1

Oct 2006 Revision

THE ORIGINS OF FREEMASONRY

By
W.Bro.Don Barry
Lodge Mentor
Camp Hill Lodge No.388, UGLQ

The precise origins of Freemasonry may well be lost in time. The Order was, until
1717, truly “secret” and as result, only a limited amount of verifiable historical
evidence has survived for the use of Masonic historians.

For example, It is recorded that there were several early histories of

Freemasonry authored by two early, speculative (as opposed to operative)
Freemasons.

One history was by Elias Ashmole, the sponsor of the famous and eponymous
Ashmolean museum which is attached to Oxford University. Ashmole is possibly
the earliest initiate into Freemasonry (in 1646) for whom we have documented
evidence. He wrote a history of Freemasonry which has since been lost.
A second was by Sir Robert Moray, who was entrusted by Charles II with
gathering prominent scientists to form the Invisible College which, in turn,
became the Royal Society. He also was a prominent Freemason and in the
seventeenth century wrote a history of Freemasonry which has also been lost.

When the Royal House of Hanover sought to purge English Freemasonry of any
Jacobite tendencies, it may well be that it’s chosen agent, the Duke of Sussex,
the then Grand Master, had these histories hidden or even destroyed.
Whatever happened, the result was that the official line of the United Grand
Lodge of England, the premier grand lodge of the world, became that the true
origins of Freemasonry are basically unknowable. This is, to say the least, rather
vague and unsatisfying, and as indicated above, may be due, in part, to a desire
to obscure the issue.

Recent scholarly research has provided some tantalizing evidence linking the
origins of Freemasonry to the Knights Templar, the Legends of the Holy Grail
and a Hermetic, Gnostic, even Kabbalistic tradition.

Before we consider this evidence, it is worth noting that anyone who is remotely
familiar with the practise of Freemasonry, will have observed, that as well as the
obvious allusions to operative stonemason symbols and practices, there are
unavoidable aspects of the Craft (speculative or symbolic Freemasonry as
opposed to operative masonry), which are surprisingly militaristic. There are also
penalties for breaching the brotherhood’s solidarity and oaths of secrecy which
seem surprisingly harsh, even barbaric, for what was, if one believes the
conventional wisdom, basically a craft guild.
2
Oct 2006 Revision
Both these apparent anomalies may be satisfactorily explained by the
propositions that, firstly, the Craft inherited traditions from a military order and,
secondly, that the harsh penalties for breaking oaths of secrecy, were consistent
with the punishment which a member of an underground and heretical
organization (e.g. Knights Templars after their disbanding in 1312) could expect if
betrayed to the authorities.
Thus, the most likely such organization is the Military Order of the Knights
Templar which was forcibly disbanded between 1307 and 1312.

Some Masonic traditions and certain historical evidences suggest that remnants
of the Knights Templar may have continued in secret, “underground” cells or
lodges until some four hundred years later after the full-flowering of the
Enlightenment, when their existence and heterodox practices were no longer
considered a threat to the Church and State.
In England this, as suggested by John Robinson(2), was around about 1715 after
the convincing defeat of the Jacobites following the so-called First Jacobite
Rising in 1715 and again, following the Battle of Culloden and suppression of the
Second Jacobite Rising in 1745.

This saw, consequently, the emergence into public view of the Grand Lodge of
England in 1717.

The Templar influence, therefore, is additional to the stonemason symbolism and

tools borrowed from the operative Masonic tradition (i.e. the stonemasons).
According to historians such as John Robinson (2), this latter source was
adopted partly as a result of Templar association with the building of the great
medieval Cathedrals and partly as a ploy to mask the Templar/Hermetic origins
of the Craft. It also facilitated the teaching of adherents by using readily
understood symbols in the times when most were illiterate.

There is also a third and more subtle influence which implies that Freemasonry is
heir to great and momentous secrets (or “sacred knowledge” – see below), but
as, during the course of progression through the various degrees and orders,
they are supposedly, gradually revealed to the initiate, for many, these secrets
never seem quite to measure up to expectations.
What exactly is this other, more subtle heritage? That must be the subject of
another discourse, but for the moment let’s continue with the evidence for the
involvement of the Knights Templar.

Some of this evidence is well explained in the following extract from The Templar
Revelation by Picknett and Prince (1):
“Recently, several commentators have presented persuasive evidence that
Freemasonry had its origins in Templarism; both The Temple and the Lodge by
Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh (3), and Born in Blood (2) by the American
historical writer-researcher, John J.Robinson have come to that conclusion even
although approaching the subject from entirely different viewpoints. (Author’s
3
Oct 2006 Revision
note: in The Hiram Key (4) and its sequel, The Second Messiah (5), Knight and
Lomas come to similar conclusions, including suggesting, in agreement with
Baigent and Leigh, that Freemasonry really originated in Scotland. A cynic might
suggest that this could explain UGLE’s insistence that the true origins of the
Craft are unknowable. Nevertheless, the situation is complex and the truth may
lie somewhere between the two extremes; i.e. Masonry originated at similar
times in similar but subtly different ways in both England and Scotland).

