book is that which relates matters of fact as they really happened. A book may be genuine without being authentic ;

and a book may be authentic without being gcjiiuine " (Dr Watson, Bishop of Llandaff, An Apology for the Bible, 179G,
p. 33).

' Dr Johnson observes ; " It has been my settled principle that the reading of the ancient books is probably true.
. • . . • . For though much credit is not due to the fidelity, nor any to the judgment, of the first publishers ; yet they
who had the copy before their eyes were more likely to read it right than we who read it only by imagination" (Johnson's
Works, 1818, vol. i., p. 255). Similarly, we shall do best if we consider what Aubrey actually records, rather than
vainly speculate upon what Dugdale may have had in his mind when expressing his opinion of tlio Freemasons.

■* It must not be lost sight of, that in his original note of Dngdale's words, Aubrey also uses the word " Patents."

20 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

1216 and 1272, in which case a solution of the problem must be looked for in the history of
Italy; whilst on the other hand, they may closely associate the reign of King Henry III.i with
the occurrence described, and indicate that in the annals of that period of English history,
will be found a clue to the explanation we are in search of.

The latter supposition, on the face of it, the more probable of the two, is fully borne out by
the circumstances of Henry's reign, as narrated by the most trustworthy historians.

The Papal authority in England stood at its highest when this prince succeeded to
the throne. An Interdict had been laid on the kingdom in 1208, and in 1211 John was
not only excommunicated but deposed, and that sentence was pronounced with the greatest
solemnity by the Pope himself. The king's subjects were not only aU absolved from their
oath of allegiance, but were strictly forbidden to acknowledge him in any respect whatever
as their sovereign, to obey him, or even to speak to him.^ On May 15, 1213, John knelt
before the legate Pandulf, surrendered his kingdom to the Roman See, took it back again as a
tributary vassal, swore fealty, and did liege homage to the Pope.^ " Never," says Mr Green,
"had the priesthood wielded such boundless power over Christendom as in the days of
Innocent the Third (1198-1216) and his immediate successors."* This Pontiff set himself up
as the master of Christian princes, changed the title of the Popes, which had hitherto been
Vicar of Peter, to Vicar of Christ, and was the author of the famous comparison of the Papal
power to the sun, " the greater Ught," and of the temporal power to the moon, " the lesser
light." At the death of John (1216) the concurrence of the Papal authority being requisite
to° support the tottering throne, Henry III. was obliged to swear fealty to the Pope, and
renew that homage to which his father had subjected the kingdom. Pope Honorius III.
(1216-27), as feudal superior, declared himself the guardian of the orphan, and commanded
Gualo to reside near his person, watch over his safety, and protect his just rights.^ The
Papal legate therefore took up his residence at the English court, and claimed a share in
the administration of the realm as the representative of its overlord, and as guardian of the
young sovereign.6 "In England," says Mr .Green, "Ptome believed herself to have more than
a spiritual claim for support. She regarded the kingdom as a vassal kingdom, and as bound
to its overlord. It was only by the promise of a heavy subsidy that Henry in 1229 could
buy the Papal confirmation of Langton's successor." ^

During the reign of this king the chief grievances endured by his subjects were the

1 It is Bot likely that Dugdale referred to Henry III. (1039-56), the most absolute of the Emperors, who, in the
Western Church, was obeyed as a dictator, and nominated the Popes. No less than four German Popes chosen by him
succeeded each other. Cf. L. Rauke, History of the Popes, translated by Sarah Austin, 1840, vol. i., p. 26 ; Sir Harris
Nicholas, The Chronology of History, 1833, p. 225 ; and H. Chepmell, A Short Course of History, 2d series, 1857,
vol i., p. 17.

2 A. Bower, History of the Popes, 1766, vol. vi., p. 202.

8 J. E. Green, History of the English People, 1881, vol. i., p. 236. * Il'i'l., p. 254.

» Dr Lingard, History of England, 1849, vol. ii., p. 387. At the Council of Bristol, Nov. 11, 1216, Lewis of France
and his adherents were excommunicated, and that prince, after the rout of his partisans at Lincoln and the defeat of his
fleet, consented to leave the kingdom (Nicholas, The Chronology of History, p. 240 ; Chepmell, A Short Course of
History, p. 161).

« Green, History of the English People, ISSl, vol. i., p. 250.

' Ibid., p. 268. Bulls of Pope Honorius III. to Henry (March 14, 1244) enjoin greater impartiality and forbearance
towards his subjects, and (April 27, 1226) forbid his assisting Raymond of Toulouse, or making war with the King of
France (Royal Letters, temp. Hen. III., Rolls Scries, 1862, vol. i., Appendix v.).

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 21

usurpations and exactions of the Court of Kome. All tlie chief benefices of the kingdom were
conferred on Italians, great numbers of whom were sent over at one time to be provided for; and
the system of non-residence and pluralities was carried to an enormous height. The benefices of
the Italian clergy in England amounted to 60,000 marks a year,i a sum which exceeded the
annual revenue of the Crown itself. The Pope exacted the revenues of all vacant benefices,
the twentieth of all ecclesiastical revenues without exception, the third of such as exceeded
100 marks a year, and half of those possessed by non-residents. He claimed the goods of all
intestate clergymen, advanced a title to inherit all money gotten by usury, and levied
benevolences upon the people. When the king, contrary to his usual practice, prohibited
these exactions, he was threatened with excommunication.'-^

" The general indignation," says Mr Green, " at last found vent in a wide conspiracy. In
1231, letters from 'the whole body of those who prefer to die rather than be ruined by the
Eomans,' were scattered over tlie kingdom by armed men ; tithes gathered for the Pope or the
foreign priests were seized and given to the poor ; the Papal collectors were beaten and their
Bulls trodden under foot." ^ Sir Robert Thwiuge, a kuight of Yorkshire, who, by a Papal
provision had been deprived of his nomination to a living in the gift of his family, became the
head of an association formed to resist the usurpations of the Court of Eome.* The Papal
couriers were murdered, threatening letters were addressed to the foreign ecclesiastics, and for
eight months the excesses continued. Henry at length interposed his authority, and Thwinge
proceeded to Eome to plead his cause before the Pontiff. He was successful, and returned
with a Bull, by which Gregory IX. (1227-41) autliorised him to nominate to the living which
he claimed.^

Tliere can be no reasonable doubt, that at a period when the Papal influence was dominant
throughout the realm, when the King of England had to pay heavily to ensure the confirma-
tion by the Pope of Archbishop Langton's successor, and when, as we have seen, the right of
a lay patron to present to a living was only successfully vindicated under colour of a Eoman
Bull, the authority of the supreme Pontiff must have been constantly invoked in the smaller
concerns of human life of which history takes but little notice. In a previous chapter I have
shown that in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, so gi-eat was the demand for Papal seals
and letters in the city of London, that their counterfeit production must have amounted to a
profitable industry .^

It is on record, moreover, that a great forgery of Bulls and other documents, professing to
emanate from the Papal chancery, was carried on in Eome itself; and privileges of questiou-

' According to a Bull of Innocent III., published in Eymer's "Fcedera, " vol. i., p. 471, the amount is stated not
to have exceeded 50,000 marks.

2 J. Tyrell, History of England, 1700, vol. ii., pt. ii., book viii., p. 836 ; and T. Keightley, History of England,
1839, vol. i., p. 209 ; The Student's Hume, 1802, p. 147.

^ Green, History of the English People, vol. i., p. 269.

* " Besides the usual perversions of right in the decision of controversies, the Pope openly assumed an absolute
and uncontrolled authority of setting aside, by the plenitude of his apostolic power, all particular rules, and all jn-ivileges
of patrons, churches, and convents " (Hume and Smollett, History of England, continued by the Rev. T. S. Hughes,
1854, vol. ii., p. 21).

° Lingard, Histoiy of England, vol. ii., p. 417. Cf. Milnian, Hi.story of Latin Christianity, 18G4, vol. vi., p. 87 ;
and Wilkins, Concilia, i. 269.

» Cf. Aide, Chap. VII., p. 370 ; and Riley, Memorials of London, pp. 495, 583.

22 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

able character were often xjroduccd by persons whose interests they favoured, as the results of
a visit to the Holy See.

Eichard of Canterbury, A.D. 1187, after denouncing persons who attempted to pass them-
selves off as bishops by counterfeiting " the barbarism of Irish or Scottish speech," goes on to
complain of spurious Bulls, and orders that the makers and users of such documents shall be
periodically excommunicated^ Innocent III. alludes frequently to these forgeries, of which
a manufactory was in his time discovered at Eome; and he exposes some of the tricks
that were practised— such as that of affixing to a forgery a genuine Papal seal taken from
a genuine deed, the erasure of some words and the substitution of others.^ The canons,
however, of later councils testify that the system of forgery long survived these exposures
and denunciations.^

In my judgment, the practice of applying in nearly every situation of life for Papal
sanction or confirmation, must have been at its height during the reign of Henry III.,*
and there is evidence beyond what I have already adduced, to favour the supposition that
this usage was especially prevalent in the British Islands.

The Papal authority in England had been vastly strengthened by the sanction which
Pope Alexander Il.^who was the mere tool of Hildebrand — had been made to give
to the expedition of WiUiam of Normandy. Nor was it diminished during the
pontificate of Hildebrand — the type of papalism in its loftiest aims, as well as in its
proudest spirit — who, as Gregory VII., was Pope from 1073 to 1085, though his influence
on the affiiii-s of the Eoman Church had been paramount for nearly twenty years before
he assumed the tiara. "There is only one name in the world," said Gregory, "that of
the Pope. He has never erred, and he never wiU err. He can put down princes from
their thrones, and loose their subjects from their oaths of allegiance." This Pontiff claimed
to be liege-lord of Denmark, Hungary, and England; and for a while he had Philip I. of
France as his trembling slave, and Henry IV. of Germany a ruined suppliant at his mercy.^

When the English throne was seized by Stephen of Blois — between whom and the Earl
of Gloucester, natural son of Henry I., a dispute had occurred as to which should precede in
swearing allegiance to the Empress Matilda — the prospect of favour to the church and sub-
mission to the Eoman See, induced Innocent II. to confirm his title, to send his benediction
in a BiiU, and to take the usurper under the special protection of St Peter.^ In the charter
subsequently granted at Oxford by Stephen to the Church, particular mention is made of the
confirmation of his title by the Pope.

