The Historical Background of

The Historical Background of Freemasonry in England

16 The literature on the origins and development of Freemasonry in England is extensive. Although detailed examination of it lies outside the scope of the Working Group’s particular task, it is nevertheless important to note that few modern commentators claim to certain knowledge of its history earlier than 1717. Walton Hannah, writing in 1954, observed:

We may dismiss out of hand the lunatic fringe of fantasiasts who profess to trace a direct historical continuity between the Craft today and King Solomon, or the Druids, the mysteries of ancient Egypt, of Eleusis, of Dionysius (sic), or any other ancient system. If modern Masons….have claimed that Freemasonry is the steward and guardian of ancient mysteries of which it is the legitimate heir, all that can be conceded to them is that there are indeed striking parallels and resemblances even in the actual signs and symbols; symbolism, however, is an exceedingly vague subject on which to be dogmatic and precise, and as ancient mysteries and religions had many points in common even where no common ancestor can be traced, it is hardly remarkable that the Masonic mysteries today should also show similarities to them. (Christian by Degrees, p.23).

Hannah went on to dismiss other theories which relate Freemasonry to the Knights Templar and readily conceded that allegations concerning the influence of Rosicrucianism on Freemasonry have ‘been pushed to quite ridiculous extremes’ (ibid., p.24).

17 More recently, John Hamill, Librarian and Curator of the Grand Lodge Library and Museum, has written of theories of the origin of Freemasonry:

When, Why and Where did Freemasonry originate? There is one answer to these questions: we do not know, despite all the paper and ink that has been expended in examining them. Indeed, the issues have been greatly clouded by well-meaning but ill-informed Masonic historians themselves. (The Craft, p.15).

We do know, however, that Lodges very much like modern Lodges existed in the seventeenth century; that on 24th June 1717 the Grand Lodge of England was formed; that a rival Antients Grand Lodge was formally constituted in 1751; and that these two rival Grand Lodges joined together on 27th December 1813 to form the United Grand Lodge of England, much as we know it today.

18 Two questions relating to the emergence of modern Freemasonry and directly relevant to the task of the Working Group are:

in what sense was it a secret organisation? And
was it a Christian organisation?

19 Any competent social historian will be familiar with the fact that secret societies were very much the fashion in seventeenth-century England. Some were the inevitable product of a society intolerant of nonconformity in religion and politics, others seem to have been formed by men attracted by a contemporary fascination for the occult.

20 By 1676, Freemasonry was well enough known to be worth lampooning in the Press, The Freemasons themselves appear to have been little concerned to conceal their existence. Indeed, between 1721 and 1747, the Annual Assembly and Feast of the premier Grand Lodge in London was a very public occasion:

The brethren all met at the town house of the incoming noble Grand Master and a procession, preceded and followed by bands of musicians, was formed to march from there to the hall where the Festival was to take place. The brethren would march two by two dressed in their aprons and jewels, carrying the emblems, symbols, and banners of the Craft, followed by the and nobility in their carriages and chariots. (The Craft, p.77).

Not surprisingly such processions attracted public attention with the result that a regulation was made in April 1747 that in future ‘no public procession of masons cloathed in the badges of the Order’ could be held without dispensation’ (ibid.).

21 That dispensations were given and that Freemasons continued to advertise their presence in a town throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, however, is well attested by the regular reports carried by provincial newspapers of public processions by local lodges, often going to divine service, or of the public processions of the Provincial Grand Lodge, again usually going to Church. As well as in their own processions, lodges would take part, in regalia, in processions as part of local or national celebrations. (ibid., p.84).

22 The "secrecy" of Freemasonry thus scarcely lay in a covert existence. Rather it lay then — as it lies now — in the strict privacy of its Lodge meetings; in the exclusiveness of its membership; and the special emphasis placed on the solemn pledges required of initiates never to divulge the words and signs by which they recognised their fellow members of the Craft. Then as now, it was these features which not merely engendered suspicion but drew down outright condemnation of their activities. The pamphlet To All God(y People in the City of London (1698) urges its readers to:

take care lest their Ceremonies and secret swearings take hold of you: and be wary that none cause you to err from Godliness. For this devlish Sect of Men are Meeters in Secret.. For how should Men meet in Secret Places and with secret Signes taking care that none observe them to do the Work of God...? (The Craft, pp.37-8).

23 In the early years of the eighteenth century, public reference was being made to the ‘Signes and Tokens’ of Freemasonry and, from 1723 onwards, there were a series of exposures of the rituals and secrets of the Craft.

24 The "secrets" of Freemasonry remain to this day the signs, grips and words used in proof of membership. They are generally said to have been derived from or modelled on the ways and means by which members of medieval stonemasons’ guilds, itinerant members of a skilled craft, recognised each other and were able to attest to their skill — a sort of medieval certificate of professional competence and a means of detecting impostors. As were the medieval craftsmen, so the initiate to Freemasonry is required to swear never to reveal his "secrets" to non-Masons.

25 Just why these customs were adopted as a basis for a new organisation in the seventeenth century, when effective craft organisation with the apprenticeship system on which it relied was already a dying institution, is very far from clear. Certainly it would be an interesting field for further historical research. Stephen Knight may be as perceptive as any when he suggests that it

stemmed from curiosity, antiquarian interest, and a kind of. fashionable search for an unconventional, exclusive social milieu — rather like a jet-set fad for frequenting working men’s pubs. There were thus cosmopolitan romance, an exclusivity and an organised secretiveness about the mason’s guild. All of this had potential fascination for men of education. (The Brotherhood pp.l7-l8).

Be this as it may, the use in Masonic ritual of archaic language and the adoption of medieval practices, embellished in the early eighteenth century by the introduction of blood-curdling oaths and dire penalties, proved a source not merely of curiosity but of a constant suspicion as to the nature and objects of Freemasonry which has persisted to the present day.