British Freemasonry, 1717-1

Róbert Péter (general editor), Cécile Révauger (volume editor). Jan A. M. Snoek (volume editor), British Freemasonry, 1717-1813, 5 vols. (New York: Routledge, 2016). volume 1: Institutions (C. Révauger) volume 2: Rituals I – English, Irish and Scottish Craft Rituals (J. A. M. Snoek) volume 3: Rituals II – Harodim Material and Higher Degrees (J. A. M. Snoek) volume 4: Debates (R. Péter) volume 5: Representations (R. Péter) More information about the edition is available at: https://www.routledge.com/British-Freemasonry-1717-1813/PeterRevauger-Snoek/p/book/9781848933774 The following copyright material from volume 3 was provided by the Routledge division of Taylor and Francis on 20 October, 2016.

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis

INTRODUCTION

General Remark About Dating Rituals Printed editions containing texts of masonic rituals are often dated explicitly, and even if they are not, we usually know from other texts, such as letters, diaries or advertisements, when they appeared. Nevertheless, such sources may well contain rituals which are much older than the publication concerned. In this volume, however, we also include transcriptions of some manuscripts, and here establishing a date becomes even more complicated. As long ago as the eighteenth century, some Masons, such as Jean-Baptiste Willermoz, became real collectors of rituals. They would not only collect original manuscripts, but also borrow manuscripts from fellow collectors in order to make a transcript of them for their own collection. This way such famous collections were created as the Maçonnerie des Hommes (the manuscript of which, containing around 100 rituals, probably dates only from c. 1780, but which contains many older rituals) or the manuscript of Andrew Francken from 1783 (an English translation of older French rituals, in the early nineteenth century misunderstood as a Rite, which was then developed into the Ancient and Accepted (Scottish) Rite). Since such collectors, as a rule, intended to make the most accurate copies possible, we should take as the date of the rituals in such copies the date of the manuscript copied, rather than that of the copy. During the nineteenth century, collectors such as Lerouge or Kloss transcribed hundreds of rituals extremely accurately. In many cases the location of the original is no longer known, if it survived at all. We therefore have no choice, but to gratefully accept this careful work. Such copies do not always explicitly mention a date of the original copied, and indeed, many original manuscripts we have are undated. In such cases we often have no more than the watermark in the paper of the copy, as an indication of when about that copy was made. But we should always bear in mind that the ritual copied may well be significantly older. A more accurate dating is then possible only by comparing the text concerned with other ones of which we have more information. – xi –

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis xii

British Freemasonry, 1717–1813: Volume 3

Harodim Material This volume contains as complete a collection as possible of the Harodim material, related to the rituals practised in this masonic tradition. All in all we may distinguish about nine distinct, yet related, appearances of Harodim Freemasonry: I) In London, no later than 1732 In 1732, Joseph Laycock (born c. 1710 in Wetherby, North Yorkshire), went to London in order to take charge of the iron foundry of Sir Ambrose Crowley in Rotherhithe. Here he became a member, not only of a lodge under the Premier Grand Lodge, but also of a body practising a form of Harodim Freemasonry.1 We do not know what ritual or rituals this Harodim body practised, but it is not unlikely that it was an early form of what later was called the Order of H.R.D.M of Kilwinning (see VI below). II) In the North-East of England, no later than 1733 A year later, Crowley needed Laycock again in the north-east of England. Before his return, however, the Premier Grand Lodge appointed him Provincial Grand Master for the North of England, and so did the Harodim body. It is not certain if Laycock introduced a form of Harodim Freemasonry into the lodges which he found there and brought into the fold of the Premier Grand Lodge, or that they were working their own brand of Harodim Freemasonry already. What we do know is that these lodges (about a dozen) worked a Rite of five degrees in the middle of the eighteenth century: the three Craft Degrees (Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft and Master Mason) and two ‘higher degrees’: ‘Harodim’ and ‘Royal Arch’, in that order.2 Again, we do not know how the ritual for the degree of ‘Harodim’ looked like. It may have been an early form of what later was called the Order of H.R.D.M of Kilwinning (see VI below) too, but it may also have been similar to the ritual practised around that time in Paris (see IV below) and it may even have been both. We do have, however, one published text, namely William Smith, The Book M: Or, Masonry Triumphant (Newcastle upon Tyne: Umfreville, 1736). This contains seven conferences, presented by members of those lodges, for their Brethren. Those texts, therefore, are likely to include implicit quotations from the rituals they used. They are therefore presented here in the first section of this volume. III) In the Earliest Lodges in Paris: The Ritual ‘Herault’ of 1737 From 1726 onwards, lodges were founded in Paris. The earliest ones were Jacobite and they probably worked with a Harodim brand of Freemasonry. The earliest ‘French’ masonic ‘exposure’, the Réception d’un Frey-Maçon,3 published

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis Introduction

xiii

in December 1737, is a one-degree ritual, but it contains elements of what we now regard as several degrees: Entered Apprentice and Fellow Craft (‘carrying the right hand to the left of the chin, & drawing it at the same level to the right side, & then striking the skirt of the coat, also on the right side; after which they shake hands, [each] placing the right thumb on the first & large knuckle of the index [finger] of his comrad’s hand, while pronouncing the word Jakhin’ and ‘each strikes himself on the breast with the right hand; then they clasp hands again, touching each other reciprocally with the right thumb on the large joint of the middle finger, while pronouncing the word Boaies, or Boesse’, which words Jakhin and Boaies must be spelled as it is usually done in masonic rituals),4 Scots Master (the drawing on the floor includes ‘two columns of the ruins of the Temple of Solomon’),5 and in a manuscript version the word ‘epeé’ (sword, probably forming a cross) is systematically found where the printed versions have ‘espace’ (space, indicating the place of the drawing on the floor), thus suggesting a chivalric dimension.6 The ruins of the Temple of Solomon are especially characteristic of the Harodim traditions. IV) Le Parfait Maçon, 1744 When in 1744 the rituals of the mainstream lodges (Hanoverian and Premier Grand Lodge oriented) were printed in Le Secret des Francs-Maçons7 (first and second degrees) and the Catéchisme des Francs-Maçons8 (third degree), the Parisian Harodim lodges seem to have published their, very different, Rite as well, in Le Parfait Maçon.9 It contains rituals for four degrees: Apprentice (about the Fall, Gen. 3), Fellow (about the ante-diluvian columns, Noah’s Ark, and the Tower of Babel, Gen. 6–8, 11), Master (about the Tabernacle and the Temple of Solomon, Exod. 25–40 and 1 Kings 5–8 / 2 Chron. 2–7 respectively), and Scots Master (about Cyrus granting the Jews their liberty after the Babylonian exile and ordering Zerubbabel to lead them back to Jerusalem in order to rebuild the Temple, Ezra 1–6). Having the Tower of Babel explicitly included in a masonic ritual is characteristic of the Harodim traditions. Furthermore, the first question of the Catechism of the third degree is: ‘Q. Are you a master Mason? A. My name is Harodim’.10 V) The Adoption Rite, 1744 The contents of the rituals of the French mainstream lodges were very much the same as those practised by the lodges under the Premier Grand Lodge in London, but they quickly developed a distinctly different, more dramatic, form. It was this form that was described in the Secret and the Catéchisme of 1744. The next year was published Le Sceau Rompu,11 presenting a large number of corrections to the Secret and the Catéchisme, although it is quite likely that at least some of those were in fact innovations and improvements, rather than

