custom of London, for seven years at least, so as the term do not expire before the apprentice shall be of the age of twenty‑four years.


27. Merchants not to take apprentices, except their own sons and those whose parents possess an estate of freehold, of the annual value of 40s.


z8. In market towns not corporate, any householder of twenty‑four years old, exercising any art, mystery, or manual occupation, may have as apprentice the child of any other artificer, dwelling in any market town in the same shire.


3o. The son of any person, though his father has no lands, may be put apprentice to a smith, wheelwright, plough‑wright, mill‑wright, carpenter, " roughe mason," plasterer, sawyer, lime‑burner, brckmaker, bricklayer, tiler, slater, " healyer," tile‑maker, linen‑weaver, turner, cooper, miller, earthen‑potter, woollenweaver, fuller, burner of ore and thatcher or shingler.


31. To encourage this kind of service, it was further enacted, that no one shall exercise any craft, mystery, or occupation, then used, or occupied within the realm of England or Wales, except he shall have been brought up therein seven years at the least as an apprentice, nor set any person on work in the same, except an apprentice, or one who, having served as an apprentice, becomes a journeyman, or is hired by the year.


33. Every cloth‑maker, fuller, sheerman, weaver, tailor, or shoemaker, having three apprentices, shall retain and keep one journeyman; and for every apprentice above three, one other journeyman.


3 S . Any person required by a householder to become an apprentice in husbandry, or in any other kind of art, mystery, or science, may, upon refusal to serve, be committed to ward till he consents, but 36. No person shall be bounden to enter into any apprenticeship, other than such as be under the age of twenty‑one years.


40. The citizens and freemen of London and Norwich may take, have and retain, apprentices there, in such manner and form as they have previously done. The Statute of Apprentices (.


XIII), though requiring in very unequivocal words, a seven years' apprenticeship, in all trades then followed in England, where‑ 200 THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS soever they should be carried on, has been held to extend only to cities and markettowns and that a person may exercise as many trades as he pleases in a country village, although he has not served a seven years' apprenticeship to each ; also that a man who had been duly apprenticed, might go anywhere and was not compelled to practise his trade only where he happened to have been apprenticed (Reeves, op. cit., vol. iii, p. 594).


The strict limitation of the statute to such trades as were established in England before the 5th of Elizabeth, gave rise to some singular distinctions. For example, a coachmaker could neither himself make, nor employ journeymen to make, his coach‑wheels and was compelled to buy them of a master wheelwright ; the latter trade having been exercised in England before the 5th of Elizabeth. But a wheelwright, though he had never served an apprenticeship to a coachmaker, might either himself make, or employ journeymen to make, coaches ; the trade of a coachmaker not being within the statute, because not exercised in England, at the time it was made.


So long, however, as the regulations of the Statute of Apprentices were maintained, the position of the journeymen was secure and, whilst obtaining what they chiefly desired‑regularity of employment and in the time of plenty " a con venient proportion of wages," the hours of employment were not excessive and the restrictions as to apprentices prevented skilled workmen from being degraded to the level of common labourers (Brentano, p. 104).


To the non‑observance, indeed, of these regulations has been attributed the origin of trade unions, which appear to have succeeded the craft guilds, very much in the same manner as the latter were formed by the free handicraftsmen, as barriers against the aggressions of the more opulent guild members (Brentano, p. 131).


It is highly probable that, for the earliest appearance of this new organization, we must consult the records of the building trades (1II, XVI) ; but the subject, though deeply interesting, lies beyond the scope of our present inquiry.


Returning to the stat. 5 Eliz., c. iv, one clause, the 3oth, demands further attention. It enumerates many varieties, or branches, of a single trade, e.g., smith, wheelwright, plough‑wright, mill‑wright ; brickmaker, bricklayer; tiler, slater, healyer, tilemaker and shingler ; yet, although in previous statutes the term Freemason occurs, we here find a solitary definition, rough mason, representing the class either of stone workers or cutters, to whom apprentice could be bound. The omission from the statute, of the appellation by which the superior of the two divisions of masons was commonly described, is curious and perhaps significant. It may point to the several uses of the word Freemason, becoming gradually absorbed within that one having special reference to freedom of the trade. On the other hand, the explanation may simply be, that cutters of free‑stone were, comparatively, so limited in number as to render any notice of their craft or industry, in the statute, inexpedient or unnecessary. Yet, if the latter solution be accepted, why the wearisome changes which are rung upon the varieties of the tiler's trade, in the same clause of the Act ? Brewer, quoting the stat. 6 Hen. VIII, c. iii (.


VI), speaks THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS 201 of " superior workmen, or freemasons " (Letters and Papers, etc., temp. Henry TV111, vol. i, 1862, preface, p. cxii). The word in the same sense is used by a high authority, who says : " Every kind of artisan's work, if on an extensive scale, was superintended by a master in the craft‑he is the master carpenter of the freemason " (J. E. T. Rogers, History of Agriculture and Prices in England from ‑1z59 to 1793 (1886), vol. i, p. 509).


