CHAPTER XXXII

OPERATIVE MASONRY
We have seen in Chapter I. (p. rz) that | Speculative Masonry is derived from the | various systems of Operative Freemasonry which have existed since the earliest periods; and that it is, more immediately, based upon the secret organizations of the Operative Masons of the Middle Ages; but it is insuffi- ciently known and realized by present-day members of our Speculative Lodges that the Craft to which they profess their devotion was, originally, wholly operative; and that the members of it were real Free Masons, engaged in actual construction of buildings; | dependent, for their subsistence, upon the | excellence of their work; that the Lodge was the place in which the work was carried on; and that the ceremony of Initiation was an actual ordeal through which the candidate had to pass before he could be permitted to learn the practical secrets of the Craft by which he expected to earn his daily bread.
422
Operative Masonry
It was only as a concession, and as a com- pliment to sympathizers of the types men- tioned in Chapter I., that the Craft from time to time admitted or ‘ accepted’ a sprinkling of non-working or Speculative Masons, who were not actually Free Masons, but were known as ‘ Accepted’ Masons.
Thus the membership of the Operative Lodges, while almost entirely composed of Operative Masons, consisted, in many in- stances, of Free Masons on the one hand, and of ‘ Accepted’ Masons on the other.
This was the state of affairs down to 1717 when the Grand Lodge of that date was formed, and Anthony Sayer, himself an Operative, was elected Grand Master.
In this connection attention may be called to the Entered Apprentice’s Song, as printed in 1722 (see p. 453), in which the toast is to a Free oR Accepted Mason.
Under the Speculative Grand Lodge the non-working element gradually increased, and indeed soon predominated, to the utter exclusion of the working element, until now- adays the very existence of an Operative is lost sight of in a Speculative Lodge’
We are often reminded in the Ritual that we are not all Operative Masons; but, for the
423
Freemasonry and its Etiquette
above reason, the phrase is meaningless to most. Itis unquestionably a survival of the times when Operatives and Speculatives sat side by side in the same Lodge.
It must not, however, be supposed that Operative Masonry died in giving birth to Speculative Masonry.
The Operative parent system, now en-— feebled by various causes, especially by Trade Unionism, continued its existence, notwithstanding the birth, separate life, and extraordinary growth of the Speculative off- spring.
Bro. R. B. Grant writes: ‘ The existing Operative Lodges in England, which are under the Worshipful Society of Free Masons, Operative, have never come under the control of the Grand Lodge of England; and they continue to work their old Ritual, as revised in 1663 and 1686, and as it was before the Speculative Grand Lodge was formed in 1717.’
To Masonic Speculative students the present-day existence of these Operative Lodges must be a matter of intellectual interest, since the ancestry is common to both.
It will be readily conceded that a right
424
Operative Masonry
understanding of the practical trade of Masonry, the methods employed in de- lineating the building in a draft or plan for the instruction and guidance of the work- men, and the working tools and implements used by them in executing the work, cannot but be helpful to a clearer appreciation of the meaning—often the hidden meaning— of the corresponding speculative aspect of Masonry, “‘. . . for many parts are quite incomprehensible even to learned Free Masons, without the technical part which only the Guilds of the Free Masons can supply.” Hence, any research which will bring us into closer contact with the actual Operative Lodges of ancient times is likely to give us clearer insight, and to widen our range of Masonic vision and comprehension. On the other hand, it must be admitted that the endeavour to distinguish and appreciate the connection of our whole system and the relative dependency of its several parts will lead us into a very wide field of research— one in which, regrettably, there is more op- portunity for developing imagination than for discovering incontrovertible facts.
There are many worthy Speculative Masons who, feeling mentally unsatisfied
425
on
Freemasonry and its. Etiquette
with the meagre and imperfect explanations provided for their acceptance. from. specula- tive sources, and feeling that there must be a rich harvest of additional knowledge to be reaped in the field indicated, are devoting their attention to the Operative aspects of ' Masonry; and are attending Operative Lodges; as a result of which Speculative Masonry is, to them, illuminated from the Operative point of view.
These Operative Lodges work their own Operative Ritual, and purport to carry on the work as practised in the ancient Opera- tive Lodges from which they claim to trace their descent both immediate and remote— that is to say, their remote origin is claimed to date from the beginning of building, while their more immediate History, although we read in our Masonic Year Book that St. Alban formed the first Lodge in Britain, A.D. 287, may be said to date from Athelstan, A.D. 926, and the granting of the Charter at York in that year.