' Eev. J. C. Kobeitson, History of the Christian Church, 1866, vol. iii., p. 581. = Hid.

^ E.g., Cone. Salisburg., A.D. 1281, c. svii. ; Cone. Leod., A.D. 1287, c. x.xxi.

* The supply of these documents kept pace with the demand for them, and it was said that a Papal emissary, named
Martin, came over in this reign "with a parcel of blank Bulls, which he had the liberty to fill up at discretion."
Matthew Paris will not allow so hard an imputation upon the Pope, though he records that Innocent IV., in 1243, sent
the King of England a provisional Bull of pardon, that in case he should happen to lay violent hands upon any ecclesi-
astics and fall under the censure of the canons, he might receive absolution upon submitting to the customary penance I
(Collier, Ecclesiastical History of Great Britain, ed. 1840, vol. ii., pp. 499, 503).

° Gregory, on being chosen Pope, had the election ratified by Henry IV. In the year 1076, at the Councils of
Worms and Kome respectively, the Pope was deposed by the Emperor, and the Emperor excommunicated by the Pope.
During the following year, however, at Canossa, Henry is said to have remained three days and "three nights barefooted
in the snow before Gregory would condescend to see him !

"Collier, Ecclesiastical History of Great Britain (F. Barhnm), 1840, vol. ii., p. 213.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 23

The supremacy of the Popes over all temporal sovereigns was maintained by Adrian IV.,
■who, on visiting the camp of Frederic Barbarossa, haughtily refused to give the kiss of peace,
iintil the Emperor elect had submitted to hold the stirrup of his mule in the presence of the
whole army. Adrian, who was the only English Pope, granted the lordship of Ireland to
Henry II. in a Bull which declared all islands to belong to St Peter.^

The murder of Thomas k Becket in 1170 still further conduced to augment the Papal
influence in England. Henry II. submitted to the authority of the Papal legates, and having
sworn on the relics of the saints that he had not commanded nor desired the death of the
archbishop, and having also made various concessions to the Church, he received absolution
from the legates, and was confirmed in the grant of Ireland made by Pope Adrian.-

Althoxigh in a later chapter, some remarks will be offered upon the fact, that both York and
those portions of southern Scotland most closely associated with the early legends of the craft,
were originally comprised within the boundaries of Saxon Northumbria, it will be convenient,
nevertheless, at this stage — as showing that the Papal influence extended throughout the whole
of Britain — to briefly notice the ancient subordination in ecclesiastical matters of the prelates
of the northern kingdom to the Archbishop of York. Pope Paschal II. (1099-1118) in his
Bull to the Bishops of Scotland, orders them to receive Gerhard, the newly-consecrated
Archbishop of York, as their metropolitan, and pay him due submission. Calixtus II. (1119-
1124), to whom John, Bishop of Glasgow, appealed against his suspension by Thurstan,
Archbishop of York, was threatened with its confirmation, unless within thirty days he made
submission to his metropolitan. Honorius II. (1124-1130) wrote to the King of Norway to
restore Pialph, Bishop of the Orcades, consecrated by the Archbishop of York, and subject to
his jurisdiction, to the privileges and revenues of the bishopric. Even later still, " William
the Lion," King of Scotland, in a letter to Pope Alexander III. (1159-1181),^ informs that
Pontiff that the churches of Scotland were anciently under the jurisdiction of the metropolitan
see of York ; that the king had thoroughly examined this title, and found it supported by
unquestionable records, together with the concurrence of living evidence. He therefore desires
the Pope to discourage all attempts at innovation, and that things may be thoroughly settled
upon the old basis.*

Although numerous examples of Papal Bulls, Confirmations, and Indulgences are to
be found in our ecclesiastical and county histories, the absence in many instances of
any index whatever, and in all cases— except in works of comparatively recent date —
of references calculated to facilitate investigation, renders the search for these ancient
writings a formidable as well as a wearisome undertaking. Furthermore, whilst if the

' Upon this Bull (1155) Collier remarks : ' ' We may observe how far the Popes of that age stretched their pretensions
upon the dominions of princes ; for here we see the Pope very frankly presents King Henry with tlie crowns of the Irish
kings, commands their subjects upon a new allegiance, and enjoins them to submit to a foreign prince as their lawful
sovereign" (0?j. cit., vol. ii., p. 257).

« ChepmcU, A Short Course of History, 2d series, vol. i., pp. 332-347 ; The .Student's Hume, p. 118. At the Council
of Avranches, May 21, 1172, Henry II. was absolved from the murder of Thomas 4 Becket, after swearing to abolish all
the unlawful customs established during his reign (Nicholas, Chronology of Histoiy, p. 238).

' As William only became King in 1165, and Alexander died in 1181, the latter must have been written within the
period covered by these two dates.

*Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicanum, 1830, vol. vi., pt. iii., pp. 1185, 1186, 1188 ; Collier, Ecclesiastical History of
Great Britain, vol. ii., p. 190.

24 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

grants and confirmations of diocesans and metropolitans are included in the general cate-
gory of these instruments, their name is Ugion, yet apart from the lists of charters given
in such works as Eymer's " Fosdera," Dugdale's " Monasticon " and " History of St Paul's,"
Drake's " Eboracum," the various chronicles, the annals of the different monastic orders, and
the like, no very extensive collection of Papal or episcopal documents of the class under
exammation will be found in any single work, nor has it been the practice of even our most
diligent antiquaries to do more than record the result of their own immediate inquiries.
So uniform is this rule, that the occasional mention of an Indulgence, such, for example, as
that granted by the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1244 (to be presently noticed), in aid of the
construction of Salisbury Cathedral,^ and copied by one writer from another, as a singular and
noteworthy occurrence, has led many persons to believe that a search for privileges of this
nature, among the records of building operations carried on in countries other than our own,
M'ould be alone lilcely to yield any profitable result. Even in the latest edition of Dugdale's
famous "Monasticon" the index merely refers the reader to a solitary Indulgence of forty
days granted in 1480, by the Archbishop of York, " to aU who should visit the Lady Chapel at
Oseny Abbey, either in pilgrimage or devotion, or shoidd bestow any of their goods upon it." ^

The following are examples of privileges and confirmations emanating from the Roman See :

"1124-1130. The gqods, possessions, and rents of the Provost and Canons of the Collegiate
Church of Beverley, confirmed by a Bull of Pope Honorius 11.^

"1181-1185. The charter of the 'Great Guild of St John of Beverley of the Hanshouse,'
confirmed by a Bull of Pope Lucius III.*

"Jan. 26, 1219. An Indulgence of 40 days given by Pope Honorius III. to those who assist
at the translation of the body of Thomas, Archbishop of Canterbury .^

" 1252. A pardon for release of xl. days' penance, sent out by Pope Innocent IV., to those
assisting at the Sustentation of St Paul's Cathedral.^

" 1352-62. An Indulgence of two years and two quarters granted by Pope Innocent VI.
' to the liberal contributors ' to the construction of the Cathedral of York.'

"1366. One year's Indulgence granted by Urban V. to 'the Christian benefactors' of the
same fabric." ^

Three Papal confirmations relating to the Chapter of the Cathedral of St Peter of York are
given by Sir W. Dugdale, one from Alexander [III.] confirming a charter granted by William
Piufus ; the others from Popes Innocent IV. and Honorius HI., ratifying privileges conferred
by English prelates.^

1 "W. Dodswortli, Historical Account of the Episcopal See and Oatliedral Church of Salisbury, 1814, p. 134 ; quoted
liy Britton in his "Architectural Antiquities," and thence passed on by numerous later writers without any reference to
the original authority.

" Vol. vi., p. 250, note, citing Harleian MS., No. 6972, fol. 39.

' G. Poulson, Beverlac : Antiquities and History of Beverley in Yorkshire, 1829, vol. ii., p. 524. " King Athel.stane,
in the thirteenth year of his reign, made and ordained the Church of Beverley collegiate." It was afterwards "spared
by William I., who bestowed lands upon the church, and confirmed its iirivileges" (Ibid., p. 14, citing a Latin MS. in
the library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, entitled " Do Abbatia Beverlaci ").

< Smith, English Gilds, p. 153. This Bull, which coiifirms the charter of an English craft guild, is given in its
entirety at the conclusion of this summary.

= Eymer, Fcedera (Record edition), vol i., p. 154.

« Sir W. Dugdale, History of St Paul's Cathedral, 1716, p. 14.

' Drake, Eboracum, p. 475. s j^^^ „ i)^,^,jnie_ Monasticon Anglicanum, vol. vi., p. 1178.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 25

Innocent IV. appears to have been a liberal dispenser of Papal favours. Marchese records
that an Indulgence was granted by this Pontiff to all those who would contribute to the
building of the church " di S. S. Giovanni e Paolo " at Venice ; ^ and a Bull of the same Pope
specified that " those who undertook the Crusade, or contributed to the relief of the Holy-
Land, were to have the benefit of their Indulgence extended proportionahly to the value of their
money." ^

The privileges and possessions of the Monastery of Glastonbury were confirmed by no less
than six Popes between the beginning of the twelfth and the close of the thirteenth century —
by Calixtus, Innocent, and Lucius (1119-1145), each the Second, and by Alexander, Honorius,
and Nicholas (1159-1280), each the Third, of their respective names.^ For fuller information
resjDecting the class of document we have been considering, I must refer the reader to the
works already quoted from, and to those below noted,* and shall next proceed to give some
examples of Indulgences granted by English prelates.