Had the generic term " masons " been used by the framers of the statute, the inference would be plain‑that it referred to both the superior and the inferior classifications of the trade ; but the employment of the expression rough mason, in a code, moreover, so carefully drawn up, almost forbids the supposition that it was intended to comprise a higher class of workmen, and rather indicates that the term Freemason‑as already suggested,‑though, perhaps, in common or successive use, applied to denote a stonecutter, a contractor, a superior workman, a passed apprentice or free journeyman, and a person enjoying the freedom of a guild or company, had then lost‑if, indeed, it ever possessed‑any purely operative significance and, if for no other reason was omitted from the statute, as importing a sense in which it would have been generally misunderstood.


According to Brentano, " Wherever the craft gilds were legally acknowledged, we find foremost, that the right to exercise their craft and sell their manufactures depended upon the freedom of the city " (Gilds, p. 131).


A pamphlet of the year 1649, referring to the constitution of the Clothworkers' Company, as amended in the twenty‑third year of Henry VII and then existing, presents an interesting picture of the classes or gradations into which this association was divided.


" The first degree was Apprentices of the Craft. These were not to take wages, or work journey‑work, by their Ordinances.


" The second degree was Freemen ; they presented, admitted to work by journeys, or journey‑work. These sometimes called the Yeomandry ; some times, the Company of Batchelors. They entred Bond not to worke with any Forraigner, but with Freemen of the Craft and this was according to their Ordinances too.


" The third degree was Householders they admitted.


" The fourth degree was a Livery of Cloathing, such as wore Gown and Hood. This was called the fellowship.


" The fifth degree was Warden.


" All were under the government, rule and punishment of the Lord Mayor and Aldermen for the time being. Such as rebelled were bound in recognizance to the Mayor's Court." 201 202 CHAPTER IX APOCRYPHAL MANUSCRIPTS AMONGST the documentary evidence that has been adduced in support of the high antiquity of the Masonic Craft, there is one kind which demands more than a passing notice, viz. the series of fabricated writings and charters ‑‑often distinguished by a strong family likeness‑relied upon at different periods and in different countries to establish claims of a varied character, but marked by the common feature of involving in their settlement the decision of important points having a material bearing upon the early history of Freemasonry.


Two of the manuscripts examined in this chapter are grouped by Krause amidst " the three oldest Professional Documents of the Brotherhood of Freemasons " ; whilst of a third (the Charter of Cologne), Kloss aptly remarks that, if authentic, all Masons, subsequent to 1717, have resorted to spurious rituals, customs and laws.


There are six documents in particular which fall within the category of Apocryphal Manuscripts. These will be considered according to priority of publication, with the exception of the Larmenius Charter (181 o), with which, being only indirectly Masonic, the chapter will conclude.




This document cannot be traced before 1753, in which year it was published in the Gentleman's MagaZine, being described as a copy of a small pamphlet printed at Frankfort in 1748. It is headed‑" Certayne Questyons, with Awnsweres to the same, concernynge the Mystery Of MACONRYE ; wryttenne by the hande of Kynge HENYRE, the Sixthe of the Name and faythfullye copyed by me JOHAN LEYLANDE, ANTIQUARIus, by the commaunde of his Highnesse." [Henry VIII, by whom Leland was appointed, at the dissolution of the monasteries to search for and preserve such books and records as were of value.] The following is an abstract of this catechism " The Mystery of Maconrye " (i.) is expressed to be " the Skylle of nature ; " (z.) " Ytt dyd begynne with the fyrste menne in the Este ; " (3 .) "The Venetians [Phenicians] dyd brynge ytt Westlye ; " (4.) " Peter Gower [Pythagoras], a Grecian," in his travels, " Wynnynge entraunce yn al Lodges of Maconnes, and becommynge a myghtye Wyseacre, framed a grate Lodge at Groton [Crotona], and maked manye Maconnes, some whereoffe dyde journeye yn Fraunce, wherefromme the arte passed yn Engelonde ; " (5 .) " Maconnes hauethe communycatedde to Mannkynde soche of her Secrettes as generallyche myghte be usefulle," keeping back such as might zoz APOCRYPHAL MANUSCRIPTS 203 be " harmefulle " in improper hands, including " soche as do bynde the Freres more strongelyche togeder, bey the Proffytte, and commodytye commynge to the Confrerie herfromme ; " (6.) amongst the " Artes " taught by the " Maconnes " to " i\‑Ian. kynde " are " Agricultura, Architectura, Astronomia, Geometria, Numeres, Musica, Poesie, Kymistrye, Governmente and Relygyonne ; " (7.) the " Maconnes " are such good teachers, because they possess the " Arte of fyndynge neue Artes, whyche the ffyrste Maconnes receaued from Godde ; " (8.) " Thay concelethe the Arte of kepynge Secrettes, of lFunder?verckynge, of fore sayinge thynges to comme, of chaunges the Wey of Wynnynge the Facultye of Abrac, the Skylle of becommynge gude, and the Universelle Longage of Maconnes ; " (9.) those in search of instruction will be taught if found worthy and capable of learning ; (io.) masons enjoy special opportunities for the acquisition of knowledge; (i i.) " yn the moste Parte, thay be more gude then thay woulde be yf thay war not Maconnes ; " and (I2.) they love one another " myghtylye, for gude Menne and treu, kennynge eidher odher to be soche, doeth always love the more as thay be more Gude." According to Dallaway the passage (S) quoted " seems to authorize a conjecture that the denomination of Free‑masons in England was merely a vernacular corruption of the FRERES‑MACRONS established in France." But the same writer freely admits that the view thus expressed is not borne out by their appellation on the Continent; which he gives as follows : " Frey‑Maureren, German; Liberi Muratori, Italian; Fratres Liberales, Roman ; Franc‑macrons, French ; Fratres Architectonici, lllodern Inscription " (Discourses upon Architecture, p. 434). If, in the adoption of a similar derivation for the word Freemason without the concluding reservation‑Fort (Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, pp. 192, 437) in 1876 and the Rev. A. S. Palmer (Folk‑Etymology, a Dictionary of Verbal Corruptions) in i882, have leant on the authority of Dallaway, as seems probable in the first instance and possible in the second‑the speculations of these two writers rest upon no other foundation than the verbiage of the literary curiosity which is being examined in the text.


