THE BUILDER November 1917

FREEMASONRY AND THE MEDIEVAL CRAFT GILDS
BY BRO. OSSIAN LANG, GRAND HISTORIAN, GRAND LODGE OF NEW YORK

PART I

PREAMBLE

WHEN speaking of Freemasonry, we must take into account a trinity
of elements: Form, Substance, and Spirit. Or, to mark the dividing
lines more distinctly: Constitutions, Ritual, and Teachings. In
attempting to trace the history of our Fraternity, it would be
necessary, therefore, to account for the origins of these several
elements.

I believe you need no argument from me to convince you that a
really satisfactory history cannot be published without doing
violence to our Masonic obligations, except for the exclusive
instruction of lawful Master Masons. Yet, if we could demonstrate
that the premier Grand Lodge represented merely the revival of
something that had had a continuous existence before, the task
would be comparatively simple. Such, however, is not the case. At
any rate, there is no proof for it. The "Constitutions" were
derived from one source and then remodeled to meet new
requirements; degrees and other ritualistic forms and usages were
elaborated on the basis of barrowings from several sources; the
teachings were organized more or less independently of any
pre-existing body of instruction; the spirit is a growth from
beginnings which may be traced with some degree of clearness to
societies quite different from those which contributed
constitutions, suggestions for initiatory ceremonies and
fundamental teachings.

The limitations set for the object of the present discussion,
restrict our researches to contributions derived from whatever
connections we may be able to trace between our Fraternity and
medieval craft gilds of operative Masons.

In order to mark clearly our point of departure, we shall have to
review briefly the establishment of the Grand Lodge of England,
between the years of 1717 and 1723.

BEGINNINGS OF THE PREMIER GRAND LODGE:

Shortly after the accession of George I to the throne of Great
Britain, a number of "accepted FreeMasons," of whom we shall speak
more fully by and by, resolved to form a center of union.
Accordingly, a preliminary meeting was held, in February, 1717, at
the Apple Tree Tavern, in London, which was attended by
representatives of four "drooping Lodges," together with "some old
Brothers." After having put into the Chair the oldest Master Mason
(then Master of a Lodge), "they constituted themselves a Grand
Lodge pro tempore in Due Form, and forthwith revived the Quarterly
Communication of the Officers of Lodges (called the Grand Lodge),
resolved to hold the Annual Assembly and Feast, and then to chuse
a Grand Master from among themselves, till they should have the
Honour of a Noble Brother at their Head."

The first "Annual Assembly and Feast" of this provisional Grand
Lodge was held four months later, on John Baptist day, June 24,
1717, at the Goose and Gridiron Ale-house, in St. Paul's
Church-Yard. Before sitting down to dinner, Mr. Anthony Sayer,
Gentleman, was elected Grand Master and duly installed.

The significance of this simple recital of events consists in the
information that a Grand Lodge was formed to be composed of Masters
and Wardens of "regular Lodges" which were approved by the Grand
Lodge, or to be established "by authority of a warrant from the
Grand Master for the time being, granted on petition."

Whatever connection, if any, may have existed theretofore between
the Lodges composing this first Grand Lodge of accepted Free-Masons
and any former organization or organizations of Craft Masons or
others, was now definitely ended. In fact, Lodges claiming to be
Masonic, which were not operating under the authority of this Grand
Lodge, were considered to be clandestine and not worthy of
consideration.

Further confirmation of the conclusion that a new Fraternity had
arisen, is supplied in the subsequent tacit admission by newly
formed Lodges and Grand Lodges that the Grand Lodge at London must
be accepted as the supreme authority in all matters concerning
Accepted Free-Masons.

In short, the formation of that Grand Lodge marked the beginning of
Freemasonry, as we know it and as we practice it today.

