Brief History of Freemasonry
Derived from the Masonic
Union of Strict Initiation Observance (U.M.S.O.I.)
There are very few incontrovertible facts
about the origins of Freemasonry. Probably the single most
significant event was the formation of the first Grand Lodge
in London in 1717. Working backwards from that time, the following
facts or landmarks stand out:
1717 formation of the first Grand Lodge
in London
1646 initiation
of Elias Ashmole into Freemasonry in Warrington
1641 initation
of Robert Moray into Freemasonry in Edenroth
1599 minutes of the Aitchisons Haven Lodge
and St Mary’s Lodge in Edinburgh
1599 William Schaw creates the Statute
of 1599, asserting the first, veiled, reference to the existence
of esoteric knowledge within the craft of stone masonry (Speculative
Masonry). It also reveals that The Mother Lodge of Scotland,
Lodge
Mother Kilwinning No. 0, was in existence, and active,
at that time
1598 William Schaw publishes his Statutes,
outlining the duties of all members to the Lodge and to the
public. It also imposed penalties for unsatisfactory work
and inadequate safety during work. His instructions, to all
LODGES (not incorporations), that they must begin to keep
written records, meet at specific times, test, annually, members
in the “Art of Memory” and enter apprentices in
the Lodge records meant that Lodges became fixed, permanent,
institutions.
1425 statute of Henry VI of England forbidding
the yearly congregation of Masons
1410 Cooke Manuscript
1390 Regius Poem or Halliwell Manuscript
1376 earliest known use of the word Freemason
1356 formation of the London Masons Company;
also ordinances governing the Lodge at York Minister.
The Craft that evolved into modern Freemasonry
emerged in the period between the Black Death, 1348, and the
Wars of the Roses, 1453. Before that date there are no trends
or events that can be identified as leading definitely towards
Freemasonry. It appears to have emerged from the building
industry as a whole. Equally, there is no part of England
that can claim the honour of originating Freemasonry.
The first recorded use of the word lodge
in a Masonic context was in 1278 during the building of a
Cistercian Monastery at Vale Royal near Chester. Initially
the lodge was no more than a rude hut in which the masons
worked and possibly took their midday meal. At other sites
they may also have slept in the lodge. By 1352 there were
elaborate rules governing the behaviour of the mason connected
with the lodge at York Minster. These regulations are described
as the “ancient customs of the masons” (consuetudines
antiquae quibus cementarii).
The Master and Deputy Master were required
to swear an oath that the ancient customs would be adhered
to. Fifty years later all masons were required to swear the
same oath. We are not aware of anything esoteric about these
customs; they mainly concerned rates of pay, hours of work,
holidays etc.
However, given the medieval obsession with
mysticism it is unlikely that their customs were wholly mundane.
A pen drawing by Matthew Paris, circa 1250, purports to show
Henry II in conference with his masons. The men building a
wall are shown using a level.
The mason actually being addressed by the
King is holding a large square and compass almost as if to
demonstrate his importance, the implication being that he
is the Master Mason. There is a similar carving in Worcester
Cathedral, circa 1224, which shows the architect clutching
a pair of dividers and, apparently, discussing the plans with
a monk. These may suggest the beginnings of the ceremonial
significance which is now given to the square and compass.
The earliest occurrence of the word Freemason
was in London in 1376. Four men were chosen to represent the
city’s builders on the Common Council of Trades, this
was the first time they had been represented. They were originally
listed as Freemasons although the word is then crossed out
and replaced with Mason. The possible reason for this error
is significant. Much of the building in the South of England
was done with a material called Freestone. This is a form
of limestone which is soft and easily worked when freshly
quarried but afterwards hardens and becomes very durable.
And the men who worked it were of course, called Freestone
Masons. There seems to be no evidence to link the prefix free-
with freedom. The balance of probability seems to suggest
that Freemason is indeed a contraction of Freestone Mason.
John Wycliffe, writing about 1383, used
the terms “men of sutel craft, as fre masons and others”
he also refers to “fraternytes or gildis”. Then
Henry Yevele, a master builder who died in 1400 may have been
described as a Freemason on his tombstone. On the other hand
the word Freemason appears in neither the Regius or the Cooke
Manuscripts.
At this distance in time there can be no
certainty but the evidence does strongly support the suggestion
the Freemasonry could have developed from Guilds and Lodges
of the medieval masons. This does not mean that other movements
or bodies of ideas or organizations did not also contribute
significantly to survival and growth the Freemasonry. Indeed
it seems very probable an organization that has survived five
hundred years must have been prepared to absorb and use any
ideas that could contribute to its strength and growth.
Freemasonry has thus also been said to
be a direct descendant of the “Poor Fellow-Soldiers
of Christ and the Temple of Solomon” (the Knights Templar);
an offshoot of the ancient Mystery schools; an administrative
arm of the Priory of Zion; the Roman Collegia; the Comacine
masters; intellectual descendants of Noah; to have existed
at the time of King Athelstan of England, in the very late
10th century C.E. - Athelstan is said by some to have been
converted to Christianity in York, and to have issued the
first Charter to the Masonic Lodges there; and to have many
other various and sundry origins. These theories are noted
in numerous different texts, and the following are but examples
pulled from a sea of books:
In “A History of Freemasonry”
by H.L. Haywood and James E. Craig, pub. circa 1927
In “Born in Blood” By John
Robinson, pub. 1989
In “The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail”
by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln, pub.
1982
As the Middle Ages gave way to the Modern
Age, the need for secrecy subsided, and Freemasons began to
openly declare their association with the fraternity, which
began to organize itself more formally.