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis xiv


just corrections. Nevertheless, now the Master of a Lodge had to have all three those publications before him in order to practise the rituals properly. Still in the same year 1745 an anonymous Amsterdam compiler realized that this situation had created a market for a one-volume alternative and published L’Ordre des Francs-Maçons Trahi.12 Once this publication with its more dramatic, and thereby more attractive, rituals was available, it spread rapidly over all of Continental Europe, replacing whatever the lodges might have practised before. But some older lodges that had worked in the Harodim tradition did not surrender that easily. Some specialized in working the Scots Master degree, thus developing into Scots Master Lodges, whilst others transformed already around 1744 the Rite they had worked so far into a new one, the Adoption Rite, into which they initiated women.13 Maybe significantly, the first publication of the rituals of the Adoption Rite was a translation into English: Womens Masonry or Masonry by Adoption,14 published in 1765, seven years before the first published version in French. I could not trace more than one copy of it, which may indicate how much later generations of British Freemasons were concerned with keeping their purely male-only reputation unstained. Its text is included here in the section ‘Womens Masonry or Masonry by Adoption (1765)’, in this volume. VI) In London, no later than 1741/1750. In the summer of 1750 the Scotsman William Mitchell fetched a patent and other documents from the Harodim Grand Lodge in London, that granted him the authority to found a Provincial Grand Lodge of the Order in The Hague, where he lived. The Grand Master who signed the patent claimed to have been installed as such in 1741, wherefore the Order must have existed at least then. In 1750, the Order worked in two ‘degrees’: the Order of H.R.D.M. [= Heredom] of K.L.W.N.N.G. [= Kilwinning] and the Order of the R.Y.C.S. [= Rosy Cross]. Their rituals are highly catechetical, consisting of a number of ‘lectures’, alternating with other rites. A number of the ‘lectures’ for the first Order have been preserved in the ‘Flather MS’ (included in the section ‘The ‘Flather’ MS (1780– 1800)’, in this volume) and in the third ritual in the ‘Deptford MS’ (included in the section ‘The ‘Deptford’ MS (1814–19)’, in this volume). Whether this Harodim body was the same one in which Joseph Laycock was a member in 1732 (see I, above) cannot be proved, but that is usually assumed. Mitchell used his patent twice, in the first place to found an Adoption Lodge in January 1751 in The Hague. In May that year the Grand Master of the Dutch Grand Lodge, Juste Gérard van Wassenaer, consented to become its Grand Master and gave it his own name: ‘La Loge de Juste’. That Mitchell used his Harodim patent for its creation shows how intricately the Adoption Rite was connected with the Harodim tradition.


xv

VII) The Royal Order of Scotland, created 1754–67 In 1753, however, Mitchell moved to Scotland where, to his surprise, the Order did not exist, despite the fact that Kilwinning is located there. He thus used his patent – though actually restricted for use in The Hague only – once more and created what we know today as the Royal Order of Scotland. This still preserves the rituals for initiation into the two Orders, which are probably very similar to those in use in 1750 in London. VIII) Lambert de Lintot’s Rite of Seven Degrees and his Royal Order Charter of 1783 There can be no doubt that the Masters of the only two lodges working under the ‘Grand Lodge of England, South of the River Trent’, William Preston and Pierre (or Peter) Lambert de Lintot, not only cooperated closely, but also had very similar interests concerning Freemasonry. The minutes of the Lodge of Antiquity, dated 9 June 1779, note that one of the visitors was ‘P. Lambert de Lintot, Adm[inistrato]r Gen[era]l & Repres[en]t[o]r of the G[rand] M[aster] of ye Lodge of Heredom, Scotland’.15 In this context it is certainly no accident that Lambert de Lintot requested for the high-degrees chapter linked to his ‘Lodge of Perfect Observance’, in 1782, from the Royal Order of Scotland ‘a constitution or diploma, under the name and title of the Perfect Observance of Scotland of Heredom of the seven degrees’.16 On 29 March 1783, William Gibb, Grand Secretary of the Royal Order, could reply that the requested charter was granted.17 Eric Ward wonders why Lambert de Lintot did not request such a charter from the body practising the Baldwyn Rite of Seven Degrees in Bristol, which Rite was so much closer to Lambert de Lintot’s than that of the Royal Order. Lambert de Lintot surely must have known of this Baldwyn organisation, and his Lodge could have become a daughter encampment, but didn’t, and it is for consideration whether this was because de Lintot regarded the Rite as of too recent an origin and wanted to be sure of being associated with an order which had an antiquity, as he puts it, ‘proved by historical facts’.18

Indeed, but not only that. Clearly the name ‘Heredom’/‘Harodim’ mattered to Lambert de Lintot. He seems to have regarded the Royal Order of Scotland as the oldest guardian of the Harodim tradition. And if the London Harodim body William Mitchell visited in 1750 was in fact the same as that of which Joseph Laycock became a member in 1732, then this claim would make sense too. In the ‘Compendium of the Seven Degrees of Masonry’ that Lambert de Lintot sent to the Royal Order of Scotland he described the Rite he practised. From this description it is clear that he used the term ‘degree’ differently from our modern way. In our modern terminology we would count seventeen degrees

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis xvi


in his Rite, but indeed grouped into seven classes (which he called degrees, because of the old French tradition that any masonic Rite had to be composed of seven degrees), in their turn grouped into three ‘lights’: the ‘first light of the Law of Moses’ (‘degrees’ 1 to 5), the ‘second light upon the Law of Christ’ (the sixth ‘degree’), and the ‘third light upon Nature’ (the seventh ‘degree’). The sixth ‘degree’ he called ‘the Metropolis of Scotland and Colledge [sic] of Heredom or Royal Order of Heredom’. It consisted of a Heredom degree, a Templar degree and a Rose Croix degree.19 By seeking a charter from the Royal Order of Scotland, he tried to bring his ‘Heredom’-Rite under the oldest Order of that kind, then in existence. No doubt, Preston approved of that. IX) William Preston’s Order of Harodim, founded 1787 William Preston (1742–1818) was probably the best British masonic ritualist of his time. Initiated in 1763 in a lodge under the Grand Lodge of the ‘Antients’, he soon changed allegiance to the ‘Moderns’. He persuaded the Grand Lodge to organize a ‘gala’ in 1772, where he presented for the first time the system of masonic ‘lectures’ he had designed. Still in that same year he published the first edition of his Illustrations of Masonry, containing the non-esoteric parts of those lectures. Shortly afterwards he became a member, and in 1774 the Master, of the ‘Lodge of Antiquity’, one of the four founding lodges of the Premier Grand Lodge. Preston now tried to reconstruct the original form of working of this lodge. New editions of his Illustrations were published, but the esoteric parts of his lectures were communicated orally only, especially in his ‘Lodge of Antiquity’, strongly abbreviated texts of which were noted down in manuscripts, and much later also published, collectively known as Preston’s Syllabus.20 Still, also those esoteric parts were practised in the ‘Lodge of Antiquity’ where every Mason could hear them. Preston’s stressing the ancient tradition and rights of his lodge eventually caused conflict between him and the Grand Lodge. In 1778, Preston, now expelled by the Premier Grand Lodge, created, with the members of his lodge who had followed him, his own ‘Grand Lodge of England, South of the River Trent’, and requested a Warrant of Constitution as a Grand Lodge from the ‘Grand Lodge of All England’ based at York. The York Grand Lodge eventually granted them ‘a deputed Authority to Act as a Grand Lodge in London’ provided that an Annual Acknowledgement was made and ‘that every Constitution granted under this sanction be registered in the Books of the Grand Lodge of York for which some Consideration will also be Expected’. Thus the ‘Grand Lodge of England, South of the River Trent’ was installed in 1779, but there is a clear hierarchy between the York-based one and its daughter Grand Lodge in London.21


