-
Articles/Ads
Article FREEMASONRY IN YORK IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. ← Page 2 of 2 Article REVIEW. Page 1 of 1 Article REVIEW. Page 1 of 1 Article TENEBRÆ E TENEBRIS.—No. I. Page 1 of 2 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Freemasonry In York In The Eighteenth Century.
This Union Lodge was warranted in 1777 from London , and is now the York Lodge , 236 . York has always been a . musical and theatrical centre , and the Masons of last century were not backward in patronising the talent . The Eboracum Lodge has an old playbill of 1791 announcing the patronage of the
Freemasons , and a performance at the Theatre Royal . The name of the Apollo Lodge would seem to point to some regard for music ; and as early as 1764 the Grand Lodge ordered "that the Freemasons ' songs , set to music , be bought for the use of the lodge . " Bro . Camidge , organist of York Minstr , was an active member of Apollo Lodge in those days . His portrait in oils is now in possession of the York Lodge , No . 236 .
Judging from the specimens of the Masonic muse thai have come down to us , it must be admitted that poets must have been scarce in the lodges , and in looking through a curious collection of old broadsides and tracts from the York Press collected by Mr . J . H . Carr , of Fossgate , I stumbled the other day upon an extraordinaril y rude sample called the " Mason ' s Song , " from the press of " J . Kendrew , printer , Colliergate , York . " I could well suppose that it was first heard at the York Tavern on the occasion of the great gathering I have mentioned in 1770 : —
When Adam in the garden was Along with his companion , Eve , And all the time of their innocence I cannot tell how long they liv'd ; In the cool of the day to her he did say ,
Why could you thus break my command ? She was not asham'd , who could her blame ? To kiss her love with his apron on . It was on the twenty-first of June , When all things were both fresh and fair , With fifes and drums we march'd along ,
Our hearts being light and free from care . Then to the church we all did go Where the Scriptures were made known , In unity we did agree Each brother wore his apron on .
See the sun , with his bright beams . He shines o'er all the verdant plain ; The moon by night she gave her light To all the free born sons of men . AH things were fair and beautiful : Just when the season does come on A pretty maid was very glad To kiss her love with his apron on .
, Did you hear the Mason ' s word Was whisper'd round the other night ? ' No girl at all doth us annoy , Or cares to put us in a fright ; Brethren dear , be of good cheer , Our brandy comes both stout and strong , Twelve times a year you must appear Before us all with your apron on .
When winter frost and snow comes on The fairest flower will decay ; Mortal man when his glass is run See how he lies in the earth ' s cold clay ! The pretty maid , as well as Eve Must leave this world and soon be gone ; And in short time she will not mind To kiss her love with his apron on .
Brethren dear , I beg your leave AH for to end my simple song , Eight hundred and two , both just and true , Unto this loyal lodge we do belong . There are five steps that wc must take , Before the jewels can go on ; Our Master fair sits in his chair , Goo save him with his apron on .
Is it possible that the number ( 802 ) may refer to the returns of lodges acting under Grand Lodge of York at this period ? The few comments I have thus strung together hinge upon the public advertisements and newspaper notices I have observed , and do not pretend in any sense to g ive a history of York Freemasonry during the last century . Far more information is to be had from the Grand Lodge minute ' s now in the custody of the York Lodge , 236 , and to which I have referred for many
facts and dates given above . Still , it is interesting to note the peculiar fashions of our Masonic forefathers , which differ so widel y from our present ideas of the best way of conducting our Masonic work , and this must be my excuse for presuming to occupy so much valuable space in the Freemason . Probably if brethren would take the trouble to examine old files of provincial papers we might come into possession of many facts connected with Masonry that are at present hidden away in dusty corners of subeditor ' s rooms .
Review.
REVIEW .
