FREEMASONRY AND ITS KINDRED SCIENCES by ALBERT C. MACKEY M. D. |
SHAMIR King Solomon is said, in a Rabbinical legend, to have used the worm Shamir as an instrument for building the Temple. The legend is that Moses engraved the names of the twelve tribes on the stones of the breastplate by means of the blood of the worm Shamir, whose solvent power was so great that it could corrode the hardest substances. When Solomon was about to build the Temple of stones without the use of any metallic implement, he was desirous of obtaining this potent blood; but the knowledge of the source whence Moses had derived it had been lost by the lapse of time. Solomon enclosed the chick of a bird, either an ostrich or a hoopoe, in a crystal vessel, and placed a sentinel to watch it. The parent bird, finding it impossible to break the vessel with her bill so as to gain access to the young one, flew to the desert, and returned with the miraculous worm, which, by means of its blood, soon penetrated the prison of glass, and liberated the chick. By a repetition of the process, the King of Israel at length acquired a sufficiency of the dissolving blood to enable him to work upon the stones of the Temple. It is supposed that the legend is based on a corruption of the word Smiris, the Greek for emery, which was used by the antique engravers in their works and medallions, and that the name Shamir is merely the Hebrew form of the Greek word. SHAKESPEARE, WILLIAM Famous playwright and poet, born at Stratford-on-Avon, England, on April 22 or 23,1564; died, April 23, 1616, at Stratford. Brother Henry F. Evans has in the Rob Morris Bulletin of Denver, March, 1918, collected a number of items from the writings of Shakespeare having some bearing on words and phrases common among Freemasons. An article, "Was William Shakespeare a Freemason," by Robert I. Clegg, appeared in the Builder, February, 1910, examined among many others certain references to the letter G. in Richard III i, 1; the grip and whisper, King John iv, 2; the North for darkness and for evil, Henry VI v, 3, Henry IV ii, 4, Merry Wives of Windsor ii, 2; the plant that discovered the grave and thus revealed the murder of Polydorus to the patient seeker, Aeneas, is in Virgil, book iii, 22, and in Macbeth iii, 4, we have similar testimony that murder will out though stones must move and trees speak. These at least show the age of various ritualistic expressions and the advisability of carefully weighing past usefulness before making changes as is sometimes advised with what is now not so familiar in common usage as formerly. SHAKESPEARE, WILLIAMS AND MASONRY There is no obvious connection between Masonic research and Shakespearean research; Freemasonry as a Fraternity does not appear in the plays, and there is no indication that Shakespeare belonged to any one of the Time Immemorial Lodges. But out of Shakespearean research and theory arose two or three theories which became connected with the Craft, and Masonic research was thereby drawn into "the Shakespearean question " 1. There was the theory that Bacon, not the actor Shakespeare. had written the plays at about the same time, and in consequence, there was the theory that Bacon had organized a secret society and that this was the origin of Freemasonry. The discovery of new documents of unquestioned authenticity since Delia Bacon launched "the Baconian Hypothesis' has completely once and for all, destroyed any possibility of the truth of it. These documents prove that Shakespeare lived for some thirteen years in London, first in the neighborhood of Blackfriars Theater, then in the neighborhood of the Globe Theater; that he was actor, manager, a re-writer and a writer of plays, etc.; that the principal characters in the plays were adapted to fit the personality, physique, and talents in Shakespeare's company; the names and number of these players are known, etc.; Bacon's name nowhere appears in these records, or any representative of Bacon or any of Bacon's ideas. Shakespeare is proved to have lived neighbor to Decker and Jonson for years, which gives their testimony to his authorship the weight of firsthand knowledge. The author of the plays indubitable was William Shakespeare of Stratford; therefore the flounder of any Baconian secret society was not their author. Meanwhile no evidence of any connection between Bacon and Freemasonry has been discovered, on the other hand a massive accumulation of evidence proves that Freemasonry was at work centuries before Bacon was born. 2. Shakespeare was living in London when the commerce, trade, and crafts were still divided among chartered City Companies; these Companies comprised the framework of London, and contributed most of the Lord Mayors for about six centuries In the manuscript of a play entitled "Sir Thomas More" are three pages in Shakespeare's handwriting. This material has a peculiar interest for Freemasons for a reason that must be explained: One of the rules of the City Companies (the Mason Company among them) gave London workmen monopolistic control of work in London. Any non-London workman brought in was called a "stranger." It might happen under extraordinary circumstances that an exception would be made in favor of a "stranger' but if not it was considered that any work he might do was "bootlegged," or "clandestine"—Scottish Masons would have called them "cowans." The records of the Mason Company are interspersed with protests against and condemnations of "strangers" in the building crafts. Once in a while the members of a City Company might gather on the street to drive "strangers" out; these were called riots or mobs. It happens that the scene written into "Sir Thomas More" by Shakespeare for use on the stage concerned just such a "mob." In a speech for the character of Sir Thomas More he wrote a powerful denunciation of this mobbing in that overwhelming poetry which was uniquely his own. 3. One of the main supports of the anti-Shakespeare theory of authorship of the plays was the argument that a man from Stratford could not have possessed the encyclopedic knowledge revealed in them. This argument has lost its point. First, Shakespearean research has proved that Shakespeare lived and worked in the very focus of British government and learning, was a boon companion of scholars, met men from travels in distant countries, was received by the Queen, helped to receive the all-important Spanish Ambassador, produced plays in the Inns of the Temple, the center and home of British law, etc. Second, it has proved that in writing a play he adhered as closely as possible to some volume by Plutarch, Holinshed, Malory, Montaigne, etc.; much of the erudition which went into the plays, and which has constituted the great puzzle, was therefore not his own erudition but belonged to the books he wed. If he introduced here and there some detail strikingly similar to a Masonic word or phrase, or custom it does not follow that he himself had any knowledge of the Craft. A Shakespeare Lodge constituted at Stratford expressly with the hope of proving Shakespeare to have been a Mason admitted its failure. Evidence may be discovered in the future; if it is it will be welcome; until it is, there are no grounds for believing that he ever entered a Lodge. As for his plays themselves their large themes are historical, political, military; architecture and the gilds have no place in them except as furnishing background for some detail or are mentioned in from passing auction. Dr. Charles William Wallace, of the University of Nebraskan made in 1919 the discovery of the records of a trial in which Shakespeare was a witness and to one of which he attached his signature. He also discovered in the Record Office the exact location of the Globe Theater. Dr. Leslie Hotson, Haverford College, America, discovered a deed belonging to Shakespeare for a house near Blackfriars; and a subpoena issued to a set of persons who had made threats against a certain William Waytes in 1596, with William Shakespeare among five accused persons named. Shakespeare lampooned this Wayte's close friend Justice William Gardiner as Justice Swallow in two plays. The Countess Clara Longworth de Chambrun discovered the copy of Holinshed which Shakespeare had used. Discoveries of records and correspondence in late years have cleared up the question of Shakespeare's religion. He spent his boyhood at the period when Roman Catholicism was being driven out of Stratford, and his father, the town's leading citizen, Mayor a number of terms, and until his last years a man of wealth, was the leader of the Protestants who stripped the Stratford Church of its images and other Popish trappings; his mother, on the other hand, was an Arden, a very old family, and famous for its devotion to the Roman Church; she was compelled by law to abandon her creed, but it is probable that she continued to cherish it in secret. Since Shakespeare was as much attached to one parent as to the other it is reasonable to believe that he had no strong inner attachment to either Protestantism or Romanism. Moreover, Stratford had become not only Protestant but Puritan; since his had been a forced marriage, and since he had gone off to London to work in a theater, the Puritan circles at home could not have looked upon him with approval. He returned, however, a wealthy man, and for that reason was accepted back into respectability, though after his death when London actors arrived in Stratford with a bust to place at his tomb they were ill received, and given one day to leave the town because they belonged to a profession which the Puritans were determined to destroy. (See Mr. Shakespeare of the Globe, by Frayne Williams; E. P. Dutton & Co.; Stew York; 1941; 396 pages; abundant references Francis Bacon and his secret society. by Mrs. Pott. Speddings Life of Bacon. .Shakespeare: Creator of Freemasonry by Alfred Dodd; Slider & Co.; London.) SHARP INSTRUMENT 1 The emblematic use of a sharp instrument, as indicated in the instructions of the First Degree, is intended to be represented by a warlike weapon, the old rituals call it "a warlike instrumented such as a dagger or sword. The use of the point of a pair of compasses, as is sometimes improperly done, is an erroneous application of the symbol, which should not be tolerated in a properly conducted Lodge. The compasses are, besides, a symbol peculiar to the Third Degree. SHARP INSTRUMENT 2 The Minutes of the Lodge of Antiquity (one of "the Four Old Lodges") record that on March 26, 1834 "a poignard for the I. G. was given by Bro. R. W. Jennings . . . " Prior to the Union there had been in general no protection of the door except by the Tiler, who stood outside, armed with a weapon, which, in Speculative Freemasonry, had symbolic purposes only yet was for those purposes inexorably wielded. The story of the sword in early Speculative Freemasonry is an interesting one—it is recommended to Masonic essayists. In the Eighteenth Century young blades wore a sword almost everywhere; sometimes even in Church (if they mere armigerous " or entitled to bear arms, Which ''commoners" were not permitted to do). Should Lodges permit swords to be worn in the Lodge Room? A weapon was out of place there. The young men insisted that they would; the Lodges insisted that they should not; Grand Lodge weakened once and gave permission, but at the end of a year recanted and withdrew permission; swords were left in the Anteroom. But it is probable that as a kind of compromise the Tiler, who was not only a "commoner" but of a lower order still, namely, a "servant," had to give over his ancient practice of carrying about the gentlemen's weapon, and took to wearing a poignard which was really a foreign weapon. When an Inner Guard was added to the Lodge officers after the Union of 1813 he also was armed, and also with what one Secretary wrote down as a "p - - - d. " In the course of time (at least in America) the Inner Guard (or Junior Deacon) went without even that weapon, and the now unlawful sword was returned to the Outer Guard, or Tiler. What a visitor, or stranger, or a Candidate encountered at the Outer Door of the Lodge was not a door, but a sword! To outsiders the "sword" is a challenge and a warning; to members it is a guard and a protection. (The "border"—or boundary, or tessellated edge of a Lodge room—is thus an actuality) There is no data to show when or why the symbolism of the Sharp Instrument was introduced, but it is a reasonable theory that it is a symbolical modification of the old custom in which the Tiler (or Outer Guard) guarded the Inner Door with his blade—certainly he never guarded it with a pair of compasses. SHASTER Hindu word meaning instruction. Any book held more or less sacred among the Hindus, whether included in the Sruti or not. The Great Shasters comprise the Vedas, the Upavedas, and the Vedangas, with their appended works of learning, including the Puranas, the Ramayana, and the Mahabharata (see puranas, Ramaydna, and Mahabharata). SHASTRAS The sacred book of the Hindus, which contains the dogmas of their religion and the ceremonies of their worship. It is a commentary on the Vedas, and consists of three parts: the moral law, the rites and ceremonies of the religion, and the distribution of the people into tribes. To the Hindu Freemason it would be the Greater Light and his Book of the Law, as the Bible is to his Christian Brother. SHEBA, QUEEN OF In the Books of Kings and Chronicles (see First Kings x, 1-13, and Second Chronicles ix, 1-12), we are told that "when the Queen of Sheba heard of the fame of Solomon concerning the name of the Lord, she came to prove him with hard questions." Sheba, or Saba, is supposed to have been a province of Arabia Felix, situated to the south of Jerusalem. The Queen, whose visit is thus described, is spoken of nowhere else in Scripture. But the Jews and the Arabs, who gave her the name of Salkis, recite many traditions concerning her. The Masonic one will be found under the words Admiration, Sign of, which see. SHEBAT The Hebrew word The fifth month of the Hebrew civil year, and corresponding with the months January and February, beginning with the new moon of the former. SHEKEL In the Fourth or Mark Master's Degree, it is said that the value of a Mark is "a Jewish half-shekel of silver, or twenty-five cents in the currency of this country." The shekel of silver was a weight of great antiquity among the Jews, its value being about a half-dollar. In the time of Solomon, as well as long before and long after, until the Babylonish exile, the Hebrews had no regularly stamped money, but generally used in traffic a currency which consisted of uncoiled shekels, which they weighed out to one another. The earliest specimens of the coined shekel which we know are of the coinage of Simon Maceabeus, issued about the year 144 B.C. Of these, we generally find on the obverse the sacred pot of manna, with the inscription, Shekel Israel, in the old Samaritan character; on the reverse, the rod of Aaron, having three buds, with the inscription, Jeruhalem Kadoshah, or Jerusalem the Holy, in a similar character. SHEKINAH The Hebrew word brad, derived from Shakan, meaning to dwell. A term applied by the Jews, especially in the Targums, to the divine glory which dwelt in the tabernacle and the Temple, and which was manifested by a visible cloud resting over the mercy-seat in the Holy of Holies. It first appeared over the Ark when Moses consecrated the Tabernacle; and was afterward, upon the consecration of the Temple by Solomon, translated thither, where it remained until the destruction of that building. The Shekinah disappeared after the destruction of the first Temple, and was not present in the second. Christie, in his learned treatise on the Worship of the Elements, says that "the loss of the Shekinah, that visible sign of the presence of the Deity, induced an early respect for solar light as its substitute. " Now there is much that is significative of Masonic history in this brief sentence. The sun still remains as a prominent symbol in the Masonic system. It has been derived by the Masons from those old sun worshippers. But the idea of Masonic light is very different from their idea of solar light. The Shekinah was the symbol of the Divine glory; but the true glory of divinity is Truth, and Divine Truth is therefore the Shekinah of Freemasonry. This is symbolized by light, which is no longer used by us as a "substitute" for the Shekinah, or the Divine glory, but as its symbol—the physical expression of its essence. SHELUM LECKA The password of the Order of Felicity. It is of Arabic root, signifying, Peace be with you! (see Selamu Aleikum). SHEM The Name. The Jews in their sacred rites often designated God by the word Name, but they applied