It will be seen that many of the pretensions advanced in this interlocutory discourse‑which are put forward by the dialogist, who replies to questions addressed him by an inquirer‑conflict with the tenor of the ordinary Masonic documents.


Prefacing the catechism is a letter [expressed to be] from the learned Mr. John Locke, to the Right Hon. [Thomas] Earl of [Pembroke], (the names are not given in the Gentleman's ilfagaZine and were filled in by a subsequent copyist), bearing date 6th May, 1696 [Sunday]. The philosopher states that, by the help of Mr C[olli]ns, he has, at length, procured a copy of that MS. in the Bodleian Library, which the Earl was anxious to see and adds The MS., of which this is a copy, appears to be about i6o years old; yet it is itself a copy of one more ancient by about ioo years, for the original is said to be in the handwriting of K. Henry VI. Where that prince had it, is at present an uncer tainty; but it seems to me to be an examination (taken perhaps before the king) of some one of the brotherhood of masons; among whom he entred himself, as 'tis said, when he came out of his minority, and thenceforth put a stop to a persecution zoo APOCRYPHAL MANUSCRIPTS that had been raised against them (Dallaway, Discourses upon Architectitre, p. 429; Masonic Magazine, October 1878, p. 148 ; Notes and Queries, 4th series, 1869, vol. iv, p. 45 5).


Locke then goes on to say that " the sight of this old paper " has so raised his curiosity as to induce him to " enter the fraternity the next time he goes to London " ; and, if we believe Preston, " the favourable opinion this philosopher conceived of the Society of Masons before his admission, was sufficiently confirmed after his initiation! " (Illustrations of Masonry, 1792, P‑ I 6z).


Notwithstanding the suspicious circumstances connected with its first appearance in this country, the MS. was very generally accepted as an accredited document of the Craft and is given in extenso in most of the Masonic works‑including the Constitutions of the Grand Lodge of England‑published during the last half of the eighteenth century. The first critic who exposed its pretensions was Lessing, in his Ernst and Falk (1778) and, though the document was considered to be a genuine one by Krause and Fessler, later German writers‑including Kloss, Keller, and Findel‑regard it as a palpable fraud and wholly unworthy of the critical acumen which has been lavished upon its simulated antiquity.


A learned writer has observed the orthography is most grotesque and too gross ever to have been penned either by Henry the Sixth or Leland, or both combined. For instance, we have Peter Gowere, a Grecian, explained in a note by the fabricator‑for who else could have solved it ?‑to be Pythagoras ! As a whole, it is but a clumsy attempt at deception and is quite a parallel to the recently discovered one of the first Englishe Mercurie (Halliwell, op. cit., p. 43) It remains to be noticed that, among the Masonic annalists of modern times, there yet lingers a solitary believer in the credibility of this MS. " A careful examination of the pamphlet," says Fort, " convinces me that it is genuine and entitled to full credence " (Fort, p. 417). Yet few, perhaps, will be in agreement with this brilliant writer, when he states that " whoever wrote the document in question was profoundly learned in the secrets possessed by the Craft"; inasmuch as the extent to which this nameless fabulist was versed in the arcana of Masonry, can only be determined approximately by a perusal of the mysterious document‑which all authorities, except Fort, concur in regarding as an impudent forgery. A possible conclusion is, that the catechism must have been drawn up at some period subsequent to the publication of Dr. Anderson's Constitutions ; and it is not improbable that the memoir of Ashmole, given in the Biographia Britannica (1747) may have suggested the idea of practising on the credulity of the Freemasons.