ORIGIN OF THE ENGLISH RITE OF FREEMASONRY . By Bro . W . J . HUGHAN . London : George Kenning , 16 , Great Queen-street . —SECOND NOTICE . ; When we come to the second part of Bro . Hughan ' s valuable work , we
are struck with much that is new , and more , that is important . Bro . , Hughan ' s may be fairly said to be the first scientific attempt to write the history of the Royal Arch Grade , as Oliver ' s history is not really a history at all , it is a composition not critical nor careful , and in which , in his
old age . to boot , the good old Doctor excels himself in tfiose , tendencies to imagination for reality , and suppositions for certainty , and hasty . conclusions for careful inductions , which have rendered his voluminousworks less valuable and authoritative than they might have been , and have even rendered nugatory these points in which he excelled , great industry , laborious researches , and wide reading . In this work of his on the
Royal Arch he clearly overruns his own theory , and his sentences contradict his conclusions . At this time Dr . Oliver had passed from his first stage of the elevation of Craft Masonry , and had taken up a sceptical view as to Craft evidences , and his idea of a foreign origin for the Arch was so contradicted even by the facts he cited , ( as it is in itself completely incorrect ) ,
that though his work on the subject ought to be studied it cannot be accepted as authority . Curiously enough , the whole question turns upon the reality and extent of the Third Degree . It has always been clear to us that the whole matter resolves itself into a question of verbiage and of detail . Holding as we do that all the Revivalists did in 1717 was to " methodize" the old traditional ceremonial , and re *
Review.
jecting as we do entirely the suggestion that Desaguliers and Co . added the Third Degree , the question , as Bro . Hughan puts ' it well , comes in . Whence came the Royal Arch ? Is it the Grade alluded to by Bro . Samber . 'for he does allude to a Grade of some kind ? or is it the " Hig hordians " of the Swalwell minutes ? Whence does the term Royal Arch come ?
So far , Bro . Hughan s , as well as Bro . Gould ' s , researches seem to trace the Royal Arch to Dublin , and we may have a connection there with Ramsay , though that is doubtful ; but that it has anything to do with a foreign Order , or the Red Cross of Babylon , is , as wc believe , a complete blunder of Oliver ' s . We doubt , we repeat , very much Ramsay ' s connection with English or Irish Freemasonry . ' Bro . Huehan
truly says that so far the first authentic mention of the Grade is in Filield Dassigny ' s invaluable testimony of 1744 , —and we ilave j t * Dublin 1746 , in London before 1765 , and probably much earlier , and York 1762 . But how could it have come from " France ? There is no French Grade at all approaching to it , though the terms " Arche Royale" are , as we took occasion to . say some time back , of old French usage . There was a * " * Confraternite de 1 'Arche Rovale " in the
mediajval times , which took charge and care of French pilgrims at Jerusalem , and there is the " Arche d'Enoch . " It is possible that Dermott himself , ( of whose early career little seems known ) , may have seert the term , translated it into Royal Arch , and when the Schism was a settled thing , to attract members and make the chasm greater between the two bodies ave
to a developement of the Third Degree , rather than a * ' mutilation , "—not only this new name , but certain striking accessories to influence those who were to share in the most Sublime Degree of Ancient Masonry . The old Masonic tradition that there were two portions in the Master ' s Degree , of which the second was only communicated to the Masters of lodges , has a great deal to commend it .