Nothing of any moment appears to have transpired between the Annual
Assembly of 1717 and that of 1718, except perhaps the probable
admission to membership of George Payne, Esquire, who became Grand
Master on June 24, 1718. Soon after this, the young, or, if you
prefer to call it so, the rejuvenated, Fraternity made a notable
accession in John Theophilus Desaguliers, who became identified
with one of the existing Lodges, was promptly made Master of his
Lodge, and at the following Annual Assembly, on June 24, 1719, was
elected Grand Master.

Desaguliers was just the man needed to place Freemasonry, as
represented by the Grand Lodge, on a solid foundation of serious
purposes and to make it a power for good in the world. A
significant sidelight on the predominantly convivial character of
the Fraternity is afforded in the record that at the feast
following the installation of Desaguliers as Grand Master "the
custom of drinking healths" was revived.

Desaguliers was thirty-six years old when he became Grand Master.
He was the son of a French Huguenot clergyman, who had been forced
to leave his native country, on the revocation of the edict of
Nantes, in 1685, and had found refuge and a parsonage in London,
the haven for thousands of exiled Protestants from all parts of the
European continent. John Theophilus proceeded to Oxford, after the
death of his father, where he came under the influence of the great
Newton, who took special interest in him. After taking his academic
degrees, entering on deacon's orders, and occupying a chair of
experimental philosophy, he was, in 1714, elected a fellow of the
famous Royal Society and invited to become demonstrator and curator
of that exclusive body of promoters of the natural sciences. Sir
Isaac Newton, who held him in high esteem, was then president of
the Royal Society. In the same year Desaguliers became chaplain to
the Duke of Chandon. King George I, who listened to one of his
sermons, was so greatly impressed that he commanded him to deliver
courses of lectures at court. Desaguliers retained this royal favor
through the reign of George I and continued his lectures to the
royal household, under George II, presumably until he died, in
1744.

We cannot, at this time, enter more fully into the biography of
this interesting character. The data I have selected are of
peculiar significance for our present purpose. Desaguliers'
prominence in the Royal Society was to be of considerable
importance for the development of the purposes of the Grand Lodge.
If we were to consider the growth of the Fraternity, from 1719 to
the end of the eighteenth century, we should find that many famous
men were drawn into Freemasonry through the influence, directly or
indirectly, of Desaguliers. Two years ago it was my privilege to
show you how this influence brought Frederick the Great into the
Fraternity.* We might show how Desaguliers' invention of military
machinery and the prominence of one of his sons in the Royal
Artillery undoubtedly account for the multiplication of military
Lodges. All these facts, interesting as they are, are rather
outside of the scope of our present discussion.

The thing that gave no doubt particular satisfaction to the
Brethren of the Grand Lodge, was Desaguliers' relations with
royalty. The Brethren had set their hearts on capturing "the Honour
of a Noble Brother at their Head." Desaguliers was the man to get
them the "Honour." Their ambitions were satisfied when, in 1721,
"John, Duke of Montagu, Master of a Lodge," was elected Grand
Master.

After his election, the Duke "commanded Desaguliers and James
Anderson, A. M., men of genius and education, to revise, arrange
and digest the Gothic Constitutions, old charges and general
regulations." The task was completed and the manuscript submitted
to the Grand Lodge on John Evangelist day, in 1721. "A committee of
fourteen learned Brothers was appointed to examine the manuscript."
This committee, after making "some amendments," recommended
approval, in 1722. The work was adopted and ordered to be printed,
and was published in 1723.

* Proceedings, 1915, Grand Lodge of New York.


Let us keep in mind that the history which formed the preface to
the "Constitutions" was written by Desaguliers and Anderson, that
"a committee of fourteen learned Brothers" made "some amendments,"
and that the final product was approved by the Grand Lodge. Mackey
and others have tried to discredit this history as a collection of
fables, not worthy of serious consideration. Our attitude, I
believe, should be rather one of respect and reverence, seeking to
appreciate and understand the character of that most carefully
prepared document.