xvii

Shortly afterwards, two lodges were constituted, the only ones this Grand Lodge would have during its ten years of existence. Preston himself was neither Grand Master of this Grand Lodge, nor Master of it’s lodge No. 1, but only Master of lodge No. 2. Master of the ‘Lodge of Perfect Observance N° 1’ was Pierre Lambert de Lintot, who corresponded in 1782/3 with William Gibb, the Grand Secretary of the Royal Order of Scotland. In a letter by Lambert de Lintot from 12 December 1782 he referred to his lodge as ‘the Lodge the perfect observance ... No. 1 under the Constitution of the most respectable Grand Lodge of England South of the River Trent seated at York’.22 He used the same formulation, ‘the Grand Lodge of England South of the River Trent seated at York’, as early as 1779 in a draft certificate.23 So, despite the fact that both Preston and Lambert de Lintot and their two lodges were residing in London, they presented their Grand Lodge as ‘seated at York’. Furthermore, in 1787, just two years before Preston would return to the Premier Grand Lodge and while his own Grand Lodge was already in decline, he founded his own ‘Ancient and Venerable Order of Harodim’, an Order that would still exist around 1900. Of course, the fact that the Royal Order of Scotland had granted Lambert de Lintot a charter in 1783 (see VIII, above) was quite convenient now. On the one hand, there seems to be no literature at all about the rituals and lectures practised in Preston’s ‘Order of Harodim’, or rather, nobody – scholars and masons alike – seems to have thought of the possibility that these might have existed. On the other hand, there do exist several texts, bearing such titles as ‘Harodim’ or ‘Old York Rituals’, which scholars have unanimously dismissed as nonsense and forgeries. However, would Preston not have tried to reconstruct, as well as he could, the oldest possible version of the Harodim Old York Lectures and Rituals for his own ‘Order of Harodim’? Nothing seems more obvious to me. Of course, Preston’s reconstructions are not ritual texts from the early eighteenth century or even older, no matter what those texts may pretend to be. But then, texts that claim to be much older than they are in reality are the rule rather than the exception in Freemasonry. The most complete text of a set of both rituals and lectures for the three Craft degrees that may have been copied – directly or indirectly – from Preston’s, are Alexander Dalziel’s manuscripts, the very first page of which bears in large letters the word ‘HARODIM’. Regrettably, he himself writes in them: ‘Revised by A Dalziel 1830’. But it is the only text that gives us the possibility of comparing its lectures with those in James’s reconstruction of Preston’s Syllabus (for which reason I included it in this volume in the section ‘Alexander Dalziel’s Manuscripts ...’). And the result of this comparison is striking. For the first degree the two versions turn out virtually identical (which strongly supports the assumption of Preston being the author of both), whereas for the second and third degree they are very different. Furthermore, those

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis xviii


for the second degree in Dalziel’s manuscript are still in line with the style of other English masonic lectures, but those for the third degree contain several highly unusual and esoteric elements. If these are indeed Preston’s lectures for his ‘Order of Harodim’, then this means that the Brethren he accepted there as members would at first be confronted with his lectures for the first degree from his Syllabus, also practised in the ‘Lodge of Antiquity’. Only in the second degree would they be confronted with new material. And only those whom he really trusted would be granted access to the lecture for the third degree. Dalziel seems to have copied his 1830 version from an earlier version he had made, probably in 1823. The revisions he made in 1830 seem to have pertained mainly to the rituals for the three degrees, which were more or less adapted to the new rituals, accepted by the Grand Lodge in 1816. Both Schnitger and Yarker apparently had that 1823 version before them when Schnitger quoted from it in the conferences he presented for his lodges at the end of the nineteenth century (quotes which I also include in the section ‘Alexander Dalziel’s Manuscripts ...’), and when Yarker made his transcription of its rituals, but not its lectures, maybe in 1896. John Yarker’s version was again copied by William Waples in 1951, and that copy was finally copied by G. Nevin Drinkwater and Isabel H. Drinkwater in 1955. Since this text presents the version of the rituals as they were before Dalziel’s revision of 1830, I included it in the section ‘Alexander Dalziel’s Manuscripts ...’, in this volume, as well. Yarker calls his transcription of Dalziel’s c. 1823 version on his title page the ‘Old York Ritual’ and stated in his preface to it: ‘In nearly the whole of his books Dr. George Oliver quotes literally from these Lectures, and describes his references “Old York Lectures”’. Waples also, in a letter from 1954, calls them ‘The old York Ritual’. All the texts, referred to in that way, correspond with what Dalziel gave on the title page of his 1830 manuscript ritual for the first degree the title ‘Harodim’ and Schnitger regarded them to be ‘the Harodim lectures which were thought to be lost’ (Schnitger, c. 1888, p. 9). That all these texts are – directly or indirectly – copied from still older rituals and lectures is confirmed by a number of texts by William Finch from between 1804 and 1815. In his annotated bibliography of Finch’s publications, Rickard mentions time and again features that are in fact quite specific for the rituals and lectures in Dalziel’s manuscripts. The earliest such text is a manuscript in Finch’s handwriting marked ‘A.D. 1804’ (but that may just refer to the watermark of the paper), mainly concerning the Royal Arch. It contains ten sections, the last of which is about the Legend of the Porphyry Stone and the insect Schamir (or Shermah). With reference to the Schamir, Bro[ther] Songhurst told us in Miscellanea Latomorum (vol. xii [1927/8], p. 141) ‘that it must not be taken that Finch was the inventor of the Legend, but only that it was included by him in a version of the R[oyal] Arch Ritual. It is not at present known in any Ritual of a date earlier than Finch ’.24


xix

The text concerned starts as follows: 2 [= 1] What was the real secret our Grand Master H[iram] Ab[iff ] was s[lain] for not revealing? A. Not the S[ign,] T[oken] & W[ord] of a Master Mason, as is erroniously [sic] asserted, but the wonderful properties of that noble Insect call’d S[herm]a which cut and shaped all the sacred utensils & holy vessels &c in king Solomons Temple, and also that famous stone call’d A...sh...o, that is held in such great veneration among ancient freemasons.25

