III. Elias Ashmole, " the eminent philosopher, chemist, and antiquary " — as he is styled by

his fullest biographer, Dr Campbell* — founder of the noble museum at Oxford, which still bears
his name, was the only child of Simon Ashmole, of Lichfield, Saddler, in which city his birth
occurred on May 23, 1617. The chief instrument of his future -preferments, as he grate-
fully records in his diary, was liis cousin Thomas, son of James Paget, Esq., some time Puisne
Baron of the Exchequer, who had married for his second wife, Bridget, Ashmole's aunt by the
mother's side. When he had attained the age of sixteen, he went to reside with Baron Paget,
at his house in London, and continued for some years afterwards a dependent of that family.

' It is a singular fatality that Abu Musa Jafar al Soil — better known as Geber— considered to be the father and
founder of Chemistry, and also a famous astronomer, and who is said to have written 500 hermetic works, should have
descended to our times as the founder of that jargon known by the name of gibberish !

* lleckethorn, loc. cit. » Freemasons' Chronicle, May 14, 1881.

* Freemason, Jan. 1 and Jan. 29, 1881.

' He says, "I may point out that Ashmole makes the London revival of Freemasonry and the occult Rosicruciau
system, with which he was connected, as both taking place in 1686" (Freemason, Jan. 29, 1881).

' Biographia Britannica, vol i., 1747, s. u Ashmole. As the ensuing monograph of Ashmole is derived mainly from
the memoirs of him in the work last cited; in Collier's " Ilistorical Dictionary," 1707, Supplement, 2d Alphabet;
Wood's " Athense O.ionienses," vol. iii., col. 354 ; and M(isonic Magazine, December 1881 (W. H. Rylands, Freemasonry
in the Seventeenth Century — Warrington, 1646); together with Lis own "Diary," published by Charles Burman in
1717 ; I sh.-ill only refer to these authorities in special instances.
VOL. II. U

130 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

In 1G38 he settled himself in the world, and on March 27 of that year, married
Eleanor, daughter of Mr Peter Mainwaring of Smallwood, in the county of Chester, and in
Michaelmas term the same year became a Solicitor in Chancery. In 1641 he was sworn an
Attorney in the Common Pleas, and in the same year lost his wife, who died suddenly. The
following year — owing to the unsettled condition of affairs — he retired to SmaUwood, where
he prosecuted his studies, and in 1644 went to Oxford, and at Brazen-Nose College and the
public library, " applied himself vigorously to the sciences, but more particularly to natural
philosopliy, mathematics, and astronomy, and his intimate acquaintance with Mr, afterwards
Sir, George Wharton, gave him a turn to astrology, which was in those days in greater credit
than now."i On March 12, 1646, at the recommendation of Sir John Heydon,^ he was
made a captain in Lord Ashley's regiment at "Worcester, and on June 12, Comptroller
of the Ordnance. After the surrender of the town of Worcester, Ashmole again withdrew to
Cheshire, and on October 16 in the same year (1646) was made a Freemason at
Warrington in Lancashire, respecting which occurrence, as it will form the subject of our
inquiry, from a different point of view, in the next chapter, I shall merely pause to observe,
that whilst he is stated to have regarded his admission as a great distinction, there is no
direct proof that he was present at more than two Masonic meetings in his life.*

Ashmole left Cheshire at the end of October, and arriving in Loudon, became intimate
with Mr, afterwards Sir, Jonas Moore, Mr W^illiam Lilly, and Mr John Booker,* esteemed the
greatest astrologers living, by whom he was " caressed, instructed, and received into their
fraternity, which then made a very considerable figure, as appeared by the great resort of
persons of distinction to their annual feast, of which he was afterwards elected steward." ^ On
November 16, 1649, he became the fourth husband of Lady Mainwaring,* and shortly
afterwards settled in London, when his house became a fashionable rendezvous for the most
learned and ingenious persons of the time. In 1661 he was admitted a Fellow of the
Koyal Society. Twice he declined the office of Garter-King-at-Arms. His wife. Lady
Mainwaring, died on April 1, 1668, and he was married to Elizabeth, the daughter of
Sir William Dugdale, on November 3 in the same year. Ashmole died on May
18, 1692, in the seventy-sixth year of his age. Anthony a Wood, who seldom erred on
the side of panegyric, says of him, " He was the greatest virtuoso and curioso that ever was
known or read of in England before his time. Uxor Solis took up its habitation in his breast,
and in his bosom the great God did abundantly store up the treasures of all sorts of wisdom
and knowledge. Much of his time, when he was in the prime of his years, was spent in
chymistry; in which faculty being accounted famous, did worthily receive the title of