These are very numerous, and appear in the varied form of Indulgences, Confirmations, and
Letters Hortatory. Por the most part, they granted a commutation of forty days' penance, and
were generally issued in aid of the construction or the repair of an ecclesiastical edifice.

Thus in 1137 the Cathedral of St Peter at York having been destroyed by fire, an
Indulgence was granted soon after by Joceline, Bishop of Sarum, setting forth, that " whereas
the metropolitical Church of York was consumed by a new fire, and almost subverted,
destroyed, and miserably spoiled of its ornaments, therefore to such as bountifully contributed
towards the re-edification of it, he released to them forty days of penance injoyued." ^

The work, however, must have languished, as there were similar Indulgences published by
Bishop Walter Grey in 1227, and by Archbishops William de Melton in 1320, and Thoreseby
at a still later period."

In 124-4 an Indulgence of forty days was granted by the Archbishop of Canterbury to such
as should give their aid " to the new and wonderful structure of the church of Sarum, which
now begins to rise, and cannot be completed with the same grandeur without the assistance
of the faithful." '

The earliest Indulgence in aid of the sustentation of St Paul's Cathedral was granted by
Hugh Foliot, Bishop of Hereford, in 1228, and the last — if we except one sent from Simon, a
cardinal of Piome, affording " C. Days release " in 1371 — by Eoger, Bishop of Salisbury,
in 131G.8

Between 1228 and 131G, the number of Indulgences, confirmations of Indulgences, and

' Vincenzo Marchese, Lives of the most Eminent Painters, Sculptors, ami Architects of the Order of St Dominic,
translated by the Rev. C. P. Meehan, 1852, p. 73, citing " Bullarium Ord. Praid.," vol. i., p. 166.
' Collier, Ecclesiastical History of Great Britain, 1840, vol. ii., p. 535.

• Diigdalc, Monasticon Anglicanum, 1830, vol. i., p. 36.

* For three letters of Pope Gregory X., confirming the privileges of sundry Scottish churches (1274-75), and an
Indulgence granted by Nicholas V. in recognition of the labours and expenses of William, Bishop of Glasgow (1451), see
W. Hamilton, Description of the Sheriffdoms of Lanark and Renfrew, 1831, pp. 176, 178, 198 (Maitland Club, Glasgow).
Many Bulls of Innocent III. (1198-1216) are given in the first volume of Rymer's " Fcedcra," and forty-ono instruments
of this class, granted by his immediate successors, Honorius III. (1216-27) and Gregory IX. (1227-41), will be found
collected in "Royal Letters, lemii. Henry III.," 1862, vol. i., Ajipcndix V. (Chronicles of Great Biitaiu, Rolls Series).

' Drake, Eboracum, p. 473. ' Ibid., p. 475. ' Dodsworth, loc. cit.

"Sir W. Dugdale, History of St Paul's Cathedral, 1716, pp. 12, 13.
VOL. II. D

26 . EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

Letters Hortatory granted " to all those, as being truly sorry for their sins, and confess'd, should
afford their helps to this pious work," was very great.

In 1240 an Indulgence was procured — from whom it is not said — by Roger, surnamed
Niger, then Bishop of London, of forty days' pardon to all such as come with devotion to the
Cathedral.1

In 1244 — Eoger having been canonized in the interim — the Indulgence was, by Walter,
Bishop of Norwich, made to extend " to those who should either for devotion's sake visit the
tomb of the saint, or give assistance to the magnificent fabrick."^

From this date scarcely a year passed without similar favours having been held out, in order
"to stir up the people to liberal contributions;" and Dugdale mentions "another letter
Hortatory" having been issued by John, Archbishop of Canterbury, in 1281, "affording the
same number of days for Indulgence as the other Bishops had done." In this letter, as well
as in those of similar tenor from the Bishops of Hereford (1276) and Norfolk (1283), the
Indulgence is expressly granted, " for the old and new work." " Nay," says Dugdale, " not
only the contributors to this glorious structure were thus favoured, but the solicitors for
contributions, and the very mcchanicks themselves who laboured therein." ^

The confirmation of an English craft guild by Pope Lucius III. has been already noticed,
and will now be more closely examined. As a ratification by the Pope of municipal privileges,
already confirmed by an English king, it is sui generis — at least so far as my researches have
extended, yet the absence of further documentary evidence of a like character by no means
warrants the conclusion, that the men of Beverley were exceptionally favoured by the Eoman
Pontiff. It is but natural to suppose that the crafts, as well as the guilds and fraternities, in
those early days, must have regarded the confirmation of their privileges by the Pope, as
consolidating their liberties and cementing their independence. Nor will the silence on this
point, of our antiquaries or of local historians, militate against such an hypothesis. The
confirmation of Pope Lucius was apparently unknown to the compilers of Eymer's " Ecedera," *
and Poulson's " Beverlac," ® although the charter of Archbishop Thurstan is given in both
these works, and a copy of it was only discovered amid the neglected rolls in the Eecord ofQce,
through the careful search of the late Mr Toulmin Smith.^ " Amongst the few returns," says
this diligent investigator, " remaining in the Eecord office of those that were made under the
Writ of Eichard 11.' from the craft guilds, is one from the ' Great Guild of St John of Beverley
of the Hanshouse.' " It gives some interesting charters, the earliest of which is expressed to
be from Thurstan, Archbishop of Yoric, to the men of Beverley, granting " all liberties, with

1 Sir W. Dugdale, History of St Paul's Cathedral, 1716, pp. 12, 13. » Ihid.

" Hid. No less than twenty-five Indulgences — generally of forty days' release from penance— were granted between
1239 and 1288, to the single Priory of Finchdale. See Charters of the Priory of Finchdale, 1837, pp. 169-191 (Publica-
tions of the Sartees Society) ; and Chronicles and Memorials of Great Britain during the lliddle Ages, Rolls Series,
Annales Monastici, vol. iv., 1869, p. 414.

« Record edition, 1816, vol. i., p. 10.

° Vol. i., p. 51. It is also worthy of observation that the Letters-patent of Richard II. are not set forth in this
elaborate and interesting work.

« English Gilds, p. 150.

' Ante, Chap. VII., p, 347. " Of the returns made under the 'V\>it [of Richard II.]," saj'S Mr Tonlrain Smith, " a
more complete and characteristic example, or one more historically valuable, could not be given than the return from
Poverley " (English Gilds, p. 150).

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 27

tlie same laws that the men of York have in that city." ^ This charter is followed by another,
granted by Archbishop ^Yilliam, the successor of Thurstan, confirming, though in different
words, the substance of the former charter, and granting free burgage to the town and
burgesses, and that they shall have a guild merchant, and the right of holding pleas among
themselves, the same as possessed by the men of York.

Then follows a confirmation of the charters of the two Arclibishops by Pope Lucius III. in
words of which the following is a translation : —

" Lucius, Bishop, servant of the servants of God, to his beloved children, the men of
Beverley, Greeting and Apostolic Benediction. The charge which we have undertaken moves
us to listen, and readily to yield, to the right wishes of those who ask ; and our well known
kindness urges us to do so. And because we make the Eedeemer of all men propitious to us
when we give careful heed to the just demands of the faithful in Christ, therefore, beloved
children in the Lord, giving ready assent to what you ask, your Liberties, and the free customs
wliich Thurstan and William of happy memory, Archbishops of York, are known to have
piously and lawfully granted to you, as is found in authentic writings made by them, which
have been confirmed by our dearest son in Christ, Henry, the illustrious king of the English,
We do, by our apostolic authority, confirm ; and by the help of this present writing, we do
strengthen : decreeing that no man shall disregard this our confirmation, or be so rashly bold
as to do aught against it. And if any one dares to do this, let him know that he will bring
down on himself the wrath of Almighty God, and of the blessed Peter and Paul, Apostles.
Dated, xiij. Kalends of September [20th August]."-

In Beverley there was also a guild of Corpus Christi, the main object of which was, as in
York, to have a yearly procession of pageants. It was like the York guild, made up of both
clergy and laity. The ordinances begin by stating that the " solemnity and service " of Corpus
Christi were begun, as a new thing, by command of Pope Urban IV. and John XXII.^

It has been already shown, that many circumstances combine to render the era of
Henry III. especially memorable as a period when the ascendant of the Pope was at its
zenith in these islands. Henry has been termed " the first monarch of England who paid
attention to the Arts," and to his munificence are ascribed the most beautiful works of the
niediceval age which we possess.* If, then, we consider the partiality of Henry III. for
foreigners, the constant communication with Piome, and that so large a portion of the English
benefices were held at that period by Italians, it may be fairly assumed, that these circumstances
must have materially influenced the employment in England of the artists of southern Europe.

1 Smith, English GilJs, p. 151 ; Rymcr, Fa'dera, 1816, vol. i., p. 10 ; Poulson, Beverlac : Antiquities and History of
Beverley in Yorkshire, 1829, vol. i., p. 51. Thurstan was chosen Andihishop of York a.d. 1114, and died 1139. In the
chronological index to Pymer, this charter is said to have been granted a.d. 1132.

^ Smith, English Gilds, p. 153. No year is given, but the Lucius who made this charter must have been the third
of that name ; for Henry, " rex Anglorum," is spoken of as if then living, and this can only refer to Henry IT., whose
reign began in 1154, and ended in 1189. Lucius the Second died in 1145.

2 Ibid., p. 154. " It is usually stated that Urban, alone, founded this celebration. He was Pope from August 1261
to October 1264. John was Pope from August 1316 to December 1334 " (Ibid.). " Anno 1481, Sept. IS. There was an
Indulgence of forty days granted to all who should contribute their charity tow.ards the relief and sustentation of the
fraternity or guild of Corpus Christi, ordained and founded in the city of York " (Drake, Eboracum, p. 24G).

* Sir R. Wostmacott, Observations on the Progress of the Art of Sculpture in England in Medioeval Times (Archa;o-
logicalJoumal, vol. iii., 1846, p. 198).