This corresponds to the following in Dalziel’s manuscript (1830) for the third degree: the Grand Secrets relative to the Noble in[sect] Sh[erma]h which was that which constituted the secrets of the 3 Grand Masters, and which H[iram] Ab[iff ] lost his life for not illegally revealing to the three Tyrian assassins26

The ‘noble insect Shermah’ is one of the most extravagantly esoteric features of the class of rituals under discussion. It appears in no masonic rituals outside this class and can therefore be used as a clear characteristic differentiating between this class and other rituals. Other such distinguishing characteristics include references to Ebrank, Blandud (or Blaudud, or Bladud) and Croseus (or Carausius), as well as the derivation of the distinguishing Signs of the degrees from the ‘penal law of ancient Tyre’. Both these features are found in the editions of Finch’s Lectures of 1808, 1809 and 1810 (see Volume 2 in this edition), and in Dalziel’s MSS from both 1823 and 1830. Furthermore, according to Rickard, the ‘14th edition of Finch’s Lectures is entitled The New Union System and Ancient York Lectures, 1815 and the 15th edition Prestonian and Ancient York Lectures’,27 thus using the expression ‘Ancient York Lectures’. But already in Finch’s Lectures of 1809 or 1810 (included in Volume 2 of this edition), he refers his readers to ‘my Ancient York Lectures’ (p. 25), which thus must have been published earlier (but after 1802). It is highly regrettable that this publication could not be found so far, because it might well be Finch’s oldest published complete version of what he, as possibly the first one, called in printing the Ancient York Lectures. He was followed in that naming by others. Dyer mentions that ‘Finch borrowed [for his publication of 1802, included in the section ‘William Finch: A Masonic Treatise (1802)’ of Volume 2 of this edition] a very great deal from William Preston’s Illustrations of Masonry – and acknowledged most of his borrowings’,28 but the elements just mentioned are not in either. Yet, if in 1802 Finch was so inclined to use material provided by Preston, then it is but logical that he would in his later productions make use of other information from the same author. In section II above we saw that the Harodim lodges in the north-east of England worked in two ‘higher degrees’: ‘Harodim’ and ‘Royal Arch’: in section IV

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis xx


that Le Parfait Maçon contained a ritual for a Scots Master degree; in sections VI and VII that the London-based Order in 1750 and the Royal Order of Scotland later, work[ed] in the Order of Heredom of Kilwinning and the Order of the Rosy Cross; and in section VIII that Lambert de Lintot’s ‘Metropolis of Scotland and Colledge [sic] of Heredom or Royal Order of Heredom’, was composed of a Heredom degree, a Templar degree and a Rose Croix degree. Dalziel’s fourth and fifth manuscripts show that the Rite he worked in, after the Craft degrees, was composed of a Royal Arch, a Knights Templar, and a Red Cross or Rosy Cross degree.29 All these Rites, then, worked, after the Craft degrees, in some ‘higher’ degrees, drawn from a restricted set.

Common Characteristics of all Harodim Texts Despite the great diversity in time and place of those nine Harodim traditions, the texts they have produced do share a significant number of characteristics. This testifies in some cases (such as II – IV – V or VI – VII) to the probability of one descending from another, whereas in other cases (such as IX) it shows that its creator actively collected older Harodim texts and incorporated what he encountered there into his own system. Among those typical Harodim characteristics I count: • The rituals and lectures are explicitly Christian and contain many implicit Bible quotations. • The rituals are very catechetical; they always contain long lectures; some contain doggerel rhyme, testifying to their great age. • The central issues of the rituals are to find the true name of God, and to reach felicity/Bliss. • The texts subscribe implicitly to the old teaching of the two books: God revealed himself in the Bible and in (the book of ) Nature; therefore, natural sciences help us to better understand Him. • The title of the governor of the Order or of a lodge is often not (Grand) Master, but Deputy (Grand) Master (the true Master being either Christ or – in the case of the Royal Order of Scotland – the King of Scotland). • The number of degrees in the Rites concerned is often larger than just the three Craft degrees. • The themes of the rituals are not restricted to the building of the Temple of Solomon, but include also other Biblical stories, such as those about Noah’s Ark and Jacob’s Ladder (standing on the Bible; its rungs representing virtues that lead to heaven).


xxi

• An important theme is the building of the Second Temple under Zerubbabel. - It is built with a trowel in one hand, and a sword in the other; this may be stated in the context of the ‘Sanballat poem’. - The story starts with the dream of Cyrus. - Then a bridge must be passed. • The Seven Wonders of the World are often mentioned. As a rule at least the Tower of Babel is counted as one of them, and sometimes also the Temple of Solomon. • The word ‘adoption’ is used as a synonym of ‘initiation’. • Sometimes a trowel is used in the ritual to seal the mouth of the member(s) with the Seal of Taciturnity. • Sometimes the members wear a garter;30 if they do, it bears the text ‘Silence & Virtue’. • The predominant numbers used are 9, 27 (3x9), and 81 (9x9), rather than 3, 5 and 7. • The predominant symbolical colours used are white, green and red, rather than blue, yellow or black. • One calls ‘Vivat!’, not ‘Housé!’

High[er] Degrees The previous list of general characteristics of Harodim Rites and rituals mentions already that they often make use of several themes. Especially in the older rituals (such as the Order of Heredom of Kilwinning within the Royal Order of Scotland) that is often the case within one and the same ritual. But such themes may in the course of time develop into separate degrees. The result are Rites of more than three degrees, including what are usually called ‘high’ or ‘higher’ degrees. Certainly one of the oldest ‘higher’ degrees was the ‘Scots Master’ degree, practised at least in the 1730s in London, Bath and Bristol. From the ‘French Union Lodge’ in London, the painter Jacopo Fabris brought it to Berlin, where he founded the ‘Scots Masters’ lodge ‘L’Union’ on St Andrew’s day, 1742. From there it spread over all of Continental Europe and the colonies. Via France it arrived in the Caribbean, where it was incorporated in the collection of rituals translated by Henry Andrew Francken into English. Misunderstood as a Rite, this collection was transformed in the early nineteenth century into the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, in the context of which this degree, now called ‘Perfect Master’, eventually also returned to England again. It is about crusaders recovering something of value – basically the ‘old Master-word’, i.e. the Name of God – in the ruins of the Temple of Solomon.31