Dr. Charles Hope Merz, President of the Masonic Library of Sandusky, Ohio, writes: ‘ By the Athelstan Charter, granted a.p. 926, the Operative Society had the inherent right to form a kind of private law court in. order
426
Operative Masonry
to preserve its rights. The Masters and Passed Masters held an Assembly regularly, and at this meeting a Charge was read to them. Edward died a.p. 924, and was suc- ceeded by his son Athelstan, who appointed his brother Edwin patron of the Masons. This prince procured a charter from Athel- stan, empowering them to meet annually in communication at York, where the first Grand Lodge of England was formed in 926, at which Edwin presided as Grand Master. Here many old writings were produced (in Greek, Latin, and other languages), from which the Constitutions of the English Lodges were originally derived. From this era we date the establishment of Free- masonry in England. ‘There is to-day in the city of York a Grand Lodge of Masons, who trace their existence from this period (Masonic Minstrel, 1818).
‘Athelstan (926) gave the Operatives power to correct within themselves faults . done within the Craft. This, with the system of fines, is in operation to-day.’
Between A.D. 926 and 4.D. 1717 the records are very meagre and tantalizingly in- sufficient.
$27
Freemasonry and its Etiquette
The following dates and facts are interest: ing and indicative, although not in all cases free from doubt:
1349. Ordinance of Labourers (23 Ed. III.) respecting Operative Masons (ce- mentarii).
1350. Statute of Labourers (25 Ed. III.) re- specting Operative Masons, “* Mas- ter Mason of Free Stone,” and “‘ other Masons.”’
1356. Regulations by the Mayor, Aldermen, and Sheriffs of the City of London concerning Operative Masons.
_ 1358.* Edward III. revised the Consti-
tions. " 1360. Statute of Labourers (34 Ed. III.) ** Masons . . . Congregations, Chap-
ters, Ordinances, and Oaths wholly annulled.”
I3—. Probable date of Halliwell MS.
1376. Two Operative Societies in London (Herbert’s Livery Companies)- *“The Worshipful Society of Free- masons in the City of London,” and “The Free Masons Company of London.”
* See Masonic Year-Book. 428
Operative Masonry
1377. Will Humbervyle, styled ‘‘ Magister Operis,” and a ‘“‘Free Master Mason,” was employed as a teacher at Oxford. ; :
1380-1400. Approximate date assigned to document from which the Regius MS. appears to have been copied.
1390-1410. Approximate date assigned to document from which the (Mat- thew) Cooke MS. appears to have been copied.
1425.* Masons yearly General Chapters prohibited (3 Henry VI.). This Act was virtually repealed in 1562 by (5 Eliz., Cap. 4), and was formally repealed in 1825 by (6:Geo: AViy:
1445. Statute of (28 Henry VI.) refers to Frank Mason. This would appear to be the earliest expression in the Statutes which could bear the ren- dering of Free Mason.
1450.* Henry VI. (said to have been) ini- tiated (at the age of twenty- nine).
1481. The City of London made further regulations re Operative Masons.
* See Masonic Year-Book. 429
Freemasonry and its Etiquette
1495. Statute of (rr Henry VII.). The words Free Mason appear for the first time in the actual Statutes (see A.D. 1445). Repealed 1497.
1515. 7 Henry VIII. ‘“‘Onthe humble pety- cyon of the Free Masons, rough Masons . . . wythin the Cytie of London.”
1550-1575. Probable date of Lansdowne MS.
1502. 5 Eliz., Cap. 4, giving Masons and others the right to take Appren- tices.
1583. ““ Grand Lodge ” version of the Opera- tive Constitutions.
1598. Schaw Statutes (No. 1) written in the Minute Book of the Lodge of Edinburgh.
1600. John Boswell, Laird of Auchenleck, a non - Operative Mason, attended Lodge of Edinburgh and attested the Minutes with his mark like his ‘Operative Brethren.’
1607.* Inigo Jones constituted several Lodges.
1637.* Earl of St. Albans ‘“‘ regulated”? the Lodges.
* See Masonic Year-Book. 430
Operative Masonry
1646.* Elias Ashmole (Windsor Herald) initiated October 16 at Warring- ton.
1655. The Free Masons Company discon- tinued the use of the word ‘ Free,’ and elected members who had not served seven years at the Trade.
