CHAPTER XII.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY.

E N G L A N D.— I.

MASONIC TRADITION— SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN— PAPAL BULLS-
ANNUAL ASSEMBLIES.

ETWEEN the region of fancy and the province of authenticated history lies a
border-land of tradition, full of difficulties, which can neither be passed with-
out notice, nor ever, perhaps, very clearly or finally explained." ^ Upon many
of the questions which it would be most interesting to decide, no conclusion
whatever is attainable. The historian knows very little of the real facts ; of the
lives of liis personages only a contemptibly small fragment has been preserved.
No doubt, if his imagination be strong, he will piece together the information he has, and
instinctively shape for himself some theory which will combine them all; though, if his
judgment be as strong as his imagination, he will hold very cheap these conjectural com-
binations, and will steadfastly bear in mind that, as an historian, he is concerned with
facts and not with possibilities.^ Some, indeed, instead of employing those tests of credibility
which are consistently applied to modern history, attempt to guide their judgment by the
indications of internal evidence, and to assume that truth can be discovered by " an occult
faculty of historical divination." Hence the task they have undertalcen resembles an inquiry
into the internal structure of the earth, or into the question, whether the stars are inhabited ?
It is an attempt to solve a problem, for the solution of which no sufficient data exist. Their
ingenuity and labour can result in nothing but hypothesis and conjecture, which may be
supported by analogies, and may sometimes appear specious and attractive, but can never
rest on the solid foundation of proof*

It is too often forgotten that "in traditional truths, each remove weakens the force of

' C. Elton, Origins of English History, p. 7.

' See Professor Seeley, History and Politics, Macmillau's Magazine, Ang. 1879.
' Lewis, An Inquiry into the Credibility of the Early Roman History, 1S55, vol. i., p. 13.
VOL. n. A

2 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

the proof; and the more hands the tradition has successively passed through, the less
strength and evidence does it receive from them." This it is necessary to recollect, because,
to use the words of a learned writer, we " find amongst some men the quite contrary commonly
practised, who look on opinions to gain force by growing older. Upon this ground, proposi-
tions, evidently false or doubtful enough in their first beginning, come by an inverted rule of
probability to pass for authentic truths ; and those which found or deserved little credit from
the mouths of their first authors are thought to grow venerable by age, and are urged as
undeniable."*

In closing the mythico-historical period of English Freemasonry at the year 1717,^ I have
been desirous of drawing a shai-p line of division between the legendary or traditionary, and the
authentic histories of the craft. The era, however, immediately preceding that of the formation
of a Grand Lodge, is the most interesting in our annals, and its elucidation will necessarily
claim attention, before we pass on to an examination of the records of later date.

Although, for convenience sake, the year 1717 is made to mark the epoch of authentic
— i.e., officially accredited — Masonic history, the existence in England of a widely-diffused
system of Freemasonry in the first half of the seventeenth century is demonstrable, whence
we shall be justified in concluding that for its period of origin in South Britain, a far higher
antiquity may be claimed and conceded.

The present chapter will deal with what may be termed the " floating traditions " of the
Society, and by carefully examining the sources of authority upon which they rest, and the
argumentative grounds (if any) by which their authenticity is supported, I shall attempt to lay
a sure foundation for the historical inquiry — properly so called — upon which we shall next
enter.

It has been observed " that a great part of the labour of every writer is only the destruc-
tion of those that went before him," the first care of the builder of a new system being
to demolish the fabrics which are standing. As the actual history of Freemasonry, like that
of any other venerable institution, is only to be derived from ancient writings, the genuineness
and authenticity of such documents are only determinable by a somewhat free handling of
authorities; and whoever attempts to explain the meaning of a writer would but half
discharge his task did he not show how much other commentators have corrupted and ob-
scured it.

It is difficult in a work of this description not to write too little for some, and too much
for others ; to meet the expectations of the student, without wearying the ordinary reader ; or
to satisfy the few that may be attracted by a desire for instruction, without repelling the many
whose sole object is to be amused.

Some friends, upon whose judgment I place great reliance, have warned me against
attempting to deal exhaustively with a subject flux and transitory, or at least until more light
has been cast upon it by the unceasing progress of modern research. That more might be
accomplished in a longer course of years devoted to the same study I admit, yet, as remarked
by Hearne, "it is tlie business of a good antiquary, as of a good man, to have mortality

' John Locke, Essay on the Human Understanding, book iv., chap, xvi., § 10. "This is certain, that what in
one age was affirmed upon slight grounds, can never after come to be more valid in future ages by being often repeated "
(Ibid., § 11).

2 Ante, Chap. I., p. 2

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 3

ahvays lefore Mm." ^ It is unwise to amass more than one can digest, and having undertaken
a work, to go on searching and transcribing, and seeking new supplies when already over-
burdened, must inevitably result in that work being left unfinished.

In the present chapter, I shall somewhat depart from the arrangement hitherto observed,
or at least attempted, of keeping the subjects discussed distinct and separate from one another.
To the student of Masonic antiquities there is nothing more bewildering than to find scattered
over the compass of a large book isolated allusions to particular subjects, which he must group
together for himself, if he wishes to examine any set of them as a whole.