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis xxii


When Baron Friedrich von Vegesack was initiated into the Ordre Sublime des Chevaliers Élus in 1749, he was told that this Order had been founded between 1728 and 1733.32 That is quite possible. We have rituals of this Order in French that show that it was again such a multi-theme ritual. Eventually it developed in different directions: in the first place into a number of ‘Élu’ or Selected Master degrees, concerned with finding and punishing the murderers of Hiram Abiff. Some of those degrees found their way into the anonymous publication Freemasonry. A Word to the Wise, of 1796, included in this volume. It also developed into a non-revenge version, included in, for example, the Swedish Rite as the Andreas-Apprentice and Fellow. Thirdly, it became the ‘mother-degree’ of all Chivalric degrees. Lambert de Lintot introduced several of those in England in his Rite of Seven Degrees, but only in French. Soon, however English translations were made and practised in both England (see the section ‘The ‘Sheffield’ Knight Templar Ritual (c. 1800)’ in this volume) and Ireland (see the section ‘High Knight Templar Rituals, Dublin (1795 and 1804)’ in this volume). Not much younger is another version of the ‘Scots Master’ degree, of which the oldest ritual we have is included in Le Parfait Maçon of 1744. This version of the ‘Scots Master’ degree is about the liberation by Cyrus of the Jews in Babylonian exile, Cyrus ordering them to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem, their voyage – led by Zerubbabel – over a bridge and to Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the Temple with a trowel in one hand and a sword in the other, and often finally the enthronization of Zerubbabel. Because of that last feature, a shortened version came into use in France for the installation of a Master of a lodge (Installed Master’s degree). In the course of time it developed in France also into the degree of ‘Chevalier de l’épée et de l’Orient’ (Knight of the sword and of the East). As such it found its way into Lambert de Lintot’s Rite of Seven Degrees, and also into the anonymous publication Freemasonry. A Word to the Wise, of 1796, included in this volume. Furthermore, Pierre Jean Laurent, a member of Lambert de Lintot’s chapter in London, introduced this degree in 1782 in Ireland under the title of ‘Prince Mason Knights of the Red Cross’ (see the section ‘Knight of the Red Cross Ritual, Ireland (1806)’ in this volume). Probably most complex of all is the history of the degree called ‘Royal Arch’. Already in the 1740s it is mentioned in Ireland, but the oldest British ritual of this degree (included in the section ‘The ‘Sheffield’ Royal Arch Ritual (c. 1780–5)’ in this volume) is estimated to be only from c. 1780 to 1785. French rituals are available from the 1760s onwards, but surely by that time the degree was worked in England as well. The theme of refinding the Name of God in the ruins of the Temple of Solomon was borrowed from the first ‘Scots Master’ degree (see above), whereas the theme of the Sojourners, returning from Babylon, was borrowed from the other version of the ‘Scots Master’/‘Knight of the sword and of the East’-degree. Others of its themes were floating around in different versions of Craft rituals, such as the ‘jewel’, found in the ‘Rite ancien de Bouillon’, claimed


xxiii

to be from 1740 (see the section ‘The Rite ancien de Bouillon (1740?)’ in this volume) or the camps of the Jews with their banners around the Tabernacle, elaborately presented in the oldest printed Royal Arch catechism (containing nothing about an Arch!), which is included in Finch’s publication of 1802 (pp. 73–89, see Volume 2 in this edition, the section ‘William Finch, A Masonic Treatise (1802)’). In other words, whereas most components seem to have British origins, they seem to have been first combined into a Royal Arch degree in France, which then returned again to England and Ireland, where it developed further. Before the Union of 1813, the ‘Moderns’ and the ‘Antients’ each had their own, but different, version, both of which were included in the ‘Deptford-MS’ (in this volume). There are alltogether thousands of ‘higher’ degrees, but pre-1813 rituals of ‘higher’ degrees in English are relatively rare. Even though our collection cannot pretend completeness, it probably does give most of the more famous and influential ones.

Frontispiece The undated engraving ‘Free Masons At Work’, included as the frontispiece of this volume, was made by Pierre Lambert de Lintot (1726–98) (on whom see pp. xv–xvii and 314–18 in this volume). He cooperated closely with William Preston, who founded in 1787 the ‘Ancient and Venerable Order of Harodim’. The rituals, here identified as probably those that Preston created for this Order, describe its ‘(tracing) board’ or ‘(masonic) lodge’ for the first degree as follows: ‘The Mosaic pavement, the blazing Star, and the tassellated border are represented by a circular board (the ground chequered), the sun in the centre with the Planets and satellites around it, which, with all the other elements of science, are to be in the East’. ‘The tassellated border refers us to the Planets and satellites in their different revolutions and evolutions, which form a beautiful skirtwork round that grand luminary the sun as the other does to a Masonic Lodge’ (see pp. 155 and 214 in this volume). This engraving seems to match this description exactly.

Editorial Principles Printed Sources Original capitalization and punctuation have been retained and only the most significant typographical errors have been amended where they undermine the understanding of the text. Note that there can be significant differences not only between different editions of texts but also between individual extant copies. The texts have been proofed against a single original source and we give details

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis British Freemasonry, 1717–1813: Volume 3

xxiv

of those sources in the List of Sources at the end of this volume. Any differences between our printed text and other original texts have to be considered in this light. The original pagination of the text is indicated by the inclusion of / plus the original page number within the text at the exact point of the page break. The page numbers appear between (round parenthesis) if they are in the original document, or between [square brackets] when I added them. Any sections omitted from the text are indicated by […]. Any other editorial interventions are also contained within square brackets. Manuscript Sources Manuscript sources are transcribed as close to the original as possible, allowing for modern typographical conventions and a degree of standardization of format. Where possible text that is struck through or appears in the originals as either super-or sub-script is reproduced in the same way within this edition. Editorial interventions are again noted within square brackets. Please note that as with all manuscript sources there is a degree of editorial judgement and interpretation. Imperfections in the condition of the originals may mean that the original text is not always clear or may be open to more than one reading. In such instances the editor has used his best abilities to provide the most likely reading. As in the case of printed texts, the original pagination of the text is indicated by the inclusion of / plus the original page number within the text at the exact point of the page break. The page numbers appear between (round parenthesis) if they are in the original document, or between [square brackets] when I added them. Any sections omitted from the text are indicated by [...]. Any other editorial interventions are also contained within square brackets.

Notes 1.

2. 3.

4. 5. 6.

T. Stewart, ‘The H.R.D.M.: A Fourth Visitation to a Curious Eighteenth-Century Masonic Phenomenon from the North East Region of England’, Acta Macionica, 6 (1996), pp. 43–93. Stewart, ‘The H.R.D.M.’. Anon., Réception d’un Frey-Maçon [Paris, 1737]. An English translation was published in H. Carr (ed.), The Early French Exposures (London: The Quator Coronati Lodge No. 2076, 1971), pp. 1–8. Furthermore, two English translations from the eighteenth century are included in volume 2 of this edition. Carr (ed.), The Early French Exposures, pp. 7–8. Carr (ed.), The Early French Exposures, p. 6 (my emphasis). See J. A. M. Snoek, ‘A Manuscript Version of Hérault’s Ritual’, in R. Caron, J. Godwin, W. J. Hanegraaff and J.-L. Vieillard-Baron (eds), Ésotérisme, Gnoses et Imaginaire Symbolique: Mélanges offerts a Antoine Faivre (Gnostica 3) (Leuven: Peeters, 2001), pp. 507–21.

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis Introduction 7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.

21.