1663. Robert Padgett rewrote the Operative Ritual.
1675. Foundation Stone of St. Paul’s Cathe- dral laid June 21 by Operative Free Masons.
1677. King Charles IJ. granted to the Operative Masons Company an- other Charter.
1685.* Sir Christopher Wren was Grand Master of Operative Free Masons.
1686. Robert Padgett further revised part of Operative Ritual.
1690.* King William III. was initiated.
1691. Sir Christopher Wren (said to have been) ‘ adopted’ a Free Mason.
1708. Last stone laid on dome of St. Paul’s, October 25.
1710. Dr. Anderson appointed Chaplain to St. Paul’s Operative Lodge.
* See Masonic Year-Book.
431
Freemasonry and its Etiquette
1715. Dr. Anderson’s connection with Opera- tive Masonry severed.
1717. Constitution of Speculative Masonry bythe formation of the Grand Lodge of England. (Seep. 21.)
It must be remembered that many of the statements made in this chapter emanate from Operative writers, and from Operative sources only, and upon them the responsi- bility for their accuracy rests, and must, of course, rest, until the production of inde- pendent corroborative testimony permits, or, indeed, compels, their unreserved acceptance by Masons generally.
It is stated that Robert Padgett, who was ‘the Clearke’ of the Operative Society, re- wrote their Ritual in 1663; and it is also stated that at Wakefield in 1663, the General Assembly sanctioned the ancient prayer which is still in use by the Operatives.
This Revised Operative Ritual is appar- ently the Ritual which was taken in hand before 1717 by the Rev. Dr. James Anderson.
Dr. Merz writes: “In order to show the close relation existing between them, it is only necessary to place the two rituals side | by side, and all the remarkable points of
432
Operative Masonry
similarity will at once become apparent; and the “‘ digestions’ of Dr. Anderson may be readily detected.’
Dr. Anderson is said to have been ap- pointed Chaplain to St. Paul’s Operative Lodge in London in January, 1710; but it appears that he never became a Master Mason in the seventh degree. It is even
alleged that he was expelled from the - Operatives in September, 1715, and that he then conceived a system of Speculative Masonry for ‘ gentlemen who did not work at the trade.’
Dr. Anderson was, of course, an important factor in the organization of the Grand Lodge of England in 1717, and he was its first Grand Secretary. This Grand Lodge was composed of both Operatives and Specu- latives, and the first Grand Master, Anthony Sayer, was an Operative; and, of his War- dens, one was an Operative, the other a Speculative.
The establishment of this Grand Lodge was, therefore, no ‘ revival’ of Freemasonry as some write of it. It was rather a ‘ re- visal ’ of it.
It was apparently shtendéd to be an alliance between the Free and the Accepted;
433
Freemasonry and its Etiquette
more or less on the same lines as before, but with their status equal; but events falsified prognostications, and the remarkable growth ~ of the Speculative side of its membership completely overshadowed and eventually crowded out the Operatives.
In September, 1721, Dr. Anderson was commissioned by the Grand Lodge of Eng- land, under John, Duke of Montagu, to write a Digest collated from the existing Gothic (7.e., manuscript) documents. In 1722 this Digest was approved, and ordered to be printed under the style of the ‘ Ancient Constitutions of Freemasonry.’ On Jan- uary 17, 1723, ‘G. Warden, Anderson, pro- duced the New Book of Constitutions now in print which was again approved.’
A second edition was published in 1738, in which Dr. Anderson made important alterations, which were unauthorized by Grand Lodge, and gave offence.
One of the most striking of these impor- tant alterations is that two degrees—the Apprentice Part and the Fellow-Crafts’ or Masters’ Part—are officially recognized in the constitutions of 1723, and three—En- tered Apprentice, Fellow-Craft, and Master —by the Constitutions of 1738. ae
434
Operative Masonry
Dr. Anderson’s characteristics would have delighted some of the Ritual Reformers of the present day, as he appears to have altered the Operative Ritual radically and ruthlessly, and often ‘without rhyme or reason.’
For instance, in Operative Masonry the three Masters sit in the West, to see the sun rise in the East. The Senior Warden sits in the East ‘ to mark the setting sun.’ The Junior Warden sits in the North to ‘ mark the Sun atits [high} meridian.’ The thought- ful Speculative Mason will perceive many reasons why this arrangement is more suit- able.
Operatives open the Lodge in the seventh degree, and work downwards.
The Degrees are:
’ VII. Three Ruling Masters.