' Biof. Brit., loc. cit. According to Ashmole's "Diary," be " first became acquainted with Captain Wharton, Ap. 17,
1G45-" and tbeir friendship, which had been discontinued many years, by reason of the latter's "unhandsome and
unfriendly dealing, began to be renewed about the middle of December 1669." Wharton died Nov. 15, 1673.

2 Lieutenant-General of the Ordnance, who died October 16, 1653, and is to be carefully distinguished from John
Heydon (Eugenius Theodidactus) the astrologer, of whom anon.

3 E.g. on October 16, 1646 ; and on March 11, 1682. See, however, post, p. 137.

* Booker died in 1667, and Lilly in 1681 ; gravestones were placed over them by Ashmole, who purchased both
tbeir libraries.

' Biog. Brit. , loc. cit.

« Sole daughter of Sir William Forster of Alderraarston, Berks, first married to Sir Edward Strafford, next to Mr
T Handyn, Tursuivant of Arms, and then to Sir Thomas Mainwaring, Kut., one of the Masters in Chancery.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 131

Mercuriophilns Anglicns." ^ This, Dr Campljell — wlio can himself see no defects in Ashmole's
character — allows to be " an extraordinary commendation from so splenetic a writer," ^ though,
as we shall see, it was somewhat qualified, by the further remarks of the Oxford Antiquary.
After mentioning the rarities, coins, medals, books, and manuscripts given by Elias Ashmole
in his lifetime, and at his death, to the University of Oxford, he very abruptly goes on to say
— " But the best elixir that he enjoyed, which was the foundation of his riches, wherewith he
purchased books, rarities, and other things, were the lands and joyntures which he had by his
second wife . •. . *. Mr Ashmole taking her to wife on the 16th of Nov. 1649, enjoyed her
estate, tho' not her company for altogether, till the day of her death, which hapned on the
first of Apr. 1668."

Ashmole's greatest undertaking was his history of the " Most Xoble Order of the Garter,"
published in 1672, and of which it has been said, "if he had published nothing else, it ought
to have preserved his memory for ever, since it is in its kind one of the most valuable books in
our language." ^

As it is, however, with his Hermetic works that we are alone concerned, I proceed with
their enumeration ; premising that he made his first appearance as an editor and translator
before taking upon himself the character of an author.

1. "Fasciculus CJiymicus :* or, Chymical Collections expressing the Ingress, Progress, and
Egress of the Secret Hermetick Science. Whereunto is added the Arcamim,^ or Grand Secret
of Hermetick Philosophy. Both made English by James Hasolle, Esq. ; Qui est Mcrcioriophilus
Anglicus. London, 1650."

To these translations was prefixed a kind of hieroglyphical frontispiece in several compart-
ments, of which a brief notice will suffice—" a scrowl from above, and a mole at the foot of an
ash-ivee, express the author's name, which is also anagramised in James Hasolle, i.e., Ellas
Ashmole. A column on the right hand refers to his proficiency in music, and to his being a
Freemason,* as that on the left does to his military preferments. Ashmole's prolegomena alone
runs to thirty-one pages. According to Wood, "farc'd with Eosycrucian language," and
dedicated to " all the ingeniously elaborate students of Hermetick Learning." ^

2. " Theatrum Chemicum Britannicum : or. Annotations on Several Poetical Pieces of our
Famous English Philosophers who have written the Hermetique IVIysteries in their own
ancient language. London, 1652."

In this he designed a complete collection of the works of such English chymists as liad
till then remained in MS. ; and finding that a competent knowledge of Hebrew, was absolutely

' Athenae Oxonienses, vol. iii., col. 359. " Biog. Brit., loc. cit. ' Ibid.