The slight variation of treatment it is now proposed to adopt, which, after all, is more
nominal than real, will not, however, be productive of any inconvenience. The general subject
to be examined is Masonic tradition in its relation to the facts of history, and though several
legends or fables will pass under review, the evidence by which these are traceable to their
respective sources of origin is in many cases identical, and one tradition is frequently so inter-
woven with another, that the only way of testing their real value and importance is by
subjecting them to a common and a searching scrutiny. Although I iise the expression
" Masonic tradition " in its widest sense, as covering all the information respecting the
past of Freemasonry that has descended to us, whether handed down by oral relations or
professedly derived from " Records of the Society " — of which we are told a great deal, but
see very little — the qualification by which it is followed above will remove any uneasiness
that might otherwise be excited.

N"o attempt will be made to follow the beaten road of those voluminous plodders of
Masonic history, who make Masons of every man of note, from Adam to Nimrod, and from
Nimrod to Solomon, down to the present day ; nor shall I seriously discuss the statements,
made in all good faith by writers of reputation, that Masonry was introduced into Britain
A.M. 2974 by "E-Brank, king of the Trojan race," and into Ireland by the prophet Jeremiah;
that 27,000 Masons accompanied the Christian princes in the Crusades ; and that Martin
Luther was received into the Society on Christmas night, 1520, just fifteen days after he had
burned the Pope's Bull.^ These and kindred creations of the fancy I shall dismiss to the
vast limbo of fabulous narrations.

In the history of Freemasonry there are no speculations which are worthy of more
critical investigation than its conjectural origin, as disclosed in the " Parentalia," and the
common belief that this derivation was attested by the high authority of a former Grand
Master of the Society.^

I shall therefore carefully examine the grounds upon wliich these speculations have arisen,
and as the theory of " travelling Masons," by which so many writers have been misled, owes

' The Rambler, No. 71, Nov. 20, 1750. The following prayer, found amongst his papers after his decease, and now
preserved in the Bodleian Library, exemplifies Hearne's character as^much, perhaps, as any anecdote that has descended
to us: "Oh, most gracious and mercifull Lord God . •. . ■. I continually meet with most signal instances of this
Thy Providence, and one act yesterday, when I unexpectedly met with three old MSS., for which, in a particular manner,
I return my thanks " (Aubrey, Letters written by Eminent Persons, and Lives of Eminent Men, 1843, vol. i., p. 118).

» Cf. Book of Constitutions, 1738 ; Multa Faucis, p. 45 ; Dalcho, Masonic Orations, Appendi.it, p. 56 ; and Free-
mason, March 10, 1880, and July 2, 1881.

' Ante, Chaps. L, p. 3, and VL, p. 257. See also the Times of June 26, and the Pall Mall Gazette of Oct. 20, 1879.
Although the pretensions of the Freemasons are mildly ridiculed in these leading journals, Wren's grand-mastership is
accepted by both !

4 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

its general acceptance to the circnnistance that it was esteemed to be the opinion of a fTeat
Freemason, as well as a great architect, the evidence upon which the opinion has been
ascribed to Wren, as well as that connecting him in any shape with the Masonic craft,
will be considered at some length.

" The road to truth, particularly to subjects connected with antiquity, is generally choaked
with fable and error, which we must remove, by application and perseverance, before we can
promise to ourselves any satisfaction in our progress. Because a story has been related in one
way for an hundred years past is not, alone, sufficient to stamp it with truth ; it must carry,
on the face of it, the appearance of probability, and if it is a subject which can be tried by
the evidence of authentic history, and by just reasoning from established data, it wiU never
be received by an enlightened mind on the ip)sc dixit of any one." ^

The common belief in Wren's membership of the Society of Freemasons rests upon two
sources of authority. Historically, the general impression derives what weight it may possess
from the importance that is attached to an obscure passage in Aubrey's "Natural History
of Wiltshire," and traditionally (or masonically) the acceptance of the " legend," and its
devolution from an article of faith into a matter of conviction, is dependent upon our yielding
full credence to statements in Dr Anderson's Constitutions of a.d. 1738, which are quite
irreconcilable with those in his earlier publication of 1723. The "Natural History of
Wiltshire," originally commenced in 1656, and of which the last chapter was written on
April 21, 1686, was the author's iirst literary essaj'. He subsequently made some additions,
but none of a later date than 1691. In 1675 it was submitted to the Eoyal Society; sub-
sequently Dr Plot ^ — curator of the Ashmolean Museum, and author of the " Natural History
of Staffordshire " — was requested by Aubrey to prepare it for the press. This, however, he
declined to do, but strongly urged the writer " to finish and publish it " himself. The work
remained in MS. until 1847, when it was first printed, under the editorial supervision of
John Britton.' The original MS. was never removed from Oxford, but a fair copy was made
by the author and presented to the Eoyal Society. Of the Oxford MS., Britton says, " Being
compiled at various times, during a long series of years, it has a confused appearance from
the numerous corrections and additions made in it by Aubrey." The same authority
continues : — " So far as Aubrey's own labours are concerned, the Eoyal Society's copy is the
most perfect ; but the notes of Eay, Evelyn, and Tanner were written upon the Oxford MS.,

' Dalcho, Masonic Orations, II., p. 37. This passage is only one of many wherein tlie principles on which masonic
investigation should be conducted are clearly and forcibly enunciated. Yet, as showing the contradiction of human
nature, the talented writer poses to at least an equal extent as an example of learned credulity. E.g., in the first
Oration we read, " It is well known that immense numbers of Free-masons were engaged in the Holy Wars ;" in the second,
that the "archives of the 'sublime institutions' are records of very ancient date, and contain, besides the evidence of
the origin of Masonry, many of the great and important princijiles of science ;" and in the Appendix, tliat the 27,000
masons who took part in the Crusades, " while in Palestine, discovered many important masonic manuscripts among the
descendants of the ancient Jews " ! !

