THE BUILDER May, 1925

The Evolution of English Lodge-Boards

By W.BRO. REV. W. W. COVEY-CRUMP, P.M., P.Z., ETC.
J.W. of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge, 2076, London, England

ALTHOUGH the ordinary lodge appurtenances known nowadays to English
Freemasons as "Tracing Boards" have not a corresponding status in
American lodges, they are at all events sufficiently familiar to
Masonic students to need but few remarks by way of introduction.
Every English lodge room is furnished with three conventional
pictures-- each being peculiar to one of the degrees--and upon them
are depicted certain objects and emblems so allocated and arranged
as to exhibit the symbolical teaching inculcated in each particular
degree.

Moreover, certain formal "Explanations" of these Tracing Boards are
comprised in the English Ritual, and are recited occasionally for
the enlightenment of newly-admitted candidates. I say
"occasionally" because truth compels an admission that
opportunities of hearing these "Explanations" are now by no means
as frequent as they were a few years ago--a neglect
much-to-be-regretted, for it leaves many brethren very ill-informed
as to the significance of degrees which they have received, because
they have thus been deprived of what was formerly a valuable medium
for imparting that information.

This set of three designs, constituting the Tracing Boards
exhibited in English lodges, is however not standardized. No
uniform size or pattern has ever been specified or endorsed by the
authority of the Grand Lodge, at all events since the Union in
1813. But the variations are, and have always been, merely in
trivial details; in their essential features the designs follow
certain recognized rules, and their little differences only serve
to enhance their interest. But of far greater interest to the
student is the problem of their past evolution. It is a problem by
no means readily solved; for eighteenth century specimens are now
very rare, and documentary allusions to them during that period
seldom (if ever) define pictorial details upon them.

"DRAWING THE LODGE"

The Tracing Boards could not have developed from a tracing board
such as would have been used by a Mediaeval architect, though they
have assumed its name. Thanks to the researches of Bros. C. H.
Breed, E. D. Dring and others, we can now safely assert that the
designs originated in sundry crude geometrical diagrams, which, in
the Freemasonry prevailing in England during the early part of the
eighteenth century, were usually drawn (with chalk, charcoal or
similar substances) upon the tavern floor when a candidate was to
be initiated. The task of thus "drawing the lodge", as it was
termed, being regarded as a rather menial operation, was frequently
delegated to one of the inferior officers; but the duty of erasing
the diagram when the ceremony ended usually devolved upon the newly
entered Apprentice. Whether it was rigidly imposed if that novice
chanced to be a person of high social position is highly
problematical, for a deputy would frequently be securable by a
gratuity, and certainly the mop and pail never obtained recognition
among the working tools of a Freemason. But, even as early as 1733,
the records of the King's Arms Lodge (now No. 28 E. C.) at London
show an order for "a proper delineation on canvas" to be made for
use at initiations in that lodge, and evidence of the same change
being made soon afterwards in other lodges could easily be adduced.
The adoption of a permanent delineation of certain outlines (like
that shown in Three Distinct Knocks, 1760), together with such
symbols as the sun, moon and Blazing Star, upon a sheet of linen or
canvas--which could be displayed upon the floor when required, and
at other times be folded or rolled up and stored away--formed a
substitute so convenient and obviously preferable that the
primitive method rapidly fell into general desuetude after that
time.

THE LODGE BOARD EMERGES

So far as has yet been ascertained, the use of these "floor-cloths"
was primarily intended merely for the First Degree; but emblems
associated with superior degrees were soon added, and thus the
diagram became a pictorial design desirable for use upon all
occasions of Masonic business, because it naturally added dignity
to the proceedings. Various appellations were given to the new
appurtenance, especially when in many instances it developed into
a framed canvas or a wooden panel, but gradually the terms
"tresselboard" and "Lodge-Board" predominated, and the latter
became familiarly abbreviated to "the Lodge".

THE SYMBOLICAL MEANING

Meanwhile another and more potent influence had also been at work.
The idea that the design which had thus been formulated should, and
in fact did, represent "the Lodge" became definite. Not in the
sense that it represented any individual lodge (still less that it
represented any individual lodge room), but that it represented the
entire Masonic Fraternity whenever and wherever assembled to
expatiate on the mysteries of the Craft. Very soon the two pillars
whose prototypes were connected with Solomon's Temple became three
columns respectively symbolizing Wisdom, Strength and Beauty; the
mosaic pavement (subsequently conventionalized as a series of
checkered squares), the tassels and broached-thurnel were
introduced; and all these details were symbolically interpreted in
the catechetical "Lectures" which then formed an invariable adjunct
to the convivial proceedings of our lodges. Furthermore, the growth
of the directive power of the Grand Lodges naturally tended to
foster a uniform system of such interpretation, and this led to
certain emblems and symbols becoming exclusively connected with
each particular degree, even as to some extent (though less
definitely) they may have been all along.