II. THE STEINMETZ CATECHISM This curious document derives whatever importance it may possess to the use that has been made of it by Fallou and writers of this school, who dwell at length upon the resemblance‑which, in their eyes, it bear's‑to the examination of an entered APOCRYPHAL MANUSCRIPTS 205 apprentice Freemason. This conclusion has been arrived at, in the case of the original German text, by persistently ignoring the ordinary as well as the technical meaning of words peculiar to the trade. The Englisb version has endured a similar maltreatment, aggravated, it may be observed, by the inherent defects of a faulty translation.


The earliest publication of this catechism appears to have been that of Schneider (Konstitutions Bucb der Loge Arcbimedes, Altenburg, circa 1803, p. 144), who says, " that he obtained it from operative masons in Altenburg after much trouble, on account of the secresy they maintain." From some notes of Krause (Die drei Aeltesten Kunsturkunden, vol. ii, pt. ii, p. 2 5 8), it would appear that Schr6der and Meyer both possessed manuscript exemplars of this examination, but he does not state whether they ever published them. He himself gives us a copy of Schneider's version and, bearing in mind his scrupulous veracity and conscientious exactitude, we may take this to be a literal transcript of the earliest published form.


From Schneider it was copied by Stock (Grundzuge der Verfassung, etc.) and from the latter by Berlepsch (Cbronik der Gewerbe). Fallon (Mysteries der Freimaurer, pp. 363‑5), in giving it, remarks that he has before him one manuscript and two printed copies : the printed copies were probably those of Stock, Krause, or Schneider, so that we are again reduced to Schneider's authority;, as to the MS. he does not say how or whence he obtained it. Findel gives it in the appendices to his History of Freemasonry and Steinbrenner (Origin and Early History of Masonry, p. 146) presents us with an English translation immediately following the " Examination upon entrance into a Lodge," from the Grand Mystery of Free‑masons discovered, declaring " The one is a counterpart. of the other." With the greatest desire to appreciate the full bearing of his argument, it is not possible to see more resemblance than this, viz. that they are both in dialogue form. Finally we find the examination published once more in the Masonic Magazine for February 1882, this time giving the German and English versions in parallel columns.


Its antiquity is a difficult matter to determine. To judge by the orthography and construction, it seems to be quite modern‑say eighteenth century: but it is evident that Schneider may have taken it from the mouth of an eighteenth‑century workman and the absence of all archaic expressions and spelling would thus be accounted for. Again, the fact of its being the examination of a Salute‑Masonas distinguished from a Letter‑Mason‑points to a date subsequent to the fusion of the Steinmetzen with the bricklayers and others ; though, on the other hand, it may have been communicated to these new bodies by the old Steinmetzen and slightly altered to suit the circumstances. Steinbrenner, however, is certainly not justified in calling it the " Examination of a German Steinmetz during the Middle Ages " ; he adduces no proof of such a high antiquity; and disproof of course is equally wanting. The age of the catechism becomes, therefore, a matter of conjecture rather than of opinion. The document may be of recent origin, or a survival of something more ancient; though in its present form it is, without doubt, of quite modern date.


zo6 APOCRYPHAL MANUSCRIPTS It has already been observed that the English translation is faulty. By this a false impression is occasioned. The catechizer is denominated throughout " War den." The German word is Alt gesell, denoting properly the " old fellow," or " Elder," viz. the elected officer of a journeymen fraternity, not a " Warden," who was appointed by the Master to preside over the lodge.


This slight but important correction transfers the scene of action from the stonemasons' " lodge " to the journeymen's " house of call." In Germany the craft guilds ultimately divided into two bodies, one being formed of masters, the other of journeymen or gesellen. The latter chose one or more of their own class to preside at their meetings (Altgesell). The Steinmetzen, who did not divide into two bodies, were presided over by the Werkmeister ; who appointed his " parlierer, pallierer, or polir," as the expression has been differently rendered. He was the Master's alter ego, his overseer and the word will rightly bear in English the sense of Warden. The following distinction may, therefore, be drawn. The " parlierer " or " warden " was appointed by the Master's sole authority‑the Alt gesell or " Elder " was elected by his fellows‑and the latter term will not bear the construction (Warden) that has been placed upon it.


The next point which claims attention is the singularity of the reply made to the query‑" for what purpose " the " stranger " is travelling ?‑the answer being (in the English version) " for honourable promotion, instruction, and honesty." The word " promotion " has a peculiar significance and at once suggests the idea of there being a series of degrees to be conferred. The German word is Beforderung‑literally advancement and figuratively promotion. But a closer examination of the subject reveals the fact that that term has been and still is the only one used by German workmen of all trades to signify employment. A scavenger or chimneysweep, equally with a SteinmetZ, was and is befordert by his employer. The expression probably grew out of the practice of journeymen working under a master for a few days, whereby they were enabled to earn sufficient money to carry them to the next town. They were, in fact, furthered or advanced, but in no sense promoted. We are next informed that " instruction and honesty " are the " usages and customs of the craft." What answer more natural from a workman ? He travels for instruction, i.e. to acquire the technics or usages of the craft; and his honesty consists in maintaining its peculiar customs and obeying its statutes. But, again, in this instance, the translation is imperfect.