^ Dr Robert Plot, born 1640, chosen F.R.S. 1677, became one of the secretaries of the Royal Society, 1682; was
appointed first keeper of the Ashmolean Maseum by the founder, 1683 ; and soon after nominated Professor of Chemistry
to the University. He was also Historiographer Royal, Secretary to the Earl Marshal, Mowbray Herald Extraordinary,
and Registrar of the Court of Honour ; died April 30, 1696. His chief works are the " Natural Histories of Oxford-
shire (1677) and Staffordshire (1686). It was his intention to have published a complete Natural History of England
and Wales, had his time and health permitted so laborious an undertaking.

' John Aixbrey, The Natural History of Wiltshire, edited by John Britton, 1S47, Editor's Preface

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY--ENGLAND. 5

after the fair copy was made, and have never been transcribed into the latter." Aubrey's
remarks upon the Freemasons are given by Mr Halliwell in two separate but consecutive
paragraphs, at page 46 of the explanatory notes attached to the second edition of the
"Masonic Poem" (1844). This writer copied from the Eoyal Society manuscript, where the
second paragraph appears as a continuation of the first.^ This is not the case in the Oxford
or original MS. There, the first paragraph, commencing "Sir William Dugdale told me,"
is written on folio 73, whilst the second, upon which Mr Halliwell based his conclusion " that
Sir Christopher, in 1691, was enrolled among the members of the fraternity," forms one of the
numerous additions made by Aubrey, and is written on the back of folio 12? As the last
chapter of the history was written in 1686, a period of at least five years separates the passage
in the text from the addendum of 1691, but the original entry in the body of the work is
probably far older than 1686^ — the date of publication of Dr Plot's "Natural History of
Staffordshire" — yet, whilst it may be fairly concluded that Plot must have seen Aubrey's
general note on the Freemasons before his own work was written, which latter in turn
Aubrey could not fail to have read prior to the entry of his memorandum of 1691, there is
nothing to show that either the one or the other was in the slightest degree influenced by, or
indeed recollected, the observations on the Freemasons which immediately preceded his own.

The Oxford copy of the " Natural History of Wiltshire " was forwarded by Aubrey to John
Eay, the botanist and zoologist, September 15, 1691, and returned by the latter in the October
following. It was also sent to Tanner, afterwards Bishop of St Asaph, in February 1694.* In
1719 Dr Eawlinson printed the dedication and preface as addenda to "Aubrey's History of
Surrey." ^ These he doubtless copied from the original. The transcript in the Eoyal Society
Library was quoted by Walpole in the first chapter of his "Anecdotes of Painting" (1762),
and Warton and Huddesford refer to the original in the list of Aubrey's manuscripts at
Oxford, in a note to the " Life of Anthony a Wood." The only other notice I have met with
— prior to 1844 — of the masonic entry or entries in Aubrey's unprinted work occurs in
Hawkins' " History of Gothic Architecture " ^ (1813), but it merely alludes to Papal bulls
said to have been granted to Italian architects, and does not mention Wren. I have
examined both manuscripts, the original in the Bodleian Library; and the fair copy at
Burlington House, by permission of the Council of the Eoyal Society. The latter has on
the title page "Memoires of Naturall Eemarques in the County of Wilts," by Mr John
Aubrey, E.S.S., 1C85; but as the memorandum of 1691, as well as the earlier entry relating to
the Freemasons, duly appears in the text, it will be safer to believe in their contemporaneous
transcription, than to assume that the copy, like the original, received additions from time
to time.'

' Mr Halliwell lias omitted the square brackets in the second paragi-aph of the Roj-al Society copy, which should
read — " Memorandum. This day [May the 18th, being Monday, 1691, after Rogation Sunday] is a great convention," etc.

^ Aubrey wrote on one side of the page only, until he had completed his history.

" The allusion to the Freemasons occurs at p. 99 of the printed work (Natural History of Wiltshire), and there are
126 pages in all.

* John Britton, Memoirs of John Aubrey, F.R.S., IS 45, p. 62. " Ibid., p. 92.

^ P. 148, citing Antiquarian Repertory, iii. 45. This reference being inexact, I have been unable to verify it, and
have vainly searched the work quoted for the passage given by Hawkins.

' The allusion to the Freemasons appears at p. 277 of the Royal Society MS., and at p. 276 three pages are inserted
conformably with Aubrey's rough note on tlie back of fol. 72 of the Cxford copy.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.
The followiug extracts are from the Oxford or original MS. ^ : —
[" Natukall Histokie of Wiltshire " — Part II. — MS. in the Bodleian Library]

Eeverse of Fol. 72.

f 1691.

Mdm, this day [May the 18th being

after Rogation Sunday'

Monday] is a great convention at St
Paul's church of the Fraternity of the

Accepted

■J'jvc Masons: where S'' Christopher Wren
is to be adopted a Brother : and S'' Henry
Goodric .... of y"^ Tower, & divers
others — There have been kings, that haue
been of this Sodalitie.

Pol. 73.

S' William Dugdale told me many years

since, that about Henry tlie third's time.