* Arthur Dee, Fasciculus Chymicus de Abstmsis HermeticiE Scientae, Ingressu, Progi-essu, etc., Par. 1631. Besides
the libraries of Booker, Lilly, Milbouni, and Hawkins, Ashmole also bought that of Dr Dee.
' As to the authorship of this, see post, p. 133.

° Biog. Brit., loc. cit. " A pillar adorned with musical instruments, rules, compasses, and mathematical schemes"
(Ibid). In Ben Jonson's comedy, "The Alchemist," 1610, Subtle says—
" He shall have a bel, that's Abel :
And by it standing one whose name is Dee,
In a nig gown, there's D, and Tlug, that's drug .-
And right anenst him a dog snarling er:
There's Dntgger, Abel Dnigger. That's his sign.
And here's now mystery and hieroglypliic."
' Athense Oxonienses, vol. iv., col. 361.

132 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGL A.YD.

necessary, for understanding and explaining such authors as had written on the Hermetic
science, he had recourse to Eabbi Solomon Frank, by whom he was taught the rudiments of
tlie sacred tongue, which he found very useful to him in his studies. The work last described
gained him a great reputation among the learned, especially in foreign countries.

3. " The Way to Bliss," in three books, made public by Elias Ashmole, 1658.

This was penned by an unknown author, who lived in the reign of Queen Elizabeth.
Ashmole received the copy from William Backhouse, and published it, because a pretended
copy was in circulation, which it was designed " to pass for the child of one Eugenius
Theodidactus, being — by re-baptisation — called ' The Wise-Man's Crown, or Eosie-crusian
Physic' " ^

This Eugenius Tlieodidactus — i.e., the taught of God — was one John Heydon, a great pre-
tender to Eosicrucian knowledge, who married the widow of Nicholas Culpepper, the famous
quack, and published many idle books, in one ^ or more of which he abused Ashmole on this
subject. In his " Wiseman's Crown, or the Glory of the Eosy Cross," 1664, are the following
curious passages :

" The Eosie Crucians, with a certain tevible authority of religion, do exact an oath of silence
from those they initiate to the arts of Astromancy, Geomancy, and Telesmaticall Images, &c."

" The late years of tirany admitted Stocking weavers. Shoemakers, Millers, Masons,
Carpenters, Bricklaiers, Gunsmiths, Hatters, Butlers, &c., to write and teach astrology, &c." ^

My readers can place what construction they please on the preceding quotations, but their
value for any useful purpose is much lessened by the general character of the writer's pro-
ductions. In one of these, indeed, he speaks of the Eosicrucians as " a divine fraternity that
inhabite the subburbs of Heaven ; " and in another place says, " I am no Eosicrucian." * His
knowledge, therefore, of the fraternity must have been of the slightest. The passage relating
to the masons appears to me to prove rather too much, though I insert it, in deference to the
learning and research of the friend from whom I received it; for not masons only, but
apparently all kinds of mechanics, were admitted into the ranks of the astrologers ; indeed,
this is placed beyond doubt by Lilly's description of his colleagues.®

" The Way to Bliss " was a treatise in prose on the Philosopher's Stone, to which he pre-
fixed a preface, dated April 16, 1658. This address to the reader was a kind of farewell to
Hermetic philosophy on the part of Ashmole. The treatise itself is pronounced by Dr Camp-
bell " to he the best and most sensible hook in our language " ® — an expression of opinion which

' The Way to Bliss, Aslimole's preface.

'^ The Idea of the Law, 1660. Heydon, according to his own statement, was born in 1629. He has been confounded
with Sir John Heydon, probably from the fact that the latter's father, Sir C. Heydon, wrote a " Defence of Judicial
Astrology," 1603. Twenty years afterwards, Dr George Carleton, successively Bishop of LlandafT and Chichester,
published "Astrologimania: or, the Madness of Astrologers," which was an answer to Sir C. Heydon's book (Athense
Oxonienses, vol. i., col. 745; vol. ii., col. 422).

^ For these extracts I am indebted to the Kev. A. F. A. Woodford. The work from which they are taken is not in
the library of the British Museum.

* The Rosie Crucian Infallible Axiomata, or General Enles to Know All Things, Past, Present, and to Come. 1660.
(Preface.) A complete list of Heydon's works is given in the "Athense Oxonienses," vol. iv., col. 362.