it only to him in his most exalted character as expressed by the Tetragrammaton, JEHOVAH. To none of the other titles of God, such as El, Eheyeh, or Adonai, do they apply the word. Thus, Shemchah Kadosh, Thy name is holy, means Thy name Jehovah is holy. To the Name thus exalted, in its reference to the Tetragrammaton, they applied many epithets, among which are the following used by the Talmudists, Shem shal arbang, the name of four, i.e., four letters, Shem hamjukad, the appropriated name, i.e., appropriated solely to God. Shem haggadol, the great name, and Shem hakkadosh, the holy name. To the Jew, as to the Freemason, this great and holy name was the symbol of all Divine truth. The Name was the true name, and therefore it symbolized and represented the true God. SHEM, HAM, JAPHETH The three sons of Noah, who assisted him in the construction of the Ark of Safety, and hence they became significant words in the Royal Arch Degree according to the American system. The interpolation of Adoniram in the place of one of these names, which is sometimes met with, is a blunder of some modern ritual maker. SHEM HAMPHORASCH A Hebrew expression, meaning the Separated Name. The Tetragrammaton is so called because, as Maimonides, in the More Nebukim, Guide of the Perplexed, says, all the names of God are derived from his works except the Tetragrammaton, which is called the separated name, because it is derived from the substance of the Creator, in which there is no participation of any other thing. That is to say, this name indicates the self-existent essence of God, which is something altogether within Himself, and separate from His works. SHEMITIC One of the three historical divisions of religion—the other two being the Turanian and the Aryan—and embraces Mosaism, Christianity, the Eddaic Code, and Moslemism. SHERIFF According to Brother Preston, the sheriff of a County possessed, before the Revival of 1717, a power later confined to Grand Masters. He says (Illustrations, page 182) that "A sufficient number of Masons met together within a certain district, with the consent of the Sheriff or chief magistrate of the place, were empowered, at this time, to make Masons, and practise the rites of Masonry without a warrant of Constitution." This is confirmed by the following passage in the Cooke Manuscript (lines 901-12): "When the masters and fellows be forewarned and are come to such congregations, if need be, the Sheriff of the Country, or the Mayor of the City, or Aldermen of the Town in which such Congregation is holden, shall be fellow and sociate to the master of the congregation in help of him against rebels and (for the) upbearing the right of the realm." SHERMAH, INSECT See Insect Shermah SHERMAN, ROGER One of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, born at Newton, Massachusetts, April 19, 1721; died in New Haven, Connecticut, July 23, 1793. Was Judge, Superior Court, Connecticut, 1766; Treasurer, Yale University, 1765; Delegate, Continental Congress, 1774; Mayor, New Haven, 1784; United States Senator, 1791; member, Committee Drafting Declaration of Independence and Articles of Federation. He was made a Freemason just prior to the breaking out of the American Revolution (see New Age, April, 1924, and Masonic Presidents, Vice Presidents and Signers, by William L. Boyden). SHESHA The seven-headed serpent floating in the cosmical ocean, upon which the throne of Brahrna rested. SHETHARBOZNAI See Tatnai SHEWBREAD The twelve loaves which were placed upon a table in the sanctuary of the Temple, and which were called the shewbread or bread of the presence, are represented among the paraphernalia of a Lodge of Perfection in the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. Bähr (Symbolik) says that the shew bread was a symbol of the bread of life—of the eternal life by which we are brought into the presence of Cod and know Him; an interpretation that is equally applicable to the Masonic symbolism. SHIBBOLETH A Hebrew word which the Gileadites under Jephthah made use of as a test at the passages of the river Jordan after a victory over the Ephraimites. The word has two meanings in Hebrew: First, an ear of corn; and second, a stream of water. As the Ephraimites were desirous of crossing the river, it is probable that this second meaning suggested it to the Gileadites as an appropriate test word on the occasion. The proper sound of the first letter of this word is sh, a harsh breathing which is exceedingly difficult to be pronounced by persons whose vocal organs have not been accustomed to it. Such was the case with the Ephraimites, who substituted for the aspiration the hissing sound of s. Their organs of voice were incapable of the aspiration, and therefore, as the record has it, they "could not frame to pronounce it right " The learned Burder remarks (Oriental Customs ii, page 782) that in Arabia the difference of pronunciation among persons of various districts is much greater than in most other places, and such as easily accounts for the circumstance mentioned in the passage of Judges. Hutchinson (Spirit of Masonry, page 182), speaking of this word, rather fancifully derives it from the Greek Gags, I revere, and a stone, and, therefore, he says Sibbolithon, Colo Lapidem, implies that they—the Freemasons—retain and keep inviolate their obligations, as the Juramentum per Jovem Lapidem, the most obligatory oath held among the heathen." It may be remarked that in the instructions of the Fellow Graft's Degree where the story of the Ephraimites is introduced, and where Shibboleth is symbolically interpreted as meaning plenty, the word waterford is sometimes used incorrectly, instead of waterfall Shibboleth means a Stood of water, a rapid stream, not a ford. In Psalm lxix, 3, the word is used in this exact sense. Shibboleth shetafatni, meaning the Stood has overwhelmed me. And, besides a waterfall is an emblem of plenty, because it indicates an abundance of water; while a waterford, for the converse reason, is, if any symbol at all a symbol of scarcity. This explanation by Doctor Mackey has been criticized, the first comment being that the passage of Scripture cited here contains no allusion whatever to a waterfall. Of course it does refer to "the passages of the Jordan" which were certainly waterfords. At these places the test was made to ascertain whether those who came to cross were Ephraimites. Further comment made is that Doctor Mackey seems to have based his opinion on the assumption that the symbol of plenty referred to an abundance of water, and it is urged as opposing this conclusion that an abundance of water is nowhere else a Masonic suggestion of plenty, while corn is so employed in speech. The further point is made that if the reference were to the quantity of water the reasoning is not conclusive. A running stream may have as much water at a ford as at a fall. All the running water must pass the ford as well as at the cataract. The water at the ford may be more shallow, but there is just as much of it. Indeed it often happens that a fall does not extend entirely across a river, so that the quantity passing over it may not be equal to that at the ford. For this reason it is claimed a waterfall is not a symbol of plenty any more than a waterford. This reasoning is said to be strengthened by consideration of the Hebrew meaning of Shibboleth. One authority gives two meanings, an ear of corn and a stream. The first is translated oftener. These suggestions have much value for us, and we may add that the references by Doctor Mackey to water, are as with all his comments, very much to the point. Water in some form is essential to life. The fertility of the ground depends upon the use of water. The scarcity of water gives importance to the use of the word as a symbol. The rainfall in Palestine was limited and uncertain, and the rivers few, and of very limited use. A waterfall became a symbol of abundance while a waterford indicated the Scarcity of water in the river, permitting its passage. The two are not the same thing by any means in their allusions. They do suggest, as Brother Mackey pointed out, the difference between scarcity and abundance. If we consider the reference by Brother Mackey in this light, we see the force of his reasoning very clearly. It is true that the same body of water may at one place widen out and be shallow and then it is crossed at that point by easy passage, while at another place the same amount of water may tumble over a rock and form a waterfall. If we start out by supposing the same amount of water is falling in each ease, we get the understanding of the critic, but this was not Doctor Mackey's argument. He was thinking of that abundance of water which tumbles plentifully over a precipice, and comparing it with a river which is almost dry and permits easy passage, the one indicating plenty and the other scarcity. Let it not be forgotten that nowadays we look upon the slaughter of the Ephraimites somewhat differently than formerly. We are told that at that time there fell forty and two thousand. This was once generally understood as meaning forty-two thousand, but it is today usually accepted as two thousand and forty only. The pronunciation of the word Shibboleth is usually with the stress on the first syllable, the I short, and the o obscure as in the word theory. Doctor Young's Analytical Concordance puts the stress on the first syllable and gives the o as obscure in sound, but he also places on record an alternative pronunciation in which the o is marked long. Another authority, Concise Dictionary of Hebrew and Chaldee Terms in the Bible, Hunt and Eaton, 1894, puts the stress on the second syllable with the o long. Here the word is traced to a Hebrew one, pronounced showable, from a root meaning to flow, and therefore shibboleth as meaning a stream that is flowing, an ear of corn ground out, and by analogy a flood; an ear of corn is given as shibboleth, with the o long. But a careful search among English Bibles including the Jewish Encyclopedia unearthed no alternative pronunciations. However, the Fonolexika Langenscheidt,, Hebrew English Dictionary, a vocabulary of the Hebrew Old Testament based upon the pronunciation of the Sephardirn or Jews of Western Europe, does give on page 339 the word with the stress on the second syllable and the o long, the definition being ear (of corn), point, branch, stream, water-course. For those who may hear the alternative pronunciation and are tempted to mention it, then it is well to understand that both sets of sounds and stresses of syllables have substantial support, one from Jewish authority, the other from English acceptance. In any event, there is nothing to justify between critic and speaker a repetition of the Bible history as told by John Milton: That sore battle, when so many diedIn commenting upon the use of picturesque phrases the London Times, 1924 asked: How many of those who talk glibly of shibboleths have before them the picture of the wretched Ephraimites at the for d striving frantically to frame the word which is going to be the arbiter for them of life and death? Rev. Walter Crick, of Oving Vicarage, in answer, mentions a striking repetition, not of the word, but of the facts which the word connotes, as related to him by Major General Sir George Mac Munn: After Lord Allenby's final routing of the Turkish forces broken parties of fugitives arrived at the fords of Jordan. There were many Arabs and Syrians conscriptioned in the Turkish Army. The fords were held by our Arab allies, and when Turkish soldiers tried to pass they one and all said they were Syrians. So the Arab guards said, " Say now, Bozzel" meaning onion, and they said 4' Bossel" for no Turk could pronounce it right.History is said to repeat itself, adds Mr. Criek, and, if this is so, no more singular illustration of the fact could well be imagined than is presented by this picture of the Turkish soldiers "striving frantically to frame the word which is going to be the arbiter for them of life and death." just as did the Ephraimites, three thousand years ago, and probably at the selfsame ford. The curious instance of the Ephraimites is not the only one related in history. The Builder, 1923 (page 31), records that during the awful days of the Sicilian Vespers a suspect was similarly tried. The name of dried peas among the Sicilians was ciceri: if the man pronounced the c with a chee sound he was allowed to pass as being a Sicilian; but if he gave it an s sound, he was captured as being a Frenchman. During a battle between the Danes and Saxons on Saint Bryee's Day in 1002, if tradition is to be trusted, the words Chichester Church were employed as a like test. SHIELD The shape of the shield worn by the knight in the Middle Ages varied according to the caprice of the wearer, but generally it was large at the top and gradually diminished to a point, being made of wood and covered with leather, and on the outside was seen the escutcheon or representation of the armorial bearings of the owner. The shield, with all the other parts of the armor worn by the knights except the gauntlets, has been discontinued by the modern Masonic Knights. Doctor Oliver thinks that in some of the military initiations, as in those of the Scandinavian mysteries, the shield was substituted for the apron. An old heraldic writer, quoted by Sloane-Evans (Grammar of British Heraldry, page 153), thus gives the symbolic import of the shield: "Like as the shield served in the battle for a safeguard of the body of soldiers against wounds, even so in time of peace, the same being hanged up, did defend the owner against the malevolent detractions of the envious." SHIELD OF DAVID Two interlaced triangles, more commonly known as the Seal of Solomon, and considered by the ancient Je vs as a talisman of great efficacy (see Seal of Solomon). Because the shield was, in battle a protection, like a talisman, to the person, the Hebrews used the same word, Magen, to signify both a shield and a talisman. Gaffarel says, in his Curiositates Inauditae (London, 1650, page 133), "The Hebrew word Maghen signifies a scutcheon, or any other thing noted with Hebrew characters, the virtue whereof is like to that of a scutcheon." After shoving that the shield was never an image, because the Mosaic law forbade the making of graven images, he adds: "Maghen, therefore, signifies properly any piece of paper or other like matter marked or noted with certain characters drawn from the Tetragrammaton, or Great Name of four letters, or from any other." The most usual form of the Shield of David was to place in the center of the two triangles, and at the intersecting points, the Hebrew word sass, Agla, which was compounded of the initials of the words of the sentence, Atah Gibor Lolam Adonai, meaning Thou art strong in the eternal God. Thus constructed, the Shield of David was supposed to he a preservative against all sorts of dangers (see Magic Squares). SHINTO The national worship of the Japanese, and the word signifies the path of the gods. I t is ancient and is analogous to nature worship with ancestor worship. SHINTOISM From Shin, meaning god or gods, and to, the way. The ancient religion of Japan, and founded on the worship of ancestors and nature. It acknowledges a Supreme Creator and numerous subordinate gods called Kami, many of whom are the apotheoses of emperors and great men. It believes in the immortality of the soul, and in its ritual uses symbols, such as the mirror—which is the symbol of an unsoiled life—and lustrations symbolic of moral purification.. Like the early Grecian mythology Shintoism has deified natural objects, such as the sun, the air, earth, fire, water, lightning, thunder, etc It is a system much mixed up with the philosophy of Confucius and with myths and legends. About the sixth century, 522, Buddhism came by way of Korea from China to Japan and thereafter continued side by side with Shintoism for three hundred years when the two were united in the doctrine of Ryobu-Shinto, the Dual Shinto. From the ninth century the two grew together intimately until the middle of the seventeenth century when a determined effort was made to return to the pure Shinto of the Kojiki. The Record of Antiquity, the Kojiki and the Record of Japan, the Nihonyis, both completed in the eighth century, are the sacred books of Shinto and contain picturesque accounts of prehistoric events. Such ethics as are taught by them and their adherents may be briefly expressed as the advice to follow the pure impulses of one's heart. Buddhism for a time suffered temporary eclipse by the later reaction toward primitive Shintoism but was too deeply planted for complete uprooting. Slowly Buddhism regained much of its former prominence. SHRINE Doctor Oliver says