In the effort to trace the gradual growth of the modern system of Speculative Masonry out of the ancient organization of Operative Masons, we are arrested by an important era when the Guilds of architects and builders, issued about the 10th century, from the north of Italy and under the name of "Traveling Freemasons," perambulated Europe, and with the patronage of the churches extended the principles of their art into every country from Germany to Scotland.

Before we can properly appreciate the events connected with the origin of this body of organized Masons as the undoubted link which connects the artificers of the Roman Colleges with the Masonic Guilds which sprang up in Gaul, in Germany, and in Britain, we must take a brief view of the condition of the Roman Empire in respect to the cultivation of the arts at the time of its declension and after the seat of government had been removed from Rome to Byzantium. Mr. Thomas Hope has devoted some thirty pages of his Historical Essay on Architecture to an investigation of the circumstances which toward the end of the 10th century affected architecture, generally and extensively, throughout Europe. To this admirable inquiry I shall be indebted for many of the details and leading ideas which will constitute the present chapter. In this work, Mr. Hope remarks that the architecture of Christian Greece and Rome, that is to say, the Byzantine and the Roman styles, exhibited, while it was confined within the limits bounded by the Alps, more local diversities than after it had crossed the mountain-ranges and advanced successively through France and Germany to the farthest inhabited regions of northern Europe. *

(* Hope, "Historical Essay on Architecture," P. 220.)

But as this advancement from the plains of Italy into more northern regions was accompanied by a style of architecture the adoption of which was at once the cause and the effect of that united action which distinguished the Freemasons of the Middle Ages, it will be necessary to give a brief glance at the condition of architecture in the times which preceded the exodus of artists from Italy. It must be remembered that it is impossible to trace with any prospect of certainty, the progress of events which finally led to the institution of Speculative Masonry, unless we direct our attention to the early history of Operative Masonry.

Though Speculative and Operative Masonry never were and never can be identical - a mistake into which early Masonic historians like Dr. Anderson have fallen - yet it must be always remembered that the former sprung by a process of mental elaboration out of the latter. Operative Masonry is the foundation and Speculative Masonry the superstructure which has been erected on it. This is the theory which is advanced in the present work, in contradistinction to that untenable one which traces a connection of the modern society with any of the religious institutions of antiquity. If then the old Masonry of the mediaeval builders, which was essentially operative in its character, is the foundation on which the Freemasonry of the modern philosophers, which is essentially speculative in its character, is built, we can not pretend to write a history of the superincumbent building and at the same time totally ignore the underlying foundation.

It is necessary, therefore, to glance at the history of architecture and at is condition before and after the 10th century, if we would understand how Freemasonry in the beginning of the 18th century was transmuted from an Operative to a Speculative system, from an art of building to a science of philosophy. It has been noted as an evidence of the union of principles which began to distinguish the architects of and after the 10th century, who called themselves Freemasons, that in the time of Caesar a habitation in Helvetia differed more from a dwelling in the northern part of Italy, though the regions were adjacent, than the church reared in England or Sweden did from one erected in Sicily or Palestine, remote as the countries were from each other. *

(* Hope, "Historical Essay on Architecture," P. 220.)

Now let it be remembered that this unity of design was introduced by the Traveling Freemasons; that these derived a knowledge of the great principles of the art of building from the artificers sent by the Roman Colleges, in company with the Legions of the Roman army, into all the conquered provinces and who there established colonies; that those Traveling Freemasons communicated their knowledge to the Stonemasons of Germany, France, England Scotland, and other countries which they visited in pursuit of employment and in the practice of their craft; and finally that those stonemasons having from time to time, for purposes of their own aggrandizement, admitted non-professional, that is to say non-Masonic members into their ranks, the latter eventually overcame the former in numbers and in influence and transmuted the Operative into a Speculative institution. Remembering these points, which give the true theory of the origin of modern Freemasonry, as it were, in a nutshell, * it will be at once seen how necessary it is that the Masonic student should be thoroughly acquainted with the history of these mediaeval Masons, and with the character of the architecture which they invented, with the nature of the organization which they established, and with the method of building which they practiced.

(* Translation by W.H. Leeds, London, 1836, p. 17.)

To attain a comprehensive view of this subject, it is necessary that we should, in the first place, advert to the history of the kingdom of Lombardy, which is admitted to have been the cradle of mediaeval architecture. At the close of the 5th century, the Ostrogoths, instigated and supported by the jealousy of the Byzantine Emperor, had invaded Italy under the celebrated Theodoric. Odoacer, who then ruled over the Roman Empire of the East, having been treacherously slain, Theodoric was proclaimed King of Italy by the Goths. He reigned for thirty-three years, during the greater part of which long period he was distinguished for his religious toleration, his administration of justice, and the patronage of the arts. In a passage written by Magnus Aurelius Cassiodorus, who was the Chancellor of Theodoric, the Minister describes, in a glowing panegyric, the exalted condition of architecture during the reign of that monarch.

Tiraboschi, who cites the passage in his History of the Sciences in Italy, attributes this flourishing state of the art to the influence of the Goths. But Moller, in his Memorials of German Gothic Architecture, dissents from this view, especially as the Gothic domination in Italy lasted scarcely more than half a century, and contends that were it even demonstrable that architecture had been at that time such as Cassiodorus describes it, the fact is to be ascribed rather to the Byzantine Romans, among whom he thinks that we must search for all that, at that era, was preserved of the city and the sciences. The Goths were finally driven out of Italy in the reign of Justinian, and by the armies of the renowned Belisarius. This event occurred about the middle of the 6th century.