The Temple and the Lodge traces the Templar continuity through Scotland while
Born in Blood depends more on working back from modern Freemasonic ritual to
its origins – and once again, ends up with the Templars. So these major books
effectively complement each other, providing a more or less complete picture of
the link between the two great occult organizations.
The only major point of disagreement between Baigent/Leigh and Robinson is
that the former see Freemasonry as developing from isolated Templars in
Scotland, then going to England in 1603 with the accession of the Scottish king,
James VI to the English throne and the ensuing influx of Scottish aristocracy.
Robinson, on the other hand, believes that the Templars developed into
Freemasons in England. He argues persuasively that the Templars were behind
the Peasant’s Revolt of 1381, which specifically attacked the property of the
Church and of the Knights Hospitallers – the two main enemies of the Templars –
although it went to great lengths to avoid damaging the former Templar buildings.

To many outsiders Freemasonry is simply a quaint old boy’s club, an insider’s

network that provides lucrative business contacts and influence for its members.
Its ritual side is perceived as being ludicrous – with brothers rolling up one
trouser leg and uttering archaic and meaningless oaths. Things may have
changed, but in its earliest days, Freemasonry was a mystery school with solemn
initiations that drew on ancient occult traditions, and which were specifically
designed to bring transcendental enlightenment, besides binding the initiate more
closely to his brothers. (Author – my emphasis).

Originally it was an occult organization, explicitly concerned with the transmission

of sacred knowledge. Much of what we would now call science actually came out
of that brotherhood – as one can see from the formation of the Royal Society in
England in 1662, which was and is concerned with the gathering and
promulgating of scientific knowledge. It was the official establishment of the
original “Invisible College” of the Freemasons that had been formed in 1645.
(And just as in Leonardo’s day, occult and scientific knowledge – far from being
antithetical – were seen as one and the same.)

Although no doubt many modern Freemasons do undertake their initiations

solemnly and with a sense of spirituality, the overall picture is one of an
organization that has forgotten its original meaning. In fact, today’s mainstream
Freemasonry is that of Grand Lodge, which was only formed relatively recently,
on John the Baptist’s Day (24th June) in 1717. Before that time Freemasonry had
4
Oct 2006 Revision
been a true secret society, but the emergence of Grand Lodge marked an era
when it had already become a glorified dining club and which had gone semi-
public because it no longer had any secrets to keep to itself.

So just how old is Freemasonry? The earliest acknowledged reference to

initiation of a speculative Freemason is 1641, but if there is a link with the
Templars it obviously goes back further. John J.Robinson cites evidence of
Masonic Lodges existing in the 1380s and an alchemical treatise dated from the
1450s explicitly uses the term “Freemason” (Author: – a carved scene in Rosslyn
Chapel – which is on the Sinclair estate near Edinburgh and on which
construction commenced ca. 1440 - allegedly depicts an accurate representation
of a “Masonic” initiation – see The Hiram Key by Lomas & Knight .)
The Masons themselves claim that they emerged from the English medieval
stonemason’s guilds – which had developed secret gestures and codes of
recognition because they possessed the potentially dangerous knowledge of
sacred geometry. But, as John J.Robinson’s extensive and meticulous research
has shown, against all expectations, these guilds were conspicuous by their
absence in medieval Britain. Another Freemasonic myth is their claim that the
stonemasons inherited their secret knowledge from the builders of the fabulous
Temple of Solomon. If so, however, why did they ignore another group with more
obvious links with that Temple? They appear to be avoiding the most obvious link
of all: the group whose full name was the Order of Poor Knights of Christ and the
Temple of Solomon – in other words, the Templars.

Yet before the formation of Grand Lodge, the Freemasons actually promulgated
the same kind of information about sacred geometry, alchemy and hermeticism
as did the Templars. For example, the early Masons were very concerned with
alchemy: a mid-fifteenth-century alchemical treatise alludes to Freemasons as
“workers in alchemy” and one of the first Masonic initiates was recorded as being
Elias Ashmole (inducted in 1648), founder of the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford,
who was an alchemist, hermeticist and Rosicrucian. (Ashmole was also the first
person to write approvingly of the Templars since their suppression.)

