ITS

LECTURE XLIV.

PRESUMED

ORIGIN.

"Is not the Third Degree of Masonry a modern interpolation not anterior to the seventeenth century? I believe not only the Third, but also the First and Second, to be decidedly modern."—"FREEMASONS' MAGAZINE," March, 1860.

In order to ascertain the origin of the third, or legendary degree in Masonry, I shall commence my researches at the Reformation in 1668, as I am unacquainted with any valid evidence to prove its existence before that period. The histories tell us that in the reign of Elizabeth "learning of all sorts revived, the Augustan style began to take place of Gothic architecture; and it would have made great progress if the Queen had possessed a taste for building; but hearing that the Masons had certain secrets that could not be revealed to her, and being jealous of all secret assemblies, she sent an armed force to break up their annual Grand Lodge at York, on St. John's day, 1561. But Sir Thomas Sackville, the Grand Master, took care to make some of the chief men sent on that errand Freemasons, who then joining in that communication an honourable report to the Queen, she never more attempted to disturb them."1

1 Noorth., p. 120.

But the Queen unfortunately did not possess a taste for building; and therefore the Lodges in her reign were so thinly scattered, that she was unable to find one in existence in the South of England; and hence a modern writer judiciously observes that "the bard of Avon, who has ranged air, earth, and ocean, in search of similes and figures of speech, would in some way or other have alluded to the Freemasons, had the institution been known in his day. Undoubtedly some of the heroes, wise men, or clowns of his plays, would have had something to say of or about Masonry,-some commendations to bestow upon it, or satires to play off at its expense, had the society then been in existence." It will be in vain, therefore, to search for a legendary degree of speculative Freemasonry in the reign of Elizabeth.

A few years later we have a record which mentions Masters and Wardens, but they are only of the same class with the MAGISTER and CUSTOS de la loge lathomorum at Canterbury already mentioned, viz. Fellow-crafts, elevated by merit to those distinctive offices of civil government. "The best Craftsmen through all parts resorted to Grand Master Jones, who always allowed good wages, and seasonable times for instruction in the Lodges; which he constituted with excellent by-laws, and made them like the schools or academies of the designers in Italy. He also held the quarterly communications of the Grand Lodge of Masters and Wardens, and the general assembly and feast on St. John's day." 3

"3

2 Stone, p. 25.

3 Noorth., p. 138.

This slight notice is by no means a conclusive proof of the existence of a third degree, because the fact is ignored by subsequent evidence, which positively shows that the Masters of Lodges were nothing more than Fellow-crafts. I subjoin the passage

(although it is well known) from the diary of Elias Ashmole. "I was made a Freemason at Warrington, Lancashire, with Colonel Henry Mainwaring, of Kerthingham, in Cheshire, by Mr. R. Penket, the WARDEN, and the FELLOW-CRAFTS, on the 16th October, 1646." In another place he says:-" On March the 10th, 1682, I received a summons to appear at a Lodge to be held the next day at Masons' Hall in London. Accordingly I went, and about noon several gentlemen were admitted into the fellowship of Freemasons. I was the senior FELLOW among them, it being 35 years since I was admitted."

It is clear from this revelation that Freemasonry, in the early part of the 17th century, had no separate Master Mason's degree, although the society began to admit unprofessional men into its Lodges; and in a record as old as the reign of James II., although we find Masters regularly installed, there is no allusion to a third or distinctive degree. If such a grade had been in existence, the abovementioned eminent antiquary, who was indefatigable in his researches after ancient observances and cabalistic ceremonies, and wrote a treatise on the philosopher's stone, a history of the order of the garter, and other curious and arcane works, would not have remained 35 years a Mason without seeking to participate in its peculiar secrets.

Besides, it is evident, from this very record, that there were no regular Lodges at that time, and the Brethren met at considerable intervals, as chance might direct. In all cases the senior Fellow-craft present took the chair as a matter of course, and was Master of the Lodge for the evening. Hence it follows that there could not have been a Master's degree in existence, because such an institution would have extinguished the claim or right of any Fellow-craft to take the chair in preference to a genuine Master Mason. This truth is fully corroborated in a MS. dated 1646, in the British Museum, which, though professing to explain the entire Masonic ritual, does not contain a single word about the legend of Hiram or the Master's degree. And a code of laws enacted a few years later provided that "Yee shal call all Masons your Fellows, or your Brethren, and no other names."

Its origin, therefore, must be sought at a subsequent period, although its budding honours were now evidently beginning to sprout. Some ascribe it to the time of the Commonwealth, and contend that it was instituted after the execution of Charles to bring about the restoration of his son; and that the death of their murdered master was bewailed in the ceremonies, and a sign of recognition chosen which would represent the manner of his murder. They took the denomination of SONS OF A BEREFT WIFE, for the widow of Charles was now the head of the family, and sought for the restoration of a

Sloane, MS. 3,848.

LOST WORD, indicating thereby the title of legitimate king then lost to the nation.5

The next record we meet with states that in the year 1685 the Lodges met and elected Sir Christopher Wren Grand Master, who annually, during the building of St. Paul's Cathedral, met the Brethren and kept up the good old usages of Masonry till the Revolution. Here we find Lodges in active operation; but, unfortunately, ten years later, the work of Masonry was thrown into abeyance by the neglect of Masters and Wardens, which Masters and Wardens were still nothing more than Fellowcrafts. It is true the old Lodge of St. Paul and a few others in London continued to meet regularly although consisting of few members. But it was once more formally agreed to admit into the Lodges men of other trades and professions, and the society rose into notice and esteem; the new Brethren were intelligent and active, and cemented themselves under a Grand Master, reviving the quarterly communications and annual festivals of the society.

5 See the Freemasons' Magazine, 1853, p. 650⚫