22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29.

xxv

Abbé Gabriel Louis Calabre Perau, Le secret des Francs-Maçons [Geneva, 1744]. For the date of the first edition, see Henri Amblaine [= Alain Bernheim], ‘Masonic Catechisms and Exposures’, in Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, 106 (1993), pp. 141–53. Many further editions were published in Paris. An English translation was published in Carr (ed.), The Early French Exposures, pp. 41–84. Léonard Gabanon [= Louis Travenol], Catéchisme des Francs-Maçons ( Jérusalem [= Paris] & Limoges, 1440 depuis le Déluge [= 1744]). An English translation was published in Carr (ed.), The Early French Exposures, pp. 85–112. Anon., Le parfait maçon ou les véritables secrets des quatre Grades d’ Aprentis, Compagnons, Maîtres ordinaires & Ecossois de la Franche-Maçonnerie [Paris, 1744]. An English translation was published in Carr (ed.), The Early French Exposures, pp. 157–200. Carr (ed.), The Early French Exposures, p. 193. See for the analysis of Le Parfait Maçon as a Harodim text J. A. M. Snoek, Initiating Women in Freemasonry: The Adoption Rite (Leiden: Brill, 2012), pp, 63–78, 93–111, 120–23. Anon., Khatam Pharouq – Le sceau rompu ou la loge ouverte aux Profânes (Cosmopolis [= Paris], 1745). An English translation was published in Carr (ed.), The Early French Exposures, pp. 201–26. Anon., L’Ordre des Francs-Maçons trahi, et le secret des Mopses revelé (Amsterdam, 1745). An English translation was published in Carr (ed.), The Early French Exposures, pp. 227–77. See Snoek, Initiating Women in Freemasonry, pp. 78–86. Anon., Womens Masonry or Masonry by Adoption (London: Hookham, 1765). Quoted in Gilbert W. Daynes’s comments to Wonnacott, in E. W. M. Wonnacott, ‘The Rite of Seven Degrees in London’, AQC, 39 (1926), pp. 63–98, on p. 94. Petition of 11 October 1782, quoted in G. S. Draffen, ‘Some Further Notes on the Rite of Seven Degrees in London’, AQC, 68 (1955), pp. 94–111, on p. 95 (my emphasis). Draffen, ‘Some Further Notes on the Rite of Seven Degrees in London’, p. 103. Eric Ward’s comments on Draffen, ‘Some Further Notes on the Rite of Seven Degrees in London’, p. 107. Draffen, ‘Some Further Notes on the Rite of Seven Degrees in London’, pp. 99–101. Neglecting any historical development of the text of Preston’s Syllabus, and using all versions he could find, a full text of it was reconstructed by P. R. James, ‘The First Lecture of Free Masonry by William Preston’, AQC, 82 (1969), pp. 104–55; ‘The Second Lecture of Free Masonry by William Preston’, AQC, 83 (1970), pp. 193–247; ‘William Preston’s Third Lecture of Free Masonry’, AQC, 85 (1972), pp. 69–127. See on this chain of events G. Y. Johnson, ‘The Grand Lodge South of the River Trent’, Prestonian Lecture for 1947, in H. Carr (ed.), The Collected Prestonian Lectures 1925–1960 (1947; London: Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076, 1965), pp. 283–96. Draffen, ‘Some Further Notes on the Rite of Seven Degrees in London’, p. 98. Wonnacott, ‘The Rite of Seven Degrees in London’, p. 89. F. M. Rickard, ‘William Finch’, AQC, 55 (1942), pp. 163–283, on p. 231. Compare Dalziel, 1830 III.81. Finch, Royal Arch MS, ‘A.D. 1804’. (LMFL BE 395 FIN fol.), p. 25. Dalziel’s MS (1830) for the third degree, p. 81. Rickard, ‘William Finch’, p. 224. C. F. W. Dyer, ‘The William-Arden Manuscript’, AQC, 87 (1974), pp. 167–203, on p. 173. Rituals for the last two in the fifth MS, pp. 1–47 and 48–80 resp.

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis xxvi


30. Namely in the Royal Order of Scotland, the Adoption Rite, and the Templar ritual included in ‘Sheffield’ Knight Templar Ritual of this volume and the one in William Waples’s transcription of Dalziel’s manuscripts (p. 143). 31. K. Bettag and J. A. M. Snoek, Quellen der Eckleff ’schen Andreas-Akten (Flensburg: Frederik, 2012), pp. 130–42. 32. A. Kervella and P. Lestienne, ‘Un haut-grade templier dans des milieu jacobites en 1750: l’Ordre Sublime des Chevaliers Élus, aux sources de la Stricte Observance’, Renaissance Traditionelle, 28:112 (1997), pp. 229–66, on p. 237.

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abbreviations AQC = Ars Quatuor Coronatorum MAMR = Transactions of the Manchester Association for Masonic Research LMFL = Library and Museum of Freemasonry, London ROS = Royal Order of Scotland

Primary sources Anon., Le parfait maçon ou les véritables secrets des quatre Grades d’Aprentis, Compagnons, Maîtres ordinaires & Ecossois de la Franche-Maçonnerie [Paris, 1744]. Anon., La Franc-Maçonne (Brussels, 1744). Anon., Khatam Pharouq – Le sceau rompu ou la loge ouverte aux Profânes (Cosmopolis [= Paris], 1745). Anon., L’Ordre des Francs-Maçons trahi, et le secret des Mopses revelé (Amsterdam, 1745). Anon., The Three Distinct Knocks (London: Srjeant, 1760). Anon., Jachin and Boaz (London: Nicoll, 1762). Anon., Hiram: the Grand Master-Key to the Door of both Ancient and Modern Free-Masonry (London: Griffin & Toft, 1764). Anon., The Complete Free Mason, or Multa Paucis for Lovers of Secrets (London, c. 1764). Anon., Womens Masonry or Masonry by Adoption (London: Hookham, 1765). Anon., Les plus secrets mystères des hauts grades de la maçonnerie dévoilés, ou le vrai Rose-Croix, traduit de l’anglois; suivi du Noachite, traduit de l’allemand, 2nd edn (1766; Jérusalem [= Paris], 1767). [Wolfstieg 29989 ascribes it to Karl-Friedrich von Köppen, but today it is more often attributed to M. de Bérage.] Anon., Les quatre grades complets de l’Ordre de l’Adoption, ou la Maçonnerie des Dames ( Jérusalem [= Paris], 1772). Anon., Free Masonry for the Ladies; or the Grand Secret Discovered (Circulating Library 37) ([London]: Printed for W. Thiselton, [Dedicated] To Her Royal Highness the Duchess of York [Dedication dated 22 November 1791]).

