I bought Robert Davis’ The Mason’s Words, because I wanted to understand American Freemasonry better, in particular the ritual diversity. This proves to be a difficult subject and even though Davis sketches an interesting portrait of the prehistory of American Freemasonry, I was still unsure how things developed towards the current situation. I did some asking around and digging and perhaps what follows is helpful to someone in some way.
Prehistory
The so-called ‘Premier Grand Lodge’ (“Grand Lodge of London and Westminster”) was supposedly founded in London in 1717 by four existing lodges. This is usually seen as the start of modern Freemasonry. Soon other umbrella organisations started to appear. The ‘Premier Grand Lodge’ drew up “Constitutions” largely based on what were to be called “Old Charges”, documents that were gathered and used for inspiration. Documents of Masons guilds.
Grand Lodges
The foundation of the ‘Premier Grand Lodge’ resulted in similar organisations to be founded. Surely, there were lodges to form ‘Grand Lodges’, but not all (immediately) joined the ‘Premier Grand Lodge’ and some started to form their own organisations. The Grand Lodge of Ireland was founded in 1725, that of Scotland in 1736, most famously the “Antient Grand Lodge of England” (who called the ‘Premier Grand Lodge’ the “Moderns”) in 1751. But there was also the “Grand Lodge of All England South Of The River Trent” from York, that traced itself back to either 1705 or 1725.
The “Antients” and “Moderns” would eventually merge into the “United Grand Lodge of England” (1813), the York Grand Lodge folded. All this took many, many years.
Spread to America
In the previously described period, many people moved to the new colonies in Northern America (there were no United Stated yet) and this included many Freemasons from a variety of backgrounds. These Freemasons started lodges. Sometimes they requested charters from (their own and different) Grand Lodges, sometimes they did not. This brought a wide variety of Masonic practices and -of course- discussions about recognition.
The ties with the mother lands remained strong for quite some time and the different European Grand Lodges attempted to get the upper hand in America. When the colonies decided that they were better off separate from the mother lands, also the Masonic landscape started to shift.
Lecturers
Both in Europe and in America, a variety of Masonic practices existed and attempts at uniformity were undertaken. “Exposures” were published to inform both the public and the members as these were the first printed resources and hence, a way to uniform the way of working in different lodges. Of course these “exposures” came from different traditions.
Then in England the concept of “lectures” started to appear. Studious and well-spoken Freemasons, started to write lectures to explain the symbolism of the ritual. Eventually, this would even lead to more uniformity of those rituals; eventually, because initially the different lecturers all had their own approach.
A desire to get things more in line started to arise and after a few predecessors, William Preston (1742-1818) became very popular. Preston wrote, lectured and even published. In 1772 Illustrations of Freemasonry appeared for the first time in London. Preston, by the way, had an interesting Masonic career not free of problems.
Preston travelled the country giving his lectures and he had a large audience. Some of the people in his audience would make the cross of the Atlantic and this is how Preston’s lectures reached what were to be the USA.
By that time, North America already had the previously described Masonic plurality. Provincial Grand Lodges started to be formed and every time the problem was that lodges with different backgrounds had to be persuaded to join (and change). Not all did.
Webb
The famous Thomas Smith Webb (1771-1819) was born in Boston, was the son of a bookbinder and was to be one himself. Once he was, he went to another part of the country to set up his own business. Within six months after his arrival in his new hometown (Keene, New Hampshire), Webb joined the local lodge and was initiated on Christmas Eve 1790 and passed and raised on the 27th of the same month. Moving back to Boston after his father had passed away, Webb met a Freemason named John Hanmer who was familiar with Preston.
It seems that Webb and Hanmer created an “Antients” lodge in an area that was actually “Modern” and their lodge also worked the Royal Arch (not uncommon among the Antients). Later Webb was also involved in the foundation of “Capitular Templar Orders in New York”.
Having heard of Preston’s lectures, in 1796 Webb could finally read them himself when the first American edition was published. Webb turned out to become the American lecturer. He visited hundreds upon hundreds of lodges to give his lectures and already in 1797 he published the first version of his The Freemason’s Monitor, or Illustrations of Masonry.
Also Webb would gain a circle of listeners, students and followers. His Monitor was to be the start of the most serious attempt at uniforming the American ritual and since his lectures are mostly based on those of Preston, the most common American ritual is still called “Preston/Webb”.
Webb’s Monitor contained the opening and closing of three degrees, followed by the “Master Mark” degree (4th), ceremonies such as installation, consecration, cornerstone laying, funerals, etc., then the “Most Excellent Master” degree (5) and Royal Arch (7, his counting). Then in Part III follow Knights of the Red Cross, Knights Templar and Knights of Malta.
Webb’s Monitor would see many editions, each one larger than the previous.
Webb’s followers
Also Webb had his followers and students, some as active as Webb himself. Each of them ‘improved’ Webb’s lectures and delivered them as the original Webb teachings. This explains why today there are variations of “Preston/Webb”. The most interesting (for our current story) is Jeremy Ladd Cross (1783-1860). Cross published his The True Masonic Chart, or Hieroglyphic Monitor in 1819. A year later he also published The Templar Chart, or Hieroglyphic Monitor. Both books are mostly famous because they contain a great many illustrations.
Of course Cross’ Monitor developed over time and it is mostly interesting for our story, because from at least the 1846 edition, there is an “Appendix to the sixteenth edition” which gives some history to Cross’ work.