' Alexander Hart had been a soldier ; William Poole, a gardener, plasterer, and bricklayer ; Booker, a haborda.sher'8
apprentice ; and Lilly, a domestic servant (Life of Lilly, with notes by Elias Ashmole).

• Biog. Brit., loc. cit.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 133

induced the late Jlr Crossley ^ to remark, " I rather agree with Dr Dibdin,^ who pronounced
it ' a work invincibly dull,' and ' a farrago of sublime nonsense.' Probably neither of us have
the true Hermetic vein, which only

" ' Pauci quos fequtis amavit
Jupiter '

are blessed with. Dr Campbell might be one of those more favoured readers of whom Ashmole
speaks : ' It is a cause of much wonder where he that reads, though smatteringly acquainted
with nature, should not meet with clear satisfaction ; but here is the reason : Many are called,
hut few are chosen. 'Tis a haven towards which many skilful pilots have bent their course, yet
few have reached it. For, as amongst the people of the Jews, there was but one who might
enter into the Holy of Holies, (and that but once a year,) so there is seldom more in a nation
whom God lets into this Sanctum Sanctorum of philosophy ; yet some there are. But though
the number of the elect are not many, and generally the fathom of most men's fancies that
attempt the search of this most subtle mystery is too narrow to comprehend it, their strongest
reason too weak to pierce the depth it lies obscured in, being indeed so unsearchable and
ambiguous, it rather exacts the sacred and courteous illuminations of a cherub than the weak
assistance of a pen to reveal it; yet let no man despair." *

After Ashmole once addicted himself to the study of antiquities and records, he never
deserted it, or could be prevailed upon to resume his design of sending abroad the works of
the other English Adepti, though he had made large collections towards it.

It has been suggested, that some of the abler alchemists showed him his mistakes, in
what he had already published, particularly as to the Arcanum before mentioned, which he
calls " the work of a concealed author," though in what seems to be the motto, — viz., the words
Penes nos unda Tagi, — the very name of the author was expressed, viz., Jean Espagnet.* But
this piece published by Ashmole, was only the second part of Espagnet's work, the first being
published under the title of " Enchiridion Physicse restitutte cum Arcano Philosophife
Hermeticse." * Paris, 1623. In the title of this work, the author's name is concealed imder
another anagrammatical motto, viz., Spes mea in agno est. The second part was entitled,
« Enchiridion Philosophise Hermeticte," 1628. It was printed again in 1647, and a third
time in 1650; and from this last volume Ashmole translated it. "The truth is," says Dr
Campbell, " and the Abbd Eresnoy ^ has justly observed it, our author was never an Adept, and
began to write when he was but a disciple. He grew afterwards more cautious, and though he
never missed any opportunity of purchasing chymical .MSS., yet he was cured of the itch of
publishing them, and held it sufficient to deposit them in the Bodleian Library, for their gi-eater
security, and for the benefit of society." ^

Ashraole's claim to the title, of which the Abbe Fresnoy would deprive him, rests in the

' Chethara Soc. Pub., vol. xiii., p. 157, note 1. ' Biblioin.iiiia, p. 387.

' Fasciculus Chymicus, 1650, prolegomena.

* "President of the Parliament of Bordeaux, and esteemed tlie ablest writer on tliis sort of learning whose works
are extant " (Biog. Brit., loc. cit.).

" The Enchiridion of Revived Physic, with the Secret of the Hermetic Philosoiihy.
Citing Histoire de la Philosoiihie Henn^titjue, torn, iii., p. 105. ' Biog. Brit., loc. cit.

134 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

main, upon certain entries in his diary which refer to Mr William Backhouse,^ who himself
was reputed an Adept, and, it is said, instilled into the mind of the younger inquirer his
affection for chemistry. These are as follow :

" 1651. April 3. Post merid. Mr William Backhouse of Swallowfield, in com. Berks,
caused me to call him father thenceforward."

"June 10. Mr Backhouse told me I must now needs be his son, because he had com-
municated so many secrets to me."

"1652. March 10. This morning my father Backhouse opened himself very freely,
touching the great secret."