– xxvii –

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis xxviii


Anon., Der Verklärte Freymaurer ([n. p., 1791). Anon., Freemasonry. A Word to the Wise (London: Thiselton, 1796). Anon., The Ceremonies of the United Religious and Military Orders of the Temple [etc.] (London, repr. 1965). Anderson, J., The Constitutions of the Free-Masons (London, 1723). Browne, J., Brown’s Masonic Master-key through the Three Degrees by way of polyglot ([London]: Browne, 1802). Bunyan, J., Solomon’s Temple Spiritualized, or, Gospel Light Fetched out of the Temple at Jerusalem, to Let Us More Easily into the Glory of New Testament Truths, 10th edn (1688; London, George Larkin, 1762). Carlile, R., ‘A Description of the Degree of Royal Arch Masonry’, The Republican, 12:12 (1825), pp. 356–64 and 12:13 (1825), pp. 385–402. —, Manual of Masonry ... Part II (London: Carlile, 1845). D’Assigny, F., A Serious and Impartial Enquiry into the Cause of the Present Decay in Freemasonry in the Kingdom of Ireland (Dublin: Waters, 1744). De l’Aulnaye, F.-H.-S., Thuileur des trente-trois degrés de l’écossisme du rit ancien, dit accepté (Paris: Delaulnaye, 1813). De Nerval, G. (= Gérard Labrunie, 1808–55), Voyage en Orient (Paris: Charpentier, 1851). Entick, J. (ed.), The Constitutions of the Antient and Honourable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, by James Anderson, D.D., Carefully Revised ... by John Entick, M.A. (London: Printed for Brother J. Scott ..., 1756). Finch, W., Freemasons Guide (London: Finch, 1807). —, Lectures on Masonry ([London:] Finch, 1809 or 1810). Guillemain de Saint-Victor, L., Recueil précieux de la maçonnerie adonhiramite ... Dédié aux maçons instruits par un chevalier de tous les ordres maçonniques [2e partie]: Contenant les trois points de la maçonnerie écossaise ... précédés des trois élus et suivis du Noachite ... enrichi d’un abrégé de tous les ordres maçonniques (Philadelphie [= Paris], Philarethe, 1785). (Wolfstieg 33380) Hannah, W., Darkness Visible (London: Augustin Press, 1952). [Hérault, R. (ed.)]: Réception d’un Frey-Maçon, [Paris 1737]. Hutchinson, W., The Spirit of Masonry (London: Wilkie & Goldsmith, 1775). Perau, Ab. G. L. C., Le secret des Francs-Maçons [Geneva, 1744]. Pincemaille, E., Conversations allégoriques, Organisées par la Sagesse (Londres [= Metz], 1763 (the ‘higher’ degrees) and 1766 (the Craft degrees)). Preston, W., Illustrations of Masonry, 1st edn (London, 1772). Prichard, S., Masonry Dissected (London: Wilford, 1730). Slade, A., The Free Mason Examin’d (London: Printed for R. Griffiths, 1754). Smith, G. [under the pen name ‘Thomas Wilson’], Solomon in all his Glory (London: Robinson & Roberts, 1766). Smith, W., The Book M: Or, Masonry Triumphant (Newcastle upon Tyne: Umfreville, 1736).

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis Bibliography

xxix

Travenol, L. (penname: Léonard Gabanon), Catéchisme des Francs-Maçons ( Jérusalem [= Paris] & Limoges, 1440 depuis le Déluge [= 1744]). A facsimile of the French version was published in Bernheim (2004), pp. 335–49. Webb, T. S., Freemason’s Monitor, or Illustrations of Masonry (New York, 1797).

Secondary literature Acaster, J. T., ‘The Lodge Forbes Poem and Catechism in their Context of Time and Place’, MAMR, 98 (2008), pp. 50–61. Bernheim, A. (writing under the pen name Henri Amblaine), ‘Masonic Catechisms and Exposures’, in AQC, 106 (1993), pp. 141–53. —, ‘La Reception mysterieuse (1738) [&] Catechisme des francs-maçons (1744)’, Acta Macionica, 14 (2004), pp. 309–49. Bettag, K. and J. A. M. Snoek, Quellen der Eckleff ’schen Andreas-Akten (Flensburg: Frederik, 2012). Bogdan, H. and J. A. M. Snoek (eds), Handbook of Freemasonry (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2014). Carr, H. (ed.), The Early French Exposures (London: The Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076, 1971). Clarke, J. R., Early Sheffield Rituals of the Royal Arch and the Knights Templar (Menton, Yorkshire: Scolar Press, [1973]). —, ‘Some Early Royal Arch Rituals’, AQC, 93 (1980), pp. 181–8. Cryer, N. B., York Mysteries Revealed (Understanding an Old English Masonic Tradition) (Hersham: Ian Allan, 2006). Culkin, C. H. M., ‘The Durham Harodim and the Hiramic Legend’, AQC, 123 (2010), pp. 221–52. Curl, J. S., Oxford Dictionary of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, 2nd edn (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006). —, Freemasonry & the Enlightenment: Architecture, Symbols, & Influences (London: Historical Publications, 2011). —, ‘Freemasonry and Architecture’, in H. Bogdan and J. A. M. Snoek (eds), Handbook of Freemasonry (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2014), pp. 557–605. Davies, M., The Masonic Muse. Songs, Music and Musicians Associated with Dutch Freemasonry: 1730–1806 (Utrecht: Koninklijke Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiedenis, 2005). De Hoyos, A. and S. Brent Morris (trans and eds), Allegorical Conversations Arranged by Wisdom, Translated & Edited from the First Edition of 1763 (Washington, DC: SRRS, 2012). [Facsimile of the French publications by Pincemaille, with an English translation.] Draffen of Newington, G. S., ‘Some Further Notes on the Rite of Seven Degrees in London’, AQC, 68 (1955), pp. 94–111. —, The Royal Order of Scotland: The Second Hundred Years (Edinburgh: Howie & Seath, 1977).

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis xxx


Dyer, C. F. W., ‘The William-Arden Manuscript’, AQC, 87 (1974), pp. 167–203. —, ‘Some Notes on the Deptford Rituals’, AQC, 91 (1978), pp. 156–67. Flather, D., ‘Freemasonry in Sheffield in the Eighteenth Century’, AQC, 44 (1931), pp. 133–70. Hamill, J. M., ‘English Royal Arch MS. Rituals c. 1780–c. 1830’, AQC, 95 (1983), pp. 37–54. —, The Craft. A History of English Freemasonry (Wellingborough: Crucible, 1986). Heidle, A. and J. A. M. Snoek (eds), Women’s Agency and Rituals in Mixed and Female Masonic Orders (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2008). Hewlings, R., Chiswick House and Gardens, 2nd edn (London: English Heritage, 1991). James, P. R., ‘The First Lecture of Free Masonry by William Preston’, AQC, 82 (1969), pp. 104–55. —, ‘The Second Lecture of Free Masonry by William Preston’, AQC, 83 (1970), pp. 193–247. —, ‘William Preston’s Third Lecture of Free Masonry’, AQC, 85 (1972), pp. 69–127. Johnson, G. Y., ‘The Grand Lodge South of the River Trent’, Prestonian Lecture for 1947, in H. Carr (ed.), The Collected Prestonian Lectures 1925–1960 (1947; London: Quatuor Coronati Lodge No 2076, 1965), pp. 283–96. Jones, B. E., Freemasons’ Book of the Royal Arch (1957; London: Harrap, 1975). Kervella, A. and P. Lestienne, ‘Un haut-grade templier dans des milieux jacobites en 1750: l’Ordre Sublime des Chevaliers Élus, aux sources de la Stricte Observance’, Renaissance Traditionnelle, 28:112 (1997), pp. 229–66. Knoop, D., G. P. Jones and D. Hamer, ‘Passing the Bridge’, Miscellanea Latomorum, new series 27:1 (1942), pp. 1–11. —, The Early Masonic Catechisms (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1943; 2nd edn, 1963). Knoop, D. and G. P. Jones, The Genesis of Freemasonry (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1947). Lepper, J. H. and P. Crossle, History of the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of Ireland, Vol. 1 (Dublin: Lodge of Research CC, 1925). Lévy, J.-B. (ed.), Le Rite en 33 degrés du comte de ‘Clairmont’, grand maître de toutes les loges; Fac simile des carnets du comte de Clermont (1768) (Valence d’Albigeois: Éditions de la Hutte, 2012). Lindsay, R. S., The Royal Order of Scotland (Perthshire: Coupar Angus, 1971). Naudon, P., La Franc-Maçonnerie Chrétienne (Paris: Dervy, 1970). Oliver, G., The Antiquities of Freemasonry (London: Whittaker, 1823). —, Signs and Symbols Illustrated and Explained, in a Course of Twelve Lectures on FreeMasonry (Grimsby: Skelton, 1826). —, The Origin of the Royal Arch Order of Masonry, A New Edition (London: Spencer, 1867). [Overbeek, A. R.?], Typed transcript of Clarke’s Early Sheffield Rituals of the Royal Arch and the Knights Templar (Amsterdam: Privately distributed, [c. 1975]). Owen, A. J., ‘The Motto of the Royal Arch Si Talia Jungere Possis: Sit Tibi Scire Satis and the Explanation of the Jewel’, AQC, 105 (1992), pp. 155–60.