Honesty in German is Ehrlichkeit ; whilst the word here used is Ehrbarkeit, indicating that peculiar quality which causes a man to be generally esteemed by his fellows. For this, if we read its somewhat harsh equivalent in the vernacular honourableness or worthiness what answer more appropriate from the mouth of a trade‑unionist ? And it has been shown that the craftsman was always such, although the name itself was unknown.


We are next told that these usages and customs commence with the termination of his apprenticeship and finish with his death. This is a bare statement of the truth, as the ordinances show it. " We recognize a mason by his honesty." APOCRYPHAL MANUSCRIPTS zoo Bear in mind a previous definition of honesty, i.e. a strict conformity with craft customs and this answer will also cease to imply the existence of any hidden doctrine or mystery.


The questions concerning the date of the institution of the trade and the introduction into the catechism of Adonhiram and Tubal Cain have already been noticed, but it is desirable to add that, according to Krause (Die drei Aeltesten Kunsturkunden, 2nd edit., vol. ii, pt. ii, pp. z61‑3), the names of the worthies last cited do not appear in the manuscripts of Schroder and Meyer. He also points out that even if they did, the Steinmetzen would only be following the example of all trades, which invariably derived their proto‑craftsman from some Biblical character. A metrical tradition of the German carpenters would read thus in English When Adam suffered heat and cold He built a hut, so we are told.


The " father of the human race " is also referred to by our own gardeners, in a familiar distich, of which the antiquated original is given in the Curalia Miscellanea of Dr. Pegge When Adam dolve and Eve span, Who was then the gentleman ? The next question with which we are concerned is the following: " What is secresy in itself ? " To which reply is made Earth, fire, air and snow, Through which to honest promotion (employment) I go.


In German as in English this forms a doggerel rhyme and was probably a mere catch‑phrase. It alludes evidently to a journeyman's tramp through the land; but taking into consideration the word " secresy " in the question, those who insist on a mystic interpretation, must give " promotion " its figurative meaning and they may turn it into an allusion to the grave and the life to come. The respondent next states that under his hat ‑ i.e. in his head ‑ he carries " a laudable wisdom " (Fine hoch1Wiche Veisheit). It is now impossible to transfuse into the English language the sense of the German word Weishet, by translating it differently; but this was not the case in former days and, unless the catechism is endowed with a real flavour of antiquity, it will cease to interest us. Anciently, Weishet would have been best defined as " the power of applying to proper purposes, the most appropriate means" (Adelung, Dictionary of the German Language, Leipzig, 178o‑6), or, to vary the expression, skill or cunning in their original signification.


Replying to further questions, the Stranger (Fremder) says, that " under his tongue he carries truth " ; and " the strength of the craft," he declares to be " that which fire and water cannot destroy." The last phrase probably alludes to the Steinmetzen fraternity. The triad‑skill, truth, and strength‑is obtained ; but its accidental resemblance to the Masonic formula‑wisdom, strength, and beauty‑ 208 APOCRYPHAL MANUSCRIPTS pace Fallou and his disciples, fails to impress a belief in there being any real connection between the two.


The last question and answer are as follows Altgesell.‑" What is the best part of a Wall ? " Fremder.‑" Union " (Verband).


Anything more mystifying than this (in its present form) is hardly conceivable. The translation is again defective, though, in justice to whoever may be responsible for this production, it must fairly be stated that he has conveyed the exact sense in which the answer has been understood by the Germans themselves. Verband, however, cannot in any circumstances be translated " Union " ; the nearest approach to it would be " a bandage." Jacobsson's Tecbnologiscbes Wo'rterbucb informs us that Verband means the different manners of laying bricks to ensure solidity. The Globe Encyclopaedia gives " Bond, in brickwork, the method of laying bricks so that the vertical joints in adjacent courses may not occur immediately over each other and so that by placing some bricks with their length across the wall (headers) and others with their length parallel to its face (stretchers), the wall may have the greatest attainable stability in both directions." Replace the word " Union " by " the bond " and what more matter‑offact answer could be expected from a stonemason or bricklayer ? Viewed by the light of common sense, there appears nothing in the preceding "examination" that is capable of sustaining the claims to mysticism which have been advanced on its behalf.