"1652. May 13. My father Backhouse lying sick in Fleet Street, over against St
Dunstan's Church ; and not knowing whether he should live or die, about one of the clock,
told me, in syllables, the true matter of the Philosopher's Stone, which he bequeathed to me
as a legacy." ^

The nature of this kind of philosophic adoption is very copiously explained by Ashmole
hiuLself, in his notes on Norton's " Ordinal," ^ and perhaps the passage may not be disagreeable
to the reader.*

" There has been a continued succession of Philosophers in aU ages, altho' the heedless
world hath seldom taken notice of them ; for the antients usually (before they died) adopted
one or other for their sons, whom they knew well fitted with such like qualities, as are set
down in the letter that Norton's master wrote to him, when he sent to make him his heir
unto this science, and otherwise than for pure virtue's sake, let no man expect to attain it, or,
as in the case of Tonsile —

" ' For almes I will make no store,
Plainly to disclose it, that was never done before.' *

" Eewards nor terrors (be they never so munificent or dreadful) can wrest this secret out
of the bosom of a Philosopher, amongst others, witness Thomas Daulton.*'

" Now under what ties and engagements, this secret is usually delivered (when bestowed
by word of mouth), may appear in the weighty obligations of that oath, which Charnock took
before he obtained it : For thus spake his master to him ' —

' Born in 1593, "a most renown'd Clij-mist, Rosicrucian, and a great encouragcr of those that studied eliymistry
and astrology, especially Elias Ashmole, whom he adopted his son, and opened himself very freely to him the secret.^
He died on the 30th of May 1662, leaving behind him the character of a good man, and of one eminent in his profession "
(Athens Oxonienses, vol. iii., col. 577).

2 Query: Was this to follow the course of ordinary legacies, i.e., not to fall in, until tlie death of the testator,
which, as stated in the previous note, did not take place until 1662!

' Theatrum Chemicum liritannicum, p. 440.

* In Ben Jonson's comedy. Sir Epicure Mnmmon thus addresses Subtle the Alchemist, "Good morrow, /o/7(rr;"
to which the latter replies, "Gentle son, good morrow." Also when the deacon Ananias, announcing himself as
"a faithful firottcr"— as the Puritans styled themselves— Subtle affects to misunderstand the expression, and to tike
him for a believer in Alchemy. He says—" What's that ?— a Lullianist ?— a Ripley ?- Filius Artis ? " (The Alchemist,
1610, Act ii. Sc. i. ; Jonson's Works, edit. 1816, vol. iv., pp. 59, 81).

^ Norton's Ordinal, apud Tlieatrum Chemicum Britannicum, p. 41.

« Ibid., p. 35.

' Breviary of Philosophy, chap. v. (Theat. Chem. Brit., p. 299).

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 135

" ' Will you with me to-morrow be content^
Faithfully to receive the Blessed Sacrament,
Upon this Oath that I shall heere you give ;
For ne Gold, ne Silver, as long as you live ;
Neither for love you heare towards your Kinne,
Kor yet to no great Man, preferment to wynne.
That yon disclose the seacret that I shall you teach
Neither by writing, nor by no swift speech ;
But only to him which you be sure
Hath ever searched after the seacrets of Nature ?
To him you may reveale the seacrets of this art^
Under the Covering of Philosophie, before this world yee depart.'

" And this oath he charged him to keep faithfully, and without violation, as he thought to
be saved from the Pit of Hell.

" And if it so fell out, that they met not with any, whom they conceived in all respects
worthy of their adoption,^ they then resigned it into the hands of God, who best knew where
to bestow it. However, they seldom left the world, before they left some written legacy
beliind them, which (being the issue of their brain) stood in room and place of children, and
becomes to us both parent and schoolmaster, throughout which they were so universally kind,
as to call all students by the dear and affectionate title of Sons- (Hermes, giving the first
precedent), wishing all were such, that take the true pains to tread their fathers' steps, and
industriously to follow the rules and dictates they made over to posterity, and wherein they
faithfully discovered the whole mystery —

" ' As lawfully as by their fealty thei may,

By lycence of the dreadful Judge at domesday.' ^

" In these legitimate children, they lived longer than in their adopted sons ; for though
these certainly perished in an age, yet their writings (as if when they dyed, their soids had
been transmigrated into them) seemed as immortal, enough at least to perpetuate their
memories, till time shoidd be no more. And to be the father of such sons, is (in my opinion)
a most noble happinesse."