It ought to be quite reasonable for a Mason to conclude that the
Grand Lodge never intended that the outside world should be
carefully instructed in plain language concerning the origins of
Freemasonry, when all teachings in carefully tiled Lodges are
veiled in allegory and conveyed by symbols more or less difficult
to interpret properly. At the same time, I do not mean to have you
infer that thoughtful non-Masons could not possibly hit upon a
right reading of the "history." A fine example of how the analytic
mind of a scholarly non-Mason may discern the truth, may be found
in the excellent article on Freemasonry, contained in the "Catholic
Encyclopedia." The author of that article comes nearer interpreting
the "history" correctly, in my estimation, than any Masonic writer
whose publications have appeared in the English language, so far at
least as these have come to my notice.

The title of the "Constitutions" tells plainly enough that the
history of the "Right Worshipful Fraternity of Accepted
Free-Masons" was "collected from their general Records, and their
faithful Traditions of many Ages." Traditions are interwoven with
authentic history. Furthermore, Anderson states expressly, in his
preface to the "Constitution" of 1738, that "Only an expert
Brother, by the true light, can readily find many useful hints in
almost every page of this book, which Cowans and others not
initiated (also among Masons) cannot discern."

As in my studies for the objects of this report I chose
deliberately to be guided by hints dug out of the "Constitutions,"
published in 1723, I am naturally desirous of having you share with
me the high estimate I place upon that venerable document.

A KEY TO THE HISTORY OF ORIGINS

A most important suggestion, the one which I regard as the
principal key to the real history of the Fraternity, is tucked away
between the pages given to Songs, in the appendix to the book of
Constitutions. It is printed after the "Warden's Song," as if
intended only to fill an open space: 

"To fill up this Page, it is thought not amiss to insert here a
Paragraph from an old Record of Masons, viz., The Company of
Masons, being otherwise termed Free Masons, of Ancient Standing and
good Reckoning, by means of affable and kind Meetings diverse
Tymes, and as a loving Brotherhood should use to doe, did frequent
this mutual Assembly in the Tyme of King Henry IV. the 12th Year of
his most gracious Reign. And the said Record describing a Coat of
Arms, much the same with That of the London Company of Freemen
Masons, it is generally believed that the said Company is descended
of the ancient Fraternity; and that in former Times no Man was made
free of that Company until he was install'd in some Lodge of Free
and Accepted Masons, as a necessary Qualification. But that
laudable Practise seems to have been long in Dissuetude.

"The Brethren in foreign Parts have also discover'd that several
noble and ancient Societies and Orders of Men have derived their
Charges and Regulations from the Free-Masons (which are now the
most ancient Order upon Earth), and perhaps were originally all
Members too of the said ancient and worshipful Fraternity. But this
will more fully appear in due Time."

In order to bring out more clearly that here we have two distinct
propositions, I have broken the "Paragraph" in two.

I regard proposition number two as the key to the real (though
possibly, for symbolic purposes, adopted) ancestry of the Masonic
fellowship represented by the premier Grand Lodge. A plain
discussion of this suggestion could be presented only in tiled
meetings of Master Masons willing and prepared to follow the thread
of inner history through the mazes of the past, beginning with the
opening of the Christian era. However, this whole matter is not
within the scope of the present report.

We must content ourselves here with a more or less summary
consideration of the line of investigation suggested in proposition
number one.

The "old Record of Masons," which is referred to in the
space-filler, I have been able to trace to a second edition of
Stow's famous "Survey of London," published in 1633, ten years
after the first "inlarged" edition appeared in print and
twenty-eight years after the death of the author of the original
work. The edition of 1633 contains several matters of special
interest to Masons. We are told on the title page that the "Survey"
is "now completely finished by the study and labours of A. M. H. D.
and others, this present yeere 1633."

In one section of the book are printed coats-of-arms of London
Livery Companies, with brief explanatory notes. After the twelve
principal Companies, headed by the Mercers, who became a Company in
1393, follow the minor Companies, in order of sequence, the Masons
being number 30. Regarding the latter, we are given this
information:

"The Company of Masons, being otherwise termed Free-Masons, of
ancient standing and good reckoning, have by meanes of affable and
kind meetings divers times, and as a loving Brotherhood should use
to doe, did frequent this mutual assembly in the time of King Henry
the fourth, in the twelfth yeere of his most gracious Reigne."