Patents
the Pope gave a Bull or diploma to a Corn-
Freemasons
pany of Italian Architects to travell up and

downe over all Europe to build Churches.

Prom those are derived the Fraternity of

Adopted-Masons.

Free-Masons. They are known to one an-
other by certayn Signes & IVrnrVs and
Watch- words: it continues to this day.
They have Severall Lodges in several!
Counties for their reception : and when
any of them fall into decay, the brother-
hood is to relieve him &c. The manner of
their Adoption is very formall, and with an
Oath of Secrecy.
As already observed, Aubre}''s memorandum of Wren's approaching initiation was not
printed or in any way alluded to until 1844. It can therefore have exercised no influence
whatever in shaping or fashioning the belief (amongst Masons) which, from 1738 onwards, has
universally prevailed as regards the connection of the great architect with the ancient craft.
Indeed, the statements of Aubrey (1691) and Anderson (1738) are mutually destructive. If
Wren was only " accepted " or "adopted" in 1691, it is quite clear that he could not have been
Grand Master at any earlier date ; and, on the other hand, if he presided over the Society
in the year 1663, it is equally clear that the ceremony of his formal admission into the
fraternity was not postponed until 1691. I shall now proceed to examine the question
chronologically, dealing with the evidence in order of time — i.e., time of publication. Accord-
ing to this method of procedure, the entries in the Aubrey MSS. will be considered last of all,
at which stage I shall enter upon a review of the whole subject, and conclude with an expres-
sion of the views which, in my judgment, are fairly deducible from the evidence before us.

In proceeding with the inquiry, whilst it is constantly necessary to bear in mind tliat
masonic writers of the last century — with whose works, in the first instance, we are chiefly
concerned, were altogether uninflueneed by the singular entries in the Aubrey MSS., yet
we should be on our guard not to assume too confidently that none of the Fellows of the
Eoyal Society who joined the fraternity between 1717 and 1750 were aware that one of their
own number — Aubrey was chosen an F.R.S. in 1663 — had recorded in a manuscript work

' During my visit to the Bodleian Library in 1880, the late Mr W. H. Turner was at the pains of instituting a
careful, though fruitless search amongst the papers of Anthony 4 Wood, in order to ascertain whether Aubrey's
Addendum of 1691 had been inspired by any information from his friend.

' The words "after Rogation Sunday," "Accepted," "Patents," "Freemasons," and "Adopted-Masons," here
printed in smaller type, arc interlineated in the original ; the words here printed in italics are there underlined.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 7

(which he deposited in their own library), the approaching initiation into Masonry of a former
President of the Eoyal Society. It is improbable that so curious a circumstance was wholly
unknown to Dr Desaguliers, Martin Folkes, Martin Clare, or Eichard Eawlinson, all Fellows
of the Eoyal Society, and zealous Freemasons.^ If we admit the probability of some one ^ or
more of these distinguished hrethrcn having perused the manuscript in question, it affords
negative evidence, from which we may not unfairly conclude that the allusion to Wren
failed to make any impression upon them.

In next proceeding to adduce the evidence upon which the belief in Wren's membership of
the fraternity has grown up, I shall, in the first instance, cite the Constitutions of 1723, as
presenting an authoritative picture of the condition of Freemasonry in that year. It may,
however, be premised that the Grand Lodge of England — established in 1717 — was then
in the sixth year of its existence. Philip, Duke of Wharton, was the Grand Master, and Dr
Desaguliers his Deputy.

The earliest " Book of Constitutions " was published by Dr James Anderson, conformably
with the direction of the Grand Lodge, to which body it was submitted in print on January
17, 1723, and finally approved. It was the joint production of Anderson, Desaguliers,
and the antiquary, George Payne, the two last named of whom had filled the office of Grand
Master. Payne compiled the " Eegulations," which constitute the chief feature of this work ;
Desaguliers wrote the preface ; and Anderson digested the entire subject-matter.

This official book speaks of " our great Master Mason Inigo Jones ; " styles James I. and
Charles I. " ]\Iasons," and proceeds as follows : —

" After the Wars were over, and the Eoyal Family restor'd, true Masonry was likewise
restor'd ; especially upon the unhappy Occasion of the Burning of London, Anno 1666 ; for
then the City Houses were rebuilt more after the Roman stile, when King Charles II. founded
the present St Paul's Cathedral in London (the old Oothick Fabrick being burnt down), much
after the style of St Peter's at Borne, conducted by the ingenious Architect, Sir Christophek
Wren.

" Besides the Tradition of old Masons now alive, which may be rely'd on, we have much
reason to believe that King Charles II. was an accepted Free-Mason, as everyone allows he
was a great Encourager of the Craftsmen.

" But in the Eeign of his Brother, King James II., though some Roman Buildings
were carried on, the Lodges of Freemasons in London much dwindled into Ignorance, by
not being duly frequented and cultivated."

In a footnote Dr Anderson speaks of the Sheldonian Theatre, Oxford, " as having been
designed and conducted also by Sir Christopher Wren, the King's Architect."

William III. is termed " that Gloriotis Frince, who by most is reckon'd a Free-Mason ; " and
having cited an opinion of Sir Edward Coke, Dr Anderson says : —

" This quotation confirms the tradition of Old Masons, that this most learned Judge really
belong'd to the Ancient Lodge, and was a, faithful Brother."