" Our author's Commentary making this point quite clear," says Dr Campbell, " there is no
necessity of insisting farther upon it ; only it may be proper to observe, that Mr Ashmole's
father, Backhouse, did not die till May 30, 1662, as appears by our author's 'Diary.'* He was
esteemed a very great Chemist, and admirably versed in what was styled the Eosicrucian
learning, and he was so ; but it appears plainly from Mr Ashmole's writings, that he under-
stood his father. Backhouse, in too literal a sense, and did not discover the confusion
occasioned by applying a method of removing all the imperfections of metals to physic, and
thereby misleading people on that subject, by the promises of an universal medicine,'' true

' Norton's Ordinal, cliap. ii. in the story of Thomas Daulton, a famous Hermetic Philosopher, wlio fiomished in
the reign of Edward IV. (Theat. Chem. Brit., p. 37).

'' Hermes in rimaiidro. ' Norton's Ordinal, in his Introduction. * P. 28.

° ISiog. Brit., loc. cit. The Universal Medicine of the Rosicrucians shows that physical science had something to
do with it. The mystical philosophy branches oil into two — the one mental, the other physical — both equally absurd,
though not without some grains of truth (for there generally are, even in the greatest absurdities), and both declined
shortly alter to give way beneath the general advance of human knowledge.

136 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

perhaps iu the less obvious sense and false iu the other, in whieh, however, it is generally

taken."

In the opinion of the same authority, Ashraole, by saving so many of the best chemical
writers from oblivion, has very worthily filled that post which he assigned himself, when
declining the arduous labours which were necessary to the gaining his father Backhouse's
legacy, and becoming an Adept; and that, in modestly and truly styling himself Mcrmrio-
2MIUS Anglicus, he selected a title so just, and so expressive of his real deserts, that one would
have thought he had exerted his skiU as a herald in devising it, if we had not known that
chemistry was his first, and to his last continued his favourite, study.^

In next proceeding with an examination ot the influence, real or supposed, of Ashmole
upon our early Freemasonry, I shall ask my readers to cast a backward glance at the extracts
already given from the " Encyclopsedia Metropolitana." ^ This article, from the pen it should
be recollected, of a learned Masonic writer, is decidedly plausible, and, what is of infinitely
Greater importance, it is also to a very considerable extent consonant with common sense.
Nor shall I attempt to deny that in all probability some process of transformation such as is
here indicated took place about this time ; but I think Sandys falls into the error of asserting
too much, and of going too minutely into detail. For without reckoning the facts that there
never was a German Kosicrucian Society, and that the era of the mania is slightly antedated,
we may well ask, was there ever a Eosicrucian Society established in London ? If there was,
did Ashmole belong to it? How do we know that the members made use of certain
emblems ? Did Ashmole and his friends * transfer the same, with sundry rites, ceremonies,
and teachings to the ]\Iasonic body ? Did the Society meet in the Mason's Hall ?— together
with other queries of a like nature.

The argument usually brought forward, on behalf of the Ashmolean theory, is an admirable
specimen of the kind of reasoning too often employed on such matters. Certain observances
and ideas which did not exist before are found, or are supposed to have been found, prevalent
among Masons towards the commencement of the eighteenth century. Ashmole was known to
have been a Mason, and to have been fond of wasting his time upon all sorts of queer, out
of the way, and unprofitable pursuits— therefore these new conceits were taught by Ashmole
to the Freemasons! But in the first place let us see, by his own showing, what manner
of man Ashmole really was. A strange being, very learned,* very credulous, very litigious,
and, to use a vulgarism, extremely cantankerous, perfectly capable of acquiring money and
takino- care of it when so acquired, capable also of writing one or two books of crabbed and
ponderous learning, and capable of very little else. As a rule his " Diary" is trifling where it is
not simply nau.seons.^ Pepys and Evelyn, judging from the tone of the allusions to Ashmole,

1 Biog. Brit., loc. cit.

' Ante, p. 115.

3 Who were they ? Ashmole was intimate at various times with Wharton, Lilly, Moore, Booker, Vaughan,
Backhouse, Oughtred, and other votaries of the Hermetic art ; but the only Freemason among them, so far as any proof
extends, was Sir Robert Moray.