There we have word for word the story told in the space-filler
between the "Songs" of the Constitutions of 1723. We are informed,
then, that the Free-Masons met as a "loving Brotherhood," in 1410,
and that they were identified with the London Company of Masons.

If we now consult the rare and monumental "History and Survey of
the Cities of London and Westminster, Being an improvement of Mr.
Stow's and other Historic Writers, By R. Seymour, Esq., and J.
Marchant, Gent.," published in 1754, and, therefore, written with
a full knowledge of the Grand Lodge of England, then thirty-seven
years old, we obtain further light:

"This Company (of Masons) were incorporated about the year 1410,
having been called the Free Masons, a Fraternity of great Account,
who have been honour'd by several Kings and very many of the
Nobility and Gentry, being of this Society."

The Arms of this Society were "granted by William Hanckeslow,
Clarencieux, King of Arms," in 1472, during the reign of Edward IV.
We are told further that the Masons of the Company were "once
called Freemasons, but that denomination appears now to belong to
another Fraternity." This was written, you see, in 1754, or
thirty-seven years after the formation of the premier Grand Lodge
at London.

CONNECTIONS WITH THE MASONS' COMPANY OF LONDON

We have now a fairly clear indication that the forebears of the
"Accepted Free-Masons" who formed the Grand Lodge of England, were
connected in some way with the London Company of Masons. The
records of that Company, therefore, ought to supply further
information regarding antecedents. I have consulted, with this
thought in mind, Conder's "Records of the Hole Crafts," the
Parliamentary Reports on the Livery Companies of London, and many
other supplementary sources.

Conder was the Master of the Masons' Company in 1894. While we may
not be able to follow him in his personal conclusions, we must
accept his gleanings from the original records. He was the first to
bring to light that there existed in that Company "a dual
condition," as early as 1620 "and inferentially in the earliest
times." He speaks of a "curious secret brotherhood" within the
bosom of the Company. Traditions are preserved, we are told, of an
old "fellowship which undoubtedly existed in Britain in the twelfth
and thirteenth centuries."

The ancient records of the Company were consumed in the great fire
which devastated London, with the exception of an old account book.
This account book furnished the material for several important
discoveries. Conder writes:

"As early as 1620, or twenty-one years before any mention of the
Society (of Accepted Masons) is made by any writers of the
seventeenth century, we find in the first year entered in the
account book, which is the earliest document concerning the Guild
that remains in the Company's possession, an entry referring to
certain gratuities received from new members in consequence of
their having been accepted on the livery."

In 1621 occur entries of certain payments, made by these new
members, when they were made Masons, doubtless by some ancient
ceremony."

In 1631 there appears this notice concerning "accepted" members:

"Paid in going abroad and at meeting at the bout the Masons that
were to be accepted--6-6."

Entry in 1650: "Item received of Thomas Moore, Junior, in full of
his fine for coming on the Livery and admission upon acceptance of
Masonry, 4 pounds."

4 pounds appears to have been the regular admission fee. 'Coming on
the Livery" was prerequisite, it seems, to 'acceptance." The
"Accepted" Masons formed a separate division or divisions, meeting
as a Lodge or Lodges.

Entry in 1665: Master orders inventory taken of goods and documents
belonging to the Company; from this inventory it appears that there
was hanging in the Hall a list of Accepted Masons, enclosed in a
"faire frame, with a lock and key."

Further clues concerning these mysterious "Accepted Masons" are
few. The earliest found, so far as I am informed, is that supplied
by entries made by Elias Ashmole (1617 to 1692), in his published
diary. There we read, under date of October, 1646: "4:30 p. m. I
was made a Freemason at Warrington, in Lancashire, with Colonel
Henry Mainwaring, of Karineham, in Cheshire." Other names mentioned
are all of men who were not operatives.