III. THE MALCOLM CANMORE [COAN‑MORE OR GREAT‑HEAD CHARTER The first appearance of this charter, according to W. P. Buchan‑to whom the Craft is mainly indebted for its antecedents and character becoming so fully knownwas in the year i 8o6, when its opportune discovery was utilized to support the claim of the Glasgow Freemen Operative St. John's Lodge to take precedence of the other Lodges in the Masonic procession at the laying of the foundation‑stone of Nelson's Monument on Glasgow Green, although at that time it was an independent organization. The title thus asserted was successfully opposed by Lodge Glasgow St. Mungo, then the senior in the Province, on two grounds: That the claimant body was not under the sheltering wing of the Grand Lodge; and that the document upon which the members relied to vindicate their claim was a " pretended Charter." This view was shared by the then Grand Secretary (William Guthrie) and the Provincial Grand Master (Sir John Stuart), yet, somehow or other, the St. John's Lodge came off victorious in i 8 i o, when the foundation‑stone of the Glasgow Asylum for Lunatics was laid with " Masonic honours," some asserting that the charter granted by Malcolm III, King of Scots, gave the members priority over all the other Lodges in Scotland (Dr. Cleland, Annals of Glasgow, 1816, vol. ii, P‑483). Dr. Cleland states that "the members of this Lodge having lately discovered an old musty paper in their Charter chest, procured a translation of it, when it turned out to be a Charter in their favour," etc.


APOCRYPHAL MANUSCRIPTS 2009 The important character of the document gradually dawned upon the minds of its possessors and ultimately led a prominent member of the Lodge to declare, that had " our predecessors in office done their duty, every Lodge in Scotland would have required to get a charter from them " (Glasgow Herald, June 17, 1870 ; Freemason's Maga.Zine, July 9, 1870). The precise nature of the dereliction of duty imputed to their Masonic ancestors and the evidence necessary to substantiate the claim to a sovereignty over the Scottish Lodges, were not alluded to at the time, nor is any information yet forthcoming upon two points of so much importance.


1051 (A.D.) was first announced as the year of origin of the charter, then 105 7, but, later on, in deference to considerable criticism, A.D. 1157 was substituted and Malcolm the third was changed to the fourth of that name. According, however, to more recent and accurate investigations, the correct date is approximately some seven centuries and a half later than the year 1057 It is difficult to understand how the authenticity of this so‑called Malcolm Charter can be upheld, when the Eglinton MS. of December z8, 1599, provides, on the authority of William Schaw, " Master of Wark, Warden of the Maisonis " for Scotland, that the Lodge of Kilwinning shall have its warden present " at the election of the Wardenis within the boundis of the Nether Waird of Cliddisdaill, Glasgow, Air and boundis of Carrik " and that the warden and deacon of Kilwinning Lodge shall convene the other wardens and deacons within the bounds aforesaid (viz. the West of Scotland), whenever circumstances demanded and gave them authority to assemble anywhere within that extensive jurisdiction.


Now, the pseudo‑charter recites that none in my dominions shall erect a lodge until they make application to the Saint John's Lodge, Glasgow (By‑Laws of the Lodge of Glasgow St. John, 1858, p. 6) and contains, moreover, a number of clauses respecting fees, dues and special privileges wholly inconsistent with the regulations known to be in force during subsequent centuries, all of which are silent as to the pre‑eminence claimed for this Lodge.


The whole subject of the charter and its relation to the St. John's Lodge was discussed at great length in the pages of the Freemasons' Magazine (1868) and, in the controversy which then took place, Buchan posed first of all as a believer in the genuineness of the document, but having subsequently made a more careful scrutiny of its contents, became its most destructive critic and was chiefly instrumental in administering the death‑blow to its pretensions.


During the process of investigation Buchan obtained the opinion of Professor Cosmo Innes, the eminent Scottish archxologist, who had examined the " charter " in 1868 and pronounced it " a forgery executed within the last 150 years, or taking plenty of time, within zoo at the utmost." He also stated that " it was made up of pieces taken out of different charters and stuck together." In a letter to Buchan, the same excellent authority observes that our first corporate Charters were to Burghs and, not till long after, came those to the Gilds and Corporations within and under Burghs; but we have no Charters 210 APOCRYPHAL MANUSCRIPTS to Burghs till William the Lion (1165‑IzI4), so you see it did not require much sagacity to stamp the Charter of Malcolm, full of the phraseology and the minute distinctions of a much later day, as a forgery.


The members of Lodge Glasgow St. John finally determined to test the strength of their position by petitioning the Grand Lodge of Scotland and particularly appealed against the action of the Grand Master in awarding precedency to the Lodge of Journeymen, Edinburgh, 8, on the occasion of meeting in Glasgow Cathedral previous to laying the foundation‑stone of the Albert Bridge, June 3, 1870, thus infringing upon their ancient rights and privileges, secured to them by the Malcolm Canmore Charter. The decision of the Grand Lodge was pronounced on February 6, 1871, which, proving adverse to the claims of the memorialists, the members of St. John's Lodge solaced their wounded feelings, by sentencing Buchan, their senior warden‑who had opposed the prayer of the petitioners in Grand Lodge ‑to a term of five years' suspension from his Masonic privileges. It is almost unnecessary to add that, on appeal, this decree was reversed.