They were succeeded by another tribe of semi-barbarians, who, though they did not, as the Ostrogoths had done, assume the domination of the whole of the Italian peninsular, yet exerted an influence on the state of mediaeval architecture that produced results of most interesting character. The Longobardi, a word which by a generally accepted etymology signifies the Longbeards, a title which they obtained from their manner of wearing that appendage to the face, were a Scandinavian tribe who, coming down from their almost arctic home, first settled on the eastern banks of the Elbe, but gradually extended their migrations southwardly until in the year 568 they invaded Italy, and founded in its northeastern part the kingdom which to this day bears the name of Lombardy. The kingdom of Lombardy existed in a condition of prosperity for two hundred years, but was finally obliterated toward the end of the 8th century, in 774, from the roll of independent monarchies by the victorious arms of Charlemagne. During that period it had been governed by one-and-twenty kings, several of whom displayed great talents and who left their monuments in the wisdom and prudence of the laws which they gave to the kingdom. *

(* Sismondi, "Histoire des Republiques Italiennes du Moyen Age," tome i., p. 14, Charles Butler says that no ancient code of law is more famous than the "Law of the Lombards;" none discovers more evident traces of the feudal policy. It survived the destruction of that empire by Charlemagne, and is said to be in force even now in some cities of Italy. "Horae Judicae Subsecivae," p. 85.)

In their first invasion under Alboin, their King, the Longobards, or, as they were more briefly called, the Lombards, who were a fierce and warlike people, were pagans, and inflicted many persecutions on the Roman Christians. But their manners became gradually more mild, and in the year 587, Anthairs, their third monarch, embraced Christianity according to the faith of the Arians. His successor afterward adopted the orthodox or Catholic creed. It was in the 6th century that the germs of the interference of the Church with the arts and sciences, and the control of architecture, were first planted.

During the repeated incursions of barbarians, the gradual decline and ultimate fall of the power of the Roman Empire, and the continual recurrence of wars, the arts and sciences would have been totally extinguished had they not found a place of refuge among the priests, the bishops, and the monastic orders. Whatever there was remaining; of the old culture was preserved from perishing in the monasteries, the churches, and the dwellings of the ecclesiastics. Schools were erected in the cathedral churches in which youths were instructed by the bishop or someone appointed by him, in the knowledge of the seven liberal arts and sciences. In the monasteries the monks and nuns devoted as a part of their discipline a certain portion of their time to reading the works of the ancient doctors, or in copying and dispersing manuscripts of classical as well as Christian writers. To these establishments, says Mosheim, are we indebted for the preservation and possession of all the ancient authors who thus escaped the fury of barbaric ignorance.

Architecture, which because its principles were generally and almost exclusively applied to the construction of churches and other religious edifices had become almost a sacred art, was at first and for a long time under the entire control of the clergy. The laity were either an ignorant peasantry or soldiers trained to war; the ecclesiastics alone exercised the arts, and especially architecture. Missionaries sent to teach the Christian faith carried with them into the fields of their labor, builders whom they directed in the construction of the new churches which they made their converts erect. *

(* "Historical Essay on Architecture," P. 213.)

Ecclesiastical writers have remarked upon the incredible number of churches which, under the influence of religious enthusiasm, were erected all over Europe, but more especially in Gaul and Italy at so early a period as the 6th century. Lombardy is, as Mr. Hope has remarked, "the country in which associations of Freemasons were first formed, and which from its more recent civilization afforded few ancient temples whence materials might be supplied, was the first after the decline of the Roman Empire to endow architecture with a complete and connected system of forms, which soon prevailed wherever the Latin Church spread its influence from the shores of the Baltic to those of the Mediterranean." *

(* "Historical Essay on Architecture," P. 250.)

Moller, a learned German writer on architecture, * asserts that the Lombards were in the habit of building much, and appear to have quickly attained a higher degree of civilization than the Goths, to whom they succeeded. As a proof of their skill and architectural culture we may refer to D'Agincourt's History of Art by its Monuments, ** where is exhibited a plate of the church of St. Julia near Bergamo, that of St. Michael at Pavia, and that of the round church of St. Momus, all of which he ascribes to the Lombards. Hope also enumerates among the churches erected in what he calls the Lombard style the Basilica of St. Eustorgio, which was built in the 7th or 8th century. But, as in the case of the Goths, Moller ascribes whatever there was of excellence in Lombard architecture not to the Lombards themselves, who were originally a rude, invading people who adopted the civilized manners of the people whom they conquered as well as their architecture, but to the Byzantine Romans.

(* See Moller's "Memorials of German Gothic Architecture," translated by W.H. Leeds London, 1836, p. 18.)

(** " L'Histoire de I'art par les monumens," Pl. xxiv.)

Other writers on this subject do not concur with Moller in this view. *

(* See Sismondi, "Histoire des Repub. Italy," ch. i.)

It is not denied that there was a constant influx of Grecian artists from Byzantium into Lombardy, who unquestionably must have influenced the condition of the arts by their superior skill; it can not be doubted that at the time of the extinction of their kingdom they had attained a very considerable share of civilization, and had made much progress in the art of building. This is evident from the few monuments that still remain as well as from the fact that Charlemagne made but little change in their government when he established his Lombard Empire by their conquest. Nicholson speaks of these Lombards in terms of commendation. He says that "Italy does not seem to have suffered much but rather the reverse from their government, and during their possession the arts flourished and were cultivated with greater success than during the periods either immediately preceding or following. It is certain that they gave a great impetus to building, for during the two hundred years of their sway the northern and central portions of Italy had become studded with churches and baptisteries." *

(* "Dictionary of Architecture" in voce Lombardii Architecture.)