It is quite clear there was no essential difference between the " Moderns " and the ' " Antients " on the subject , though there was a distinction of form and developement . The speech of the Grand Secretary , —that they knew nothing of the often quoted "Arch or Royal Arch , " as I understand , only relates to the terminology , and the action of the Moderns themselves in winking at and allowing Royal Arch chapters about 1765-6-7 , and the " compact , " & c , serve to confirm Bro . Hughan ' s view that there was a "distinction" without a " difference . "
Dunckerley ' s alleged ritual was-both brief and inchoate , and is very like what was once prevalent , and as wc are unaware of any authentic antient ritual , we may assume that the Chapter of Promulgation , like the Lodge of Reconciliation , found no essential differences to harmonize , only certain minutia * : to control or curtail , to rearrange and methodize , as generally happens in like circumstances . It is a very curious fact that this
alleged Dublin use and ori gin of the Royal Arch seem to have been forgotten by the Irish Freemasons , and after a time they appear to have repudiated the source from which Dermott apparently obtained his knowledge of the Grade in 1746 . We say apparently , for there is something mysterious about the possible connection of Dermott and Ramsay with the
Royal Arch . But was Ramsey ever in Dublin '{ It is quite clear lhat the old story that he came to England about Freemasonry is untrue . As a Roman Catholic and preceptor of the Pretender ' s son he would be a " persona ingrata" at our head quarters . He left Freemasonry apparently also about 1736 , and it is even doubtful now whether he
had actually anything to do with the Rite de Bouillon , —called so after the " Due De Bouillon , " or Godfrey De Bouillon . If , however , he was in any way connected with the " Relation Apologique , " said to have been published in 1728 , by Patrice O'Donoko , in Dublin , reprinted in London in 1 749 , and at Frankfort , in German , 173 S and 1 740 , and again in 1743 and 1764
, he may have been . His " Discours d ' un Grand Maitre" appeared , in " Varrentraapp ' s Constitutions , " & c , FVankfort , 1742 , " and then in a separate form at Paris , in 1760 . There is , however , a doubt on this point , as it was printed we are assured earlier at the Hague , that is between 1742 and 1760 .
We have no trace of Ramsay after 1736 , when he seems to have delivered ( if he did deliver at all , ) his famous address , The Foundation of the Templar , or Crusading Theory rather of Freemasonry . We are then inclined to conclude on the whole absolutely that the Royal Arch is essentially an English Grade , though perhaps foreign derivatively in its name . But here we must stop to-day , as our space is exhausted . We recommend all students to read Bro . Hughan ' s work for themselves , and we shall rejoice to hear that it is much asked for .
Tenebræ E Tenebris.—No. I.
TENEBR ? E TENEBRIS . —No . I .
Such is the heading of a very able article by Bro . Robbins in the" Voice of Masonry "for September , and I think it is a very good heading , inasmuch as , unless we take care we shall drift into " confusion , worse confounded " about , the vexed questions of "degrees , " concerning which I see some are greatly " exercized " in America . In the controversy between Bros . Robbins and Bromwell I naturally side with Bro . Bromwell , and as I neveram ashamed
of standing by my flag , I certainly endorse to a great extent all he has said . The state of the case as regards degrees under the English Grand Lodge is simply and undoubtedly this : In 1720-1-2-3 the Grand Lodge of England recognized the three separate and distinct degrees of Master , Fellow Craft , and Apprentice . The private lodges " initiated , " and had also a power , apparently " by dispensation , " to " craft" and " raise . " Otherwise the two
last degrees could only be given in Grand Lodge at the Quarterly Communications . This law was repealed in 1725 , and the "limitation " taken away . The members of Grand Lodge were the Masters and Wardens of lodges , and the then . few Grand Officers , namely , the Grand Master , the Deputy Grand Master , the Grand Wardens , the Secretary and Treasurer . But the Secretary and Treasurer , though members of Grand Lodge " virtute officii , " were not to vote in the election of a Grand Master . So any idea that
Apprentices were permitted to be present is absolutely erroneous and absurd . The Treasurer and Secretary wcre allowed a clerk , " who must be a Fellow Craft , " but " never" a member of Grand Lodge . The doorkeeper was also to be a "Fellow Craft . " In case the Grand Wardens were absent , their p laces were to be filled by two private Wardens , and theirs also b y two Fellow Crafts of the same lodges , as I understand , respectively . A 1 Board of '• Fellow Crafts " was to receive the tickets on the Grand Feast , and to prove all comers , if need be .