IV. KRAUSE'S MS. OR PRINCE EDWIN'S CONSTITUTION OF 926 The crux for those who maintain the authentic character of the documents under review is satisfactorily to bridge over the period between the dates of their alleged origin and of their actual publication as MSS. relating to the Craft. In this respect the Krause MS. is no better off than its companions, though its internal character is, in many points, superior to any of them. Had some portions of its text been presented, as appertaining to the latter part of the seventeenth century, it is probable that no objections could reasonably have been urged against their reception, inasmuch as absolute correctness is not to be expected or required, it being essential only that the general character of these Constitutions should be such as to accord with known versions written about the same period. There is, however, much more involved than this, in allowing the claim made by the apologists of the Krause MS., for it is either the " Constitution completed by the pious Edwin " and the " Laws or Obligations " are those " laid before his Brother Masons " by the same Prince, or the document is an imposture. Then again, " the old obligations and statutes, collected by order of the King in the year 1694," are declared to have been issued by " command of the King " (William III) and other regulations were " compiled and arranged in order, from the written records, from the time of King Edred to King Henry VIM" These pretensions are based upon no foundation of authority. The only evidence applicable to the inquiry, tends to show that many clauses of this composite document differ most suspiciously from any that appear in the veritable Old Charges of the last century, while others could not have been circulated, if at all, until some thirty years subsequent to 1694. Yet, with all these drawbacks, there remain a considerable number that might fairly pass muster, if removed from their objectionable surroundings, the resemblance to the early Constitutions of England and Germany being frequently so marked as to suggest that a varied APOCRYPHAL MANUSCRIPTS 211 assortment of authentic Masonic records lay conveniently at hand, whilst the compilation or fabrication of the MS. was being proceeded with. It was probably from the close similarity, in places, of the Krause MS. to the ordinary text of the Old Charges, that the genuineness of this anachronistic rehearsal of Craft legends and regulations was, at first, very commonly believed in ; albeit, a careful collation of the points of agreement between the Edwin and the attested Constitutions, only brings into greater relief the divergences of narrative and description, which stamp the former as an impudent travestie of the Old Charges of British Freemasons.


True it is, the MS. is not always at variance with the recognized text, but it must have more to recommend it than a mere agreement now and then, especially when, side by side with such resemblances, are several statements and clauses wholly irreconcilable with its claim to be either Edwin's Constitution in part, or even a version of some seven centuries later date. The Constitution is more elaborate and exact in its details than any other of known origin, many of the particulars being singular in character and clearly out of place in a document of the tenth century. The second division, entitled the History of the Origin and Progress of Masonry in Britain, is equally singular and precise in its verbiage as compared with the scrolls of the Craft, from which it differs materially, especially in the introductory observations common to the latter, respecting the assembly at York and the laws then promulgated.


The " Laws of Prince Edwin " (?) are sixteen in number, the first of which enjoins " that you sincerely honor God and follow the laws of the Noachedxans." The latter reference, as already mentioned, is also to be found in Dr. Anderson's Constitutions of A.D. 173 8, but was omitted in all subsequent editions and does not appear in any other known version of the Old Charges. The third and fifth regulations ordain respectively, that friendship is not to be interrupted by a difference of religion and that the sign is to be kept from every one who is not a brother; whilst the fifteenth, further requires that " every mason shall receive companions who come from a distance and give him the sign " (Hughan's Old Charges). These allusions are sufficient of themselves to demonstrate the essentially modern character of the MS. and it will be unnecessary to multiply the evidence‑already conclusive on this point‑by citing discrepancies which cannot fail to strike the least observant reader, who compares the apocryphal document No. 51 in the chapter on the Old Charges, with any of the forms or versions of those ancient writings, which there preceded it in the enumeration.


The " old obligations for the year 1694 " again refer to the sign; and the " regulations " declared to be counterparts of the "written records from the time of King Edred to King Henry VIII," inter alia, affirm: I, III. " All lawful brotherhoods shall be placed under patrons, who shall occasionally examine the brotherhoods in their lodges." IV. The numbers of a brotherhood shall be fifty or sixty, " without reckoning the accepted masons." VI. " The master of a lodge can found a new lodge." IX. Each year the lodges shall assemble on St. John the Baptist's day. XII. Those who wish to be made Masters must register their 212 APOCRYPHAL MANUSCRIPTS application " several months before"; all the brethren of the lodge to vote on the occasion. No more than five new brethren to be accepted at one time.


The Latin certificate which follows, runs thus: " This manuscript, written in the old language of the country and which is preserved by the venerable Architectural Society in our town, agrees exactly with the preceding Latin translation," it is confirmed by " Stonehouse, York, January 4, 18o6." Inasmuch as there was no society of the kind in existence at York in the year named ; also that the deponent Stonehouse cannot be traced as having ever resided at that ancient city, it would be a waste of time to carry this examination any further. In conclusion, it may be stated that the fidelity of the German translation is attested by C. E. Weller, an official at Altenburg, after it had been compared with the Latin version by three linguists.


The original document, as commonly happens in forgeries of this description, is missing and how, in all the circumstances of the case, Krause could have constituted himself the champion of its authenticity, it is difficult to conjecture. Possibly, however, the explanation may be that in impostures of this character, credulity on the one part is a strong temptation to deceit on the other, especially to deceit of which no personal injury is the consequence and which flatters the student of old documents with his own ingenuity.