We may therefore very safely say that the ancient architecture of the Romans derived from their Colleges of Artificers was imitated by the Lombards and with its inevitable improvements brought to them from Byzantium by Grecian architects was subsequently extended over Europe. But it was only after the conquest of Lombardy by Charlemagne that that province began to assume that high place in architecture which was won for it by the labors of the builders who disseminated over all Europe the principles of the new style which they had invented. This style, which was designated as the Lombard from the place of its origin, differed both from the Roman and the Byzantine, though it adapted and appropriated portions of both. Notwithstanding that the rule over Lombardy by Charlemagne, a monarch whose genius in acquiring empires was equaled by his prudence in preserving them, must have tended to advance the civilization of the inhabitant, the long succession of a race of degenerate descendants had a retarding effect and it was not until two centuries after his death that the architects of Lombardy established that reputation as builders which has so closely connected their labors with the history of Freemasonry in the Middle Ages.

It has been already seen, when this subject was treated in a previous part of this work, that the Roman Colleges of Artificers continued to exit in all their vigor until the complete fall of the Empire. The invasion of the hordes of barbarians which led to that result had diminished their number and impaired their organization, so long as paganism was the religion of the State. But when the people were converted to Christianity, the Colleges, under the new name of Corporations, began to flourish again.

The bishops and priests, who were admitted into them as patrons and honorary members, soon assumed the control of them and occupied the architects and builders in the construction of churches, cathedrals, monasteries, and other religious edifices. What Whittington * has said of Gaul, may with equal propriety be applied to the other portions of Europe.

(* "An Historical Survey of the Ecclesiastical Antiquities of France." London, 1811, p. 19.)

The people were degraded, the barons only semi-civilized, commerce had not yet elevated the lower classes, and the arts had made but little progress among the higher classes. It was therefore chiefly through the clergy that the art of building was revived, which under these barbaric influences had previously led to its decay. All the writers who have made this subject a study agree in the statement of the great influence of the clergy in the practice and propagation of mediaeval architecture. Ferguson goes so far as to say that in the 13th century the Masonic though skilled in hewing and setting stones and acquainted with all the inventions and improvements in their art, never exercised their calling, except under the guidance of some superior person, who was a bishop, an abbot, or an accomplished layman. *

(* "History of Architecture in all Countries," etc., vol. i., p. 479.)

This too broad assertion is, however, hardly reconcilable with the fact that in France alone in the 13th century, to say nothing of England, Italy, or Germany, there were many architects who, though neither bishops nor abbots, both designed and built great works. Such, for instance, as Hugues Libergier, the builder of the Cathedral of Rheims, Robert de Lusarches, the builder of the Cathedral of Amiens, and Eudes de Montreuil who, says Whittington, was "an artist equally remarkable for his scientific knowledge and the boldness of his conceptions. He accompanied St. Louis in his expeditions to the Holy Land, where he fortified the city and port of Joppa, and on his return to France, was employed by the King in the constructing of several religious buildings." * The important place occupied by the Church in the revival of architecture can not, however, be too highly estimated. Though it

(* "Historical Survey," p. 68.)

would be an error to suppose that there were no laymen who were architects, it must be confessed that the most eminent ecclesiastics made architecture a study, and that in the construction of religious houses, the bishops or abbots designed the plans and the monks executed them. And even if the architect and the Masons were laymen, the house was almost always built under the superintendence and direction of some ecclesiastic of high rank. The view taken of this subject is the one that is historically the most tenable. Whittington's language is worthy of quotation. "In those ages of barbarism, when the lay portion of the community was fully employed in warfare and devastation, when churches and convents were the only retreats of peace and security, they also became the chief foci of productive industry. Convents have long been celebrated as the chief asylums of letters in those ages. They also deserve to be remembered as the sole conservators of art; not only painting, sculpture, enameling, engraving, and portraiture, but even architecture was chiefly exercised in them; and the more as the edifices which showed any elegance of skill were only required for sacred purposes. In every region where a religious order wanted a new church or convent, it was an ordinary thing for the superior, the prior, the abbot, nay, the bishop, to give the design and for the monks to fulfill, under his direction, every department of the execution from the meanest to the highest." *

(* "Historical Essay," P. 222.)

It is important that the reader should be thoroughly impressed with the position and the services of the clergy in the architecture of the Middle Ages, because it accounts for the character of the institution of Stonemasons, who succeeded the ecclesiastical artists, and who though released from the direct service of the Church still remained under its influence. This is well shown in the symbols used by them in the decoration of the buildings which they erected, most of which belong to Christian iconography, in the charters and constitutions by which they were governed, which inculcate religious faith and respect for the Church, and finally in the transmission of a religious character to the Speculative Masons who succeeded them, and of whose institution it has been said that if Freemasonry be not an universal religion, it forms an auxiliary to every system of faith.

The only difference between the Freemasonry of today and that of the 10th or the 11th century, in respect to the question of religion is that the former is cosmopolitan and universal in its creed, whose only unalterable points are the existence of God and the immortality of the soul, while the latter was strictly Christian according to the orthodox, catholic form in its belief and practice. But notwithstanding the change from intolerance to liberality of sentiment which the progress of the age has introduced, it must never be forgotten that whatever there is of a religious or sacred character in the constitution or the ritual of the Freemasonry of today must be traced to the influences of the Church over the Operative Masons of the Middle Ages. But it is necessary to resume the thread of our history.