Ashmole mentions the Freemasons again when referring to the
historical meeting of a Lodge, held at Masons' Hall, Basinghall
Street, London (the Hall of the Masons' Company), on March 11,
1682. He records that the Master, his Warden and several members of
the Company were present on that occasion, and adds: "We all dyned
at the Half Moon Tavern in Cheapside, at the charge of the New
Accepted Masons."

Ashmole is often spoken of as a Rosicrucian. He appears to have
been a seeker after curiosities, studied physics and mathematics
with predilection, went to London in 1646, where he mixed much in
astrological circles and cultivated particularly the acquaintance
of Lilly and Booker. A further hint as to his connections is found
in his having been a guest at "the mathematical feast at the White
Hart."

Following Conder's statement, that there was "doubtless an ancient
ceremony" attending "making" of Masons, we may next quote from a
manuscript note by Randle Holme, the genealogist, written between
1610 and 1650, what appears to have been part of the oath on
admission to the fellowship:

"There is several words and signs of a free Mason to be revealed to
you which as you will answer before God at the great and terrible
day of Judgment, you keep secret and not reveal the same to any in
the hearing of any person whatsoever, but to the Masters and
fellows of the said society of free Masons. So help me God."

The Bodleian Library, Oxford, has a MS. of 1686, in which there is
a notation in John Aubrey's handwriting, as follows:

"1691, May 18.--This day a great convention at St. Paul's Church of
the fraternity of the Accepted Masons ("free" crossed out by
Aubrey, and "accepted" substituted by him); where Sir Christopher
Wren is to hall be adopted a Brother; and Sir Henry Goodric* of the
Tower and divers others. There have been Kings that have been of
this sodality."

Aubrey was an antiquary, who had been made a fellow of the Royal
Society, in May, 1663. Among his friends were Sir William Petty,
political economist and inventor; Hobbes, the philosopher; and
Ashmole. He composed, by order of King Charles II, an unpublished
discourse on Stonehenge and other ancient stone monuments which he
regarded as derived from the Druids.

I shall quote just one more record before gathering up a few
threads on our return to the Masons' Company. Plot's "History of
Staffordshire" is too important to be passed by. It was published
in 1686. In it we read:

"Among the customs of Staffordshire is one to admit men into the
Society of Freemasons, which membership is more sought after here
than anywhere else, though the custom extends more or less over the
whole nation. Persons of the most eminent quality do not despise to
belong to this fellowship."

Robert Plot goes on to relate that these Freemasons have "a large
parchment volum . . . containing History and Rules of the craft of
masonry." He then gives substantially the account contained in the
"historic" preface to the Constitutions of 1722-3, so far as
England is concerned.

He describes the mode of admission. "A meeting or Lodg as they term
it in some places" is called, composed of at least five "Ancients
of the Order" who are presented with gloves, also for their wives.
After a collation, "they proceed to the admission," which consists
chiefly in the communication of "certain secret signes" whereby
they know one another all over the nation, "by which means they
have maintenance whither ever they travel; for if any man appear,
though altogether unknown, that can shew any of these signes to a
Fellow of the Society, whom they otherwise call an accepted Mason,
he is obliged presently to come to him, from whatever company or
place soever he be."

This would seem to be quotation sufficient for our purpose. Let us
now formulate a few conclusions.

*Sir Henry Goodricke (1642-1705) was a distinguished diplomatist
and was a member of Parliament, in 1673 and 1678-1679.

(Concluded in an early issue.)

NIGHT AND MORNING

The darkness came, and kissed a rose,
A thorn grew, straight-way in its heart. 
Then came the dew-drop, and a blush,
When Morning bade the Night depart.

Old Sorrow came, and kissed a child,
A pain grew, straight-way in its heart. 
Then came the tear-drop, and a smile,
When Mother bade Old Sorrow part.
--James T. Duncan.

Too great haste to repay an obligation is a kind of ingratitude.--
La Rochefoucauld.