« Evelyn, however, thus speaks of him :— "He has divers MSS., but most of them Astn.logieal, to which study
he is addicted, though I helieve not learned, but very industrious, as his ' History of the Order of the Garter' proves"
(Diary, July 23, 1678).

» " 1657. October 8. The cause between me and my wife was heard, where Mr Serjeant Maynard observed to the

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 137

in their respective diaries, seem to have had no very exalted opinion of him. When the
former says he found him " a very ingenious gentleman," it is damning with faint praise, in
the same way as people call a person "good natured," when by no possibility can any other
salient trait of goodness be ascribed to him.

This was not]the kind of man to influence any considerable body or bodies of his fellow-men,
either for good or for evil, to inoculate them with his own ideas, or to guide their steps into new
fields of inquiry. Moreover, we do not actually know that he was a philosopher of the class
supposed. An astrologer, or a believer at least in astrology, he certainly was, though it may
be doubted whether any of the charlatans forming his entourage ever succeeded in getting
money from him ; but it is believed by competent authorities, as has been stated on a former
page, that he was never an adept or professional at either this or any similar art. It is also
denied that he was a Eosicrucian, although Wood asserts the contrary. By " Eosicrucian," we
must, I imagine, in the former instance, understand a disciple of Fludd, of which I do not find
any positive proof; whilst what Wood meant must clearly have been that he was addicted to
pursuits which passed under that generic term. We have also to consider, that the taste for
such trifles had considerably died out, in the last half of the seventeenth century, during
the greater part of which period lay Ashmole's connection with the Freemasons.

Moreover, what were the circumstances attending his connection with the Masonic body ?
Only two allusions to the Freemasons occur under his own hand — one relating to his admission
in 1646, the other to his attending a meeting at Mason's Hall in 1682, thirty-five years subse-
quently, and it has been inferred from his silence that these were the only two occasions on which
he ever attended a lodge.^ But not to mention that his diary obviously omits many things of
infinitely greater interest than his colds, purges, or " the heav}' form which fell and hurt his great
toe,"^ it is difficult to account for his being summoned to a Lodge at Mason's Hall, London,
in 1682, thirty-five years after his initiation at far distant Warrington, if he held altogether
aloof from Masonic meetings in the interim, or what is virtually the same thing, strictly con-
cealed the fact of his being a member of the Fraternity. Is it likely, under either supposition,
that the ^lasons of the metropolis — even had the fact of his initiation in any way leaked out
— would have gone so far as to summon (not invite) their distinguished and " unattached "
brother to take part in the proceedings of a society upon which he had long since virtually
turned liis back ? It is probable, therefore, that he did in some way keep up his connection
with the Freemasons, but that it was of such a slender character as not to merit any special
mention. He might not, and probably would not, have entered into any detail — his diary

Court that there were 800 sheets of depositions on my wife's part, and not one word proved against me of using her ill,
nor ever giving her a bad or provoking word.

"October 9. The Lords Commissioners having found no cause for allowing my wife alimony, did, i hor. post
merid., deliver my wife to me ; whereupon I carried her to Mr Lilly's, and there took lodgings for us both."

This summary mode of issuing a decree for the restitution of conjugal rights will astonish some readers. Poor
Lady Mainwaiing had, I doubt not, at least 800 good reasons for leaving such a man, who must certainly have been
most "provoking." Still, as he was her fourth husband, she ought to liave been pretty well used to the ways of the
sex, and, at her time of life — she had a grown-up family when she made her fourth venture — had no one but herself to
thank for her troubles, more especially as her acquaintance with Ashmole was not a sudden one.

' Findel, History of Freemasonry, p. 113.

' Of the trivial character of the entries, the following affords a good specimen : — " 1681. April 11. I took early in

the morning a good dose of Elixir, and hung three spiders about my neck, and they drove my ague away Dio

gratias."