A jewel in the crown of Freemasonry is the curious and compelling building called
Rosslyn Chapel, a few miles out of Edinburgh. From the outside it looks so
dilapidated as to be almost in danger of collapsing completely, but the interior is
eye-openingly robust – as indeed, it would have to be for Rosslyn Chapel is the
acknowledged focus for today’s Freemasons and many Templar organizations.

Built between 1450 and 1480 by Sir William St Clair, Laird of Rosslyn, it was
originally intended to be simply the lady chapel of a much larger building that was
supposed to be based on the design of the Temple of Solomon, but in the event
it was to stand alone throughout the centuries. The St Clairs (later their name
became Sinclair) were to be the hereditary protectors of Freemasonry in
Scotland from the fifteenth century onwards: surely it is no coincidence that
before that time they served the same function for the Templars.
5
Oct 2006 Revision

From its very beginnings the Templar Order was connected with the Sinclairs
and Rosslyn: founding Grand Master Hugues de Payens was married to
Catherine St Clair. Originally of Viking descent, the St Clairs/Sinclairs are one of
the most intriguing and remarkable families in Western history, and were
prominent in Scotland and France from the Eleventh Century (Interestingly, their
family name came from the Scottish martyr Saint Clair, who was beheaded).
Hugues and Catherine visited the St Clair estates close to Rosslyn and
established there the first Templar commandery in Scotland, which became their
headquarters.
(As we have seen, Pierre Plantard adopted the name “de St Clair”, thereby
deliberately linking himself with the French branch of this ancient family. Several
commentators have wondered whether he is entitled to use this designation, but
there is at least good reason for him to do so.)

The knights certainly made Scotland one of their major havens after their official
suppression – perhaps because it was very much the land of Robert the Bruce,
who had himself been excommunicated, so that the Pope for the moment held no
sway in Scotland. And Baigent and Leigh argue persuasively that the missing
Templar fleet turned up on Scottish shores.

One of the critical historic events of the British Isles was undoubtedly the Battle
of Bannockburn, which took place on 24th June, (St John the Baptist’s Day) in
1314, when Robert the Bruce’s forces decisively overcame the English.
However, the evidence suggests that they had formidable help – in the form of a
contingent of Knights Templar who saved the day at the eleventh hour. Certainly,
that is what today’s Scottish Knights Templar (who claim to descend from the
fugitive knights) believe, as they commemorate the Battle of Bannockburn in
Rosslyn Chapel on its anniversary as being the occasion when ‘the Veil was
lifted from the Knights Templar’. One of the knights who had fought alongside
Robert the Bruce at Bannockburn was (another) Sir William St Clair, who died in
1330 and was buried at Rosslyn in a characteristic Templar Tomb.

The Rosslyn Chapel itself contains some apparent anomalies in its decoration.
Every square inch of the Chapel’s interior is covered in carved symbols and the
building as a whole is designed to accord with the high ideals of sacred
geometry. Much of this is undeniably Masonic. It boasts the ‘Apprentice Pillar’, an
explicit parallel with the Masonic myth of Hiram Abiff, and the apprentice depicted
on it is known as ‘the Son of the Widow’, a highly significant Masonic term (which
is also important in this investigation). The lintel next to the Pillar bears the
inscription:
“Wine is strong, the King is stronger, women are strongest, but TRUTH conquers
all”.

But while much of Rosslyn’s symbolism is clearly Masonic, at least as much is

definitely Templar; the floor plan of the chapel is based on the Templar cross,
6
Oct 2006 Revision
and there are carvings that include the famous two-men-on-a-horse image from
their seal. And an ancient nearby wood was planted in the shape of a Templar
cross.

All this is most curious, for according to standard history texts, Freemasonry
dates from no earlier than the late 1500s, and the Templars were no longer a
force to be reckoned with after 1312. Thus the imagery in the chapel, which
dates from around the 1460s, should be too early for the former and too late for
the latter.…….”

The Templar love and preservation of knowledge meant that at Rosslyn we also
find the “Rosslyn-Hay Manuscript”, which is the earliest known work in Scottish
prose. It is a translation of Rene d’Anjou’s writings on chivalry and government
and on its binding are found inscribed “JHESUS (sic) – MARIA – JOHANNES”
(Jesus, Mary, John). As Andrew Sinclair says in his The Sword and the Grail
(1992)(5): ‘The addition of the name of St John to that of Jesus and Mary is
unusual, but he was venerated by the Gnostics and the Templars…..Another
remarkable feature of the binding is the use of the Agnus Dei, the Lamb of
God….In Rosslyn Chapel, the Templar Seal of the Lamb of God is also carved.”

Earl William and Rene d’Anjou were close, both being members of the Order of
the Golden Fleece (Author: my italics) a group whose avowed intent was to
restore the old Templar ideals of chivalry and brotherhood.