The text of the original " Book of Constitutions " thus concludes : —

> Dr Desaguliera was Grand Master 1719, and Deputy Grand Master 1722-3 and 1725 ; Folkes was Deputy Grand
Master in 1724, and Glare in 1741 ; Rawlinson was a Grand Steward in 1734.

' It is hardly within the limits of possibility that Rawlinsou could have appropriated the dedication and preface of
this work without perusing the work itself?

8 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

"And now the Free-horn British Nations, disentangled from foreign and civil "Wars,
and enjoying the good Fruits of Peace and Liberty, having of late much indulg'd their
happy Genius for Masonry of every sort, and reviv'd the drooping Lodges of London. This
fair MeU'opolis flourisheth, as well as other Parts with several worthy particular Lodges,
that have quarterly communication, and an annual Grand Assemlly wherein the Forms and
Usages of the most ancient and worshipful Fraternity are wisely propagated, and tlie Royal
Art duly cultivated, and the cement of the Brotherhood preserv'd ; so that the whole Body
resembles a well built Arch."'^

It will be seen by the above extracts, that whilst various kings of England, the cele-
brated architect Inigo Jones, and even a learned judge, are included in the category of
Freemasons, Sir Cliristopher Wren is only mentioned in a professional capacity. From which
it may safely be inferred, that the triumvirate charged with the preparation of the first
code of laws, and the first items of masonic history, published by authority, had at that
time no knowledge of his ever having been a member of the Society. Dr Mackey indeed
thinks, that " this passing notice of him who has been called the ' Vitruvius of England,'
must be attributed to servility ; " but with aU due respect to the memory of this diligent
lexicographer, I am of opinion — for reasons which will hereafter appear in fuller detail — that
the English Freemasons of 1717-23 had no reason to believe in Wren's connection with their
Society,^ also, that if at any time during the building of St Paul's Cathedral he had been
" accepted " as a Freemason, all recollection of so important a circumstance as the initiation
or aifiliation of the " King's Architect," would not have totally died out in the subsisting
lodges of masons, within the short span of six or seven years, which, according to Anderson
(in his subsequent publication of 1738), elapsed between Wren's cessation of active interest in
the lodges, and the so-called Revival of 1717.^ It is important, moreover, to note, that the
Constitutions of 1723 record no break in the career of prosperity, upon which the craft had
embarked after the accession of William III.

Between 1723 and 1738, though a large number of masonic books and pamphlets were
published, in none of these is Wren alluded to as a Freemason. He is not so styled in the
Constitutions of 1726, and 1730 (Dublin), which were reprinted by the late Mr Ptichard
Spencer in 1871, nor is his connection with the craft in any way hinted at by Dr Francis
Drake, the Junior Warden of the Grand Lodge of York, in his celebrated oration of 1726.

Smith's "Pocket Companion" for 1735, 1736, 1737, and 1738,^ though they contain much
masonic information, describe Charles II. as " that mason king," and refer to William III. as
" with good reason believed to have been a Free-Mason," merely designate the late surveyor
general, " that excellent architect. Sir Christopher Wren."

The newspapers during the same period (1723-38) — with the exceptions to be presently
noticed — at least so far as my research has extended, are equally sUent upon the point under

1 The Constitution of tlie Freemasons, 1723, pp. 40, 43, 47, 48.

'^ In a former cliapter {" The Statutes relating to the Freemasons," ante, vol. i., p. 352), I have drawn attention to
the scnipulous care with which the Constitutions of 1723 were compiled.

* Even taking Aubrey's prediction as a fact, and further assuming that Sir Christopher never attended another
masonic meeting after his reception in 1691, is it credible that so remarkable an occurrence cintld have been entirely
forgotten in 1717 ?

* lu the 1736 and subsequent editions the title is enlarged to "The Freemason's Pocket Companion. By W. Smith,
a Freemason."

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 9

consideration, and there is no reference to Wren in the Eawlinson MSS. at the Bodleian
Library.

Sir Christopher died on February 25, 1723 ; and in the Posthoy, No. 5243, from
February 26 to February 28 of tliat year, appears an obituary notice of Wren and au advertise-
ment of the "Book of Constitutions." The same paper in the next number (5244) gives a
more elaborate notice, consisting of twenty-eight lines, enumerating all the offices held by the
deceased. The Posthoy, No. 5245, from March 2 to March 5, has the following: —
"London, March 5, this evening the corpse of that worthy Free Mason, Sir Christopher
Wren, Knight, is to be interr'd under the Dome of St Paul's Cathedral." A similar announce-
ment appears in the British Journal, No. 25, March 9, viz. : — " Sir Christopher Wren, that
worthy Free Mason, was splendidly interr'd in St Paul's Church on Tuesday night last."

I find in my notes sixteen notices in all of Wren's death or burial, occurring between
February 26 and March 9, 1723. Four are copied from the Posthoy, and a similar number
from the Daily Post. Two each from the British Journal, the Weekly Journal or Saturday's
Post, and the Weekly Journal or British Gazetteer. Single notices are given in the London
Journal and the Postman.

In none of these, except as above stated, is Sir Christopher designated a " Freemason," and
this expression is not again coupled with his name, in any newspaper paragraph that I have
seen, of earlier date than 1738.

It will be observed that the journal, announcing in the first instance, that Wren was a
"Freemason," had been previously selected as the advertising medium through which to
recommend the sale of the " Book of Constitutions," ^ and it is hardly to be wondered at that
the editor of the Postboy should have deemed a title so lavishly bestowed by Dr Anderson
upon the persons and personages of whom he had occasion to speak, including Inigo Jones, a
predecessor of Wren in the office of Surveyor General, would be fitly applied to designate the
great man whose funeral obsequies he was announcing.