In 1717, four Lodges, which met at the
“Apple-Tree Tavern, the Crown Ale-House near Drury Lane,
the Goose and Gridiron in St. Paul’s Churchyard, and
the Rummer and Grapes Tavern in Westminster” in London,
England (as recounted in (2)) combined together and formed
the first public Grand Lodge, the Premier Grand Lodge of England
(PGLE). The years following saw Grand Lodges open throughout
Europe, as the new Freemasonry spread rapidly.
How much of this was the spreading of Freemasonry
itself, and how much was the public organization of pre-existing
secret lodges, is not possible to say with certainty.
The PGLE in the beginning did not have
the current three degrees, but only the first two. The third
degree appeared, so far as we know, around 1725.
The Two Great Schisms
of Freemasonry (1753 and 1877)
The PGLE (Premier Grand Lodge of England),
along with those jurisdictions with which it was in amity,
later came to be known colloquially as the “Moderns”,
to distinguish them from a newer, rival group of Freemasonry,
known colloquially as the “Antients”. The Antients
broke away and formed their own Grand Lodge in 1753, prompted
by the PGLE’s making changes to the secret modes of
recognition.
The differences between the two groups
ran deeper than just that, however. The “Antients”
were based in York, and claimed that their version of the
Freemasonic Ritual (which included an additional fourth degree,
the “Royal Arch”, with Christian elements) was
truer to ancient tradition. From the point of view of the
Moderns (actually the older group, in spite of the name),
the Antients were trying to Christianize a fraternity that
had always been non-Christian and religiously non-dogmatic.
From the Antient point of view, on the
other hand, the fraternity had been a Christian organization
during the Middle Ages, and the Moderns had de-Christianized
it.
In fact, both groups changed Masonry in
the eighteenth century by adding new degrees, so neither can
claim to be thoroughly ancient in practice. Tensions between
the two groups were very high at times. Benjamin Franklin
was a “Modern” and a deist, for instance, but
by the time he died, his Lodge had gone “Antient”,
and would no longer recognize him as one of their own, declining
even to give him a Masonic funeral (see “Revolutionary
Brotherhood”, by Steven C. Bullock, UNC Press, Chapel
Hill, 1996)
The schism was healed in the years following
1813, when the competing Grand Lodges were amalgamated, by
virtue of a delicately worded compromise which left English
Masonry clearly not Christian, returned the modes of recognition
to their pre-1753 form, kept Freemasonry per se as consisting
of three degrees only, but which was ambiguously worded so
as to allow the Moderns to think of the Antient Royal Arch
degree as an optional higher degree, while still allowing
the Antients to view it as the completion of the third degree
Because both the Antients and the Moderns
had “daughter” Lodges throughout the world, and
because many of those Lodges still exist, there is a great
deal of variability in the Ritual used today, even between
UGLE-recognized jurisdictions.
Most Lodges conduct their Work in accordance
with an agreed-upon single “Rite,” such as the
“York Rite” which is popular in the United States,
or the “Canadian Rite” which is, in some ways,
a concordance between the Rites used by the “Antients”
and “Moderns”.
The second great schism in Freemasonry
occurred in the years following 1877, when the GOdF started
accepting atheists unreservedly.
This on-going schism is in many ways a
re-emergence of the same basic conflict that created the split
between the Antients and Moderns: the religious requirements,
if any, for being a Freemason.
While the issue of atheism is probably
the greatest single factor in the split with the GOdF, the
English also point to the French recognition of women’s
Masonry and co-Masonry, as well as the tendency of French
Masons to be more willing to discuss religion and politics
in Lodge. While the French curtail such discussion, they do
not ban it as outright as do the English. The schism between
the two branches has occasionally been breached for short
periods of time, especially during the First World War when
American
Masons overseas wanted to be able to visit French Lodges.
Concerning religious requirements, the
oldest constitution of Freemasonry that of Anderson, 1723,
says only that a Mason “will never be a stupid Atheist
nor an irreligious Libertine” if he “rightly understands
the Art”. The only religion required was “that
Religion in which all Men agree, leaving their particular
Opinions to themselves”. In 1815, the newly amalgamated
UGLE changed Anderson’s constitutions to include more
orthodox overtones: “Let a man’s religion or mode
of worship be what it may, he is not excluded from the Order,
provided he believes in the glorious Architect of heaven and
earth, and practices the sacred duties of morality.”
The English enforce this with a requirement for belief in
a Supreme Being, and in his revealed will. While these requirements
can still be interpreted in a non-theistic manner, they made
it more difficult for unorthodox believers to enter the fraternity.
In 1849, the GOdF followed the English
lead by adopting the “Supreme Being” requirement,
but there was increasing pressure in Latin countries to openly
admit atheists. There was an attempt at a compromise in 1875,
by allowing the alternative phrase “Creative Principle”,
which was less theistic-sounding than “Supreme Being”,
but this was ultimately not enough for the GOdF, and in 1877
they went back to having no religious entrance requirements,
making the original Anderson document of 1723 their official
constitution. They also created a modified ritual that made
no direct verbal reference to the G.A.O.T.U. although, as
a symbol, it was arguably still present. This new Rite did
not replace the older ones, but was added as an alternative.
European jurisdictions in general tend not to restrict themselves
to a single Rite, like most North American jurisdictions,
but offer a menu of Rites, from which their Lodges can choose
The first Freemasons lodge opened in what
would become the United States of America on July 30, 1733.
|