that the shrine is the place where the secrets of the Royal Arch are deposited. The word is not so used in the United States of America, nor does it seem properly applicable according to the legend of the Degree. The word is frequently applied to the Ancient Arabic Order, Nobles of the Mystic Shrine. The Shrine, as is for brevity the familiar name applied to the Ancient Arabic Order Nobles of the Mystic Shrine, has an origin about which the various writers upon the subject have not agreed. The point on which there is general agreement is that the real work of preparing a Ritual and organizing a Temple in the City of New York and four years later organizing what was first known as the "Imperial Grand Council of the Ancient Arabic Order of Nobles of the Mystic Shrine for the United States of America," was done by Dr. Walter M. Fleming, ably assisted by Nobles (Charles T. McClenachan and a few others (see history of the Imperial Council, Nobles of the Mystic Shrine, W. B. Melish, Preston Belvin, Jarnes McGee, George S. Meredith, Fred D. Schram, Committee on History, Cincinnati,1919, page 14, also see Doctor Mackey's revised History of Freemasonry, pages 1973 to 1983). Noble Fleming and his associates purposely gave the Ritual an alluring mysticism presented in Oriental style. So much is this in evidence that even those active in the Shrine from the earlier years found difficulty in saying with precision how much or how little confidence should be placed in any claims made for an exclusively foreign origin of the institution. We submit some of the statements. From these the reader may determine whether the Shrine was from the far East, or of near New York, or Oriental in dress and American by birth. The history is discussed in Mecca, the Parent Temple, 1894, a book "compiled and collated" by Noble Dr. Walter M. Fleming and Noble William S. Paterson. Brother Fleming was the first Grand Imperial Potentate. Grand in the titles was discarded by the Imperial Council in 1887. The name of the Temple at New York was Gotham and was changed when it was decided that all Temples should have an Arabic or Egyptian title, when Mecca was chosen. Noble Paterson was the first Recorder of Mecca Temple, serving for twenty-five years, and was also Recorder of the Imperial Council, 1876-89. Pages 12 to 14 of the above work state, "'the Order of the Nobles of the Mystic Shrine was instituted by the Mohammedan Kalif Alee (whose name be praised!), the cousin-german and son-in-law of the Prophet Mohammed (God favor and preserve him!), in the year of the Hegira 25 (A.D. 644) at Mecca, in Arabia, as an Inquisition or Vigilance Committee, to dispense justice and execute punishment upon criminals who escaped their just deserts through the tardiness of the courts, and also to promote religious toleration among cultured men of all nations." Brothers Fleming and Paterson say also: "The Order of the Nobles of the Mystic Shrine in America does not advocate Mohammedanism as a sect, but inculcates the same respect to Deity here as in Arabia and elsewhere, and hence the secret of its profound grasp on the intellect and heart of all cultured people. The Ritual now in rise is a translation from the original Arabic, found preserved in the Archives of the Order at Aleppo, Syria, whence it was brought, in 1860, to London, England, by Rizk Allah Hassoon Effendee, who was the author of several important works in Arabic, one of which was a metrical version of the Book of Job. His History of Islam offended the Turkish Government because of its humanitarian principles, and he was forced to leave his native country. He was a ripe scholar in Arabic poetry and the general literature of the age, and his improvements in the direction of certain parts of the Ritual of the Shrine are of great beauty and value." They add that in 1698 a "learned Orientalist, Luigi Marracci," was initiated into "our Order of Nobles," and translated the Ritual into Italian, and "in making the present version the translator has had the benefit of the work of Alnasafi, of Marracci, and of Hassoon. The rendering is literal where the idiom permitted, except where a local reference required the substitution of America for Oriental names of cities. The work was perfected in August, 1870, under the supervision of Dr. Walter M. Fleming, Thirty-third Degree, Sovereign Grand Inspector General, Ancient Accepted Scottish Mite, and Past Commander of Columbian Commandery, No. 1, Knights Templar, New York, who received his instructions and authority from Rizk Allah Hassoon Effendee, who had competent jurisdiction for America." The History of 1894 by Brothers Fleming and Paterson deals with William J. Florence, the famous actor. A long letter from Brother Florence written in 1882 tells of a visit by him in August, 1870, at Marseilles, France, to a Hall near the Grand Hotel de l'Univers where there was a meeting of Bokhara Shrine Temple presided over by Yusef Churi Bey, of the Persian Consulate. Brother Florence says: A letter written by Doctor Fleming is in the History by Noble Paterson and himself. He says:"I need not describe the work of the Temple any further than to say that the intention is to enact a drama very much like our own, which had for its object the same lesson, and there can be no better or more zealous workers in a good cause than those French brothers who celebrated the Mysteries at Marseilles on that evening. My duties prevented a sufficiently long stay in Marseilles to witness a second performance and I therefore begged Yusef Bey to allow me to have a copy of the Ritual and Laws which I received on the day I sailed for Algiers. In Algiers the Shrine of the Mogribins was in full operation, meeting each week on Friday evening. zebu Mohammed Baki was the Shayk, and among the members were nearly every one of the many consuls, vice-consuls, and other diplomats of the port, many of the most noted merchants and bankers, and not a few of the learned and gifted Mohammedans, who are passionately fond of perpetuating ancient customs which increase their social pleasures. The costumes and furniture of the Shrine in Algiers were gorgeous in silk, wool and fine linen, decorated with embroidery in gold, silver and colors, and the sword, spears, and other articles used by the guards and officers in the work were genuine steel, many of which had been in actual service in the field of battle."A few months before Brother Florence died, (Grand Secretary Parvin of Iowa submitted to him a newspaper clipping that said among other things that he was initiated at Cairo. In reply the famous actor wrote: "The points in the paper are mainly correct. I was the first to introduce the Order in America. Doctor Fleming amplified and perfected the work." "Mr. Florence was entertained as a Mason at Marseilles, in Bokhara Temple of the Arabic Bektash. He at this time simply witnessed the opening session of the exoteric ceremonials which characterize the politic or religious Order of Bektash of Oriental Europe. A monitorial, history and explanatory manuscript he also received there. It did not embrace the esoteric inner temple exemplification or obligation, nor the Unwritten Law which is never imparted to any one except from mouth to ear. Shortly afterwards, Mr. Florence was similarly favored in Algiers and Aleppo. Through letters and commendations he finally secured the manuscript monitor, history and descriptive matters, from which sprang the Order in this country. It was in Algiers and Aleppo that he was received into the Inner Temple under the domain of the Crescent, and first became possessor of the esoteric ivory the unwritten law, and the Shayk's obligation. Subsequently he visited Cairo, Egypt, and was admitted, and collected more of Oriental history and the manuscript of Memorial Ceremonials. But Mr. Florence was never fully recognized or possessed of authority until long after his return to America. All he possessed was a disconnected series of sheets in Arabic and French, with some marginal memoranda made by himself from verbal elucidation in Aleppo Through Professor Albert L. Rawson, these, with others received afterwards through correspondence abroad, comprised the translations from which the Order started here. Mr. Florence and myself received authority to introduce the Order in America."Brother James McGee in his Early History of the Ancient Arabic Order of the Nobles of the Mystic Shrive e in North America tells a different story. Published in 1918 this pamphlet says that with the object of bringing the Order to the notice of the Masonic Fraternity the founder felt the same necessity, as did those who have founded other secret fraternal orders, of giving it the flavor of mysticism and antiquity to secure a standing and success. Brother Fleming wanted the Order to be Arabic by birth but American by adoption, having a broad toleration, "He who holds a belief in a Supreme or Most High is never questioned as to any definition of that belief." In this connection examine the dialogue between the Angel and the Student on page 208 of Francis S. Salturs' book Honey and Gall, published by J. E. Lippincott & Company, at Philadelphia, 1875, a copy of which was owned by Doctor Fleming and preserved by his family. This work has some significant marginal notes written by Doctor Fleming showing that his manuscript of the ceremonies was influenced by this poem. The lines in question are: ANGEL—Believest thou? . .Doctor Fleming has a note substituting the word Arab for Jew in the above text, and two additional lines were added by him in his copy of Saltus' books These are: Stir thy lethargy—Brother Fleming had traveled throughout Europe, the Orient, and America. Democratic congenial, a sportsman, ever at home with kindred spirits, a constant student, he had a book in hand up to his last moments Possessing a keen retentive memory, he was the best of entertainers, having a fund of recitations and he attracted a host of friends. Through miscellaneous literary work he developed into form his conception of the Order of the Mystic Shrine as a relaxation from the serious labor necessary in the portrayal by himself and his fellow members of the many characters in the Degrees of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry. The foundation of the Shrine was laid in that Rite. On Sunday, April 21, 1867, Aurora Grata Lodge of Perfection of Brooklyn held a special meeting at the Metropolitan Hotel, New York Cites for the purpose of communicating the Ineffable Grades of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite upon Brother William J. Florence who was "about to depart for Europe," as the Minutes say. There were present Illustrious Brother McClenachan and one other member of the Supreme Council for the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction, two from the Southern, and a number of Brethren of Aurora Grata. The Degrees of the Council, Chapter, and Consistory were also conferred upon Brother Florence before his departure. This was the trip made by him to the Old World preceding the establishment of the Ancient Arabic Order of the Nobles of the Mystic Shrine in the United States. Brother Charles A. Brockaway, Past Potentate of Kismet Temple, and Historian of the Aurora Grata Bodies says: "Brother Florence brought back monitorial, historical and explanatory manuscripts and communicated the secrets of the Order to Dr. Walter M. Fleming of Aurora Grata Consistory, who was empowered to introduce and establish the Order in America. It was determined to confer the Order only on Freemasons and on the 16th of June, 1871 (brother McGee puts the date in September of the following year), four Knights Templar and seven members of Aurora Grata Consistory, Thirty-second Degree, were made acquainted with the secrets of the Order by Doctor Fleming and Brother Florence. It was decided to engage in the establishment of the Order, and on the 26th of September, 1872, the organization was effected and officers elected. Nine of the thirteen founders of the Mystic Shrine in the United States were members of the Aurora Crata Bodies. (see One Hundred Years of Aurora Grata, Charles A. Brockaway, Brooklyn, 1908, page 48). William J. Florence, Walter M. Fleming, Charles T. MeClenachan, Daniel Sickels, John W. Simons, (George W. Millar, William S. Paterson, John A. Moore and James S. Chappelle were the nine members mentioned above. The first thirty Nobles of the Mystic Shrine were officially listed and numbered as follows: 1—Walter Millard FlemingBrother Fleming was working early in the seventies upon the Ritual. He joined the Consistory in May, 1871, and in March, 1872, became a member of Columbian Commandery. He conferred with an able ritualist and Masonic student, Charles T. McClenachan, and Brother McGee says they agreed to decorate the Shrine Ritual with the glamour of Eastern mysticism and color. The new organization became an adjunct to the York as well as the Scottish Rite. A candidate must be a Thirty-second Degree Freemason or a Knights Templar. Doctor Fleming was the physician and friend of Brother Florence. Fleming and McClenachan, according to Noble James McGee, considered how the Order could gain the quickest success. Florence consented to the use of his name. Fleming drew upon his imagination and wrote up Florence in his visits to the imaginary Shrine Temples of foreign lands in "regal splendor," as he termed it, and his "comminglings" with the Nobility of the Order abroad, bestowing upon his congenial patient and chum many honors (see Early History of the Ancient Arabic Order of the Nobles of the Mystic Shrine in North America, James McGee, New York, 1918, page 9). While less romantic, this the more recent account of the Order has gained ground though the story lacks the picturesque qualities of the days when on paper at least relations with Shrine Temples of the East were presumably maintained and the advertising of a welcome to visiting Nobles was printed regularly in Arabic in the columns of a New York publication. Mecca Temple was organized in 1872. The following officers were elected, there being thirteen members of the Temple, of whom eleven were present. Florence and Campbell were absent: Walter M. Fleming, Potentate; Charles T. McClenaehan, Chief Rabban; John A. Moore, Assistant Rabban; William S. Paterson, Recorder; Edward Eddy, High Priest; James S. Chappelle, Treasurer; George W. Millar, Oriental Guide; and Oswald M. d'Aubigne, Captain of the Guard. In the Imperial Grand Council of the Ancient Arabic Order of Nobles of the Mystic Shrine for the United States of America was organized on June 6, 1876. The following were officers of the Imperial Grand— Grand as a title was dropped later—Council for three years: Walter M. Fleming, New York, Grand Potentate; George F. Loder, Rochester, New York, Deputy Grand Potentate; Philip F. Lenhart, Brooklyn, Grand Chief Rabban; Edward M. L. Ehlers, New York City, Grand Assistant Chief Rabban; William H. Whiting, Roehester, New York, High Priest and Prophet; Samuel R. Carter, Rochester, New York, Oriental Guide; Aaron L. Northrup, New York City, Grand Treasurer; William S. Paterson, New York City, Grand Recorder; Albert P. Moriarty, New York City, Grand Financial Secretary; John L. Stettinius, Cincinnati, Ohio, Grand First Ceremonial Master; Benson Sherwood, New York City, Grand Second Ceremonial Master; Samuel Harper, Pittsburgh, Grand Marshal; Franl; Bascom, Montpelier, Vermont, Grand Captain of the Guards; and George Scott, Paterson, New Jersey, Grand Outer Guard. Brother Fleming was born at Portland, Maine, June 13, 1838, and died at Mount Vernon, New York, on September 9, 1913; McClenachan was born at Washington, District of Columbia, on April 13, 1829, and died on December 19, 1896; Florence was born at Albany, New York, on July 26, 1831, and died at Philadelphia on November 19, 1891; Paterson was a Scotchman, born at Haddington on March 6, 1844, coming to the United States at three years of age, and died in New York City on May 21, 1913. Brief Masonic biographies are given in the Early History by Noble McGee of Nobles Fleming, Florence, McClenachan, Paterson, and Sam Briggs, the latter succeeding Noble Fleming as Imperial Potentate at the Cleveland session of 1886. Noble Briggs as the first Potentate of Al Koran Temple of Cleveland, Ohio, is credited highly by Brother McGee for the fine staging of the ceremonies in the early days. Damascus Temple of Rochester is credited by him on page 17 of his History with the first complete rendition of the ceremonial work, but the History of the Imperial Council (page 167), assigns this honor to Al Koran Temple. Important articles of Shrine interest were published in the Builder, 1916 (pages 157, 242, 286, and 350), the last giving a list of the Masonic