Such are the simple laws which bur forefathers thought needful in 1723 , and which seem to me to savour of much greater antiquity , owing to their very simplicity . As time passed on , more complex laws and more precise regulations became needful ; but those which Payne compiled , regularized ,
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Freemasonry In York In The Eighteenth Century.
This Union Lodge was warranted in 1777 from London , and is now the York Lodge , 236 . York has always been a . musical and theatrical centre , and the Masons of last century were not backward in patronising the talent . The Eboracum Lodge has an old playbill of 1791 announcing the patronage of the
Freemasons , and a performance at the Theatre Royal . The name of the Apollo Lodge would seem to point to some regard for music ; and as early as 1764 the Grand Lodge ordered "that the Freemasons ' songs , set to music , be bought for the use of the lodge . " Bro . Camidge , organist of York Minstr , was an active member of Apollo Lodge in those days . His portrait in oils is now in possession of the York Lodge , No . 236 .
Judging from the specimens of the Masonic muse thai have come down to us , it must be admitted that poets must have been scarce in the lodges , and in looking through a curious collection of old broadsides and tracts from the York Press collected by Mr . J . H . Carr , of Fossgate , I stumbled the other day upon an extraordinaril y rude sample called the " Mason ' s Song , " from the press of " J . Kendrew , printer , Colliergate , York . " I could well suppose that it was first heard at the York Tavern on the occasion of the great gathering I have mentioned in 1770 : —
When Adam in the garden was Along with his companion , Eve , And all the time of their innocence I cannot tell how long they liv'd ; In the cool of the day to her he did say ,
Why could you thus break my command ? She was not asham'd , who could her blame ? To kiss her love with his apron on . It was on the twenty-first of June , When all things were both fresh and fair , With fifes and drums we march'd along ,
Our hearts being light and free from care . Then to the church we all did go Where the Scriptures were made known , In unity we did agree Each brother wore his apron on .
See the sun , with his bright beams . He shines o'er all the verdant plain ; The moon by night she gave her light To all the free born sons of men . AH things were fair and beautiful : Just when the season does come on A pretty maid was very glad To kiss her love with his apron on .
, Did you hear the Mason ' s word Was whisper'd round the other night ? ' No girl at all doth us annoy , Or cares to put us in a fright ; Brethren dear , be of good cheer , Our brandy comes both stout and strong , Twelve times a year you must appear Before us all with your apron on .
When winter frost and snow comes on The fairest flower will decay ; Mortal man when his glass is run See how he lies in the earth ' s cold clay ! The pretty maid , as well as Eve Must leave this world and soon be gone ; And in short time she will not mind To kiss her love with his apron on .
Brethren dear , I beg your leave AH for to end my simple song , Eight hundred and two , both just and true , Unto this loyal lodge we do belong . There are five steps that wc must take , Before the jewels can go on ; Our Master fair sits in his chair , Goo save him with his apron on .
Is it possible that the number ( 802 ) may refer to the returns of lodges acting under Grand Lodge of York at this period ? The few comments I have thus strung together hinge upon the public advertisements and newspaper notices I have observed , and do not pretend in any sense to g ive a history of York Freemasonry during the last century . Far more information is to be had from the Grand Lodge minute ' s now in the custody of the York Lodge , 236 , and to which I have referred for many
facts and dates given above . Still , it is interesting to note the peculiar fashions of our Masonic forefathers , which differ so widel y from our present ideas of the best way of conducting our Masonic work , and this must be my excuse for presuming to occupy so much valuable space in the Freemason . Probably if brethren would take the trouble to examine old files of provincial papers we might come into possession of many facts connected with Masonry that are at present hidden away in dusty corners of subeditor ' s rooms .
Review.
REVIEW .