That a single paper only — the British Journal, No. 25 — reprinted the statement given in
the Postboy, will surprise the readers of old newspapers, for if there is one circumstance more
than another which renders an examination of these records especially fatiguing, it is the
wearisome repetition by journals of later date, of neai-ly every item of intelligence published
in a London newspaper.

Passing from this branch of the inquiry, the importance of which I do not rate very highly,
I shall next present an extract from a work, published in 1730, that will be again, on its
own merits or demerits, considered at a later stage of this history. " The terms," says Samuel
Prichard, " of Free and Accepted Masonry (as it now is) has [sic] not been heard of till within
these few years ; no constituted Lodges or Quarterly Communications were heard of till 1691,
when lords and dukes, lawyers and shopkeepers, and other inferior tradesmen, porters not
excepted, were admitted into this mystery or no mystery." - It will be seen that stress is

' The Postboy, No. 5243. Commenting upon tlio passage in the Posiloy, No. 5245, Mr W. P. Buchan observes:
" Is it true that Wren was really a ' Freemason' hcfore his death ? And, if so, when and where did he become one ? At
page 595 of the Graphic for 19th December 1S74, we are told that the Duke of Edinburgh is a mason, but I fear this
is a mistake ; consequently, if the latter scribe is not infallible as regards a living celebrity, I feel justified in doubtiii"
the veracity of the former respecting a dead one."

° Samuel Prichard, Masonry Dissected, 1730, pp. 6, 7.
VOL. II. B

10 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

here laid on some great Masonic event having occurred in 1691, -which is so far corroborative
of Aubrey's memorandum. This notion may indeed have suggested itself to Prichard from the
fact that, in 1729, the Grand Lodge of England, in its official list of lodges, showed the date
of constitution of the senior lodge, formerly the old Lodge of St Paul, as 1691 ; or, on the
other hand, this entry in the engraved list may be viewed as confirmatory of the statement in
" Masonry Dissected " ?

Elsewhere, I have expressed an opinion that the date of 1691, as given in the official
calendar for 1729, may denote that in this year original No. 1,^ formerly the old Lodge of
St Paul {now Antiquity), from being an occasional became a stated lodge, and Aubrey's
statement respecting Wren's "adoption," I instanced as strengthening this hypothesis.
If, indeed, Prichard's observations are entirely put on one side, as being inspired by the
calendar of 1729, there yet remains the inquiry — must not this date of 1691, officially
accorded to the senior lodge thirty-eight years after its original establishment as computed by
the G-rand Officers^ point at least to some remarkable event connected with its history ? On
the other hand, however, it may be fairly contended that nothing very extraordinary could
have taken place in 1691, since all recollection of it had died out before 1723,^ and though
slightly anticipating the sequence of my argument, I may here conveniently add, that it would
be contrary to all reason and experience for a tradition to hybernate for at least twenty-one
years (1717-38) and then suddenly return to full life and reality.

Between 1730 and 1738, the newspapers of the time contain very frequent references to
Freemasonry. Many of these were preserved by Dr Eawlinson, and may be seen in the
curious collection of Masonic scraps, entitled the " EawUnson MSS.," in the Bodleian Library.
These I have carefully examined, and the passing allusions of the learned collector, to con-
temporaneous events of a Masonic character, I have in each case verified wherever a date
is named, or a journal cited, and the reference is sufficiently plain and distinct to enable
me to trace it in the newspaper files at the British Museum. Furthermore, I have searched
these files with more or less particularity from the year 1717 down to 1738 and later,
and though I have met with numerous dissertations on Freemasonry, squibs, catechisms, and
the like, nowhere, prior to 1738 save in the two journals of 1723, already cited, have I found
any mention of Wren as a Freemason.* That this belief did not exist in 1737 is, I think,
plainly evidenced by the " Pocket Companion " for 1738, printed according to invariable
usage slightly in advance, and which, like its predecessors and successors, was a summary of
all the facts, fancies, and conjectures previously puUishcd in reference to Freemasonry. Had

1 The Four Old Lodges, 1879, p. 46.

'^ I am far from suggesting that the period of fomiation of onr oldest Englisli lodge (present No. 2) was rightly
determined in 1729. The masonic authorities appear to have proceeded on no, 'principle whatever in the dates of
constitution they assigned to lodges. Thus, the lodge at "St Hook's Hill," near Cliichester, No. 65 in the numeration
of 1729-39, was duly chronicled in the ofTicial calendars as having been established "in the reign of Julius Csesar." In
the Weekly Journal, or British Gazetteer (No. 264, April 11, 1730), however, is the following: "A few days since,
their Graces the Dukes of Kichmond and Montagu, accompanied by several gentlemen, who were all Free and Accepted
Masons, according to ancient custom, form'd a lodge upon the top of a hill near the Duke of Richmond's seat, at Good-
wood in Sussex, and made the Right Hon. the Lord Baltimore a Free and Accepted Mason."

* The date of publication of the first " Book of Constitutions."

* Numerous extracts from the St James Evening Post, ranging from 1732 to 1738, were reprinted by Jlr Ilughau
in the Masonic Magazine, vol. iv., 187G-77, pp. 418, 472, 618, but in none of these is there any allusion to Wren.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. n

there, at that time, been a scintilla of evidence to connect Wren with the fraternity, the
worthy knight, without doubt, would have figured in that publication as a Freemason.