At the beginning of the 11th century Lombardy was the active center of civilization in Europe. It had prospered under the free institutions of its kings for two centuries, and on the extirpation of the royal line, the people shared in the benefits of the wise policy and prudent government of their conqueror, Charlemagne. The workmen of Lombardy still maintained the relics of those ancient Sodalities, which had carried under the Roman domination the principles and practices of the Colleges of Artificers into the conquered provinces of the Empire. The policy of the kings had led them to give various craftsmen the exclusive privilege of exercising their own trades, and under the form of guilds or corporations to establish bodies, which were governed by peculiar laws, and which were sought to be perpetuated by the introduction into them of youths who were to be instructed by the Masters, so that having served a due probation as apprentices, they might become associates and workers in the guild or corporation. It was in this way that at that time all trades and professions were organized. In so far as respects the union in a corporation endowed with peculiar privileges, the Masons did not differ essentially from the shoemakers, the hatters, or the tailors. Each had its Masters, its Wardens or equivalent officers, and each was governed by its own laws and was recruited from a body of apprentices. *

(* Fergusson, "History of Architecture," vol. i-, p. 477.)

There was, however, one very important difference between the Masons and the other crafts which was productive of singular results. This difference arose from the nature of the work which was to be done, and which affected the relations of the craftsmen to each other. The trade of the tailor or the shoemaker was local. The custom was derived from the place in which he lived. The members of the corporation or guild all knew each other, they lived in the same town or city - and their apprentices, having accomplished their time of service and gone forth to see the world, almost always returned home and sated among their relatives and their friends. Hence the work done by these trades was work that came to them. It was brought to them by the neighbors who lived around them. Every shoemaker in a city knew every other shoemaker in the same place; every tailor was familiar with the face, the life, and the character of every other tailor. While such intimacy existed there was no necessity for the establishment of any peculiar guards against impostors, for the trade was seldom troubled with the presence of strangers. But it was not so with the Masons. Theirs was not a local craft. Work did not come to them, but they had to go to the work.

Whenever a building was to be erected which required a force of workmen beyond the number who resided usually near the place, Masons had to be sent for from the adjacent towns and districts, and sometimes from even much greater distances. There was therefore a great necessity for caution in the admission of these "strangers among the workmen" lest some should intrude who were not legally entitled to employment by having acquired a knowledge of the craft in the regular way; that is, by having passed through the probation of an apprenticeship to some lawful Master. Hence arose the necessity of adopting secret modes of recognition, by which a stranger might be known on his first appearance as a member of the Craft, as a true craftsman, or be at once detected as an impostor. Mr. Fergusson has adopted this view of the origin of signs and passwords among the Masons. As a scholar of much research, but who, not being a member of the modern confraternity, derives his opinions and deductions from history unconnected with any guild traditions, his remarks are interesting. He says:

"At a time when writing was almost wholly unknown among the laity, and not one Mason in a thousand could either read or write, it is evidently essential that some expedient should be hit upon by which a Mason traveling to his work might claim assistance and hospitality of his brother Masons on the road, by means of which he might take his rank at once on reaching the lodge without going through tedious examinations or giving practical proofs of his skill. For this purpose a set of secret signs was invented which enabled all Masons to recognize one another as such, and by which also each man could make known his grade to those of similar rank without further trouble than a manual sign, or the utterance of some recognized password. Other trades had something of the same sort, but it never was necessary for them to carry it either to the same extent nor to practice it so often as Masons, they being, for the most part, resident in the same place and knowing each other personally." *

(* "History of Architecture," vol. i., p. 478.)

Freemasonry was therefore in the following condition at the beginning of the 11th century, so far as respects the Kingdom of Lombardy, to which the honor has been universally assigned of being the center from which the Masonic corporations spread abroad into the rest of Europe. Lombardy being, as has already been shown, the active center whence the arts and sciences were radiated into other countries, architecture, as one of the most useful of the arts and one of an almost sacred character from its use in the construction of religious edifices, took a prominent place among the crafts that were cultivated in that country. Schools of architecture and corporations of architects principally ecclesiastics, were formed. These, passing into other countries and disseminating the principles of their science which they had acquired in the schools at home, have been hence known in history by the title of the "Traveling Freemasons of the Middle Ages."

Among these schools one of the most distinguished was that of Como. The ancient city of Comum, lying at the southern extremity of the Lacus Larius, now called the Lake of Como, was, even under the Empire, a place of some distinction, as it had obtained from Coesar the full franchises of a Roman community. It was probably the birthplace of the elder and the younger Pliny, and was certainly the favorite residence of the latter, who writes of it in one of his letters to Canidius Rufus in words of endearing fondness, calling it his darling. "What," he says, "is doing at Como, our darling?" *

(* Quid agit Comum, tuae mem que deliciae? Pliny, "Epistles," lib. i., cap. 3.)

Pliny established there a school of learning, and at an early period it was noted for its foundries of iron. It retained its prosperity until the fall of the Empire, and continued in a flourishing condition under the Goths and under the Lombards. It retained its importance during the Middle Ages and is still populous and flourishing. The architectural school of Como was of such repute in the 10th century that, according to Muratori, the historian of Italy, the name of Magistri Comacini, or Masters from Como, came to be the generic name for all these associations of architects.