ORIGIN OF THE ENGLISH RITE OF FREEMASONRY . By Bro . W . J . HUGHAN . London : George Kenning , 16 , Great Queen-street . —SECOND NOTICE . ; When we come to the second part of Bro . Hughan ' s valuable work , we
are struck with much that is new , and more , that is important . Bro . , Hughan ' s may be fairly said to be the first scientific attempt to write the history of the Royal Arch Grade , as Oliver ' s history is not really a history at all , it is a composition not critical nor careful , and in which , in his
old age . to boot , the good old Doctor excels himself in tfiose , tendencies to imagination for reality , and suppositions for certainty , and hasty . conclusions for careful inductions , which have rendered his voluminousworks less valuable and authoritative than they might have been , and have even rendered nugatory these points in which he excelled , great industry , laborious researches , and wide reading . In this work of his on the
Royal Arch he clearly overruns his own theory , and his sentences contradict his conclusions . At this time Dr . Oliver had passed from his first stage of the elevation of Craft Masonry , and had taken up a sceptical view as to Craft evidences , and his idea of a foreign origin for the Arch was so contradicted even by the facts he cited , ( as it is in itself completely incorrect ) ,
that though his work on the subject ought to be studied it cannot be accepted as authority . Curiously enough , the whole question turns upon the reality and extent of the Third Degree . It has always been clear to us that the whole matter resolves itself into a question of verbiage and of detail . Holding as we do that all the Revivalists did in 1717 was to " methodize" the old traditional ceremonial , and re *
Review.
jecting as we do entirely the suggestion that Desaguliers and Co . added the Third Degree , the question , as Bro . Hughan puts ' it well , comes in . Whence came the Royal Arch ? Is it the Grade alluded to by Bro . Samber . 'for he does allude to a Grade of some kind ? or is it the " Hig hordians " of the Swalwell minutes ? Whence does the term Royal Arch come ?
So far , Bro . Hughan s , as well as Bro . Gould ' s , researches seem to trace the Royal Arch to Dublin , and we may have a connection there with Ramsay , though that is doubtful ; but that it has anything to do with a foreign Order , or the Red Cross of Babylon , is , as wc believe , a complete blunder of Oliver ' s . We doubt , we repeat , very much Ramsay ' s connection with English or Irish Freemasonry . ' Bro . Huehan
truly says that so far the first authentic mention of the Grade is in Filield Dassigny ' s invaluable testimony of 1744 , —and we ilave j t * Dublin 1746 , in London before 1765 , and probably much earlier , and York 1762 . But how could it have come from " France ? There is no French Grade at all approaching to it , though the terms " Arche Royale" are , as we took occasion to . say some time back , of old French usage . There was a * " * Confraternite de 1 'Arche Rovale " in the
mediajval times , which took charge and care of French pilgrims at Jerusalem , and there is the " Arche d'Enoch . " It is possible that Dermott himself , ( of whose early career little seems known ) , may have seert the term , translated it into Royal Arch , and when the Schism was a settled thing , to attract members and make the chasm greater between the two bodies ave
to a developement of the Third Degree , rather than a * ' mutilation , "—not only this new name , but certain striking accessories to influence those who were to share in the most Sublime Degree of Ancient Masonry . The old Masonic tradition that there were two portions in the Master ' s Degree , of which the second was only communicated to the Masters of lodges , has a great deal to commend it .