CONTEMPORARY EVIDENCE ADDUCED

But all this was a process of unnoticed evolution. The exact era
when the diagrams first became a series, consisting of two or
three, is as yet undetermined; but in a well-known contemporary
cartoon of the "Scald Miserables" travesty, in 1742, the two huge
standards which are there being borne in the procession seem
intended to caricature two Lodge-Boards, separately used in
consecutive degrees at that time; although it by no means follows
that the emblems and general scheme as depicted on those standards
were identical with those appertaining to the genuine degrees of
Freemasonry. Further confirmation of the inference is also
furnished by certain illustrations given in the Francs-Macons Trahi
published at Paris in 1745; and therefore we may fairly say that
two or three different designs, connected severally with different
degrees, came into common use soon after 1740. Bro. Dring's view is
(I believe) that whereas the lodges under the so-called "Moderns"
jurisdiction usually preferred to have separate cloths or boards,
differing according to the degree which was being worked, those
lodges which avowed allegiance to the "Antients" used only one and
the same for all three degrees. Moreover he surmised that, whilst
the "Moderns" usually delineated the whole of their symbols on
their various diagrams, the "Antients" clung to the simpler plan of
having a diagram which could convey no coherent idea to uninitiated
persons, because it would only become intelligible when certain
additional tools, jewels and emblems (or miniatures of them) were
suitably arranged upon it as occasion required. In fact, this
latter method still survives as a custom in a few old lodges in the
west of England.

In the foregoing connection need I say that many of us would fain
learn how and when the Middle Chamber and the sanctum sanctorum of
Solomon's Temple at Jerusalem were adopted as central features in
the diagrams of the superior degrees? But the available evidence is
too scanty for that, and the subject too complicated to be
summarized as an incidental detail of the present article. Nor
would a digression be profitable here to review any profound
aspects of Masonic symbolism--such as were illustrated on the
Tracing-Boards--upon an intelligent apprehension of which every
brother must have relied to derive that spiritual inspiration and
moral power which are essential to every participant in our
Mysteries. That Freemasons then were as fully conscious of all such
important matters as we ourselves are today can scarcely be
disputed, but we can only notice them en passant as side issues to
our present subject.

Our main point is that long before the nineteenth century certain
symbols had gradually become restricted in England to certain
degrees, and consequently they were displayed either on three
separate diagrams or else on three separate compartments of the
same cloth or board. A few symbols--such as Aaron's rod and
Amalthea's horn, the bee-hive and the scythe--had meanwhile fallen
into disfavor and become generally discarded; whilst one or two new
ones were added or (as in the case of the broached-thurnel)
acquired new significance.

THE DESIGNERS OF LODGE BOARDS

For the grouping, or arrangement in which the various components
are usually exhibited, the Craft is indebted chiefly to three
London brethren; who, during many years, devoted much insight and
artistic genius to the designing of many cloths and boards for
individual lodges. Of these Masonic worthies the first was a Bro.
Jacobs, concerning whom unfortunately nothing is now known beyond
the fact that about the year 1800 he was living near Hatton Gardens
(London), and produced several good designs: in which, however, the
anachronistic substitution of a coffin was a regrettable evidence
of his originality. In this (as in sundry other peculiarities) he
was copied by his contemporary Josiah Bowring, then residing in the
district known as Moorfields (London). He was initiated in 1795,
and for many years was a prominent member of the "Strong Man Lodge"
(now No. 45, E. C.), of which he became Master in 1821. Numerous
examples of Bowring's skill are still extant--distinguishable
usually by having a key suspended from the ladder. He died,
apparently in somewhat reduced circumstances, about the end of
1831. The third of the artistic trio was John Harris, who was
initiated in the "Lodge of Good Intent" (now defunct) in 1818, and
survived until 1873. In regard to these three brethren it is not
too much to say that the fixation (and one might almost say
standardization) of the diagrams has resulted from a unanimous
acceptance and perpetuation of their ideas. Truly indeed they were
masters, whose designs have better enabled their English brethren
to carry on the structure with order and propriety. Possibly
something superior may some day displace them from favor, but
hitherto thev have had no serious rivals and are now regarded under
the English Constitution as ad;uncts almost as venerable and
unalterable as Landmarks of the Order.