The influx of Grecian artists from Byzantium into Italy at that time was, most probably, one of the means by which the Lombardic architects were enabled to improve their system of building. It was from the Greek Empire of Byzantium that the light of the arts and sciences, and of literature, proceeded, which poured its intellectual rays into the darkness, of Western Europe. At that time the word Greek, or Grecian, was synonymous with all intellectual culture. We find a curious illustration of this in the Legend of the Craft, where Charles Martel, evidently a mistake for Charlemagne, is said to have been indebted for the improvements in architecture or Masonry in his Kingdom to the visit of Naimus Grecus.

I have shown, in the first part of this work, that this expression simply means "a certain Greek." The legend thus recognized the fact that Europe was instructed in architecture by the Greeks of Byzantium, who visited Italy and Gaul. The labors of these Masons could not long be confined within the narrow limits of Lombardy. Opulent as it was and populous, it could not fail to be fitted with churches and religious edifices, so that in time the need and the means of building more must have become exhausted. There being no further demand for their services at home, they looked beyond the Alps, which formed their northern boundary, for new fields in which to exercise their skill and to avail themselves of the exclusive privileges which they are said to have possessed.

A certain number, says Mr. Hope, united and formed themselves into a single greater association or fraternity which proposed to seek for occupation beyond its native land, and in any ruder, foreign region, however remote, where new religious edifices and skillful artists to erect them were wanted, to offer their services and bend their steps to undertake the work. *

(* "Historical Essay," pp. 230, 231.)

The connection of these Freemasons with the Church forms an interesting and important part of their history. Governor Pownall, in an article on this subject in the Archaelogia, was one of the first to make the statement that the origin of Freemasonry as an organized institution is to be traced to the builders who issued from Italy about the 12th century and traveled all over Europe, disseminating the principles of their art and erecting religious buildings under the patronage of the Pope. On this subject he writes as follows:

"The churches throughout all the northern parts of Europe being in a ruinous state, the Pope created several corporations of Roman or Italian architects and artists, with corporate powers and exclusive privileges, particularly with a power of setting by themselves the prices of their own work and labor, independent of the municipal laws of the country wherein they worked, according as Hiram had done by the corporations of architects and mechanics which he sent to Solomon. The Pope not only thus formed them into such a corporation, but is said to have sent them (as exclusively appropriated) to repair and rebuild these churches and other religious edifices. This body had a power of taking apprentices, and of admitting or accepting into their corporation approved Masons. It will be found that, claiming to hold primarily and exclusively under the Pope, they assumed a right, as Freemasons, of being exempt from the regulations of the statutes of laborers, laws in England which made regulations for the price of labor; secondly, in order to regulate these matters amongst themselves as well as all matters respecting their corporation, they held general chapters and other congregations. Doing this they constantly refused obedience or to conform themselves to these statutes, which regulated the price of the labor of all other laborers and mechanics, although they were specifically mentioned therein." * Dr. Henry, the historian, in speaking of them in his History of Great Britain, says that "the Popes, for very obvious reasons, favored the erection of churches and convents, and granted many indulgences by their bulls to the society of Masons in order to increase their numbers. These indulgences produced their full effect in those superstitious times, and that society became very numerous and raised a prodigious multitude of magnificent churchen about this time, in several countries." **

(* "Archaeologia," p. 117.)

(** "History of Great Britain," vol. viii., p. 275)

Sir Christopher Wren makes the same statement, and I quote at length the passage contained in the Parentalia (which is one of the rarest of modern English books), because it not only repeats the statement of Papal encouragement, but gives a very detailed account of the mode of traveling adopted by these wandering Masons and their usages in constructing buildings. His words are: "We are told by one who was well acquainted with their history and constitutions that the Italians, with some Greek refugees, and with them Frenchmen, Germans, and Flemings, joined into a fraternity of architects, procuring Papal bulls for their encouragement and their particular privileges; they styled themselves Freemasons, and ranged from one nation to another as they found churches to be built; for very many, in those days, were every day building through piety or emulation; their government was regular; and where they fixed near the building in hand, they made a camp of huts.

A surveyor governed in chief; every tenth man was called a Warden, and overlooked each nine. The gentlemen in the neighborhood, either out of charity or commutation of penance, gave the materials and carriage. Those who have seen the accounts in records of the charge of the fabrics of some of our cathedrals near four hundred years old, can not but have a great esteem for their economy and admire how soon they erected such lofty structures." * Hope is still more explicit in referring to the Papal patronage which is said to have been bestowed upon these Traveling Freemasons. He says that when they were no longer restricted in the exercise of their profession to Lombardy, but had begun to travel into the most distant countries, wherever their services as builders might be required, it was found necessary to establish a monopoly in the construction of religious edifices by which all craftsmen, even the natives of the country where they went as strangers were, if not members of their body, to be excluded from employment. Now this exclusive privilege was one which no temporal potentate could give to have effect beyond his own dominions. In all those countries which recognized the Pope as the head of the Church - that is to say in all the countries of Europe - the authority of a Papal bull was the only power by which this monopoly could be universally secured. The Masons, says Mr. Hope, could be regarded only as different troops of laborers working in the cause of the Pope, extending his estates by the erection of new churches; and he thinks that they thus obtained the requisite powers soon after Charlemagne had put an end to the rule of the Lombards in Italy, and had annexed that Kingdom to his own Empire.

(* "Parentalia," p. 306.)