I shall now proceed to show how the fable originated, and in the first instance, before
examining the " Constitutions " of 1738, two extracts from the iliuutes of Grand Lodge claim
our attention : —

"February 2-4, 1735. — Bro. Dr Anderson, formerly Grand Warden, represented that he had
spent some thoughts upon some alterations and additions that might fittly be made to the
Constitutions, the first Edition being all sold off.

"Eesolved — That a committee be appointed .■. .•. .•. to revise and compare the same, and,
when finished, to lay the same before Grand Lodge."

" March 31, 1735. — A motion was made that Dr James Anderson should be desired to
print the names (in his new Book of Constitutions) of all the Grand Masters that could
be collected from the beginning of Time; with a list of the Names of all Deputy Grand
jMasters, Grand Wardens, and the brethren who have served the Craft in the Quality
of Stewards."

The new edition of the "Constitutions" was published in 1738, and we are informed
therein that in 1660 Charles II. approved the choice of the Earl of St Albans as Grand
Master ; that in 1663 this nobleman appointed Sir John Denham Deputy Grand Master, and
Sir Christopher Wren (slightly antedating his knighthood) and Mr John Webb,^ Grand
Wardens. I shall proceed to give some extracts from this work, premising that by all
authorities aUke, whether in or out of the craft, the Constitutions edited by Dr Anderson
have been regarded as the basis of Masonic history.

" Gilbert Sheldon, Archbishop of Canterbury, an excellent Architect, shew'd his great skill
in designing his famous Theatrum Slieldoniamim at Oxford, and at his Cost it was conducted
and finished by Deputy When and Grand Warden Web.

"And the Craftsmen having celebrated the Cape-stone, it was open'd with an elegant
oration by Dr South, on 9th July 1669. D. G. M. Ween built also that other Master Piece,
the pretty Musceum near the Theatre, at the Charge of the University. Meanwhile —

" London was rebuilding apace ; and the Fire having ruin'd St Paul's Cathedral, the KiSG
with Grand Master Elvers, his architects and craftsmen, Nobihty and Gentry, Lord Mayor
and Aldermen, Bishops and Clergy, etc., in due Form leveU'd the Footstone of New St Paul's,
designed by D. G. Master Wren, A.D. 1673, and by him conducted as Master of Work and
Surveyor, with his Wardens Mr Edward Stronj, Senior - and Junior, under a Parliamentary
Fund.

- "Upon the death of Grand Master Arlington, 1685, the Lodcjes met and elected Sir
Christopher Wren Gkand Master, who appointed

' Preston, et hoc gcnns omnc, -nho hare bliudly copied from Anderson, are well described by the wortliy they persist
in styling Grand Warden : " Some are so far in love with Tulgarly receiv'd reports, that it must be taken for truth,
whatsoever related by them, though nor head, nor tail, nor foot, nor footstep in it oftentimes of reason or common sense "
(John Webb, The Most Notable Antiquity of Great Britain, vulgarly called Stonehenge, 1655, p. 108).

» Edward Strong, the elder, died in 1723, aged 72 ; consequently ho was only 22 years of age in 1673. It is
improbable that his son Edward was bom until some years after the footstone was levelled. As will presently appear,
the credit of having laid the foundation-stone of St Paul's Cathedral is claimed for Thumas Strong by his brother
Edward, in the latter's "Memoir of the Family of Strong," given in Cluttcrbuck's "History and Autiijuity of the
County of Hertford," 1815, vol. i., p. 167

12 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

Mr Gabriel Gibber ") j" and whilst carrying on St Paul's, he annually

Mr Edward Strong J ^''""'^ Wardens. ^ ^^^ ^^^^^ Brethren that could attend him, to
keep up good old Usages, till the Eevolutiou."

The "Constitution Book" goes on to say that King William III. was privately made a
Free-Mason, and that he approved the choice of Grand Master Wren; that in 1695 the Duke
of Eichmond became Grand Master, Wren being Deputy, and the Edward Strongs, Senior and
Junior, Grand Wardens respectively ; and again records Sir Christopher's elevation to the
Grand Mastership in 1698.

The official record proceeds : —

" Yet still in the South (1707) the Lodges were more and more disused, partly by the
Neglect of the Masters and Wardens, and partly by not having a Nolle Grand Mccster at
London, and the annual Assembly was not duly attended. G. M. Wren, who had design'd St
Paul's, London, a.d. 1673, and as Master of Worh had conducted it from the Foot-stone, had the
Honour to finish that noble Cathedral, the finest and largest Temple of the Augustan stile
except St Peters at Rome; and celebrated the Cape-stone wh&i he erected the Cross on the Top
of the Cupola, in July a.d. 1708.^

" Some few years after this Sir Christopher Wren neglected the office of Grand Master, yet
the Old Lodge near St Paul's, and a few more, continued their stated meetings."

In the Constitutions of 1738 we learn for the first time that Wren was a Freemason, this
volume, it must be recollected, having been written by the compiler of the earlier Constitutions,
Dr James Anderson; that the Sheldonian Theatre, Oxford, was opened masonically ; that King
Charles II. laid the foundation-stone of St Paul's ; and that Wren continued as Grand Master
until after 1708, when his neglect of the office " caused the Lodges to be more and more
disused."