28 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

Whetlier or not the opinion expressed by Diigdale was the result of his own inductions, or
a mere einljodiment of the prevalent belief — narrated to him in good faith during one of his
visitations — is indeterminable, and in a sense, immaterial, that is to say, up to this point
of the inquiry, though in the observations that follow, the possibility of the latter hypothesis
will alone be considered.

From the point of view, therefore, that Dugdale, in his various heraldic visitations and
perambulations of counties, may, and in all probability did, become conversant with many
old customs akin to those described by Dr Plot as existing in the moorlands of Stafford-
shire, it is desirable to examine upon what foundations the belief he notices could have
been erected. The history of the Papacy, at a period synchronizing with the reign of
Henry III. of England, affords the information we seek.

The great religious event of the Pontificate of Innocent III.,^ the foundation of the
]\Iendicant Orders, perhaps perpetuated, or at least immeasurably strengthened, the Papal
power for two centuries. Almost simultaneously, without concert, in different countries,
arose two men wonderfully adapted to arrest and avert the danger which threatened the whole
hierarchal system.^ These were the fiery Spaniard, St Dominic, styled " the burner and slayer
of heretics," and the meek Italian, St Francis of Assisi, called by Dante " the splendour of
cherubic light." They were the founders of the Dominican and the Franciscan Orders, which'
sprang suddenly to Life at the opening of the thirteenth century, and whose aim it was to
bring the world back within the pale of the Church.

The followers of St Francis were formed into an Order, with the reluctant assent of Pope
Innocent III. in 1210, and the Dominicans were similarly established in 1215. Both bodies
were confirmed by a Bull of Honorius III. in 1223, and the partiality shown towards them by
the Popes so increased the number of Mendicant Orders that, in the Second Council of Lyons
(a.d. 1274), it was thought necessary to confine the institution to the Dominicans, the
Franciscans, the Carmelites, and the Augustinians, or Hermits of St Augustin.^ The members
of these four orders were called friars, in contradistinction to the Benedictine Monks and the
Augustine Canons. Each of these mendicant bodies had its General.

The reputation of the friars arose quickly to an amazing height. The Popes, among other
extraordinary privileges, allowed them the liberty of travelling wherever they pleased, of
conversing with people of all ranks, of instructing the youth and the people in general, and of
hearing confessions without reserve or restriction.* On the whole, two of these mendicant
institutions — the Dominicans and the Franciscans — for the space of near three centuries,

' Innocent was elected Pope 1198, laid England under an interdict 1208, declared John deposed 1212, received his
Bubmission 1213, and died 1216. Henry III. became King in 1216, and died 1272.

' Milman, History of Latin Christianity, 1864, pp. 8, 60 ; Green, History of the English People, vol. i., p. 255.

3 The Franciscans, called by their founder Pmtercali, or Fratres'Minores {MiaoT Friars), received in England the
name of Grey Friars, from the colour of their habit. The Dominicans, at first termed PreacJdng Friars, v/ere aftenvards
styled Major Friars, in contradistinction to the Franciscans, and in England Black Friars. The Carmelites were
the TVTiite Friars. The Augustinians, of which body Martin Luther was a member, were the Austin. Friars.

* Horace Walpole says : " The friars, frcres, or brothers, united priesthood with monachism ; but while the monks
were chiefly confined to their respective houses, the friars were wandering about as preachers and confessora. This gave
great offence to the secular clergy, who were thus deprived of profits and inheritances. Hence the satyric and impure
figures of friars and nuns in our old churches" (Walpoliana, vol. i., No. IX.). Cf. Ante, chaps. III., p. 166, and VI.,
p. 306.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 29

appear to have governed the European Church and State with an absolute and universal sway.
Mosheira says, " what the Jesuits were, after the reformation of Luther began, the same were
the Dominicans and Franciscans from the thirteenth century to the times of Luther — the soul
of the whole Church and State, and the projectors and executors of all the enterprises of any
moment." ^ They filled, during this period, the most eminent, civil, and ecclesiastical stations,
for although both Dominic and Francis had intended that their followers should eschew
ecclesiastical dignities,^ we find, before the end of the century, many Franciscan and
Dominican Bishops, and even a Franciscan Pope.^ The two Orders grew with wonderful
rapidity, and in the middle of the thirteenth century the Franciscans possessed about 8000
convents and nearly 200,000 monks. They gi-adually forsook their early austerity, gathered
riches, established a gorgeous ritual, and made their chief seat, Assisi, a centre of Christian art.
From the name of their Church in this town, " Portiunicula," arose the phrase Portiunimda
Iiulidgmce, from the frequency with which indulgences were granted to, and disseminated by,
this order.*

As with the followers of St Francis, so with those of St Dominic. The extreme plainness
which was at first affected in the dwellings and churches of the two Orders was soon
superseded by an almost royal splendour of architecture and decoration. They had ample
buildings and princely houses.^

The foundation in Italy of the Franciscan and the Dominican Orders coincides strangely
enough, as is pointed out by Marchese, with the period when architecture underwent a chancre,
and " the imitation of the antique was abandoned for the Gothic," or, as he prefers to term it,
"the Teutonic style." ^ The same writer observes, "that religious enthusiasm, which was
kindled in the hearts not only of the Italian people but in those of the Ultramontanes also, is
very discernible in the vast number of edifices which in those days arose, as it were, by
enchantment in the cities, hamlets, and rural districts of Spain and Italy." ^ In 1223
Fra Giovanni, a Dominican of Bologna, appealed to the people of Eeggio for means to enable
him to erect a convent and church of his Order there. Then was repeated what was witnessed
a few centuries before, when the Benedictines commenced the erection of their church at Dive.
Men, women, and children — noble and plebeian — absolutely carried the materials for the sacred
edifice, which, under the direction of a certain Fra Jacopino of the same Order, was finished

' Mosheim, Institutes of Ecclesiastical History, Ancient and Modern, 1S63, vol. ii., p. 194.

'Acta Sanctorum, Ang. 4, p. 487. Lists of the Kings and Nobles of the Order, of the "Generals," and of the
Provincial Heads in England, are given in the "Monumenta Franciscana," vol. i.,pp. 534-541 (Chronicles of Great Britain
and Ireland, Rolls Series). The fact that royal personages obtained admission into the ranks of the Grey Friars is
consistent with the analogy sought to be established in the text, and may have given rise to that portion of the masonic
tradition, which declares that " kings have not disdain'd to enter themselves into this society " ! Popes Nicholas IV.
(1288-92) and Sixtus IV. (1471-84) are numbered amongst the "Generals" of the Franciscans.

• Eobertson, History of the Christian Church, 1866, vol. iii., p. 592.

* Dr Milner saj-s : " The friars intruded themselves into the dioceses and churches of the bishops and the clergy,
and, by the sale of Induhjenccs, and a great variety of scandalous exactions, perverted whatever of good order and
discipline remained in the Church " (History of the Cliurch of Christ, 1847, vol. iii., p. 170).

° Robertson, loc. cil. ; Milner, History of the Churcli of Christ, voh iii., p. 157.
' Cf. Milman, History of Latin Christianity, vol. vi., p. 587.

' Marchese, Lives of the most Eminent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects of the Order of St Dominic, translated
by the Rev. C. P. Meehan, 1852, pp, 8, 30.

30 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

in the brief term of three years.i "This zeal for church-building," says Marchese, " required
a great number of architects, stonemasons, engineers, and other persons competent to superintend
the works, and the new Orders, on this account, received many skilful persons into their ranks."
According to the Abbb Bourassfe,^ the architects of the Dominicans followed one style,
whilst those^of the Franciscans adopted another, but he neither discloses the source whence
he derived his information, nor specifies what constituted the styles peculiar to the respective
Orders. In the opinion, however, of Marchese, the Franciscans, who, in the magnificence of
their temples, very often equal, and indeed surpass, every other Order, " either for want of
architects, or being desirous to avaU themselves of extern talent, neither in the thirteenth
nor fourteenth century employed any architect of their oivn body to erect any edifice of
importance." 2 This writer suggests therefore that as the Dominicans commonly had architects*
in their communities, it is likely that the Franciscans must have had recourse to some member
of the rival brotherhood.

The Black Friars of St Dominic made their appearance in England in 1221, and the Grey
Friars of St Francis in 1224; both were received with the same delight.* "At London," says
Mr Green, "they settled in the shambles of Newgate; at Oxford they made then- way to the
swampy ground between its waUs and the stream of Thames. ZTwfe of mud and timber, as mean
as the huts around them, rose within the rough fence and ditch that bounded the Friary." «
In London the first residence of the Franciscans was in " Stynkinge Lane," in the parish of
St Nicholas in MaceUo, but ere long, grant after grant was made of houses, lands, and
messuages in the same quarter, and in the reign of Edward I. they possessed a noble church—
300 feet long, 95 wide, and 64 high— with pillars of marble.'

At Oxford, in 1245, the Grey Friars enlarged their boundaries, and began to build new
houses, whilst the Black Friars left their house in the Jewry and entered a new dwelling by
the great bridge.^

Within thirty years after the arrival of the Grey Friars in England theii' numbers, in this
country alone, amounted to 1242; they counted forty-nine convents in different localities.
With equal rapidity they passed into Ireland and Scotland, where they were received with
the same favour, thus presenting an instance of religious organisation and propagandism
unexampled in the annals of the world."

1 Marchese, Lives of tlie most Eminent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects of the Order of St Dominic, translated
hy the Eev. C. P. Meehan, 1852, p. 31. During the erection of the Church of St Peter at Dive, the monk Aimone
wrote to his brethren of the Abbey of Tutbury in England thus : " It is truly an astonishing sight to behold men who
boast of their high lineage and wealth, yoking themselves to cars, drawing stones, Hme, wood, and all the materials
necessary for the construction of the sacred edifice. Sometimes a thousand persons, men and women, are yoked to the
same car, so great is the burden; and yet the profoundest silence prevails" (Comte de Caumont, Histoire Sommaire de
I'Architecture Religieuse, Militaire et CivUe au Moyen Age, chap, viii., p. 176). Cf. Muratori, Italicarum Eerum
Scriptores, vol. inii., p. 1007 ; Parentalia, p. 306 ; Levasseur, Histoire des Classes Ouvritres en France, voL i., p. 326 ;
and ante. Chaps. IV., p. 197, and V., p. 258.