"The Masons were," he says, "fraught with Papal bulls or diplomas not only concerning the corporate powers given to them by their own native sovereign, on their own native soil, but granting to them, in every other foreign country which they might visit for purposes connected with their association, where the Latin creed was avowed, and the supremacy of the spiritual creed acknowledged, the right of holding directly and solely under the Pope, alone, entire exemption from all local laws and statutes, edicts of the sovereign or municipal regulations, whether with regard to the force of labor or any other binding upon the native subjects; they acquired the power, not only themselves to fix the price of their labor, but to regulate whatever else might appertain to their own internal government, exclusively in their own general chapters; prohibiting all native artists, not admitted into their society, from entering with it into any sort of competition, and all native sovereigns from supporting their subjects in such rebellion against the Church, and commanding all such temporal subjects to respect these credentials and to obey these mandates under pain of excommunication." *

(* "Historical Essay on Architecture," P. 232.)

This statement in reference to the granting of bulls or charters of privilege to the Traveling Freemasons is given by Mr. Hope, probably on the authority of Governor Pownall. In February, 1788, a letter from Governor Pownall was read before the Society of Antiquaries of London, and subsequently published in the ninth volume of the Archaeologia, * under the title of "Observations on the Origin and Progress of Gothic Architecture, and on the Corporation of Free Masons supposed to be the Establishers of it as a Regular Order." Governor Pownall commences his letter by the assertion of his belief that the College or Corporation of Freemasons were the formers of Gothic architecture into a regular and scientific order by applying the models and proportions of timber frame-work to building in stone.

(* "Archaeologia," vol. ix., pp. 110-126.)

Without stopping to discuss the question of the correctness of this theory of the origin of the Gothic style, which must be a subject of future consideration, I proceed to analyze those parts of the letter which refer to the patronage of the Freemasons by the Papal See. According to Governor Pownall, the churches throughout all the northern parts of Europe being in a ruinous state, the Pope erected several corporations of Roman or Italian architects and artists with corporate powers and exclusive privileges, * particularly with a power of setting by themselves the prices of their own work and labor, independent of the municipal laws of the country wherein they worked.

(* Although it was never competent for the Pope to create a corporation in England, yet according to Mr. Ayliffe, on the Continent that power was conceded to him and shared by him with the prince or temporal sovereign. "Treatise on the Civil Law," P. 210.)

The Pope not only thus formed them into such a corporation, but is said to have sent them with exclusive powers to repair and rebuild the churches and other religious edifices which in different countries had fallen into decay, but also to build new ones when required. In England, into which these builders had penetrated at an early period, they were styled "Free and Accepted Masons." In respect to the historical authority for the existence of this Papal bull, charter, or diploma, which is said to have been issued about the close of the 12th or the beginning of the 13th century, Pownall says that being convinced from "incontrovertible record" that the Corporation of Architects and Masons had been thus instituted, he was very solicitous to have inquiry and search made among the archives at Rome, whether it was not possible to find there some record of the transaction.

Application was accordingly made to the librarian of the Vatican and the Pope himself is said to have ordered minute search to be made. But the report was that "not the least traces of any such record" could be found. Governor Pownall, notwithstanding this failure, thought that some record or copy of the charter must be buried somewhere at Rome amidst forgotten and unknown bundles and rolls - a circumstance which he says had frequently occurred in relation to important English records. Unfortunately for the positive settlement of the historic question, it by no means follows because the Roman Catholic librarian of the Vatican could not or would not find a bull or diploma which in the 12th century had granted special indulgences to an association which the Popes in the 18th century had denounced and excommunicated, that no such bull is in existence. The policy of the Papal Church overrules, without compunction, all principles of historic accuracy and by its undeviating course, whenever the end seemed to justify the means, forged or suppressed documents are of no uncommon occurrence. This question still divides Masonic writers. Krause, for instance, on the supposed authority of a statement of Elias Ashmole, communicated by Dr. Knipe to the compiler of his Life, admits the fact of a Papal charter, while Stieglitz, accepting the unsuccessful application of Pownall to the Vatican librarian, contends for the absurdity of any such claim.

The preponderance of historical authority is, however, in favor of the statement. There is certainly abundant evidence of the subordination of these Masons to ecclesiastical authority. And it is not unreasonable to suppose that the entire supervision of church buildings exercised by bishops and abbots, who, as Fergusson says, made the designs while the Masons only followed the plans laid down for them, must have been supported by the express authority of the head of the Church.

The Traveling Freemasons were at an early period simply the servants of the Church. Another fact worthy of attention is that the relationship of trade and the frequency of intercourse for other reasons between the different cities of Lombardy and Constantinople brought to Italy many Greeks, some of whom came seeking for employment and others were driven from their homes by political or religious persecutions. Among these emigrants were many artists who united with the Masonic Corporations of Lombardy, and infused into them a large portion of their Byzantine art.

These Freemasons, thus armed with the authority of the Pontiff, having been well organized at home, were ready to set forth, like missionaries at the call of the Church, to build cathedrals, churches, and monasteries as they might be needed by the extension of the Christian religion. From the 10th to the 12th century, and in some places even earlier, we find them perambulating Europe and spreading the knowledge of the art in Germany, in France, in England, Scotland, and elsewhere.