connections of Noble Florence whose affiliation with Freemasonry had been mistakenly questioned. William Winter, the historian of the American stage, has a chapter of eulogy upon Florence in his Wallet of Time. He is bountiful of praise in verse and prose, stating of Florence that he was "in art admirable; in life gentle; he was widely known, and he was known only to be loved." Again, he claims of Florence that "Heaven were lonely but for souls like this." We must not too readily exclude from the credit of truly active work for the Shrine this gracious personality, "Billy" Florence. At the suggestion of Brother W. Freeland Kendrick, a resolution was offered at the meeting of the Imperial Council at Indianapolis in 1919 by Brother Philip D. Gordon, proposing the establishment of a home for friendless, orphaned, and crippled children, to be supported by the Nobles of the Mystic Shrine of North America. The matter was laid over until the meeting of 1920 at Portland, Oregon, when Brother Kendrick personally presented the matter in his annual address as Imperial Potentate. At this time a resolution was adopted authorizing the establishment of a hospital to be supported on an annual per capita basis and to be known as the Shrine Hospital for Crippled Children. An assessment of $2.00 per capita was levied upon the entire membership and a Committee of Seven was to be appointed to select a site and secure plans and specifications. Provision was also made for additional assessments to be levied annually for the support of the institution After the Portland session Imperial Potentate Ellis L. Garretson appointed the following Committee and called its first meeting at St. Louis on October 30, 1920: Sam P. Cochran, Hella Temple; Philip D Gordon, Karnak Temple, Frederic W. Reator, Afifi Temple; W. Freeland Kendrick, Lu Lu Temple; Oscar M. Lanstrum, Algeria Temple; John D. McGilvray, Islam Temple; John A. Morrison, Kismet Temple. At the St. Louis meeting Noble Cochran was appointed chairman and Noble Morrison elected secretary. A resolution was adopted providing for the incorporation of the hospital work under the title "The Shriners' Charity Foundation." The word "charity" was afterward eliminated and the official title became "Shriners' Hospitals for Crippled Children." Up to this time but one large hospital centrally located was contemplated, but at the next session in Des Moines, 1921, the report of the Committee was convincing that no one hospital would meet the needs. the Imperial Council adopted a resolution providing for the election of a Board of Trustees to be incorporated and vested with authority to select and purchase sites in various parts of the Jurisdiction of the Imperial Council. A unanimous vote was cast for the following Trustees: Nobles Sam P. Cochran, W. Freeland Kendrick, Philip D. Gordon, Frederic W. Keator, Oscar M. Lanstrum, John D. McGilvray and Forrest Adair. Organization was perfected at once by the election of Noble Cochran, chairman; W. Freeland Kendrick, vice chairman; and Forrest Adair, secretary. Two changes in the Board resulted from deaths. Noble Gordon was succeeded by Noble Arthur W. Chapman of Khartum Temple, appointed by Imperial Potentate McCandless in 1923, and Noble Keator was succeeded by Noble James R. Watt, of Cyprus Temple, appointed by Imperial Potentate Dykeman, in 1924. At the 1924 session in Kansas City the Imperial Council added its first four officers as ex-officio members. They were James E. Chandler, Imperial Potentate; James C. Burger, Deputy Imperial Potentate; David W. Crosland, Imperial Chief Rabban, and Clarence M. Dunbar, Imperial Assistant Rabban. Trustees whose terms had expired were re-elected. The next meeting of the Board of Trustees was held in Atlanta, in September, 1921, all members attending. It was here that the board received the advice and co-operation of three distinguished orthopedic surgeons: Robert B. Osgood, of Boston; A. McKenzie Forbes, of Montreal, and Michael Hoke, of Atlanta. From their willingness to assist in the work and give the board the benefit of their skill and experience there grew the Advisory Board of Orthopedic Surgeons, who devote a great deal of time, without remuneration, to the Shrine institutions. In the spring of 1925, with the opening late in February of the hospitals at Montreal, Canada, and Springfield, Massachusetts, there were seven regular hospitals in the series, besides four mobile units, the total capacity being five hundred beds, which meant that two thousand bed-patients a year can be given surgical treatment and hospital care. The Philadelphia Hospital was then well under way, the contracts having been let the previous Fall, and the bids for the Chicago Hospital were opened by the Board of Trustees in March. The first child admitted for surgical treatment by a Shriners' surgeon was a patient at Shreveport, Louisiana, in September, 1922. The hospital building was not then completed but an old structure on the property was used temporarily The new fifty-bed institution was dedicated in April, 1923. Twin Cities Hospital, in the corporate limits of Minneapolis lout on the St. Paul side of the river, opened in March, 1923, with a capacity of sixty beds. San Francisco Hospital opened in June, 1923, with a capacity of fifty beds. Portland, Oregon, Hospital opened in January, 1924, with a capacity of fifty beds. St. Louis Hospital opened in April, 1924, and dedicated on June 1 with a capacity of one hundred beds. Springfield and Montreal Hospitals, of fifty beds each, opened in February, 1925. Sites were Selected in 1924 for the hospitals in Philadelphia and Chicago and were donated by Lu Lu and Medinah Temples. The Shriners' hospitals and mobile units are open to every crippled child, without restriction as to race or religion, subject to the following requirements: The parents or guardians must be financially unable to pay for its treatment. The child must not be over fourteen years of age, of normal mentality, and there must be reasonable hope of materially improving the child's condition through orthopedic surgery. SHOCK A striking of hands and feet, so as to produce a sudden noise. There is a ceremony called the shock, which was in use in the reception of an Apprentice in the beginning of the nineteenth century, and is still used by some Lodges in what is called the Shock of Entrance, and by all in the Shock of Enlightenment. Of the first shock as well as of the second, there are evident traces in some of the earlier rituals of the eighteenth century, and there is no doubt that it was an ancient ceremony, the gradual disuse of which is an innovation (see Shock of Entrance and Shock of Enlightenment) . SHOCK OF ENLIGHTENMENT A ceremony used in all the Degrees of Symbolic Freemasonry. By it we seek to symbolize the idea of the birth of material light, by the representation of the circumstances that accompanied it, and their references to the birth of intellectual or Masonic light. The one is the type of the other; and therefore the illumination of the candidate is given with a ceremony that may be supposed to imitate the primal illumination of the universe—most feebly, it is true, and yet not altogether without impressiveness. The Shock of Enlightenment is, then, a symbol of the change which is now taking place in the intellectual condition of the candidate. It is the symbol of the birth of intellectual light and the dispersion of intellectual darkness. SHOCK OF ENTRANCE A ceremony formerly used on the admission of an Entered Apprentice, but becoming obsolete. In the old initiations, the same word signified to die and to be initiated, because, in the initiation, the lesson of death and the resurrection to eternal life was the dogma inculcated. In the initiation of an Apprentice in Freemasonry the same lesson begins to be taught, and the initiate, entering upon a new life and new duties, disrupting old ties and forming new ones, passes into a new birth. This is, or ought to be, necessarily accompanied by some ceremony which should symbolically represent this great moral change. Hence the impression of this idea is made bit the symbolism of the shock at the entrance of the candidate. The shock of entrance is then the symbol of the disruption of the candidate from the ties of the world, and his introduction into the life of Freemasonry. it is the symbol of the agonies of the First death and of the throes of the new birth. SHOE Among the ancient Israelites, the shoe was made use of in several significant ways. To put off the shoes, imported reverence, and was done in the presence of God, or on entering the dwelling of a Superior To unloose one's shoe and give it to another was the way of confirming a contract. Thus we read in the Book of Ruth, that Boaz having proposed to the nearest kinsman of Ruth to exercise his legal right by redeeming the land of Naomi, which was offered for sale, and marrying her daughter-in-law, the kinsman, being unable to do so, resigned his right of purchase to Boaz; and the narrative goes on to say (Ruth iv, 7 and S), "Now this was the manner in former time in Israel concerning redeeming and concerning changing, for to confirm all things; a man plucked off his shoe, and gave it to his neighbor: and this was a testimony in Israel. Therefore the kinsman said unto Boaz, Buy it for thee. So he drew off his shoe." The reference to the shoe in the First Degree is therefore really as a symbol of a Covenant to be entered into. In the Third Degree the symbolism is altogether different. For an explanation of it, see Discalceation. SHOULKAIN A Hebrew compound word, meaning close-guarded captive. Stolkin, mentioned in the Ninth and other Degrees of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. SHOVEL An instrument used to remove rubbish. It is one of the working-tools of a Royal Arch Mason, and symbolically teaches him to remove the rubbish of passions and prejudices, that he may be fitted, when he thus escapes from the captivity of sin, for the search and the reception of Eternal Truth and Wisdom SHRINER OATH OF ALLEGIANCE See Flag Ceremony SHRYOCK, THOMAS J. When Thomas J. Shryock died on February 3, 1918, he was in the midst of his thirty-second year as Grand Master, Grand Lodge of Maryland—almost twice the length of office held by any predecessor in his own or in any other Grand Lodge. Such a record is now impossible among modern American Grand Jurisdictions which elect a new Grand Master each year (New York reelects for one year, Massachusetts for two) but one that could have surprised no Mason in Great Britain where it has long been a tradition among the three Grand Lodges to re-select the same Grand Master for many years on end. General Shryock, the great-grandson of a Revolutionary Lieutenant-Colonel, was born in Baltimore, February 27, 1851. He held almost every office of high rank in Masonry; was a railway president, a businessman, bank director, was director or treasurer of hospitals, was once police commissioner of Baltimore; and from having been Brigadier General on the staff of Governor Henry Lloyd came into the title of "the General" by which he was everywhere known. Among his countless Honorary Lodge memberships was one in Solomon Lodge, 346, of England, of which the Worshipful Master was Robert Freke Gould, and which had among its subscribing and Honorary Members Theodore Roosevelt, Sr., William Howard Taft Duke of Connaught, Count Goblet d'Alviella, and the Kings of Denmark and Sweden. SIDE DEGREES There are certain Masonic Degrees, which, not being placed in the regular routine of the acknowledged Degrees, are not recognized as a part of Ancient Freemasonry, but receive the name of Honorary or Side Degrees. They constitute no part of the regular ritual, and are not taken under the specific control of either Grand Lodges, Grand Chapters, or any other of the legal, Administrative Bodies b of the Institution. Although a few of them are very old, the greater number are of a comparatively modern origin, and are generally supposed to have been indebted for their invention to the ingenuity of either Grand Lecturers, or other distinguished Freemasons. Their history and ceremonies are often interesting, and so far as we have been made acquainted with them, their tendency, when they are properly conferred, is always moral. They are not given in Lodges or Chapters, but at private meetings of the Brethren or companions possessing them, informally and temporarily called for the sole purpose of conferring them. These temporary assemblies owe no allegiance to any supreme controlling Body, except so far as they are composed of Master or Royal Arch Masons, and when the business of conferring the Degrees is accomplished, they are dissolved at once, not to meet again, except under similar circumstances and for a similar purpose. Some of them are conferred on Master Masons, some on Royal Arch Masons, and some only on Knights Templar. There is another class which females connected by certain ties of relationship with the Fraternity, are permitted to receive; and this fact, in some measure, assimilates these Degrees to the Freemasonry of Adoption, or Female Freemasonry, which is practiced in France and some other European countries, although there are important points of difference between them . These female Side Degrees have received the name of Androgynous Degrees, from two Greek words signifying man and woman, and are thus called to indicate the participation in them by both sexes. The principal Side Degrees that have been practiced in the United States of America are as follows: 1. Secret Monitor SIERRA LEONE The Grand Lodges of England and Scotland each have three Lodges in Sierra Leone, on the west coast of Africa. SIGHT, MAKING MASONS AT The prerogative of the Grand Master to make Freemasons at sight is described as the eighth landmark of the Order. It is a technical term, which may be defined to be the power to initiate, pass, and raise candidates, by the Grand Master, in a Lodge of Emergency, or, as it is called in the Book of Constitutions, an Occasional Lodge, specially convened by him, and consisting of such Master Masons as he may call together for that purpose only; the Lodge ceasing to exist as soon as the initiation, passing, or raising has been accomplished, and the Brethren have been dismissed by the Grand Master. The following item appeared in the Leeds Mercury, April 7 to 14, 1730, and bore the heading, London. A few days since, their Graces the Dukes of Richmond and Montague, accompanied by several Gentlemen, who were all Free and Accepted Masons, according to Ancient Custom, formed a Lodge upon the Top of a Hill near the Duke of Richmond's Seat, at Goodwood in Sussex, and made the Right Hon. the Lord Baltimore a Free and Accepted Mason.It is but right to say that this doctrine is not universally received as established law by the Craft. Brother Mackey did not think, however, that it was ever disputed until within a comparatively recent period. It is true that Brother Cole (Freemasons Library, book 51), as far back as 1817, remarked in reference to the custom in the United States that it was "a great stretch of power, not recognized, or at least, he believed, not practiced in this country." But the qualifying phrases in this sentence, clearly show that he was by no means certain that he was correct in denying the recognition of the right. Brother Cole, however, would hardly be considered as competent authority on a question of Masonic law, as he was evidently unacquainted with the Book of Constitutions, and does not quote or refer to it throughout his voluminous work. In that Book of Constitutions, however, several instance are furnished of the exercise of this right by various Grand Masters. In 1731, Lord Lovell being Grand Master, he "formed an Occasional Lodge at Houghton Hall, Sir Robert Walpole's House in Norfoll," and there made the Duke of Lorraine, afterward Emperor of Germany, and the Duke of Newcastle, Master Masons. We do not quote the case of the initiation, passing and raising of Frederick, Prince of Wales, in 1737, which was done in "an Occasional Lodge," over which Doctor Desaguliers presided, because, as Desaguliers was not the Grand Master, nor even, as has been incorrectly stated by the New York Committee of Correspondence, Deputy Grand Master, but only a Past Grand Master, it cannot be called a making at sight. He most probably acted under the Dispensation of the Grand Master, who at that time was the Earl of Darnley. But in 1766, Lord Blaney, who was then Grand Master, convened "an Occasional Lodge," and initiated, passed, and raised the Duke of Gloucester. Again in 1767, John Salter, the Deputy, then acting as Grand Master, convened "an Occasional Lodge," and conferred the three Degrees on the