« Marchese, vol. i., p. 73. ' ■^'"''^•

♦ Of the Dominicans, Marchese observes : " In truth, no other Order has reared a grander or more numerous body
of painters, architects, painters of glass, intarsiatori, and miniaturists " (Preface, p. xxviii.).
5 Green, History of the English People, p. 256. ' ■'i''^-

' Milman, History of Latin Christianity, 1864, vol. vi., p. 44.

8 Chronicles and Memorials of Great Britain and Ireland during the Middle Ages, Rolls Series, Annales Monastic!,
vol. iv., 1869, pp. 93, 94.

» Monuraenta Franciscana, Charters and Memorials of Great Britain and Ireland, Eolls Series, vol. i. ,1858, Preface, p. xli

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 31

In 1234 John, Abbot of Osney, became a Franciscan, and in 1246 Walter Mauclerc,
Bishop of Carlisle, assumed the habit of the Dominicans.^ A general chapter of the Franciscans
was held at Worcester in 1260, and of the Dominicans, at Oxford, in 1280 ; Edward I. being
present at the latter.-

The Dominicans, who ceased to be Mendicants in 1425, held wealthier benefices than were
possessed by any other Order. At the period of the dissolution of monasteries there existed
in England fifty-eight houses of this Order, and sixt^'-six of the Grey Friars.^ The most learned
scholars in the University of Oxford at the close of the thirteenth century were Franciscan
Friars, and long after this period the Grey Friars appear to have been the sole support and
ornament of that university.* Eepeated applications were made from Ireland, Denmark,
France, and Germany, for English friars.^

The " History of the Friars " is alike remarkable, from whatever point of view it may be
regarded, and, as the editor of the " Monumenta Franciscana " has well observed, deserves the
most careful study, not only for its own sake, as illustrating the development of the intellect of
Europe previous to the Eeformation, but as the link which connects modern with medifeval
times.'^ The three schoolmen, of the most profound and original genius, Eoger Bacon, Duns
Scotus, and Occham, were English friars. On the Continent the two Orders produced, in
Italy, Thomas Aquinas, author of the " Summa Theologiae," and Bonaventura ; in Germany,
Albertus Magnus — said by some writers to have invented Gothic architecture, revived the
symbolic language of the ancients, and given new laws to the Freemasons ; '' and in Spain,
Eaymund Lully, to whose chemical inquiries justice has not yet been done, and who, whilst his
travels and labours in three-quarters of the globe are forgotten, is chiefly recollected as a
student of alchemy and magic, in which capacity, indeed, he is made to figure as an early Free-
mason, by a few learned persons, who find the origin of the present Society in the teachings of
the hermetic philosophers.

No effort of the imagination is required to bring the rise and development of the Men-
dicant Orders into harmony with the floating traditions from which either Dugdale or Wren —
even if we assume the latter to have formed the opinion ascribed to him at least a century
before it was recorded by his son — may have formulated their accounts of the origin of Free-
masonry. The history, moreover, of the Franciscan and Dominican Orders seems to lend itself
to the hypothesis of Ashmole, as related by Dr Campbell, on the authority of Dr Knipe —
"Such a Bull there was," i.e., a Bull incorporating the Society in the reign of Henry III. —
" but this Bull, in the opinion of the learned JMr Ashmole, was confirmative only, and did not
by any means create our fraternity, or even establish them in this kingdom." ^ The Dominican
Order, as we have already seen, was confirrned by a Bull of Honorius III. in 1223,^ but it had

' Chronicles and Memorials of Great Britain and Ireland during the Middle Ages, Rolls Series, Annales Monastic!,
vol. iv., 1S69, pp. 82, 94.
» Hid., pp. 284, iM.
' Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicanura, ed. 1830, vol. vi., pp. 1482, 1602.

* Walton, History of English Poetry, ed. 1840, vol. ii., p. 89.

' Monumenta Franciscana, vol. i., pp. 93, 354, 365, 379. " Preface, p. lix.

' Heideloff, Bauhiitte dcs Mittelalters, p. 15 ; Winzer, Die Deutschen Brudcrschaften, p. 54 : Findel, History of
Freemasonry, p. 59.

8 Biographia Britannica, 1747, tit. Ashmole, ante, p. 16.

• Heldman says: "In the time of Henry III., the English masons were protected by a Bull of (probably)
Honoriua III." (Die drei Aeltesten Geschichtlichen Denkmale, p. 842).

32 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

planted an offshoot in England two years previously. I shall not contend that the speculative
theology of the schoolmen has exercised any direct influence upon the speculative masonry of
which we are in possession. Such a supposition, however curious and entertaining, lies outside
the boundaries of this discussion,^ yet the fact that Eoger Bacon, a Franciscan, Albertus
Magnus and Eaymond Lully, Dominicans, have been claimed in recent times as members of
the craft,^ should not be lost sight of, it being, to say the least, quite as credible that the persons
from whom Dugdale derived his information, may have been influenced by the general history
of the chief Mendicant Orders, as that writers of two centuries later should have found in
certain individual friars the precursors of our modern Freemasons.

The coincidences to which I shall ne.xt direct attention are of unequal value. Some are of
an important character, whilst others will carry little weight. But, unitedly, they constitute
a body of evidence, which, in my judgment, fairly warrants the conclusion, that the idea of
travelling masons having been granted privileges by the Popes germinated in the history of the
Franciscan and Dominican Orders.

These friars were Italians — among them were many architects — commingled with French,
GermoMs, Flemings, and others.^ They procured Papal Bulls for their encouragement, and par-
ticular privileges ; they travelled all over Europe, and built churches ; their government was
regular, and, where they fixed near the building in hand, they made a camp of huts. A General *
governed in chief. The people of the neighbourhood, either out of charity or commutation of
penance, gave the materials and carriage.

In the preceding paragraph I have closely paraphrased the statement in the " Parentalia "
as being the fullest of the series, though, if we turn to that of Dugdale, as being the original
from which the opinions of Ashmole and Wren were derived, the same inference will be
deducible.

Connected in men's minds, as the Freemasons were, with the erection of churches and
cathedrals, the portion of the tradition which places their origin in these travelling bodies of
Italians, is not only what we might expect to meet with, but it possesses what, without doing
violence to language, may be termed some foundation in fact.^ For the earliest masons we must
search the records of the earliest builders, and whilst, therefore, it is clear that this class
of workmen had been extensively employed by the Benedictines, the Cistercians, and the

^ Of St Francis, Mr Brewer observes : ' ' Unlike other and earlier founders of religious orders, the requisites for
admission into his fraternity point to the better educated, not to the lower classes. ' He shall be whole of body and
prompt of mind ; not in debt ; not a bondsman bom; not unlawfully begotten ; of good name and fame, and competently
learned'" (Monumenta Franciscana, Preface, p. xxviii.).

* See the Masonic Encyclopaedias ; and observations on the Kusicrucians, jiost.

^ Of. The statements attributed to Dugdale, Ashmole, and Wren, ante. Chaps. VI., p. 258, and XII., pp. 6, 17.

* The General of the Franciscans was elected by the Provincials and Wardens in the chapter of Pentecost, hold
every third year, or a longer or a shorter term as the General thought fit. He was removable for insufiiciency. A general
chapter of the Dominicans was held yearly (Fosbroke, British Monachism, 1802, vol. iT, p. 72 et seq.).

^ Attention is pointedly directed by Marchese to the numerous ecclesiastical structures erected in the thirteenth
century, not only in Italy, but in France, Germany, England, and Belgium, who cites, ivier alia, the basilica of S.
Francesco di Assisi, a.d. 1228 ; the duomo of Florence, 1298 ; that of Orvieto, 1290 ; S. Antonio di Padova, 1231 ; the
Campo Santo di Pisa, 1278 ; S. Maria Novella in Florence, 1279 ; S. Croce, built in 1294 ; to which period also belong
SS. Giovanni and Paolo, and the Church of the Frari in Venice. Outside Italy, he names the cathedrals of Cologne,
Beauvais Chartres, Kheims, Amiens, Brussels, York, Salisbury, Westminster, Burgos, and Toledo, as all belonging to
i\\& first half of the thii'teenth century (Lives of the most Eminent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects of the Order of
St Dominie, 1852, Preface, p. xxv.).

: J DURABLE THE EARL OF ZETLAND

-VINCIAL GRAND MASTER OF YORK.

r NOKTH AND KAST pir.JNr.Bl

ThoDiAa C t'AcI',

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 33

Carthusians, all of which had a footing in England long before the era of the Franciscans and
Dominicans ; on the other hand, the latter Orders can fairly claim to rank as links in the
chain, by which, if at all, the Freemasons of the jNIiddle Ages can be connected with their
congeners, the actual constructors of those marvels of operative skill, the temples, of a more
remote antiquity.

Dugdale, Ashmole, and Wren very probably derived their information much in the same
manner as their several opinions have been passed on to later ages. Somebody must have told
Dugdale what Aubrey's pen has recorded, it matters not who, and whether a mason or otherwise
is equally immaterial. The members of a secret society are rarely conversant with its origin
and history, and unless the Freemasons of the sixteenth century were addicted to the study of
Masonic antiquities, in a degree far surpassing the practice of their living descendants — of whom
not one in a hundred advances beyond a smattering of ritual and ceremonial — they could have
had little or nothing to communicate beyond tlie tradition as it has come down to us.