It is clear that the Templars survived in Scotland and continued to operate

openly, not just at Rosslyn but in several other locations. However, in 1329 their
charmed life was once again under threat when Robert the Bruce’s
excommunication was lifted and the shadow of the Pope’s authority returned to
haunt them. At one point there was even the distinct possibility that a crusade
would be launched against Scotland and although this did not materialise, the
Scottish Templars thought it prudent to go underground like many of their
European brothers and it was this, it is claimed, that gave rise to the beginnings
of Freemasonry.”

So there is substantial evidence of Masonic ritual dating back to the mid-fifteenth

century in the murals/carvings of Rosslyn Chapel.
What other early evidence is there?

Preston, one of the early historians of post-1717 Freemasonry published his

history in 1778. According to Stephen Lomas in his book, The Invisible College,
there were early, now “lost” histories, which as mentioned earlier, were produced
by Sir Robert Moray and by Elias Ashmole (he of the Oxford Ashmolean Library
fame) probably a hundred years earlier than Preston’s. On his website at
http://www.robertlomas.com/preston/padlock/index.html, Lomas has published
“Illustrations of Masonry by William Preston, Past Master of the Lodge of
Antiquity, Acting by Immemorial Constitution, Blacklock The Ninth Edition; with
7
Oct 2006 Revision
considerable additions. London: Printed for G and T Wilkie; No 57 Paternoster
Row, MDCCXCV
To the Right Honourable Lord Petrie, Past Grand Master of the Ancient and
Honourable Society of Free and Accepted Masons. This Treatise is, with the
Greatest Respect, Inscribed by His Lordship's Most Obedient Servant and
Brother, William Preston”.

In this remarkable document, Preston records, albeit without documentation,

some astonishing early events in Freemasonry, which if true, transform the
history of the Craft.
For example, he states -”On the 24th June 1502, a lodge of masters was formed
in the palace, at which the King (Henry VII) presided in person as Grand Master;
and having appointed John Islip, Abbot of Westminster, and Sir Reginald Bray,
Knight of the Garter, his Wardens for the occasion, proceeded in ample form to
the east end of Westminster Abbey, where he laid the foundation stone of that
rich masterpiece of Gothic architecture known by the name of Henry the
Seventh’s Chapel…..Henry VIII succeeded his father in 1509, and appointed
Cardinal Wolsey, Grand Master…..Thomas Cromwell, Earl of Essex, succeeded
the Cardinal in the office of Grand Master and employed the fraternity in building
St Jame’s Palace, Christ’s Hospital and Greenwich Castle…..the Masons
remained without any nominal patron till the reign of Elizabeth, when Sir Thomas
Sackville accepted the office of Grand Master. Lodges were held during this
period in different parts of England, but the General or Grand Lodge assembled
in York where the Fraternity were numerous and respectable.
The following circumstance is recorded of Elizabeth: Hearing that the Masons
were in possession of secrets which they would not reveal, and being jealous of
all secret assemblies, she sent an armed force to York with intent to break up
their annual Grand Lodge. This design, however, was happily frustrated by the
interp[osition of Sir Thomas Sackville who took care to initiate some of the chief
officers which she had sent on this duty. They joined in communication with the
Masons and made so favourable a report to the queen on their return that she
countermanded her orders and never afterwards attempted to disturb the
meetings of the Fraternity.
Sir Thomas Sackville held the office of Grand Master until 1567 when he
resigned in favour of Francis Russel, Earl of Bedford and Sir Thomas Gresham,
an eminent merchant distinguished by his abilities and great success in trade. To
the former the care of the Brethren in the northern part of the kingdom was
assigned while the latter was appointed to superintend the meetings in the south
where the society had considerably increased in consequence of the honourable
report which had been made to the queen.”
Is this all fantasy, or was there evidence, now lost, on which he based his
claims?
8
Oct 2006 Revision
Bibliography
1. The Templar Revelation, Picknett, L & Prince, C. (1998) Corgi Books
2. Born in Blood, The Lost Secrets of Freemasonry, John L.Robinson.
(1989) M.Evans & Co, New York.
3. The Temple and the Lodge, Baigent, M & Leigh, R. (1990) Corgi Books
4. The Hiram Key, Pharoahs, Freemasons and the Discovery of the
Secret Scrolls of Jesus, Knight, C & Lomas, R. (1996) Century
Publishers, UK.
5. The Second Messiah, Templars, the Turin Shroud and the Great
Secret of Freemasonry, Knight, C & Lomas, R (1997) Century, UK.
6. The Sword and the Grail, Sinclair, A. (1993) Century, UK.
7. Illustrations of Masonry by William Preston -
http://www.robertlomas.com/preston/padlock/index.html