The remarks of Mr. Hope on the professional wanderings of these Craftsmen of the Middle Ages, though they have the air of romance, are really well supported by historical authority. "Often obliged," says that pleasing writer, "from regions the most distant, singly to seek the common place of rendezvous, and departure of the troop, or singly to follow its earlier detachments to places of employment equally distant, and that at an era when travelers met on the road every obstruction and no convenience, when no inns existed at which to purchase hospitality, but lords dwelt everywhere, who only prohibited their tenants from waylaying the traveler, because they considered this, like killing game, one of their own exclusive privileges; the members of these communities contrived to render their journeys more easy and safe by engaging with each other, and perhaps even in many places, with individuals not directly participating in their profession, in compacts of mutual assistance, hospitality, and good services, most valuable to men so circumstanced. They endeavored to compensate for the perils which attended their expeditions, by institutions for their needy or disabled brothers; but lest such as belonged not to their communities should benefit surreptitiously by these arrangements for its advantage, they framed signs of mutual recognition as carefully concealed from the knowledge of the uninitiated as the mysteries of their art themselves. Thus supplied with whatever could facilitate such distant journeys and labors as they contemplated, the members of these Corporations were ready to obey any summons with the utmost alacrity, and they soon received the encouragement they anticipated.

The militia of the Church of Rome, which diffused itself all over Europe in the shape of missionaries, to instruct nations and to establish their allegiance to the Pope, took care not only to make them feel the want of churches and monasteries, but likewise to learn the manner in which the want might be supplied. Indeed they themselves generally undertook the supply; and it may be asserted that a new apostle of the Gospel no sooner arrived in the remotest corner of Europe, either to convert the inhabitants to Christianity or to introduce among them a new religious order, than speedily followed a tribe of itinerant Freemasons to back him and to provide the inhabitants with the necessary places of worship or reception. "Thus ushered in, by their interior arrangements assured of assistance and safety on the road; and by the bulls of the Pope and the support of his ministers abroad assured of every species of immunity and preference at the place of their destination; bodies of Freemasons dispersed themselves in every direction, every day began to advance farther and to proceed from country to country to the utmost verge of the faithful, in order to answer the unceasing demand for them or to seek more distant custom." *

(* "Historical Essay on Architecture," p. 235.)

One fact peculiarly worthy of remark is that throughout all Europe, from its southern to its northern, from its western to its eastern limit - wherever the Christian religion had penetrated and churches had been created - a surprising uniformity existed in the style of all edifices wheresoever built at the same period. No better evidence than this could be furnished of the existence of an association whose members, wherever they might be scattered, must have been controlled by the same rules of art. Sidney Smith, Esq., in a paper in the Archaeologia, alludes to this fact in the following language, in which he speaks of this association as having been established in the early part of the 13th century by a Papal bull:

"Thus associated and exclusively devoted to the practice of Masonry, it is easy to infer that a rapid improvement, both in the style and execution of their work, would result. Forming a connected and corresponding society, and roving over the different countries of Europe, wherever the munificent piety of those ages promised employment to their skill, it is probable, and even a necessary, consequence, that improvements by whomsoever introduced would quickly become common to all; and to this cause we may refer the simultaneous progress of one style throughout Europe which forms so singular a phenomenon in the history of architecture." * Mr. Hope is subsequently still more elaborate in his remarks on this subject.

(* "Archaeologia," vol. xxi., P. 521.)

"The architects," he says, "of all the sacred edifices of the Latin Church, wherever such arose - north, south, east, or west - thus derived their science from the same central school; obeyed, in their designs, the same hierarchy; were directed in their construction by the same principles of propriety and taste; kept up with each other, in the most distant parts to which they might be sent, the most constant correspondence; and rendered every minute improvement the property of the whole body and a new conquest of the art.... The result of this unanimity was, that at each successive period of the Masonic dynasty, on whatever point a new church or new monastery might be erected, it resembled all those raised at the same period in every other place, however distant from it, as if both had been built in the same place, by the same artist.... For instance, we find at particular epochs, churches as far distant from each other as the north of Scotland and the south of Italy more minutely similar than those erected within the single precincts of Rome or Ravenna." *

(* "Historical Essay on Architecture," pp. 238, 239. )

Paley also speaks of this uniformity of style which prevailed everywhere throughout all counties as one of the most remarkable facts connected with the history of mediaeval architecture. And he cites the remark of Willis in his Architecture of the Middle Ages, that whereas in our own age it is the practice to imitate every style of architecture that can be found in all the countries of the earth, it appears that in any given period and place our forefathers admitted but of one style, which was used to the complete exclusion of every other during its prevalence. Paley very correctly accounts for this by the fact that Freemasonry was in the Middle Ages "a craft in the hands of a corporate ecclesiastical confraternity the members of which seem to have been bound down to certain rules." *

(* Paley, "Manual of Gothic Architecture," p. 206.)

After what has already been said in this work, it is very evident that this "craft in the hands of a corporate ecclesiastical confraternity "must make a very important link in the great chain which connects the history of Freemasonry in one continued series from the first development of the art in a corporate form in the Colleges of Numa, until that transition period when the Operative was merged in the Speculative element. Mr. Hope, who devoted much labor to an investigation of the influences which toward the end of the 10th century affected architecture generally and diffusively throughout Europe, wrote an exhaustive chapter on this subject in his Historical Essay, whence copious citations have been made in the present work.

It will be sufficient in making a summary of what has been already presented to the reader, to say of these influences he considered the most important to be the establishment of a school of architecture in Lombardy and the organization of Guilds of Builders who, under the name of "Freemasons," perambulated the whole continent, passing over to England and Scotland, and taught the art of building under the inspiration of the same principles of architecture, directed by the same ideas of taste, and governed by the same guild spirit of fraternity. Subsequently to the appearance of this work of Mr. Hope, Lord Lindsay entered the same field of investigation and presented the public with the result of his inquiries in a work entitled Sketches of the History of Christian Art, from whose pages much interesting information may be gleaned in respect to the condition of mediaeval Freemasonry and architecture.