I conceive that about the middle of the sixteenth century certain leading incidents in the
history of the Friars had become blended with the traditionary history of the Freemasons, and
I think it not improbable that the " letters of fraternity," ^ common in the thirteenth century —
as well as before and after — of which those of the Friars had a peculiar sanctity ,2 may have
potently assisted in implanting the idea, of the Irothcrhood of Freemasons having received Papal
favours through the medium of the Italians, who were travelling over Europe and building
churches. Colour is lent to this supposition by the fact, already noticed, that in 1387 "a
certain Friar preacher^ Brother William Bartone by name, gave security to three journeymen
cordwainers of London, that he would make suit in Rome for a confirmation of their fraternity
by the Pope." * If this view of the case be accepted, the Dugdale-Aubrey derivation of the
Freemasons from certain wandering Italians would be sufficiently explained.

Although, in the opinion of some respectable authorities, the only solution of the problem
vmder consideration is to be found in the Papal Writings,^ of which at various times the
Steinmetzen were the recipients, it appears to me, that the supporters of this view have failed
to realise the substantial difficulties of making out their case, or the lengths to which they
must go, in order to even plausibly sustain the theory they have set up. In the first place,
the belief in Papal BuUs having been granted to the Freemasons, is an English and not a
German tradition. Secondly, the privileges claimed for the Steinmetzen rest upon two distinct
sources of authority — one set, the confirmations of Popes Alexander VI. and Leo X. in 1502

' " Tliere were ' letters of fraternity ' of various kinds. Lay people of all sorts, men and women, married and single,
desired to be enrolled in spiritual fraternities, as thereby enjoying the spirituall prerogatives of pardon, indulgence, and
speedy despatch out of purgatory " (Fosbroke, British Monachism, 1802, vol. iL, p. 53, citing Smith, Lives of the
Berkeley Family, MS. iii., 443).

- Piers Plowman, speaking of the day of judgment, says :
"A poke full of pardon, ne provincial letters
Though ye be founden in the fraternitie of the iiii. orders " (fol. xxxviii. h.).

' The origin of this term, as applied to distinguish a member of the Dominican Order, is thus e.^cplained by Fosbroke :
" When the Pope was going to write to Dominick on business, he said to the notary, ' Write to Master Dominick and
the preaching brethren ; ' and from that time they began to be called the Friars Preachers " (British Monachism, vol. ii.,
p. 40, citing Jansenius, Vita Dominici, 1. i., c. vi., p. 44).

* Riley, Memorials of London, p. 495 ; ante, Cbap. VIL, p. 370.

° I.e., Bulls, Briefs, Charters, Confirmations, Indulgences, Letters — in a word, every possible written instrument by
which the will of the Supreme Pontiff was proclaimed to the laity.
VOL. II. E

34 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

and 1517, are supported by credible tradition; the other set, the Indidgcnccs'^ extending from
the time of Nicholas III. to that of Benedict XII. (1277-1334), repose on no other foundation
than unverified assertion.

Now, in order to show that Dugdale's statement to Aubrey was based on the Papal con-
firmations of 1502 and 1517, proof must be forthcoming, that the first antiquary of his age not
only recognised the Steinmetzen as the parents, or at least as the precursors, of the Freemasons,
but that he styled the former Italians, and made a trifling mistake of three centuries in his
chronology ! True, the anachronism disappears if we admit the possibility of his having been
influenced by the legendary documents of earlier date (1277-1334) — though, as a matter of fact,
since the masons of southern Germany only formed themselves into a brotherhood in 1459, no
Papal writing of earlier date can have been sent to them — but the error as to nationality
remains, and under both suppositions, even adding the Indulgence of Cologne^ (1248), it is
impossible to get over the circumstance, that Dugdale speaks of a Society or hody of men who
were to travel over Europe and build churches. The Steinmetzen, indeed, built churches, but
the system of travelling — which, by the way, only became obligatory in the sixteenth century ^
— was peculiar to iihe journeymen of that association, and did not affect the masters, to whom,
in preference to their subordinates, we must suppose the Pope's mandate to travel and erect
churches, -would have been addressed.

Except on the broad principle, that "an honest man and of good judgment, beHeveth still
what is told to him, and that which he finds written," I am at a loss to understand how the
glosses of the Germans have been so readily adopted by English writers of reputation.*

The suggestion of Dr Kloss, that the tradition of the " Bulls " was fabricated for the
purpose of adorning the " legend of the guilds," and fathered upon Ashmole and Wren — on the
face of it a very hasty induction from imperfect data — may be disposed of in a few words.

Kloss evidently had in his mind Dr Anderson's "Constitutions" of 1723 and 1738, the
" Memoir " of Ashmole in the " Biographia Britannica," 1747, and Wren's opinion, as related
in the " Parentalia," 1750. The "Guild" theory, as it has since been termed, was first
broached in the publications of Dr Anderson, by whom no doubt the legends of the craft were
" embellished," somewhat, in the process of conversion into a simple traditionary history. Still,
in the conjecture that the story of the " Bulls " was prompted by, and in a measure grew out of,
the uncritical statements in the " Constitutions," his commentator has gone far astray, as this
tradition has come down on unimpeachable authority from 1686, and probably dates from the
first half of the seventeenth century. From the works already cited, of 1747 and 1750 respec-
tively, Kloss no doubt believed that the opinions of Ashmole and Wren acquired publicity,
and as the earlier conception of Sir WiUiam Dugdale was then entombed in MS., the conclu-
sions he drew were less fanciful than may at first sight appear. The statement attributed to
Wren can claim no higher antiquity, as printed matter, than 1750 ; and though the opinion of
Ashmole appears to have first seen the light in 1719, Preston, in his quotation from Dr

' Ante, Chaps. III., p. 176, and XII., p. 18. = Ante, Chap. III., p. 177.

8 Brentano, On the History and Development of Gihis, p. 89.

* Mr Papworth says : " From a comparison of the circumstances, Dugdale's information most probably referred to
the " Letters of Indulgence " of Pope Nicholas III. in 1278, and to others by his successors, as hate as the fourteenth
century, granted to the lodge of masons working at Strasbourg Cathedral " (Transactions, Koyal Institute of British
Architects, Deo. 2, 1862).

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 35

Eawlinson's memoir of that antiquary, prefixed to the " Antiquities of Berkshire," published
in 1719, not only omits the passage relating to the origin of the Freemasons, but deprives
the excerpt he presents of any apparent authority, by introducing it as a mere statement by
" the writer of Mr Ashmole's life, who was not a mason." ^

The tradition we have examined forms one of the many historical problems, for the com-
plete solution of which no sufficient materials exist. Yet as no probability is too faint, no
conjecture too bold, or no etymology too uncertain, to escape the credulity of an antiquarian
in search of evidence to support a masonic theory ; writers of this class, by aid of strained and
fanciful analogies, have built up some strange and incredible hypotheses, for which there
is no manner of foundation either in history or probability. "Quod volumus, facile
credimus:" whatever accords with our theories is beheved without due examination. It is
far easier to believe than to be scientifically instructed ; we see a little, imagine a good deal,
and so jump to a conclusion.

Eeturning from the dissertation into which I have been led by the statement in the
" Parentalia," the next evidence in point of time bearing on Wren's membership of the
Society, is contained in a letter written July 12, 1757, by Dr Thomas Manningham, a
former Deputy Grand Master (1752-56) of the earUer or constitutional Grand Lodge of
England, in reply to inquiries respecting the validity of certain additional degrees which
had been imported into Holland. This document, found in the archives of the Grand
Lodge of the Netherlands in 1868, was shortly afterwards published by ]Mr S. H. Hertz-
veld of the Hague.2 The letter runs :— " These innovations are of very late years, and I
believe the brethren will find a difficulty to produce a mason acquainted with any such
forms, twenty, nay, ten years. My own father has been a mason these fifty years, and
has been at Lodges in Holland, France, and England. He knows none of these ceremonies.
Grand Master Payne, who succeeded Sir Christopher Wren, is a stranger to them, as is like-
wise one old brother of ninety, who I conversed with lately. This brother assures me
he was made a mason in his youth, and has constantly frequented lodges till rendered
incapable by his advanced age," etc.

" Here," says a valued correspondent,^ " are three old and active masons, who must have
been associated with Su: Christopher Wren, and known aU about his masonic standing,
with whom Dr Manningham was intimately associated, and who must have given him
correct information as to Wren, in case he had it not of his own knowledoe."

The genuineness of tlie Manningham letter has been disputed. On tliis point I shall
not touch. Where Hughan, Lyon, and Fiudel, are in accord, and the document has received
the " hall-mark " of their approval, 1 am unwilling on light gi-ounds to reject any evidence
deemed admissible by such excellent authorities.

Still, if we concede to the fuU the genuineness of the letter, the passage under examina-
tion will, on a closer view, be found to throw no light whatever upon the immediate
subject of our inquiry. The fact— if such it be— of Sir Eichard Manningham* (the father

' Illustrations of Masonry, 1792, p. 213.

= In the " VrijinetJelaars Yaarbookje," the parts referring to the above letter were kindly sent me by Mr IlertzvcKl.
The letter is ])rintea in cxlcnso by Findel, p. 315, and in the Freemasons' Magazine, vol. xxiv., p. 148.

^ Mr S. D. Nickerson, Secretary, Grand Lodge of Massachusetts.

* According to the register of Grand Lodge, Sir Kichard Mauniugham was a member of the lodge "at the Ilorne,"
Westminster, in 1723 and 1725.

36 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

of the writer) having been, in 1757, "fifty years" a member of the craft, and the assurance
of the "old brother of ninety," that he had been "made a mason in his youth," are
interesting, no doubt, as increasing the aggregate of testimony which bears in favour of the
masonic proceedings from 1717 onwards, having been continued without break from a much
earlier period. But with Wren, or the circumstances of his life, they have nothing to do.

The expression " Grand Master Payne, who succeeded Sir Christopher Wren, is a stranger
to them," is both inaccurate and misleading. In the first place, he did not succeed Wren, and
the statement, besides carrying its own condemnation, shows on the face of it, that it was
based on the " Constitutions " of 1738. Secondly, the word "is," as applied to Payne in July
1757, is singularly out of place, considering that he died in the previous January, indeed, it
seriously impairs the value of Dr Manningham's recollections in the other instances where he
permits himself the use of the present tense.