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis Bibliography

xxxi

—, ‘The Motto of the Royal Arch’ [Supplementary], AQC, 106 (1993), pp. 257–9. —, ‘Some Observations on the Fifth Section of the Lecture in Early Royal Arch Rituals’, AQC, 110 (1997), pp. 250–5. —, ‘Basilides and the Basilidean System’, AQC, 112 (1999), pp. 170–1. Parkinson, R. E., History of the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of Ireland, Vol. II (Dublin: Lodge of Research CC, 1957). Péter, R., ‘The Mysteries of English Freemasonry. Janus-faced Masonic Ideology and Practice between 1696 and 1815’ (PhD dissertation, University of Szeged, 2006). —, ‘Secular British Masonic Rituals?’ in F. C. Schneid and S. Conner (eds), The Consortium on Revolutionary Europe, 1750–1850: Selected Papers, 2005 (High Point: High Point University, 2007), pp. 13–24. —, ‘Women in Eighteenth-Century English Freemasonry: The First English Adoption Lodges and their Rituals’, Journal for Research into Freemasonry and Fraternalism, 4.1 (2013), pp. 42–69. Powell, C., The Sheffield Royal Arch Ritual (c. 1780–5) (Sheffield: Privately printed, 2009). —, ‘The Sheffield Manuscript No. 1 Royal Arch (c. 1780)’, AQC, 126 (2013), pp. 203–22. —, Sheffield Knights Templar Ritual (c. 1795) (Sheffield: Privately printed, 2013). —, ‘The Sheffield No. 2 MS Knight Templar (c. 1795)’, AQC, 127 (2014), pp. 243–60. Prescott, A., 2014, ‘Chapter 3: The Old Charges’, in H. Bogdan and J. A. M. Snoek (eds), Handbook of Freemasonry (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2014), pp. 33–49. Read, W., ‘Yorkshire – Its Ritual Heritage’, AQC, 93 (1980), pp. 129–70. Rickard, F. M., ‘William Finch’, AQC 55 (1942), pp. 163–283. Snoek, J. A. M., Initiations: A Methodological Approach to the Application of Classification and Definition Theory in the Study of Rituals (Pijnacker: Dutch Efficiency Bureau, 1987). —, ‘Rituaal voor de graad van Ridder van de Degen en van het Oosten, ingeleid, be- werkt en geannoteerd’ (Ritual for the degree of Knight of the Sword and of the East, introduced, edited and annotated), Het Rozekruis, 66:3 (1992), pp. 46–70. —, ‘De namen en kleuren van de twee Leidse loges - Over Astrea en de Vrijmetselarij’ (The names and colours of the two lodges in Leyden - On Astraea and Freemasonry), Acta Macionica, 6 (1996), pp. 195–227. —, ‘A Manuscript Version of Hérault’s Ritual’, in R. Caron, J. Godwin, W. J. Hanegraaff and J.-L. Vieillard-Baron (eds), Ésotérisme, Gnoses & Imaginaire Symbolique: Mélanges offerts à Antoine Faivre (Gnostica 3) (Leuven: Peeters, 2001), pp. 507–21. —, Ritual Dynamics in the Independent United Order of Mechanics (Forum Ritualdyna16 (http://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/ritualdynamik/article/ mik view/9071/2913) [accessed 11 December 2014]), SFB 619 ‘Ritualdynamik’ (Heidelberg: University of Heidelberg, 2008). —, Einführung in die Westliche Esoterik, für Freimaurer (Zürich: ‘Modestia cum Libertate’, 2011). —, Initiating Women in Freemasonry: The Adoption Rite (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2012).

Copyright Material – Provided by Taylor & Francis xxxii


—, ‘Smith, [ John] George [de] (c. 1728 - c. 1785)’, in C. Porset and C. Révauger (eds), Le Monde Maçonnique des Lumières (Europe-Amériques & Colonies). Dictionnaire prosopographique, 3 vols (Paris: Champion, 2013), pp. 2562–6. —, ‘Freemasonry and Women’, in H. Bogdan and J. A. M. Snoek (eds), Handbook of Freemasonry (Brill Handbooks on Contemporary Religion 8) (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2014), pp. 409–23. Snoek, J. A. M. and H. Bogdan, ‘The History of Freemasonry: An Overview’, in H. Bogdan and J. A. M. Snoek (eds), Handbook of Freemasonry (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2014), pp. 13–32. Solis, J., Rituel des grades alchimiques du baron Tschoudy (Bonneuil-en-Valois: La Hutte, 2009). Sommers, S. M., Thomas Dunckerley and English Freemasonry (London: Pickering & Chatto, 2012). Stewart, T., ‘The H.R.D.M.: A Fourth Visitation to a Curious 18th Century Masonic Phenomenon from the North East Region of England’, Acta Macionica, 6 (1996), pp. 43–93. Thorp, J. T., Rite Ancien de Bouillon, Masonic Reprints of the Lodge of Research, No. 2429 Leicester, Vol. IX (Leicester: Johnson, 1926). Van de Sande, A., ‘Inleiding’ in A. van de Sande and J. Rosendaal (eds), Een stille leerschool van deugd en goede zeden’. Vrijmetselarij in Nederland in de 18e en 19e eeuw (Hilversum: Verloren, 1995), pp. 9–23. Vieler, D., ‘William Finch – The Positive View’, AQC, 102 (1989), pp. 61–97. Waples, W., ‘An Introduction to the Harodim’, AQC, 60 (1947), pp. 118–98. Watkins, G. G., ‘Why Doth the Sun Within our Lodge With so Much Brightness Shine?’, MAMR, 97 (2007), pp. 11–58 Wolfstieg, A., Bibliographie der freimaurerischen Literatur, Band II (Burg bei Magdeburg: Selbstverlag, 1912) and Erster Erganzungsband (Leipzig: Verein Deutscher Freimaurer, 1926). Wonnacott, E. W. M., ‘The Rite of Seven Degrees in London’, AQC, 39 (1926), pp. 63–98.