V. THE CHARTER OF COLOGNE In the year 1816, Prince Frederick, Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of the Netherlands, received a packet of papers, accompanied by a letter, written in a female hand and signed " C., nee von T.," stating that the manuscripts had been found amongst her deceased father's effects and that she believed he had received them from Van Boetzelaer [Grand Master of Holland]. In 1818 the Grand Master caused copies to be made of the documents and sent the Latin text with a Dutch translation to all the Lodges in the Netherlands. He also had all the manuscripts carefully examined by experts in writing, who, at once, expressed doubts as to their authenticity. Some Lodges, however, could not be divested of a belief in their genuineness and the three‑hundredth anniversary of the alleged promulgation of the charter was actually celebrated by the Lodge La Bien Aimee at Amsterdam in 1835.


The legend runs thus : From 1519 to 16o1 there was a Lodge at Amsterdam named Het Vredendall, or the " Valley of Peace," which, having fallen into abeyance, was revived in 1637 under the title of Frederick's Vredendall, or Frederick's Valley of Peace. The Lodge‑chest, according to a protocol dated January 29, 1637, contained the following documents:' (1) The original warrant of constitution of the Lodge Het Vredendall, written in the English language; (2) A roll of the members, 1519‑i6oi ; and (3) The Charter of Cologne, i.e. a document in cipher, signed by nineteen master masons in Cologne, June 24, 15 3 5.


These papers passed from one person to another, until 1790, when they were presented to Van Boetzelaer, the Grand Master of the Dutch Lodges.


The so‑called charter appears to have been first printed in the Annales Nlafon‑ APOCRYPHAL MANUSCRIPTS 213 niques, 1818 and many German versions of and commentaries upon its text have since appeared (Heldmann, 1819 ; Krause, 18 21 ; Bobrik, 1840 ; Eckert, 18 5 z ; Kloss and others). It is also accessible to the English reader in many popular works (Dr. J. Burnes, Sketch of the History of the Knights Templar, 1840 ; Findel, History of Freemasonry, p. 69z ; Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 316 ; Masonic Alaga !Zine, January 188 z). It consists of a preamble and thirteen clauses on articles, the latter being lettered in due sequence from A to N.


The charter is a manifesto of " the chosen masters of the St. John's fraternity, heads of the lodges in London, Edinburgh, Vienna, Amsterdam, Paris, Lyons, Frankfort, Hamburg, Antwerp, Rotterdam, Madrid, Venice, Ghent, Konisberg, Brussels, Dantzic, Middleburg, Bremen and Cologne, addressed to their fellow labourers and to the unenlightened world." The absence of deputies from the chief lodges of the stonemasons in Strasburg, Zurich and Utrecht‑as well as from Bruges, during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries the central emporium cif the whole commercial world‑detracts from the skill of the compiler ! A. That the order of Freemasons is more ancient than that of the Knights Templar, having existed in Palestine, Greece and the Roman Empire, even before the Crusades and the time when the Knights Templar went to Palestine.


B. That the fellowship (consociatio) then, as in former times, embraced the degrees of Disciple, Fellow and Master, the last‑named class comprising Elect and Most Elect Masters.


C. That one person was selected from the body of Elect Masters to assume authority over the rest and to be reverenced (though known to very few) as the Supreme Elect Master or Patriarch (Qui ut summus magister electus vel patriarcha veneraetur).


D. The government of the society was confided to the highest Elect Masters. E. That the society of brethren began to be called " the fraternity of Freemasons, A.D. 1450 (in the Deuchar text, i44o), at Valenciennes in Flanders, prior to which date they were known by the name of " brethren of St. John." F. None are admitted into the order, but those who are professedly Christians. No bodily tortures are employed at initiation.


G. Amongst the duties which must be undertaken on oath, are fidelity and obedience to secular rulers.


H. The aim of the society is expressed in the two precepts :‑to love all men as brothers ; to render to God what is God's‑and to Cxsar what is Cxsar's.


I. The secrets and mysteries conduce to this end‑that, without ostentation, the brethren may do good.


K. Every year a feast is held in honour of St. John, patron of the community. L. The ceremonies of the order, though represented by signs or words, or in other ways, differ entirely from ecclesiastical rites.


M. He alone is acknowledged as a brother of the society of St. John or Freemason, who in a lawful manner, under the direction of an Elect Master, assisted by at least seven brethren, is initiated into the mysteries and is ready to prove his adoption by the signs and tokens (signs et tesseris) practised by the brethren. In which are included those signs and words (signis et verbis) customary in the Edinburgh 214 APOCRYPHAL MANUSCRIPTS lodge or tabernacle (mansione vel tabernaculo) and in those affiliated with her. Also in Hamburg, Rotterdam and Venice.


N. As a general conformity it is necessary in the lodges ; therefore the " charter " shall be transmitted to all the colleges of the order.