The memoir of Wren in the "Biographia Britannica" which appeared in 1763, was written
by Dr Nicolls, and merely deserves attention from its recording, without alteration or addition,
the items of masonic information contained in the two extracts from the " Parentalia," already
given. There are no further allusions to the Freemasons, nor is the subject of the memoir
represented to have been one of that body.

The fable of Wren's Grand Mastership — inserted by Anderson in the " Constitutions " of
1738 — was repeated, with but slight variation, in all subsequent issues of that publication to
which a history of masonry was prefixed.^ It was also adopted by the schismatic Grand Lodge
of 1753, as appears from the " Ahiman Eezon," or "Book of Constitutions," published by the
authority of that body in 1764. Laurence Dermott, the author or compiler of the first four
editions of this work ^ — and to whose force of character and administrative ability must be
attributed the success of the schism, and the triumph of its principles — agrees with Anderson
that Wren was Grand Master, and that he neglected the lodges, but endeavours " to do justice
to the memory of Sir Christopher by relating the real cause of such neglect." This he finds
in the circumstance of his dismissal from the office of surveyor general, and the appointment
of Mr Benson. " Such usage," he argxies, " added to Sir Christopher's great age, was more
than enough to make him decline all public assemblies ; and the master masons then in
London were so much disgusted at the treatment of their old and excellent Grand Master,
that they would not meet nor hold any communication under the sanction of his successor."
"In short," he continues, "the brethren were struck with a lethargy which seemed to
threaten the London Lodges with a final dissolution." ^

As Wren was not superseded by Benson until 1718, the year after the formation of the
Grand Lodge of England, at which latter period (1717) occurred the so-called "revival of
Masonry," the decay, if one there was, preceding and not succeeding that memorable event, we
need concern ourselves no further with Dermott's hypothesis, though I cite it in this place,

' The last of these appeared in 1781, and no later edition was published by the/j-s( Grand Lodge of England during
the remainder of its separate existence (1784-1813). After the union (1813) the historical portion was omitted.

' I.e., those of 1756, 1764, 1778, and 1787.

» Ahiman Eezon ; or, a Help to a Brother, 1764, p. xxiii. " The famous Sir Christopher Wren, Knight, Master of
Arts, formerly of Wadham College, Professor of Astronomy at Gresham and Oxford, Doctor of the Civil Law, President of
the Royal Society, Grand Master of the Most Anticnt and Honourable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, Architect
to the Crown, who built most of the churches in London, laid the first stone of the glr.rious Cathedral of St Paul, and
lived to finish it " {Ihid.).

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 37

becaiise the "Aliiman Eezou" has been regarded as a work of great authority, and its
very name has been appropriated by many Grand Lodges to designate their books of
Constitutions.

" The Compleat Freemason, or Multa Faucis for Lovers of Secrets," an anonymous work
published in 1764 or the previous year, has been followed in many details by Preston and
other writers of reputation.^ In this publication, the number of legendary Grand Masters is
vastly enlarged. Few Kings of England are excluded, the most noticeable being Pdchard I.
and James IL We are here told that " the King, with Grand Master Elvers, the Architects,
Craftsmen, Nobility, Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Bishops, levelled the Footstone of St Paul's
Cathedral in due Form, a.d. 1673." Also, that "in 1710, in the eighth year of the reign of
Queen Anne, our worthy Grand Master Wren, who had drawn the Design of St Paul's, had the
Honour to see it finished in a magnificent Taste, and to celebrate with the Fraternity, the Cape-
stone of so noble and large a Temple." We learn further, that masonry, which in the reign of
James II. " had been greatly obstructed, and no Lodges frequented but those in or near the
places where great works were carried on," after the accession of William and Mary (1689),^
" made now again a most brUliant appearance, and numbers of Lodges were formed in all parts
of London and the suburbs." Sir Christopher Wren, "by the approbation of the King from this
time forward, continued at the head of the Fraternity," but after the celebration of the cape-
stone in 1710, " our good old Grand Master Wren, being struck with Age and Infirmities, did,
from this time forward, [1710] retire from aU Manner of Business, and, on account of his
Disability, could no more attend the Lodges in visiting and regulating their Meetings as usual.
This occasioned the Number of regular Lodges to be greatly reduced ; but they regularly
assembled in Hopes of having again a noble Patron at their Head." ^

Preston, in his "Illustrations of Masonry,"* of which twelve editions were published
during his lifetime — the first in 1772, the last in 1812 — follows Anderson in his descrip-
tion of Wren's official acts as Grand Master, but adduces much new evidence bearing upon
Sir Christopher's general connection with the craft, which, if authentic, not only stamps
him as a Freemason, but also as an active member of the Lodge of Antiquity. Preston,
whose masonic career I shall at this stage only touch upon very briefly, having published the
first edition of his noted work in 1772, delivered a public course of lectures at the Mitre
Tavern in Fleet Street in 1774, and the 15th of June in the same year having attended the
" Lodge of Antiquity " as a visitor, the members of that lodge not only admitted him to
membership, but actually elected him master at the same meeting. According to his
biographer, Stephen Jones, "he had been a member of the Philanthropic Lodge at the
Queen's Head, Gray's Inn Gate, Holborn, above six years, and of several other lodges

' Multa Faucis has two important statements, which will be hereafter examined — one, that six lodges were present
at the "revival" in 1717 ; the other, that Lord Byron (17i7-52) neglected the duties of his office. The latter, copied
into the "Pocket Companions " and works of a like character, has been accepted by eminent German writers, and held
to account in some degree for the great schism by which the masons of England were, for more than half a century,
arrayed in hostile camps. See Kloss, Geschichte der Freimaurerei in England, Irland, uud SchotUand, 1818, p. 157 ;
and Findel, History of Freemasonry, p. 174.

- " Tlie King was soon after made a Free-Mason in a private Lodge ; and, as Koyal Grand Master, greatly ajiproved of
the choice of Grand Master Wren " (Multa Faucis, p. 78).

^ Ibid., pp. 75, 78, 81, 82.

* Styled by Findel, " one of the best and most extensively known works in the masonic literature of England."

38 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

before that time, but he was now taught to consider the importance of the office of the
first master iinder the English Constitution." ^ It will form part of our inquiry to examine
into the composition of this Lodge before Preston became a member, for although during
his mastership, which continued for some years, it made a great advance in reputation,
and in 1811 exceeded one hundred in number, including many members of both Houses of
Parliament, the brilliancy of its siibscqucnt career will not remove the doubts which suggest
themselves, when Preston recounts traditions of the lodge, which must have slumbered
through many generations of members, and are inconsistent and irreconcilable with its com-
paratively humble circumstances during whatever glimpses are afforded us of its early history.
Nor are our misgivings allayed by Preston's method of narration. Comparing the successive
editions of his work, we find such glaring discrepancies, that, unless we believe that his
information was acquired, as he imparts it, piecemeal, or, like Mahomet and Joseph Smith,
each fresh effort was preceded by a special revelation, we must refuse credence to statements
which are unsupported by authority, contradictory to all known testimony, and even incon-
sistent with each other.

The next edition of the " Illustrations " published after Preston's election to the chair of
the Lodge of Antiquity appeared in 1775, where, at p. 245, this Masonic body is referred to as
"the old Lodge of St Paul, over which Sir C. Wren ijresided dm-iug the building of that
structure."

According to the same historian,^ in June 1G66, Sir Christopher Wren, having been
appointed Deputy under the Earl of Ptivers, "distinguished himself more than any of his
predecessors in office in promoting the prosperity of the few lodges which occasionally met at
this time,* [particularly the old Lodge of St Paul's, now the Lodge of Antiquity, which he
patronized upwards of eighteen years." ^]

A footnote — indicated in the text at the place where an asterisk (*) appears above — adds,
" It appears from the records of the Lodge of Antiquity that IMr Wren, at this time, attended
the meetings regularly, and that, during his presidency, he presented to the lodge three
mahogany candlesticks, at that time truly valuable, which are still preserved and highly
prized as a memento of the esteem of the honourable donor."

Preston follows Anderson in his account of the laying of the foundation stone of St Paul's
by the king, and states that, " during the whole time this structure was building, Mr Wren
acted as master of the work and surveyor, and was ably assisted by his wardens, Mr Edward
Strong and his son." * In a note on the same page we read, " The mallet with which the king
levelled this foundation stone v:as lodged ly Sir Christopher Wren in the old Lodge of St Paul,
now the Lodge of Antiquity, where it is stiU preserved as a great curiosity." ^

"In 1710," says Preston, "the last stone on the top of the lantern was laid by Mr
Christopher Wren, the son of the architect. This noble fabric .-. .-. was begun and completed

• Freemasons' Magazine, 1795, vol. iv., p. 3. = Illustrations of Masonry, 1792, p- 219.

' The passage within crotchets, and the footnote by which it is followed above, are not given in the editions for
1781 and 17S8, and appear for the first time in that for 1792.

* Illustrations of Masonry, 1792, p. 228.

0 In the two preceding editions the words in italics do not appear, and the note simply runs : " The mallet with
which this foundation-stone was laid, is now in the possession of the Lodge of Antiquity in London, and preserved there
as a great curiosity" (Illustrations of Masonry, 1781, p. 214 ; 1788, p. 226).

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 39

in the space of thirty-five years by one architect — the great Sir Christopher Wren; erne
principal mason — ilr Strong; and under one Bishop of London." ^

It will be seen that Preston's description of the completion of the cathedral, does not quite
agree with any other version of this occurrence which we have hitherto considered. The
" Constitutions " of 1738 date the event in 1708, imply that Wren himseK laid the last stone,
and are sUent as to the presence of Freemasons. The " Parentalia " alters the date to 1710,
deposes the father in favour of the son, irnplies that "Wren was absent, and brings in the
Freemasons as a leading featui-e of the spectacle. " ilulta Faucis " follows the " Constitutions "
in allowing AVren " to see " his work " fiiiisheJ," leaves the question open as to by whom the
stone was laid, adopts the views of the " Parentalia " as to the year of the occurrence and the
presence of the Freemasons, and goes so far as to make Sir Christopher participate in the
Masonic festivities with which the proceedings terminated.