VOL. II. S

138 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

scarcely gives details on any point except his ailments and his law-suits — but he would pro-
bably have given at least notices of his having attended Lodges — had he done so with any
frequency — as he does of having attended the Astrologers' feasts. Moreover, if Dr Knipe's
account ^ of his collections relative to Freemasonry be correct, he does not appear to have
been much inclined to mix the new mystical and symbolical ideas, with the old historical or
quasi-historical traditions of the craft. My own view, therefore, is, that the Ashmolean
influence on Freemasonry, of which so much has been said, is not proved to have had any
foundation in fact, though it is fair to state that I base this opinion on circumstantial evidence
alone, which is always liable to be overthrown by apparently the most trifling discovery.

Hence, whilst admitting that Freemasonry may have received no slight tinge from the
pursuits and fancies of some of its adherents, who were possibly more numerous than is gene-
rally supposed — and the larger their number, the greater the probability that some of the more
influential among them may have indoctrinated their brethren with their peculiar wisdom —
still I do not think that such a proceeding can with safety be ascribed to a particular set of
men, much less to any one individual.^

To sum up. We may assume, I think, (1.) That while there was an abundance of astrologers,
alchemists, charlatans, and visionaries of all kinds, who seem to have pursued their hobbies
without let or hindrance, yet there was no organised society of any sort, unless the Astrologers'
Feast, so often mentioned by Ashmole, be accounted one ; (2.) That there is no trace of any sect
of Eosicrucians or Fluddian philosophers ; ^ (3.) That Hartlib's attempt at a " Macaria " ended
as might have been supposed, and was never either anticipated or revived by himself or any-
body else ; and (4.) That there is no trace, as far as any remaining evidence is concerned, that
tliic Freemasons were in any way connected with any one of the above, but on the contrary, that,
although they had probably in a great measure ceased to be entirely operatives, they had not
amalgamated with any one of the supposed Eosicrucian or Hermetic fraternities — of the actual
existence of which there is no proof — still less that they were their actual descendants, or
themselves under another name.* To assume this, indeed, would be to falsify the whole of
authentic Masonic history, together with the admittedly genuine documents upon whieli it
rests.

I have now finished this portion of my task, which has, I am conscious, somewhat exceeded
its allotted limits, though I am equally well aware that I have only succeeded in collecting some

' See ne.xt chapter.

^ Mr Jobn Yarker, however, pronounces Elias Ashmole to have been, drca 1686, "the leading spirit, both in Craft
Masonry and in Rosicrucianism ;" and is of opinion that his diary establishes the fact " that both Societies fell into
decay together, and both revived together in 1682." He adds, "It is evident, therefore, that the Eosicrucians— who
had too freely written upon their instruction, and met with ridicule — found the Operative Guild conveniently ready to
their hand, and grafted upon it their o^ti Mysteries. Also, from this time Rosicrucianism disappears, and Freemasonry
springs into life, with all the possessions of the former " (Speculative Freemasonry, an historical lecture, delivered March
31, 1883, p. 9). Cf. ante, p. 129.

^ If it is held, that by some process of evolution the fratcniity of the Rosie Cross became the first English Free-
masons^Hermeticism, as a possible factor in the historical problem, is at once shut out, and the Masonic traditions
as contained in the "Old Charges") are quietly ignored, to say nothing of Scottish Freemasonry, of which the
Fluddian philosophy would in this case prove to be an unconscious plagiarism !

* In the common practice of sweeping everything into their net, Masonic writers too often follow the example of
Autoly cus, described as " a collector of unconsidered trifles. "

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 139

of the materials for an exhaustive chapter on the subjects above treated, not in writin" such a
cliapter itself

Many of my conclusions, I doubt not, will be disputed, and many more may be overturned
by a more thorough investigation. It is quite possible that, buried in the dust of long-forgotten
works of Hermetic learning, or enshrined amidst the masses of manuscripts contained in our
great collections, there may still exist the materials for a far more perfect, if, indeed, not a
complete elucidation of this dark portion of our annals. The indulgent reader will, however
pardon my errors. It is impossible not to stumble in the midst of intense darkness ; and in
the course of my explorations I have but too often found, not only the cave to he dark but
that the guides are blind. I can truly say, with Nennius, that my work has been " non quidem
ut volui sed ut potui," ^ and my motto must be the modest one of the Greek sculptors, of
'EnOIEI, since I feel myself to be rather the finger-post pointing the way to others, than I a
guide.

' Historia Britonum, chap. i.

140 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.