It is somewhat remarkable that not one of the foregoing statements can be cited as an

historical fact.

I do not propose multiplying evidence to invalidate the testimony of this work, but it may
be shortly stated that among the EngUsh Grand Masters Dr Anderson gravely enumerates
Austin the Monk, St Swithin, St Dunstan, Henry VII., and Cardinal Wolsey; whilst of
"Foreigners," who have attained that high office, he specifies Nimrod, Moses, Solomon,
Nebuchadnezzar, and Augustus Ctesar ! !

Between 1738 and 1750 there is nothing to chronicle which bears upon the present inquiry,
but in the latter year appeared the following work :— " Pakentalia ; or, Memoirs of the
Family of the Wrens. But Chiefly of Sir Christopher Wren, compiled by his son Christo-
pher : Now published by his grandson Stephen Wren, Esq. ; with the care of Joseph Ames,
F.E.S. London, mdccl."

Two passages in this publication demand our attention. These occur at p. 292 and p. 306
respectively, the latter being the opinion aserihed to Wren in respect of the origin of Free-
masonry, and the former, the statement of his son Christopher with regard to certain occur-
rences, about which there is a great diversity of testimony. The remarks attributed to Sir

1 Accoraiug to Edward Strong, senior, in the "Memoir" before alluded to, the last stone of the lanthorn on the
dome of St Paul's was laid by himself, October 25, 1708. Christopher Wren also claims the honour of having laid the
" highest or last stone," but fixes the date of this occurrence at 1710 (ParentaUa, or Memoirs of the FamUy of the
Wrens, mdccl., p. 292).

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 13

Christopher are given iu full in an earlier chapter,^ and I shall proceed to adduce the remaining
extract from the " Parentalia," which will complete the stock of evidence derivable from this
source. At p. 292, the subject being sundry details connected with the erection of St Paul's
Cathedral, there appears : — " The first Stone of this Basilica was laid in the Year 1675, and the
Works carried on with such Care and Industry, that by the Year 1685 the Walls of the Quire
and Side ailes were finished, with the circular North and South Porticoes ; and the gi-eat
Pillars of the Dome brought to the same Height ; and it pleased God in his Mercy to bless
the Surveyor with Health and Length of Days, and to enable him to compleat the whole
Structure in the Year 1710 to the Glory of his most holy Name, and Promotion of his divine
Worship, the principal Ornament of the Imperial Seat of this Eealm ^ Majestas convenit isfa
deo. The highest or last Stone on the Top of the Lantern, was laid by the Hands of the Szor-
veyor's son, Christojiher Wren deputed by his Father, in the Presence of that excellent Artificer
M"" Strong, his Son, and other Free and Accepted Masons, chiefly employed in the Execution of
the Work."

Before, however, commencing an analysis of the two extracts from the " Parentalia," it
will be desirable to ascertain upon what authority they have come down to us.

In his " Literary Anecdotes of the Eighteenth Century," John Nichols * observes, " the
last of M' Ames's literary labours, was the drawing up the ' Parentalia ' in one volume folio,
from the papers of M"' Wren. The title sets forth that they were published by Stephen Wren,
with the care of Joseph Ames."

In the view that the work we are considering was virtually the compilation of Joseph
Ames, Nichols has been followed by Elmes, whose two biographies of Wren,* together with
those in the " Biographia Britannica " and the " Parentalia," contain everything of an authentic
character in the life of Sir Christopher that has descended to us. As it is my purpose to show
the gradual accretion of error that has taken place owing to the progressive influence of succes-
sive publications, I postpone for the present a full consideration of those statements wherein
Elmes has copied from Masonic writers, and shall merely adduce in this place his comments
upon the " Parentalia," as a work of authority. It is described by this writer as " Ames's
miserable compilation, published under the name of Stephen Wren." Altogether, according to
Elmes, the " Parentalia " is a very bungling performance. Numerous errors and inaccuracies
are pointed out, especially in the matter of dates.

Thus it is shown that a letter from Wren to Lord Broucker was written in 1663, and not
in 1661 ; that to a paper read before the Eoyal Society the year 1658, instead of 1668, had
been assigned ; and that mistakes occur in the accounts both of Sir Christopher's appointment
as surveyor-general, and his receiving the honour of knighthood ; and such expressions occur
as — " the ' Parentalia,' with its usual carelessness or contempt of correctness in dates ; " and
" This is not, by many, the only or the greatest falsification of dates by Ames." "

In spite, however, of the combined authority of Nichols and Elmes, I am of opinion that

' Ante, Chap. VI., p. 257. » Ovid's Fast, 1. i.

s Born 1745 ; edited the Gentleman's Marjazinc from 1778 until his death in 1826. He was the author or editor
of at least sLxty-seven works, of which the one cited in the text was begun in 1782, hut recast and enlarged in 1812-15.

< James Elmes, Memoirs of the Life and Works of Sir Christopher Wren, 1823 ; Sir Christopher Wren and his
Times, 1852.

» Memoirs of Wren, 1823, pp. 139, 217, 241, 242, 255, 203, 317, aud 440.

14 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

Ames's labours in connection with the " Parentalia " were strictly of an editorial character,
and that the actual writer or compiler was Christopher Wren, only son of the architect. I
have arrived at this conclusion from an examination of the original manuscript of the work,^
which appears to be in the handwriting of Christopher Wren, and as the title page shows at
the foot, was prepared for publication six years before the death of the compiler —