In this appendix Cross says that the first organised “Chapter of Royal Arch Masons” in America started in 1797 (Boston). There was a: “long-desired and necessary authority for correcting abuses and regulating the concerns of Royal Arch Masonry”. A little further down Cross writes:
After the Grand lodges of several States had declared themselves free and indepedent, and the General Chapter as formed and organised in 1798, it was deemed advisable to adopt a regular and uniform mode of Lecturing and Work for the whole; and in order to accomplish this great desideratum, the expert workmen from various parts of the country met together. The work was completed and adopted fully by the year 1810. It was at the period, the Author commenced Lecturing in the New England States, with all those bright and well-informed masons, who had been so assiduous in selecting and arranging the above system, which was by them adopted as the most correct. Taking the “Ancient York Rite” for a standard, they selected from the “Scottish Rite” those things which approximated to the former, and out of the two systems, they formed a very perfect and complete set of Lectures […]
Do we here have the first mention of the “York Rite”? Does Cross here say that the York Rite was forged in the “New England States”?
It is said that the term “York” was taken to prevent having to use ‘old country’ names such as English or Scottish and therefor used the situation in York during with king Athelstan had the ordinances of the Masons noted down. As we will see “York” is fitting for another reason.
Rites
Now comes the confusing part. Both in Webb and in Cross, we also have the first three degrees (Entered Apprentice, Fellowcraft and Master Mason), while the “York Rite” nowadays is a system that comes after the degree of Master Mason.
In Cross we find the following degrees:
- Entered Apprentice
- Fellow-Craft
- Master Mason
- Mark Master
- Past Master
- Most Excellent Master
- Royal Arch
- Royal Master
- Select Master
- Knights of the Red Cross
- Knights Templar
- Knights of Malta
This is not entirely the same as the “York Rite ladder” of nowadays, see above (source Wikipedia). Then again, also the York Rite is not the same everywhere. What you mostly see is that a Mason joins a “craft” or “blue” lodge and after becoming Master Mason, the Mason can continue with the degree of Mark Master within the “order” of the Royal Arch. After those degrees there is the order of “Cryptic Masonry” and lastly the “Knight Templar” or “Encampment” degrees.
There are also honorary degrees and other bodies to join, but that is outside of the scope of the present text.
High degrees
This got me thinking, in 1797 Webb was already publishing quite ‘exotic’ ‘high degrees’. The degree of Master Mason (the 3rd) appears to have come into existence between 1721 and 1730 in the ‘Premier Grand Lodge’. Shortly after, there were already other degrees. It seems as if either the development of the third degree inspired people to create more degrees or that the third degree was deemed unsatisfactory and therefor more degrees were created.
In any case, the “Scots Master” degree appears to have been known in England in the 1730’ies. We have a text from 1742 found in Berlin, which was a copy of an English text. Also the Royal Arch seems to go back to at least the 1740’ies. It is possible that such degrees travelled to the American colonies early on.
Templar degrees are another story though. There were organisations for Templar degrees only shortly before 1800 (Dublin and Sheffield), but word is that the collector of degrees (and father of the Swedish Rite) Carl Friedrich Eckleff (1723-1786) received Templar degrees in Geneva as early as 1759. We do not know much about that, but a fact is that Eckleff’s collection contains degrees such as “Scots Master” and no specific Templar degrees.
The Dublin and Sheffield documents are interesting in regards of our current story, because the degrees that are mentioned are:
- 1st / 2nd / 3rd degree;
- Mark Degree;
- Excellent Master / Super Excellent Master;
- Royal Arch;
- Knight Templar / Knight Rose Cross.
(Sheffield ca. 1800)
- Excellent;
- Super-excellent;
- Royal Arch;
- Knight Templar.
(Dublin ca. 1795)
Quite similar to the degrees and the order found in Webb and Cross. These systems appear to have travelled to the USA before 1797, so before the oldest known documents! So the question is: when and how did these degrees find their way to America?
It seems that there are several early ‘systems’ of ‘high degrees’. The oldest and most notable ‘high degree’ is that of Scots Master (Maitre Ecossais, in France usually Maitre Parfait or Perfect Master). It seems that what found its way to America comes from another tradition as this degree appears to be lacking. Jan Snoek writes about a “Harodim” tradition, but Belton and Dachez prefer to compartiment a little further and divide between “Ecossais” (Scots) and Templar systems.
To be even more precise, the order of the degrees is mostly like the Modern Sheffield Templar system, but the Dublin degrees and even the (Antient?) degrees on the Kirkwall Scroll are also similar.
As we saw above, it appears that the Royal Arch appeared in Boston (where Webb was born and lived after the passing of his father) in October 1797. Cross writes that in May of the same year “a convention of Knights Templars was holden at Philadelphia, for the purpose of taking into consideration the propriety and expediency of forming a Grand Encampment.”
Apparently the term “encampment” was a known term and this is possible, because in Dublin there have been two. Jan Snoek writes:
The ‘Early Grand Encampment [of Ireland]’ (under its ‘Early Grand Master’) was older than its rival, the ‘Kilwinning High Knights Templar Encampment’ (under its ‘Grand Master’), both in Dublin. Both developed out of the ‘Kilwinning High Knight Templars Lodge’ (IC), warranted 8/10/1779 by ‘Mother Kilwinning’ (SC), and both worked the degrees ‘Excellent, Super-excellent, Royal Arch, and Knight Templar’.
So at least as early as 1779 there was Knight Templar Freemasonry in Dublin and degrees were worked that are remarkably similar to those we find in Webb, even though we only know then from a document from around 1800.
The Sheffield list of degrees has the advantage that the Mark degree is already included. What is also interesting is that Christopher Powell (in AQC 126, 2013) who concluded that the Royal Arch part of the Sheffield rituals can be traced back to the earliest “Moderns” Royal Arch chapter in York.
Conclusion?
A variety of Masonic rituals travelled to North America, including early ‘high degrees’. One attempt of structuring would eventually lead to the York Rite which is still similar to early ‘high degree’ systems that we know, in particular one from Sheffield, which just might be traced back to the actual city of York.