Preston, in this particular instance, throws over the " Book of Constitutions," and pins
his faith on the narrative of Christopher Wren in the "Parentalia," though it should not
escape our notice that he omits to reproduce the statement in the latter work relating to the
presence of the Freemasons, which, of all others, it might be expected that he would. I
may here briefly remark, that whilst claiming as "Freemasons" and members of the
Lodge of Antiquity, several persons connected with Wren in the construction of St Paul's,
no connection with the Masonic craft is set up on behalf of the architect's son,^ nor
does Preston allude to him throughout his work, except in the passage under examination.
This, whilst establishing with tolerable certainty that in none of the records from which the
author of the " Illustrations of Masons " professed to have derived his Masonic facts concerning
the father, was there any notice of the son, at the same time lands us in a fresh difficulty, for
in the evidence supplied by the " Parentalia," written, it may be assumed, by a non-Mason,
we read of the Strongs and other Free and Accepted Masons being present at the celebration of
the capestone in 1710, a conjunction of much importance, but which, assuming the statement
of Christopher Wren to be an accurate one, is passed over sul silcntio by WiUiam Preston.

The next passage in the " Illustrations," which bears on the subject of our inquiry, occurs
where mention is made of Wren's election to the presidency of the Society in 1685. The
account is word for word with the extract already given from the " Constitutions" of 1738, but
to the statement that AVren, as Grand Master, appointed Gabriel Cibber and Edward Strong
his wardens, Preston adds, " both these gentlemen were members of the old Lodge of St Paul
with Sir Christopher Wren." ^

Throughout the remainder of his remarks on the condition of Masonry prior to 1717,
Preston closely follows the "Constitutions" of 1738. He duly records the initiation of
WiUiam III. in 1695, the appointment as Grand Wardens of the two Edward Strongs, and
concludes with the familiar story of the decay of Freemasonry owing to the age and infu-mities
of Sir Christopher drawing off his attention from the duties of his office.

' Illustrations of Masonry, 1792, pp. 236, 237. It will be seen that Preston wholly ignores Thomas Strong, tho
elder brother of Edward Strong, senior.

' Query, Does Christopher Wren owe this immunity, to the consideration that his membership of the society might
have been awkward to reconcile, with the theory of the lodges having languished fiom about 1710 to 1717, owing to the
neglect of his father ?

' Illustrations of Masonry, 1792, p. 244. The above is shown as a footnote, and docs not appear in the 1788 and
earlier editions.

40 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

Arrantred in order of time— i.e., of publication— the nav evidence given by Preston may be
thus briefly summarised : —

In 1775 it is first stated that Wren presided over the old Lodge of St Paul's during the
building of the cathedral.

Between 1775 and 1788 the only noteworthy circumstance recorded, is the possession by
the Lodge of Antiquity of the " historic " mallet, employed to lay the foundation stone of

St Paul's.

In 1792, however, a mass of information is forthcoming : we learn that Wren patronised
the Lodge of Antiquity for eighteen years, that he presented it with three candlesticks during
the period of his mastership, and " lodged " with the same body— of which Gabriel Gibber and
Edward Strong were members— the " mallet " so often alluded to.^

I shall next quote from a memoir of the family of Strong,^ compiled seven years before
the appearance of the first book of " Constitutions " (1723), though not published until 1815.
It is inscribed: "Loudon, May the 12th, 1716. Memorandums of several works in masonry
done by our family: viz., by my grandfather, Timothy Strong; by my father, Valentine
Strong; by my brother, Thomas Strong; by myself, Edward Strong; and my son, Edward

Strong."

Timothy Strong was the owner of quarries at Little Berrington, in Gloucestershire, and at
Teynton, in Oxfordshire, in which many masons and labourers were employed. Several
apprentices were also bound to him. He was succeeded in his possessions by his son
Valentine, who built some fine houses, and dying at Fairford, in Oxfordshire, in 1662, was
buried in the churchyard there, the following epitaph appearing on his monument :—

Here lyeth the body of Valentine Strong, Free Mason.

He departed this life

November the ...

A.D. 1662.

Here's one that was an able workman long,
Who divers houses built, both fair and Strong ;
Though Strong he was, a Stronger came than he.
And robb'd him of his life and fame, we see :
Moving an old house a new one for to rear.
Death met him by the way, and laid him here.

According to the " Memoir," Valentine Strong had six sons and five daughters.' All his
six sons were bred to the mason's trade, and about the year 1665 Thomas, the eldest, " built

' In which edition of the " Illustrations" it was first stated that the cathedral was completed by one principal
mason, I cannot at this moment say, nor is the point material.

^ Copied from a transcript of the original MS. in the possession of John Nares, Esq., of John Street, Bedford Row
(R. Cluttcrbuck, The History and Antiquity of the County of Hertford, 1815, p. 167). John Nares, a Bencher of the
Inner Temple, was descended from Edward Strong the younger, through his daughter Susannah, wife of Sir John Strange,
Master of the Rolls, whose daughter, Mary, married Sir George Nares, a Judge of the Court of Common Pleas, and bore
him the above.

' Vis., "Ann, Tliomas, "William, Elizabeth, Lucy (who died young), Sarah, Valentine, Timothy, Edward, John,
and Lucy, the second of that name."

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 41

lodgings for scholars at Trinity College, Oxford, under the direction of Dr Christopher "Wren,
of Wadham College. In the year 1667, artificers were invited by Act of ParHament to rebuild
the city of London; and accordingly, the aforesaid Thomas Strong pro-vided stone at the
qiiarries which he had the command of, and sent the same to London, and sold great quantities
to other masons. He also took up masons with him to London to work with him, to serve the
city in what they wanted in his way of trade. In the year 1675 he made the first contract
with the Lords and others, the Commissioners for rebuilding the cathedral church of St
Paul's in London, and on the 21st of June in that year laid the first stone in the foundation
with his own hand." ^

Thomas Strong died in 1681, unmarried, leaving all his employment to his brother Edward,
who he made his sole executor.

The "Memoir" continues, "about the year 1706 Edward Strong, jun., began the lanthorn
on the dome of St Paul's, London; and on the 25th of October 1708 Edward Strong, sen., laid
the last stone upon the same." ^

It will be seen that the testimony of Edward Strong is directly opposed to that of
Christopher Wren in the matter of the last stone. On this point their evidence is of equal
authority, both were present at the occurrence they describe, and whilst on the one hand it
may be contended that the claim of the younger Wren to have laid the stone has been
admitted by later writers, on the other hand this is more than balanced by the opinion of
Strong's relatives, as recorded on his monument immediately after his decease. As regards the
first stone, however, in the testimony of Edward Strong, we have the only deposition of an
eye-witness of the proceedings of 1675. Christopher Wren was but four months old when the
foundation stone was laid, and without detracting in the slightest degree from his honesty and
general accuracy of statement, it is impossible to accord what he ivas told ^ a higher measure
of belief than we yield to the evidence of a witness of equal veracity who describes what he
actually saiv.

Throughout the "Memoir" there is no reference to the "Lodge of St Paul," or the " Free
and Accepted Masons," of which Preston and Christopher Wren respectively declare Edward
Strong to have been a member.

Elmes, in his first biography of Wren,* alludes to Freemasonry at some length, cites
Preston, from whom he largely quotes, as its best historian, and faithfully repeats the stories of
Wren's Grand Mastership, of the mahogany candlesticks, of the mallet, and of the appointment
of Edward Strong as Grand Warden. Happily he gives his authorities, which are the
" Illustrations of Masonry," the " Ahiman liezon," and Piees' " Cycloptedia," therefore we may

' Seymour, in his " Survey of London " (1734), describes Strong as laying the first stone, and Longland the second,
on June 21, 1675.

^ Upon the monument erected to the memory of Edward Strong in the Church of St Peter, at St Albans, he is
described as " Citizen and Mason of London," and the inscription adds — " In erecting the edifice of St Paul's several
years of his life were spent, even from its foundation to his laying the last stone; and herein equally with its ingenious
architect, Sir Christopher Wren, and its truly pious diocesan, Bishop Compton, he shared the felicity of seeing both the
ieginning and finishing of that stupendous fabric " (Freemasons' Magazine, Oct. 8, 1864, p. 261, citing Peter Cunningham
in the Builder).

' This refers to a manuscript (British Museum, Lansdowne JISS., No. 698), which will bo presently examined. The
" Parentalia, " it will be recollected {ante, p. 13), does not state by whom the stone was laid.

4 Memoirs of the Life and Works of Sir Cliristopher Wren, 1823, pp. 484, 485, 493.
VOL. II. F

42 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

safely pass on to a consideration of the points which are chiefly in dispute, and at the same
time glean indiscriminately from the pages of his two biographies.^

Elmes cites " Clutterbuck's History of Hertford," containing the " Memoir of the Strongs,"
and in part reconciles the discrepant statements of Edward Strong and the younger Wren by
making Sir Christopher lay the first stone of St Paul's, assisted by Thomas Strong, though the
honour of laying the last stone, "with masonic ceremony," he assigns exclusively to the
architect's son, who, he says, was " attended by his venerable father, Mr Strong, the master-
mason of the cathedral, and the lodge of Freemasons, of which Sir Christopher was for so
many years the acting and active master." ^

This writer then proceeds to state that, " in the Lansdowne collection of manuscripts in
the British Museum is one by the eldest son of Sir Christopher, countersigned by the great
architect," which he cites in full, and describes as " a remarkable breviate of the life of one of
the greatest men of any time." ^

On the first leaf of the manuscript, at the top of the page, is scrawled, " Collata, Oct. 1720,