It is quite clear there was no essential difference between the " Moderns " and the ' " Antients " on the subject , though there was a distinction of form and developement . The speech of the Grand Secretary , —that they knew nothing of the often quoted "Arch or Royal Arch , " as I understand , only relates to the terminology , and the action of the Moderns themselves in winking at and allowing Royal Arch chapters about 1765-6-7 , and the " compact , " & c , serve to confirm Bro . Hughan ' s view that there was a "distinction" without a " difference . "
Dunckerley ' s alleged ritual was-both brief and inchoate , and is very like what was once prevalent , and as wc are unaware of any authentic antient ritual , we may assume that the Chapter of Promulgation , like the Lodge of Reconciliation , found no essential differences to harmonize , only certain minutia * : to control or curtail , to rearrange and methodize , as generally happens in like circumstances . It is a very curious fact that this
alleged Dublin use and ori gin of the Royal Arch seem to have been forgotten by the Irish Freemasons , and after a time they appear to have repudiated the source from which Dermott apparently obtained his knowledge of the Grade in 1746 . We say apparently , for there is something mysterious about the possible connection of Dermott and Ramsay with the
Royal Arch . But was Ramsey ever in Dublin '{ It is quite clear lhat the old story that he came to England about Freemasonry is untrue . As a Roman Catholic and preceptor of the Pretender ' s son he would be a " persona ingrata" at our head quarters . He left Freemasonry apparently also about 1736 , and it is even doubtful now whether he
had actually anything to do with the Rite de Bouillon , —called so after the " Due De Bouillon , " or Godfrey De Bouillon . If , however , he was in any way connected with the " Relation Apologique , " said to have been published in 1728 , by Patrice O'Donoko , in Dublin , reprinted in London in 1 749 , and at Frankfort , in German , 173 S and 1 740 , and again in 1743 and 1764
, he may have been . His " Discours d ' un Grand Maitre" appeared , in " Varrentraapp ' s Constitutions , " & c , FVankfort , 1742 , " and then in a separate form at Paris , in 1760 . There is , however , a doubt on this point , as it was printed we are assured earlier at the Hague , that is between 1742 and 1760 .
We have no trace of Ramsay after 1736 , when he seems to have delivered ( if he did deliver at all , ) his famous address , The Foundation of the Templar , or Crusading Theory rather of Freemasonry . We are then inclined to conclude on the whole absolutely that the Royal Arch is essentially an English Grade , though perhaps foreign derivatively in its name . But here we must stop to-day , as our space is exhausted . We recommend all students to read Bro . Hughan ' s work for themselves , and we shall rejoice to hear that it is much asked for .
Tenebræ E Tenebris.—No. I.
TENEBR ? E TENEBRIS . —No . I .
Such is the heading of a very able article by Bro . Robbins in the" Voice of Masonry "for September , and I think it is a very good heading , inasmuch as , unless we take care we shall drift into " confusion , worse confounded " about , the vexed questions of "degrees , " concerning which I see some are greatly " exercized " in America . In the controversy between Bros . Robbins and Bromwell I naturally side with Bro . Bromwell , and as I neveram ashamed
of standing by my flag , I certainly endorse to a great extent all he has said . The state of the case as regards degrees under the English Grand Lodge is simply and undoubtedly this : In 1720-1-2-3 the Grand Lodge of England recognized the three separate and distinct degrees of Master , Fellow Craft , and Apprentice . The private lodges " initiated , " and had also a power , apparently " by dispensation , " to " craft" and " raise . " Otherwise the two
last degrees could only be given in Grand Lodge at the Quarterly Communications . This law was repealed in 1725 , and the "limitation " taken away . The members of Grand Lodge were the Masters and Wardens of lodges , and the then . few Grand Officers , namely , the Grand Master , the Deputy Grand Master , the Grand Wardens , the Secretary and Treasurer . But the Secretary and Treasurer , though members of Grand Lodge " virtute officii , " were not to vote in the election of a Grand Master . So any idea that
Apprentices were permitted to be present is absolutely erroneous and absurd . The Treasurer and Secretary wcre allowed a clerk , " who must be a Fellow Craft , " but " never" a member of Grand Lodge . The doorkeeper was also to be a "Fellow Craft . " In case the Grand Wardens were absent , their p laces were to be filled by two private Wardens , and theirs also b y two Fellow Crafts of the same lodges , as I understand , respectively . A 1 Board of '• Fellow Crafts " was to receive the tickets on the Grand Feast , and to prove all comers , if need be .
Such are the simple laws which bur forefathers thought needful in 1723 , and which seem to me to savour of much greater antiquity , owing to their very simplicity . As time passed on , more complex laws and more precise regulations became needful ; but those which Payne compiled , regularized ,