These mediaeval Freemasons at first adopted the principles of Byzantine art in their construction of churches and afterward invented that new system known as the Gothic style of architecture. Before the organization of the Lombard school the architecture of Europe was that which had been derived from the builders of Rome, and all the churches constructed in Italy, in Gaul, and even as far as Britain, were built upon the model of the Roman basilica, an edifice which in pagan Rome served as a court of law and an exchange, or a place of public meeting for merchants and men of business. As after the conversion of the Empire to the new religion, many of these edifices were converted into Christian places of worship, the word was used in the low Latin of the period to designate a cathedral or metropolitan church, and the style was readily adopted and followed in the construction of new churches. The style of architecture which prevailed in Byzantium or Constantinople was very different from the Roman.

The principal differences were the four naves as parts of a cross of equal limbs, and especially the surmounting dome or cupola, which was, generally, octagonal in shape. This style the Lombard Freemasons adopted in part, modifying it with the Roman style, and finally developing the Gothic as a new system peculiarly their own. The history of this style, its progress in different countries, and the gradual changes it underwent, is therefore intimately connected with Freemasonry.

The question naturally arises why these Lombard Masons, who had derived their first lessons from the descendants of the old builders of the Roman Colleges of Artificers and who were surrounded by the examples of Roman art, should have so materially modified their system as to have given to it a much greater resemblance to the Byzantine than to the Roman style. The answer to this question will be found not only in the fact that between the shores of northern and eastern Italy there was a very frequent, continuous intercourse with Byzantium, but also in the additional fact that the religious architects of Lombardy were very thoroughly imbued with the principles of the science of symbolism, and that they found these principles far better developed in the Byzantine than in the Roman style. "The basilica," says Lord Lindsay, "is far less suggestive, far less symbolical than the Byzantine edifice, and hence the sympathy always manifested for Byzantium by the Lombard architects." *

(* "Sketches of Christian Art.")

How the Freemasons of Lombardy became imbued with the science of symbolism and made it a prominent part of their art of building, are questions of very great interest, because they refer to the only bond which connects the Speculative Masons of the present day with the old Operative Masons of the Middle Ages. This important topic will be hereafter discussed in a separate chapter when I come to the consideration of that period of time in the history of Freemasonry which is marked by the transition of the Operative into the Speculative institution. All that is necessary to be said here is that this symbolic style of architecture, beginning in Lombardy somewhere between the 7th and the 10th centuries, diffused itself gradually at first, but rapidly afterward over the whole of Europe.

For this diffusion of a peculiar religious architecture Lord Lindsay assigns the following reason as germane to the subject of the present chapter: "What chiefly contributed to its diffusion over Europe was the exclusive monopoly in Christian architecture, conceded by the Popes toward the close of the 8th century, to the Masons of Como, then and for ages afterward, when the title Magisiri Comacini had long been absorbed in that of Free and Accepted Masons, associated as a craft or brotherhood in art and friendship.

A distinct and powerful body, composed, eventually, of all nations, concentrating the talent of each successive generation with all the advantages of accumulated experience and constant mutual communication - imbued, moreover, in that age of faith, with the deepest Christian reverence, and retaining these advantages unchallenged till their proscription in the 15th and 16th centuries - we cannot wonder that the Freemasons should have carried their art to a pitch of perfection which, now that their secrets are lost, it may be considered hopeless to attempt to rival." *

(* "Sketches of Christian Art," vol. ii., p. 14.)

The result of all these observations has been, I think, to strengthen and substantiate the theory which, all through this work, has been maintained, of the origin of Freemasonry as a Speculative institution founded on an Operative art. In every country where it has been founded we are enabled to trace its first beginning as a craft organized into a Guild, Corporation, or Confraternity, to the Roman Colleges of Artificers - the Collegia Fabrorum - which were originally established, or are said to have been established, by Numa. Thus we find the architects who came out of these Colleges following the Roman legions in their marches to conquest, settling to work in the colonies, municipalities, and free cities which were established by the Roman government in the colonies of Gaul and Britain, and perpetuating the Roman taste and the Roman method of work. So have we traced the progress of these Masons of Rome in the different colonies where they settled and continued their labors after the Empire had fallen.

And now we see the links of the historical chain more distinctly visible in the rise and progress of these Masons of Lombardy. Originally, undoubtedly Roman Colleges must have had their seats in the northern part of Italy, that highly favored province which, more than any other had received its civilization and its art cultivation from the imperial city. Then, when the glory of Rome had departed, the Lombard kings preserved the Roman architecture, and after their conversion to Christianity, practiced it under the auspices of the Church.

Then came, toward the 10th century, those Corporations of Freemasons, who, imitating in their form of government the example which had been set by the Colleges, presented themselves as a Confraternity of workmen who, first having filled their own country with specimens of their skill, at length leaving Como and other cities of Lombardy, crossed the Alps and proceeded to communicate to other countries the knowledge of that art and the mode of practicing it, which they had acquired at Como.

One of the first countries into which these Traveling Freemasons penetrated - perhaps the very first - was Germany. There we find, in the 12th century, the Steinmetzen, or the Stonemasons, who appear to have been almost a direct continuation of the Comacine Masters, or Traveling Freemasons of Lombardy. These German Stonemasons have played too important a part in the history of Masonry to permit them to be passed over without an extended survey of all that is connected with their rise and progress, and with their wonderful achievements in medioeval Masonry or Architecture. The Stonemasons of Germany will then be the topic discussed in the following chapter.

Back to The History of Freemasonry [ Next ] [ Previous ]