Duke of Cumberland. In 1787, the Prince of Wales was made a Freemason "at an Occasional Lodge convened," says Brother Preston, "for the purpose at the Star and Garter, Pall Mall, over which the Duke of Cumberland— Grand Master—presided in person." It has been said, however, by those who deny the existence of this prerogative, that these Occasional Lodges were only Special Communications of the Grand Lodge, and the "makings" are thus supposed to have taken place under the authority of that body, and not of the Grand Master. The facts, however, do not sustain this position. Throughout the Book of Constitutions, other meetings, whether regular or special, are distinctly recorded as meetings of the Grand Lodge; while these Occasional Lodges appear only to have been convened by the Grand Master for the purpose of making Freemasons. Besides, in many instances the Lodge was held at a different place from that of the Grand Lodge, and the officers were not, with the exception of the Grand Master, the officers of the Grand Lodge. Thus the Occasional Lodge which initiated the Duke of Lorraine was held at the residence of Sir Robert Walpole, in Norfolk, while the Grand Lodge always met in London. In 1766, the Grand Lodge held its communications at the Crown and Anchor, but the Occasional Lodge, which in the same year conferred the Degrees on the Duke of Gloucester, was convened at the Horn Tavern. In the following year, the Lodge which initiated the Duke of Cumberland was convened at the Thatched House Tavern, the Grand Lodge continuing to meet at the Crown and Anchor. But Doctor Mackey also held that a conclusive argument d fortiori, a stronger reason, may be drawn from the dispensing power of the Grand Master which has never been denied. No one ever has doubted, or can doubt, the inherent right of the Grand Master to constitute Lodges by Dispensation, and in these Lodges, so constituted, Freemasons may he legally entered, passed, and raised. This is done every day. Seven Master Masons applying to the Grand Master, he grants them a Dispensation, under authority of which they proceed to open and hold a Lodge and to make Freemasons. This Lodge is, however admitted to be the mere creature of the Grand Master, for it is in his power at any time to revoke the Dispensation he had granted, and thus to dissolve the Lodge. But if the Grand Master has the power thus to enable others to confer the Degrees and make Freemasons, by his individual authority out of his presence, are we not permitted to argue à fortiori, all the more, that he has also the right of congregating seven brethren and causing a Freemason to be made in his sight? Can he delegate a power to others which he does not himself possess? And is his calling together an Occasional Hodges and making, with the assistance of the Brethren thus assembled, a Freemason "at sight," that is to say, in his presence, any thing more or less than the exercise of his dispensing power for the establishment of a Lodge under Dispensation for a temporary period and for a special purpose. The purpose having been effected, and the Freemason having been made, he revokes his Dispensation, and the Lodge is dismissed. If we assumed any other ground than this, we should be compelled to say that though the Grand Master might authorize others to make Freemasons when he was absent, he could not do it himself when present. The form of the expression "making Masons at sight" is borrowed from Laurence Dermott, the Grand Secretary of the Atholl Grand Lodge; "making Masons in an Occasional Lodge" is the phrase used by Anderson and his subsequent editors. Brother Dermott (Ahiman Rezon), commenting on the thirteenth of the old regulations, which prescribes that Fellow Crafts and Master Masons cannot be made in a private Lodge except by the Dispensation of the Grand Master, says: "This is a very ancient regulation, but seldom put in practice, new Masons being generally made at private Lodges; however, the Right Worshipful Grand Master has full power and authority to make, or cause to be made, in his worship's presence Free and Accepted Masons at sight, and such making is good. But they cannot be made out of his worship's presence without a written Dispensation for that purpose. Nor can his worship oblige any warranted Lodge to receive the person so made, if the members should declare against him or them; but it such case the Right Worshipful Grand Master may grant them a Warrant and form them into a new Lodge." But the fact that Brother Dermott uses the phrase does not militate against the existence of the prerogative, nor weaken the argument in its favor. For, in the first place, he is not quoted as authority; and secondly, it is very possible that he did not invent the expression, but found it already existing as a technical phrase generally used by the Craft, although not to be found in the Book of Constitutions. The form there used is "making Masons in an Occasional Lodge," which, as we have already said, is of the same signification. The mode of exercising the prerogative is this: The Grand Master summons to his assistance not less than six other Freemasons, convenes a Lodge, and without any previous probation, but on sight of the candidates confers the Degrees upon him, after which he dissolves the Lodge and dismisses the Brethren. This custom of making Freemasons at sight has been practiced by many Grand Lodges in the United States of America, but is becoming less usual, and some Grand Lodges have prohibited it by a constitutional enactment. A few noted eases may be mentioned: John Wanamaker, at Philadelphia; former Vice-President Charles W. Fairbanks, at Indianapolis, Indiana; Rear-Admiral Winfield Scott Schley, at Washington, District of Columbia; and when William Howard Taft was President-Elect, he was made a Freemason "at-sight" on February, 1909, at Cincinnati, by the Grand Master of Ohio. A valuable historical account of Making Masons at Sight was contributed to the New Age, March, 1925, by Brother William L. Boyden, Librarian at Washington of the Supreme Council, Southern Jurisdiction, Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. SIGN Signs constitute that universal language of which the commentator on the Leland Manuscript was that "it is a thing rather to be wished than hoped for." It is evident, however, that such a substitute for a universal language has always existed among mankind. There are certain expressions of ideas which, by an implied common consent, are familiar even to the most barbarous tribes. An extension forward of the open hands will be understood at once by an Australian savage or an American Indian as a gesture betokening peace, while the idea of war or dislike would be as readily conveyed to either of them by a repulsive gesture of the same hands. These are not however, what constitute the signs of Freemasonry. It is evident that every secret society must have some conventional mode of distinguishing strangers from those who are its members, and Freemasonry, in this respects must have followed the universal custom of adopting such modes of recognition. The Abbé Grandidier (Essais Historiques et Topographiques, page 422) says that when Josse Dotzinger, as architect of the Cathedral of Strassburg, formed, in 1452, all the Master Masons in Germany into one body, "he gave them a word and a particular sign by which they might recognize those who were of their Confraternity." Martene, who wrote a treatise on the ancient rites of the monks (De Antiquis Monachorum ritibus), says that, at the Monastery of Hirsehau, where many Masons were incorporated as Lay Brethren, one of the officers of the monastery was called the Master of the Works; and the Masons under him had a sign which he describes as pugnam super pugnam pone uicissim quasi simules constructores marum; that is, they placed alternately fist upon fist, as ef imitating the builders of ways. He also says, and other writers confirm the statement, that in the Middle Ages the monks had a system of signs by which they were enabled to recognize the members of their different Orders. Krause ( Kunsturkunden iv, page 420) thinks that the Freemasons derived their custom of having signs of recognition from this rule of the old monks. But we can trace the existence of signs to remote antiquity. In the Ancient Mysteries, the initiates were always instructed in a sign. Thus, when a wreath was presented to an initiate of the Mysteries of Mithras by another, instead of receiving it, he east it upon the ground, and this gesture of casting down was accepted as a sign of recognition. So, too, Apuleius (Metamorphoses) describes the action of one of the devotees of the Mysteries of Isis, and says: "He walked gently, with a hesitating step, the ankle of the left foot being slightly bent, in order, no doubt, that he might afford me some sign by which I might recognize him. " And in another work (Apologia) he says: "If any one happens to be present who has been initiated into the same rites as myself, if he will give me the sign, he shall then be at liberty to hear what it is that I keep with so much care."Plautus, too, alludes to this custom in one of his plays (Miles Gloriosuos iv, 2) when he says: Cedo Signum si horune Bacohorum est. Give me the sign, if you are one of these Bacchantes. Signs, in fact, belong to all secret associations, and are no more peculiar to Freemasonry than is a system of initiation. The forms differ, but the principle has always existed. SIGNS, UNIVERSALITY OF Churchward, Yarker, Ward, Cockburn, and a number of other Masonic writers of their way of thinking, have made much of the fact, or at least have tried to, that "Masonic Signs" have been encountered among Congo tribes, Eskimos, Melanesians, the Hairy Ainus, etc., and that on many occasions such tribesmen have responded to Masonic signs. The difficulty with their "fact" is that there is too much of it. Some 175 separate, distinct, identifiable, nameable motions can be made by the hands, arms, legs, torso, head, eyes, the whole body, etc.; each and every one of those motions has been employed as a "sign" by at least one people, and usually by many, not once but thousands of times. It would be a strange anomaly if explorers, traders, soldiers, missionaries, and other travelers among the so-called "primitive" people did not encounter "Masonic signs"; as for that, the "Masonic signs" were not originated or invented by Masons, who were never able to alter anatomy, but were chosen by them from among the 175 possible motions, gestures, etc., suitable for use as "signs." For at least nine centuries our own Navajo people have had an outdoor ceremony strikingly like our Third Degree; but if one of them who has been made a Mason is asked if they are the same he will smile and say, "They have nothing in common." So with a Pueblo ceremony similar to HA.-. (the writer has not only seen and studied these ceremonies on the spot, but has taken part in a few portions of them). Two young traders of New Mexico (both Masons) rode horseback to San Diego and return without once using a highway, and visited some twenty Indian peoples en route with whom they conversed easily by the still-living, still used old Indian sign language. A sign in use somewhere, even if identical with one of our own, proves nothing about Freemasonry—Freemasonry never had the slightest connection with "the ancient gods" (which, incidentally, almost never were "gods"; American Indians have never had any "gods"). Consult Sign Talk, by Ernest Thompson Seton; Doubleday, Page & Co.; Garden City, L. I.; 1918;1725 signs are explained. Frazer's Golden Bough is an encyclopedia of the subject. SIGNATURE Every Freemason who receives a Certificate or Diploma from a Grand Lodge is required to affix his signature in the margin, for a reason which is given under the words Ne Varietur, which see. SIGNET A ring on which there is an impression of a device is called a signet. They were far more common among the ancients than they are among the moderns, although they are still used by many persons. Formerly, as is the custom at this day in the East, letters were never signed by the persons who sent them; and their authenticity depended solely on the impression of the signets which were attached to them. So common was their use among the ancients, that Clement of Alexandria, while forbidding the Christians of the second century to deck their fingers with rings, which would have been a mark of vanity, makes an exception in favor of signet rings. "We must wear," he says, "but one ring, for the use of a signet; all other rings we must east aside." Signets were originally engraved altogether upon stone; and Pliny says that metal ones did not come into use until the time of Claudius Caesar. Signets are constantly alluded to in Scripture. The Hebrews called them nosed Sabaoth, and they appear to have been used among them from an early period, for we find that when Judah asks Tamar (Genesis xxxviii, 18) what pledge he shall give her she replies, "Thy signet, and thy bracelets, and thy staff that is in thine hand." They were worn on the finger, generally the index finger, and always on the right hand, as being the most honorable; thus (Jeremiah xxu, 24) we read: "As I live, saith the Lord, though Coniall, the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, were the signet upon my right hand, yet would I pluck thee thence." The signets of the ancients were generally sculptured with religious symbols or the heads of their deities. The sphinx and the sacred beetle were favorite signets among the Egyptians. The former was adopted from that people by the Roman Emperor Augustus. The Babylonians followed the same custom, and many of their signets, remaining to this day, exhibit beautifully sculptured images of Baal Berith and other Chaldean deities. The impression from the signet-ring of a King gave the authority of a Royal Decree to any document to which it was affixed; and hence the delivery or transfer of the signet to anyone made him, for the time the representative of the King, and gave him the power of using the royal name. SIGNET OF TRUTH The signet of Zerubbabel, used in the instructions of the Royal Arch Degree, is also there called the Signet of Truth, to indicate that the neophyte who brings it to the Grand Council is in search of Divine Truth, and to give to him the promise that he will by its power speedily obtain his reward in the possession of that for which he is seeking. The Signet of Truth is presented to the aspirant to assure him that he is advancing in his progress to the attainment of truth, and that he is thus invested with the power to pursue the search. SIGNET OF ZERUBBABEL This is used in the American instructions of the Royal Arch Degree. It refers to a passage of Haggai (ii, 23) where God has promised that he will make Zerubbabel His signet. It has the same symbolic meaning as is given to its synonym the Signet of Truth, because Zerubbabel, as the head of the second Temple, was the symbol of the searcher after truth. But something may be said of the incorrect form in which it is found in many Chapters. At least from the time when Cross presented an engraving of this signet in his Hieroglyphic Chart, and perhaps from a much earlier period, for he may possibly have only perpetuated the blunder, it has been represented in some Chapters by a triangular plate of metal. Now, an unattached plate of metal, in any shape whatsoever, is about as correct a representation of a signet as a walking-cane is of a piece of money. The signet is and always has been a finger-ring, and so it should be represented in the ceremonies of the Chapter. What the peculiar device of this signet was—for every signet must have a device—we are unable to show, but we may suppose that it was the Tetragrammaton, perhaps in its well-known abbreviated form of a god within a triangle. Whether this was so or not, such a device would be most appropriate to the symbolism of the Royal Arch teaching. SIGNIFICANT WORD Significant is malting a sign, from two Latin words meaning respectively make and sign. A significant word is a sign-making word, or a word that is equivalent to a sign; so the secret words used in the different Degrees of Freemasonry, and the knowledge of which becomes a sign of the possession of the Degree, are called significant words. Such a word Lenning calls ein bedeutendes Wort, which has the same meaning. SIGN OF ASSENT Brother Henry F. Berry M. A., of the Public Record Office in Ireland, discovered among the papers of Archbishop Ussher preserved in the Library of Trinity College, Dublin a complete Code of manual signs used by the Vietorine Canons at Saint Thomas's Abbey, Dublin. The Latin code contains the following item: Pro signo annuendi, leva manum moderate et move non inversam sed ut exterior superfieies sit sursum.The above code is published in the Journal of the Royal Society of Atuaries of Ireland, part Il. volume ii, 1892. SIGN OF DISTRESS This is probably one of the original modes of recognition adopted at the revival period, if not before. It is to be found in the earliest ceremonies extant of the eighteenth century, and its connection with the legend of the Third Degree makes it evident that it probably belongs to that Degree. The Craft in the Eighteenth Century called it sometimes the Master's Clap, and sometimes the Grand Sign, which latter name has been adopted by the Freemasons of the Nineteenth Century, who call it the Grand Hailing Sign, to indicate its use in hailing or calling a Brother whose assistance may be needed. The true form of the sign has unfortunately been changed by carelessness or ignorance from the ancient one, which is still preserved in Great Britain and on the Continent of Europe. It is impossible to be explicit; but it may be remarked, that looking to its traditional origin, the sign is a defensive one, first made in an hour of attack, to give protection to the person. This is perfectly represented by the European and English form, but utterly misrepresented by the American. The German Rite of Schroeder attempted some years ago to induce the Craft to transfer this sign from the Third to the First Degree. As this would have been an evident innovation, and would have contradicted the ritualistic history of its origin and meaning, the attempt was not successful. SIJEL, AL The Recording Angel of Islam SILENCE See Secrecy and Silence SILENT BROTHERHOOD Dwellers in the Priories of Cluny and Hirsan in the eleventh century were placed under rigid discipline as to speech. Those of Cluny were the first to adopt the system of signs for daily intercommunication, which system, by consent or per missal, granted after application through three special messengers from the Priory of Hirsan, was adopted by that Priory in all its elaborateness, and indeed enlarged and perfected by the well-known Abbot William. The doctrine of a perfect silence in such extensive communities became noteworthy in history. These earnest and devoted men, under strong discipline, as Conversi or barbati fratres, Returned or Bearded Brethren, were encouraged in the Abbeys of the Middle Ages. Their labors were conducted in companies of ten each, under Deans of the Monastery, who were in turn instructed by Wardens and Superiors. SILOAM INSCRIPTION An inscription accidentally discovered in 1880 by a native pupil of Schick, a German architect, who had long settled in Jerusalem is chiseled in the rock that forms the southern wall at the channel which opens out upon the ancient Pool of Siloam, and is partly concealed by the water. The modern Pool includes the older reservoir, supplied with water by an excavated tunnel, 1708 yards long, communicating with the Spring of the Virgin, which is cut through the ridge that forms the southern part of the Temple Hill. The Pool is on the opposite side of the ridge, at the mouth of the Tyropoeon Cheesemakers valley, which was filled with rubbish, and largely built over. The inscription is on an artificial tablet in the rock, about nineteen feet from the opening upon the Pool. The first intelligible copy was made by Prof. A. H. Sayce, whose admirable little work, called Fresh Light on the Ancient Monuments, gives full details. Doctor Guthe, in March, 1881, made a complete facsimile copy of the six lines, which read thus: (Behold) the excavation! now this is the history of the excavation. While the excavators were still lifting up the pick, each towards his neighbor and while there were yet three cubits to (excavate there was heard) the voice of me than calling to his neighbor, for there was an excess in the rock on the right hand (and on the left). And after that on the day of excavating, the excavators had struck pick against pick, one against the other, the waters flowed from the spring to the pool for a distance of 1200 cubits. And (part) of a cubit was the height of the rock over the head of the excavators.The engineering skill must have been considerable, as the work was tortuous, and yet the excavators met at the middle. There is no date, but the form of the letters show the age to be nearly that of the Moabite stone. Scholars place the date during the reign of Hezekiah and in that event appraise it as the oldest Hebrew inscription known. "He made the pool and the aqueduct and brought the water into the city" (Second Kings xx, 20). The discovery was an important one. Processor Sayce deduces the following: The modern city of Jerusalem occupies very little of the same ground as the ancient one, the latter stood entirely on the rising ground to the east of the Tyropoeon valley, the northern portion of which is at present occupied by the Mosque of Omar, while the southern portion is uninhabited. The Tyropoeon valley itself must be the Valley of the Sons of Hinnom, where the idolaters of Jerusalem burnt their children in the fire to Moloch. It must be in the southern cliff of this valley that the tombs of the kings are situated," they being buried under the rubbish with which the valley is filled; and " among this rubbish must be remains of the city and temple destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar. Here, as well as in the now obliterated Valley of the Cheesemakers, probably lie the relies of the dynasty of David.Hebrew inscriptions of an early date have hitherto long been sought for in vain. Seals and fragmentary inscriptions have heretofore been discovered. Several of these seals have been found in Babylonia and Mesopotamia, and are regarded as memorials of the Jewish exiles; but the Schick discovery gives us a writing certainly as old as the time of Isaiah. SILVER AND GOLD When Saint Peter healed the lame man whom he met at the gate Beautiful of the Temple, he said to him "Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee" (Acts iii, 6); and he bestowed on him the gift of health. When the pious pilgrim begged his way, through all the perils of a distant journey, to kneel at the Holy Sepulcher, In his passage through poor and inhospitable regions, a crust of bread and a draft of water were often the only alms that he received. This has been symbolized in the ceremony of reception of a Knight Templar, and in it the words of Saint Peter have been preserved, to be applied to the allegorical pilgrimage there represented. SILVER CORD In the beautiful and affecting description of the body of man suffering under the infirmities of old age given in the twelfth chapter of Ecclesiastes, we find the expression "or ever the silver cord be loosed, or the golden bowl be broken, or the pitcher be broken at the fountain, or the wheel broken at the cistern: then shall the dust return to the earth as it was, and the spirit shall return to God who gave it." Doctor Clarke thus explains these beautiful metaphors. The silver Cord is the spinal marrow; its loosening is the cessation of all nervous sensibility; the golden bowl is the brain, which is rendered unfit to perform its functions by the approach of death; the pitcher means the great vein which carries the blood to the right ventricle of the heart, here called the fountain; by the wheel is meant the great artery which receives the blood from the left ventricle of the heart, here designated as the cistern. This collection of metaphors is a part of the Scripture reading in the Third Degree, and forms an appropriate introduction to those sublime ceremonies whose object is to teach symbolically the resurrection and life eternal. SIMONIS, JOHN W. A tactful and native factor in the Saint Johns Grand Lodge of the Most Ancient and Honorable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons in the State of New York independently formed about 1837, and headed by Harry C. Atwood, Master of York Lodge No. 367 of New York City. This was united with the old Grand Lodge of New York on December 27, 1850, by a public procession on Saint John's Day and suitable ceremonies at Tripler Hall. Brother Simons was noted for his knowledge of Masonic Jurisprudence and was also Grand Master of his State in 1861 (see History of Freemasonry in the State of New York, Ossian Lang, 1922, pages 134, 146). SIMORGH A monstrous griffin, guardian of the Persian mysteries. SINAI A mountain of Arabia between the horns of the Red Sea. It is the place where Moses received the Law from Jehovah, and where he was directed to construct the Tabernacle. Hence, says Lenning, the Scottish Freemasons make Mount Sinai a symbol of truth. Of the advanced Degrees, the Twenty-third and Twenty-fourth of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, or the Chief and Prince of the Tabernacle, refer in their instructions to this mountain and the Tabernacle there constructed. SINGAPORE, THE FOUNDER OF With the same suddenness in which it began, the war with Japan in 1941 filled American papers, movies, and magazines with a continuing food of discussions and descriptions of islands, nations, cities, and men who, before Pearl Harbor, had been scarcely better known to the American public than Marco Polo or Prester John, and in doing so made us see of what importance to us had been the City of Singapore which, though a British port, cost us Americans by its fall five billion dollars and tens of thousands of men and the attack on Pearl Harbor. Coincidentally, we American Masons discovered, to our very great surprise, that Freemasonry had been at work "out there" almost as long as it had been at work here, and that it had in quietness and by peaceable means a part in Asiatic settlement beyond anything anybody could have believed possible. The discoverer and founder—a British writer says "almost the inventor"—of Singapore was Sir Stamford Rafiles. (The name has no connection with the verb "to raffle" but is the French form of the botanic name for the plant from which raffia comes.) He was born at sea July 5, 1781, the son of a merchant captain plying between England and the West Indies—the year in which Britain surrendered at Yorktown. After a small bit of schooling at Hammersmith he went to work for almost nothing in the offices of the East India Company—offices in which Charles Lamb and John Stuart Mill also were to work in after times. During the years of an iron apprenticeship in that ruthless corporation he worked as hard nights and Sundays on studying at home as he did in his office by day. In 1805 he was sent out to be assistant-secretary in the Malay city of Penang, where he learned the native speech, came to love the people, and exhibited a religious tolerance (in that Mohammedan country) which was astonishing. "Mahomet's mission does not invalidate our Savior's"; he wrote; "one has secured happiness to the Eastern and one to the Western world, and both deserve our veneration." (While there he studied Hebrew and Greek, the Hebrew in order the better to understand Arabic.) In 1806 Napoleon placed his Brother Louis on the throne of Holland and sent out a French Army to occupy Java, the first step of a Napoleonic scheme to conquer the whole of Asia. (The Nazis and Japanese studied Napoleon's Asiatic plans and strategy down to the last detail.) Raffles laid before the Governor General of India, Lord Minto, a military plan to crush the French in Java, prepared the way, and with Minto in 1811 drove them out. Raffles was appointed Lieutenant-Governor. Lord Minto was an active Mason. On a coffee estate near Batavia was a small Lodge called Virtuitis et Artis Amici (Friends of Virtue and Arts), the Worshipful Master of which was Nicolas Englehardt, a former Dutch Governor of Java. With Minto present, Raffles received the first two Degrees. On July 5, 1813, he took the Third in Lodge De Vriendschap, at Sourabaya. In the years that followed, Sir Stamford went through black hours: Java went back to the Dutch; Minto died; Raffles' wife died, and after her their children. In 1816 he received the Rose Croix Degree in Batavia. On his journey back to England he stopped off to visit Napoleon on St. Helena. In a few months (after a second marriage) he went back to be Governor of Sumatra, and on the way visited Lord Hastings in India—also an ardent Mason. It was there and then that Raffles proposed the building of a city and great naval base at Singapore. Space does not permit a description of his labor thereafter, among them being his founding of the London Zoology Society. He died in April, 1826. If a Freemason writes about the power Freemasonry has to shape men, to inspire them toward tolerance and enlightenment, and to cultivate in them kindliness and friendliness, non-Masons may be tempted to discount it by half on the grounds of enthusiasm or a favorable prejudice; but if any non-Mason, and concerned only with unvarnished facts, will begin with Sir Stamford Raffles (or Minto, or Hastings) and search out the Mystic Tie in Asia as it stretched from one man to another, even across languages and in the midst of wars, and across the barriers of race (Hindus, Malays, Filipinos, Chinese became Brothers), and see how Masonry led to schools; hospitals, orphanages and tolerance, he will be forced in the end to admit that the part taken by the Craft in the bringing of civilization and culture into the Far East was astounding—and all the more so, in that it had behind it no armies, no powers of public office, no wealth, and never employed intrigue or force. SIR this is the distinctive title given to the possessors of the Degrees of Masonic Knighthood, and is borrowed from the heraldic usage. The word knight is sometimes interposed between the title and the personal name, as, for example, Sir Knight John Smith. English knights are in the habit of using the word Crater, or brother, a usage which to some extent is being adopted in the United States of America. English Knights Templar have been led to the abandonment of the title Sir because legal enactments made the use of titles not granted by the Crown unlawful. But there is no such law in America. The addition of Sir to the names of all Knights is accounted, says Ashmole, "parcel of their style." The use of it is as old, certainly, as the time of Edward I, and it is supposed to be a contraction of the old French Sire, meaning Seigneur, or Lord. SIRAT, AS or AL See Al-Sirat SIROC The Hebrew word n . A Significant word, formerly used in the Order of High Priesthood in the United States of America. It signifies a shoelatchet, and refers to the declaration of Abraham to Melchizedek, that of the goods which had been captured he would "not take from a thread even to a shoe latchet" (Genesis xiv, 23), that is, nothing even of the slightest value. The introduction of this word into some of the lower Capitular Degrees was an error of the ritualists. SISTER LODGES Lodges are so called which are in the same Masonic Jurisdiction, and owe obedience to the same Grand Lodge. SISTERS BY ADOPTION In the Lodges of the French Adoptive Rite this is the title by which the female members are designated. The female members of all androgynous, both sexes, Degrees are Sisters, as the male members are Brethren. SISTERS OF THE GILD The attempt of some writers to maintain that women were admitted into the Medieval Confraternities of Freemasons fails to be substantiated for want of sufficient proof. The entire spirit of the Old Constitutions indicates that none but men, under the titles of Brethren and fellows, were admitted into these Masonic Gilds; and the first Code of Charges adopted at the Revival in 1717, declares that "the persons admitted members of a Lodge must be good and true men . . . no women, etc." The opinion that women were originally admitted into the Masonic Gild, as it is asserted that they were into some of the others, is based upon the fact that, in what is called the York Manuscript, No. 4, whose date as affixed to the Roll is 1693, we find the following words: "The one of the elders taking the Booke, and that hee or shee that is to be made mason shall lay their hands thereon, and the charge shall be given. " But in the Alnwick Manuscript, which is inserted as a Preface to the Records of the Lodge at Alnwick, beginning September 29, 1701, and which manuscript was therefore probably at least contemporary with that of York, we find the corresponding passage in the following words, "Then shall one of the most ancient of them all hold a book that he or they may lay his or their hands upon the said Book," etc. Again in the Grand Lodge Manuscript, No. 1, whose date is 1583, we meet with the same regulation in Latin thus: Tunc unus er senioribus teneat librum et ille vet illi apposuerunt manus sub librum et tune praecepta deberent legi. This was no doubt the original form of which the writer of the York Manuscript gives a translation, and either through ignorance or clerical carelessness, the ille vet illi, instead of We or they, has been translated he or she. Besides, the whole tenor of the Charges in the York Manuscript clearly shows that they were intended for men only. A woman could scarcely have been required to swear that she "would not take her fellow's wife in villainy," nor make anyone a Free mason unless "he has his right limbs as a man ought to have." It cannot be admitted on the authority of a mistranslation of a single letter, by which an a was taken for an e, thus changing ille into illa, or he into she, that the Masonic Gild admitted women into a Craft whose labors were to hew heavy stones and to ascend tall scaffolds. Such never could have been the ease in Operative Masonry. There is, however, abundant evidence that in the other Gilds, or Livery Companies of England, women or sisters were admitted to the freedom of the company. Herbert (History of the Livery Companies xi, page 83) thinks that the custom was borrowed, on the constitution of the Companies, by Edward III from the Ecclesiastical or Religious Gilds, which were often composed of both sexes. But there does not seem to be any evidence that the usage was extended to the Building Corporations or Freemasons Gilds. A woman might be a female grocer or haberdasher, but she could hardly perform the duties of a female builder. SIT LUX ET LUX FUIT A motto frequently used in Freemasonry, although sometimes written, Luz ftat et Luz flit, signifying Let there be light, and there was light (Genesis i, 3); the strict translation from the Hebrew continues, "And the Lord took care of the light, that it was useful, and He divided the light from the darkness." SITUATION OF THE LODGES A Lodge is, or ought to be, always situated due East and West, for reasons which are detailed in the articles on East and Orientation, which see. SIVAN The Hebrew word ll'D. The ninth month of the Hebrew civil year, corresponding with the months May and June, beginning with the new moon of the former. SIX LIGHTS The six lights of Symbolic Freemasonry are divided into the Greater and Lesser Lights, which see. In the American system of the Royal Arch there is no symbol of the kind, but in the English system there are six lights—three lesser and three greater—placed in the form of two interlaced triangles. The three lesser represent the Patriarchal, Mosaic, and Christian Dispensations; the three greater the Creative, Preservative, and Obstructive Power of God. The four lesser triangles, formed by the intersection of the two great triangles, are emblematic of the four Degrees of Ancient Craft Masonry. SIX PERIODS The Grand Architects' Six Period's constituted a part of the old Prestonian lecture in the Fellow Craft's Degree. It referred to the six days of creation, the six periods being the six days. It no longer forms a part of the lecture as modified by Doctor Hemming in England, although Brother Oliver devotes a chapter in his Historical Landmarks to this subject. It was probably at one time taught ill the United States of America before Brother Webb modified and abridged the Prestonian lectures, for Hardie gives the Six Periods in full in his Monitor, which was published in 1818. The Webb lecture, practiced in the United States, comprehends the whole subject of the Six Periods, which make a closely printed page in Browne's Master Key, in these few words: "In six days God created the heavens and the earth, and rested upon the seventh day; the seventh, therefore, our ancient Brethren consecrated as a day of rest from their labors; thereby enjoying frequent opportunities to contemplate the glorious works of creation, and to adore their great Creator. " SKELETON A symbol of death. The ancient Egyptians often introduced a skeleton in their feasts to remind the revelers of the transitory nature of their enjoyments, and to teach them that in the midst of life we are in death. As such an admonitor a symbol it has been used in some of the advanced Degrees (see Skull). SKIRRET In the English system the Skirret is one of the working-tools of a Master Mason. It is an implement which acts on a center-pin, whence a line is drawn, chalked, and struck to mark out the ground for the foundation of the intended Structure. Symbolically, it points to us that straight and undeviating line of conduct laid down for our pursuits in the volume of the Sacred Law. The Skirret is not used in the American system. SKULL The skull as a symbol is not used in Freemasonry except in Masonic Templarism, where it is a symbol of mortality. Among the Articles of Accusation sent by the Pope to the Bishops and Papal Commissaries upon Which to examine the Knights Templar, those from the forty-second to the fifty seventh refer to the human skull, Cranium humanus, which the Templars were accused of using in their reception, and worshiping as an idol. It is possible that the Old Templars made use of the skull in their ceremony of reception; but Modern Templars will readily acquit their predecessors of the crime of idolatry, and find in their use of a skull a symbolic design (see Baphomet). Of this symbol of mortality, the skull, much has been written and when found of suitable service quoted with effect at Masonic meetings. About 1860 Brother J. S. Parvin of Iowa received a copy of a poem entitled Lines to a Skeleton as printed in a newspaper published at Glasgow, Scotland. He was struck with its beauty and used it in his Knight Templar work, he at that time being Eminent Commander of the local Commandery. A similar experience befell Brother Eugene S. Elliott of Wisconsin but brother Parvin is believed to have been first to use the poem as above described and it soon became very popular and is still generally used. The popularity of the poem has caused it to be paraphrased by several Brethren, Derman S. Wagstaff, New Age Magazine, April 1917 (page 178); Newton Newkirk, .Missouri Freemason, October 29, 1904; and copies of others published by H. D. Loveland, California, Noman T. Gassette, and so on are in our possession but lack particulars of first place of publication. However, the original also has its uncertainties. The Square and Compass, Denver, July, 1923, page 44, says "The poem was written by Robert Philip of Gormyre Cottage, Scotland. He wrote the verses unite Watching for 'body snatchers' in the parish churchyard of Torphichen where during the repairing of the church the unearthing of a skeleton suggested the subject." Clothes C. C. Hunt, Grand Secretary of Iowa, has kindly investigated the matter for us, writes "In 1816 the manuscript of the poem was found in the museum of the Royal College of Surgeons at London near a perfect human skeleton.Hoyt's New Cyclopedia of Practical Quotations, 1922 (page 687), credits the ode to Anna Jane Vardill (Mrs. James Niven) and it did appear in the European Magazine, November, 1816, signed with the initial "V". But Brother Hunt points out that the poetess denied the authorship and the coincidence of the initial is the only thing to connect her with the poem. The Subject came up frequently in Notes and Queries, London, and usually was credited to Miss Vardill but has been claimed for J. D. Gordman and Robert Philip, the latter in 1826. The lines are listed as anonymous in Edith Granger's Index to Poetry and Recitations, Chicago, 1904, McClurg. Behold this ruin, 'Twas a skullThere is an earlier poem of 1808 by Lord Byron on the skull. He tells of it in his conversations with Medwin; "The gardener in digging discovered a skull that had probably belonged to some jolly friar or monk of the abbey (Newstead Abbey) about the time it was demonstrated. Observing it to be of giant size and in a perfect state of preservation, a strange fancy seized me of having it set and mounted as a drinking cup. I accordingly sent it to town, and it returned with a very high polish, and of a mottled color like tortoise shell." Start not—nor deem my spirit fled: In me behold the only skull SKULL AND CROSS-BONES They are a symbol of mortality and death, and are so used by heralds in funeral achievements. As the means of inciting the mind to the contemplation of the most solemn subjects, the skull and cross-bones are used in the Chamber of Reflection in the French and Scottish Rites, and in all those Degrees where that Chamber constitutes a part of the preliminary ceremonies of initiation . SLADE, ALEXANDER On the title page of a 32-page pamphlet, The Free Mason Examined, published at London, England, 1754, the author is given as "Alexander Slade, Late Master of Three Regular Constituted Lodges, In the City of Norwich." Careful search among the archives failed to find a Brother who by the year 1751 had occupied the chair of three Norwich (England) Lodges. The pamphlet was reproduced in facsimile by the Lodge of Research, No. 2429, Leicester, 1926-7, with comments by Brother John T. Thorp, who also read a paper "Freemasonry Parodied in 1754 by Slade's Free Mason Ezamin'd" (see Transactions, Quatuor Coronati Lodge, 1907, volume xx, pages 95-111). Slade has not been identified with Norwich nor with Freemasonry and the purpose of this unknown writer is mysterious, Brother Thorp suggesting several possibilities: first, that this curious production is what it claims to be—an account of some Lodge ceremonies of that time; second, perhaps published to ridicule the claims made to a remote antiquity by the Grand Lodge of the Ancient; third, a misleading parody upon certain Masonic work of that period, and fourth, an outright invention prompted by pure greed, there being a lively demand for such information, Prichard's pamphlet of 1730 having four editions in a month and nearly twenty by 1754. Six editions of Slade's work were published four in 1754, the others bear no date, and Copies of all are rare. SLANDER Inwood, in his sermon on Union Amongst Masons, says: "To defame our Brother, of suffer him to be defamed, without interesting ourselves for the preservation of his name and character there is scarcely the shadow of an excuse to be formed. Defamation is always wicked. Slander and evil speaking are the pests of civil society, are the disgrace of every degree of religious profession, are the poisonous bane of all brotherly love." SLAVE See Free Born SLAVES, SERVANTS, ETC. The first Lodge constituted in South Africa was De Goede Hoop (Lodge of Good Hope), under a Dutch warrant, in the Transvaal, 1772. The Minutes of this Lodge which was set up in a frontier country to bring a ray of light into a Dark Continent contain the most surprising set of entries ever written before or since by a Lodge Secretary; perhaps they are unique. In 1774 the Lodge rented a slave. By 1775 they had come to own a slave, named Slammat, then sold him for 170 rix dollars. In the following year the Secretary records show that the Lodge had purchased another, named September. They sold September, and then bought two others, without names. The last slave sale was dated 1777. George, Prince of Wales, afterwards George IV, in 1787 initiated ("with his own hands"!) twenty footmen, etc., in order to have personal servants to wait on him while he sat in the East of his Prince of Wales Lodge, No. 259. Bro. George Washington inherited a slave from his mother. But no such items as these, nor any other among Masonic curzosa, can ever rob Goede Hoop of its melancholy and surprising distinction of dealing in slaves. (See The Early History of the Lodge De Goede Hoop, by O. H. Bate; Cape Town, South Africa.) G. G. Coulton (in Art and Reformation; page 74) records one case of the selling of a Freemason into slavery. A Normandy lady was so inordinately proud of a castle a Master Freemason built for her that she had him beheaded to guarantee against his making another like it. John Coustos was sent to the galleys by the Portuguese Inquisition for being a Freemason. Kings sometimes "bonded" a favorite physician, musician, Mason, etc., for life, a status which was serfdom in effect. In Tudor times more than one king sent out sheriffs to round up Freemasons to compel them by force to work on royal buildings. In 1907 Bro. Harry W. Gowen, of Halifax, N. C., wrote an exuberant booklet to prove that Georgia had in it the first and only Provincial Grand Master of Masons for America (1771-1776) and the only Provincial Grand Lodge for America; it was entitled The Stony of the Right Worshipful Joseph Montfort. On page 26 is a paragraph about a slave: "During the early years of the records a Brother died in the West Indies, and by his will, left a slave, a negro woman, to Royal White Hart Lodge. Halifax" The Lodge loaned the slave to Mrs. Taylor, a Mason's widow, and after a few years appointed a committee to recover the slave and her increase; but whenever the committee went after the woman, Mrs. Taylor would hide her. The chase was ineffectually kept up for a few years, finally abandoned and was most amusing. "NOTE. On page 676 of this Encyclopedia Bro. Clegg writes: 'Royal White Hart Lodge, No. 2, Halifax, North Carolina, has met in an old frame building erected in 1769 and since mused exclusively and continuously for Lodge purposes. ' In two details Bro. Clegg was misled by his sources of information. The lower door was made and equipped for a school room and was so used for many years. The "old frame building" suggests a poor or decrepit building whereas it was a very fine structure. "We have a description of the temple written in 1820, when it was in a perfect state of preservation: the roof was of slate color; the building white with green blinds, red brick chimney and foundation, and mahogany doors; the ceiling of the lodge room (which is arched) was blue; the woodwork white, excepting the doors, which were mahogany." Gowen; page 26. It is a fact of large significance that in the Minute Books of Lodges and the Proceedings of Great Lodges of the United States from 1850 neither slavery nor the Civil War is almost ever mentioned, and still less is ever discussed It was assumed tacitly, as it necessarily had to be, that the Tenets of Freemasonry are incompatible with buying, selling, or owning men and women. But the slavery issue from 1850 to 1865 was brought into the Fraternity, or made to confront it, in an indirect way, and, as it were, through the back door; because when the Roman Catholic hierarchy in the second period of the Anti-Masonic Crusade joined the Anti-Masons in their attempt to obliterate the Fraternity, one of its modes of attack was to accuse Freemasons of being abolitionists. The hierarchy of the Roman Church, though not always with the support of the lower clergy, and from 800 A.D. to World War II, has always been on the side of special privilege, ruling classes, slave and serf owners, etc., as against democracy, freedom, representative government, public schools, etc. Even in the North the hierarchy was outspokenly pro-slavery; in the South its hatred of Lincoln, emancipation, and abolitionism was malignant. Thus in a letter to Secretary of War Cameron in 1861, Archbishop Hughes wrote that "it should be understood that, with or without knowing it, if they [Catholics] are to fight for the abolition of slavery, then indeed they will turn away in disgust from the discharge of what would otherwise be a patriotic duty." In a book published in 1941 the Roman Catholic historian Theodore Maynard described the Emancipation Proclamation as a "blot on Lincoln's record." (The records and documents in the case may be found in American Catholic Opinion in the Slavery Controversy, by Madeline Hooke Rice; Columbia University Press; New York; 1944. The Church did not disavow its pro-slavery after the war, but permitted the subject to die away. This book by Maynard, it is interesting to note, is one of a long series of propaganda volumes being published by Roman Catholic agencies in order to re-write American history in their own favor.) Note. Detailed week-by-week records of Roman Catholic attacks on Freemasonry may be found in diocesan newspapers between 1848-1865, North and South. SLIP This technical expression in American Freemasonry, but commonly confined to the Western States, and not generally used, is of comparatively recent origin; and both the action and the word probably sprang up, with a few other innovations, intended as especial methods of precaution, about the time of the anti-Masonic excitement. SLOANE MANUSCRIPTS There are three copies of the Old Constitutions which bear this name. All of them were found in the British Museum among the heterogeneous collection of papers which were once the property of Sir Hans Sloane. The first Sloane Manuscript, which is known in the Museum as No. 3848, is one of the most complete of the copies extant of the Old Constitutions. At the end of it, the date is certified by the following subscription: finis p. me Eduardu Sankey decimo sexto die Octobris Anno Domini 1646. It was published for the first time, from an exact transcript of the original, by Brother Hughan in his Old Charges of the British Freemasons. The second Sloane Manuscript is known in the British Museum as No. 3323. It is in a large folio volume of three hundred and twenty-eight leaves, on the fly-leaf of which Sir Hans Sloane has written "Loose papers of mine Concerning Curiosities." There are many manuscripts by different hands. The Masonic one is subscribed thus with the date and name of the writer, Haec scripta fuerunt p. me Thomam Martin, 1659, and this fixes the date. It consists of three leaves of paper six inches by seven and a half, is written in a small, neat hand, and endorsed Free Masonry. It was first published, in 1871, by Brother Hughan in his Masonic Sketches and Reprints. The Rev. Brother A. F. A. Woodford thinks this an "indifferent copy of the former one." But this seems unlikely. The entire omission of the Legend of the Craft from the time of Lamech to the building of the Temple, including the important Legend of Euclid, all of which is given in full in the other manuscript, No. 3848, together with a great many verbal discrepancies, and a total difference in the eighteenth charge, would lead one to suppose that the former manuscript never was seen; or at least copied, by the writer of the latter. On the whole, it is, from this very omission, one of the least valuable of the copies of the Old Constitutions. The third Sloane Manuscript is really one of the most interesting and valuable of those that have beers heretofore discovered. A portion of it, a small portion, was inserted by Findel in his History of Freemasonry; but the whole has been since published in the Voice of Masonry, a periodical printed at Chicago in 1872. The number of the manuscript in the British Museum is 3329, and Brother Hughan places its date at from 1640-1700; but he says that Messrs. Bond and Sims, of the British Museum, agree in stating that it is "probably of the beginning of the eighteenth century." But the Rev. Brother Woodford mentions great authority, Wallbran, on manuscripts who declares it to be "previous to the middle of the seventeenth century." Findel thinks it originated at the end of the seventeenth century, and "that it was found among the papers which Doctor Plot left behind him on his death, and was one of the Sources whence his communications on Freemasonry were derived." It is not a copy of the Old Constitutions, in which respect it differs from all the other manuscripts, but is a description of the ritual of the Society of Free Operative Masons at the period when it was written. This it is that makes it so valuable a contribution to the history of Freemasonry, and renders t so important that its precise date should be fixed. SMARAGDINE, TABLET OF HERMES The foundation of Hermetic knowledge, by an unknown author. Translated in the Oedipus Aegyptiacus. SMITH, GEORGE Captain George Smith was a Freemason of some distinction during the latter part of the eighteenth century. Although born in England, he at an early age entered the military service of Prussia, being connected with noble families of that kingdom. During his residence on the continent it appears that he was initiated in one of the German Lodges. On his return to England he was appointed Inspector of the Royal Military Academy at Woolwich, and published, in 1779, a Universal Military Dictionary, and, in 1783, a Bibliotheca Miliaris. Brother Smith devoted much attention to Masonic studies, and is said to have been a good workman in the Royal Military Lodge at Woolwich, of which he was for four years the Master. During his Mastership the Lodge had on one occasion, been opened in the King's Bench prison, and some persons who were confined there were initiated. For this the Master and Brethren were censured, and the Grand Lodge declared that "it is inconsistent with the principles of Masonry for any Freemason's Lodge to be held, for the purpose of making, passing, or raising Masons, in any prison or place of confinement'' (see Constitutions, 1784, page 349). Brother Smith was appointed by the Duke of Manchester, in 1778, Provincial Grand Master of Kent, and on that occasion delivered his Inaugural Charge before the Lodge of Friendship at Dover. He also drew up a Code of Laws for the government of the Province, which was published in 1781. In 1780 he was appointed Junior Grand Warden of the Grand Lodge; but objections having been made by Heseltine, the Grand Secretary, between whom and himself there was no very kind feeling, on the ground that no one could hold two offices in the Grand Lodge, Smith resigned at the next Quarterly Communication. As at the time of this appointment there was really no law forbidding the holding of two offices, its impropriety was so manifest, that the Grand Lodge adopted a regulation (Constitutions, 1784, page 336) that "it is incompatible with the laws of this society for any Brother to hold more than one office in the Grand Lodge at the same time. " Captain Smith, in 1783, published a work entitled The Use and Abuse of Freemasonry: a work of the greatest utility to the Brethren of the Society, to Mankind in general, and to the Ladies in particular. The interest to the ladies consists in some twenty pages, in which he gives the "Ancient and Modern reasons why the ladies have never been accepted into the Society of Freemasons," a section the omission of which would scarcely have diminished the value of the work or the reputation of the author. The work of Brother Smith would not at the present day, in the advanced progress of Masonic knowledge, enhance the reputation of its writer. But at the time when it appeared, there was a great dearth of Masonic literature—Anderson, Calcott, Hutchinson, and Preston being the only authors of any repute that had as yet written on the subject of Freemasonry. There was much historical information contained within its pages, and some few suggestive thoughts on the symbolism and philosophy of the Order. To the Craft of that day the book was therefore necessary and useful. Nothing, indeed, proves the necessity of such a work more than the fact that the Grand Lodge refused its sanction to the publication on the general ground of opposition to Masonic literature. Noorthouck (Constitutions, 1784, page 347), in commenting on the refusal of a sanction, says: No particular objection being stated against the abovementioned work, the natural conclusion is, that a sanction was refused on the general principle that, considering the flourishing state of our Lodges, where regular instruction and suitable exercises are ever ready for all Brethren who zealously aspire to improve in masonical knowledge new publications are unnecessary on a subject which books cannot teach. Indeed, the temptations to authorship have effected a strange revolution of sentiments since the year 1720, when even ancient manuscripts were destroyed, to prevent their appearance in a printed Book of Constitutions! for the principal materials in this very work, then so much dreaded, have since been retailed in a variety of forms, to give consequence to fanciful productions that might have been safely withheld, without sensible injury, either to the Fraternity or to the literary reputation of the writers.To dispel such darkness almost any sort of book should have been acceptable. The work was published without the sanction, and the Craft being wiser than their representatives in the Grand Lodge, the edition was speedily exhausted. In 1785 Captain Smith was expelled from the Society for "uttering an instrument purporting to be a certificate of the Grand Lodge recommending two distressed Brethren." Doctor Oliver (Revelations of a Square, page 215) describes Captain Smith as a man "plain in speech and manners, but honorable and upright in his dealings, and an active and zealous Mason." It is probable that he died about the end of the eighteenth or the beginning of the nineteenth century. SMITH, WILLIAM Brother Smith published The Freemasons Pocket Companion, 1736, at London, England. SMITH, WM.; HIS CONSTITUTIONS When the Modern (first) Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania dedicated its Lodge house (Americans first Masonic building), and called "The Freemasons' Lodge," the dedication sermon was preached by William Smith, D. D., a member of Lodge No. 2, famous for his learning throughout the Colony. In 1781, the year that Cornwallis surrendered at Yorktown, the Grand Lodge decided to reissue its Shiman Rezon, or Book of Constitutions, and appointed Bro. Smith to revise and to abridge it. He was to become Grand Secretary in 1783. In 1782 he was Provost of the College of Philadelphia—now the University of Pennsylvania. He had the revision ready in 1781, and on November 22 of that year it was approved by Grand Lodge. But the printing was delayed. In 1782 Smith wrote a dedication to George Washington; in 1783 the Book was published. Though its editor could not know of it at the time, it was a book destined to be carried far, because it was to become the sanction and guide for Lodges in Tennessee, Kentucky, the West Indies Louisiana, Mexico, etc., and to be a model for later editors in other and future Grand Lodges. Since the volume is now listed as a rare book, collectors may find useful its full title page: "Ahiman Rezon Abridged and Digested; as a Help to all that are. or would be Free and Accepted Masons, to which is added a Sermon, Preached at Christ-Church, Philadelphia, at a General Communication, Celebrated, Agreeable to the Constitutions, Monday, December 28, 1778, at the Anniversary of St. John the Evangelist, Published by Order of The Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania, by William Smith, D. D., Philadelphia; Printed by Hall and Sellers, M,Dcc, LXXXIII." The 1778 London Edition of the Ahiman Rezon which presumably Bro. Smith had before him, has as its title: "Ahiman Rezon: or a Help to all that are, or could be Free and Accepted Masons." It was the Third Edition. The first paragraph of Bro. Smith's Chapter I appears to have been of his own composition, and may be guessed to have been a device for condensing into one sentence a series of exhortations which in the original version Laurence Dermott had spread over a number of pages. In this paragraph and in the chapter sub-head Bro. Smith uses a phrase which is peculiar, so peculiar that it is difficult to know why it has thus far escaped attention. In the sub-head he says: "for the use of Operative Masons, in the American Lodges . . ."; in the first line of the paragraph he says: "Before we enter upon the duties of the operative Mason," etc. (Italics ours.) Why did he say "Operative" instead of Speculative? (Two or three other Books of Constitutions afterwards repeated these phrases, Massachusetts being one of them.) one can only surmise that he took "operative" to mean Masons who operate a Lodge, the officers, tiler, janitor, etc.; this surmise has a support in his describing the duties of the "Operative Mason," "in the various offices and stations to which he may be called in the Lodge...." In any event this misreading of the meaning of "Operative" supports a statement made elsewhere in this Supplement to the effect that the first American Masons were often themselves uninstructed on Craft practices, and in the dark about its customs and Landmarks. Note. The Book of Constitutions prepared by Thaddeus Mason Harris for the new United Grand Lodge of Massachusetts. and which he printed in 1798, was a revision of an earlier Book; Harris also uses the phrase "for Operative Masons. ' SMITTEN BUILDER The old lectures used to say "The veil of the Temple is rent, the builder is smitten, and we are raised from the tomb of transgression." Brother Hutchinson, and after him Doctor Oliver, apply the expression, The smitten builder, to the crucified Savior, and define it as a symbol of His divine mediation; but the general interpretation of the symbol is, that it refers to death as the necessary precursor of immortality. In this sense, the smitten builder presents, like every other part of the Third Degree, the symbolic instruction of eternal life. SNOW, JOHN A distinguished lecturer on Freemasonry, who was principally instrumental in introducing the system of Webb, of whom he was a pupil, into the Lodges of the Western States. He was also a Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Ohio, and was the founder and first Grand Commander of the first Grand Encampment of Knights Templar in the same State. He was born in Providence, Rhode Island, February 25, 1780; was initiated into Freemasonry in Mount Vernon Lodge, of Providence, in 1809, and died May 16,1852, at Worthington, Ohio. SNOWS See Rains SOANE, GEO., HIS ROSICRUCIAN THEORY In his Curiosities of Literature; and Book of the Months (London; 1849), Vol. II., page 35, George Soane, a non-Mason, published one of the earliest essays in the attempt to prove that Freemasonry originated in Rosicrucianism. It is written by an intelligent, well read antiquarian who has neither a fool nor a fanatic; it is therefore the more useful as a specimen of the kind of theories which even the well-informed entertained before much was known about Masonic history. Some takes it for granted that Freemasonry was invented in 1717 by a few gentlemen inspired by antiquarian curiosity; the symbols and ceremonies and their attribution by the Masons to the old builders he dismisses as "trash." (There were some Masons in 1849 who held a similar theory.) Those ceremonies and symbols had a queer and occult look to him (it did not occur to him that as a non-Mason he could have no knows ledge of them), therefore he cast about among the "queer fish" of occult and pseudo-occult "societies" current in 1717 to see if he could find one "similar" to the Craft, and at the same time "older." Rosicrucian~ ism appeared to him to fill the bill. His history of Rosicrucianism is not made of the facts as now known. He traced it to a pamphlet written by John Valentine Andrea, and more especially to a second edition of 1617 entitled Fama Frater witatis (published by Cassel). He took it that in consequence of this putative "revelation" an organized fraternity ensued; and that this fraternity emerged in 1717 under the disguise of Freemasonry. These notions have gone the way of all flesh. Rosicrucianism was never anything more than a book, a name, a rumor, a nickname for anything queer, archaic, occult until in the Nineteenth Century a small group of English Masons organized a side order under that label. Andrea could not have fathered Masonry in 1717 because there had been Speculative Lodges before that date, and there had been Operative Lodges many centuries before. The discovery of the Regius and Cooke MSS. destroyed the last vestige of any feasibility Soane's theory may ever have had. That theory would be no longer of any importance were it not that a Masonic writer or lecturer now and then repeats Soane's argument, a thing possible only to those w ho have never read an authentic historic of the Fraternity. SOCIAL CHARACTER OF FREEMASONRY Freemasonry attracts our attention as a great social Institution. Laying aside for the time those artificial distinctions of rank and wealth, which, however, are necessary in the world to the regular progression of society, its members meet in their Lodges on one common level of brotherhood and equality. There virtue and talent alone claim and receive pre-eminence, and the great object of all is to see who can best work and best agree. There friendship and fraternal affection are strenuously inculcated and assiduously cultivated, and that great mystic tie is established which peculiarly distinguishes the society. Hence is it that Washington has declared that the benevolent purpose of the Masonic Institution is to enlarge the sphere of social happiness, and its grand object to promote the happiness of the human race. SOCIAL STATUS OF MASONS The damage done by the barbarians when they devastated France and Italy in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries was in the long run not as great as was the consequence of the caste system which they rooted so deeply in Europe that it has not yet been eradicated. At the top were the kings, nobles, and the prelates; next afterwards came patricians and knights and later, squires; at the bottom were slaves (slavery was still in practice in Britain in the Eighteenth Century); next above the slaves were the cotters, next above them were the villains, and next above the villains were working men, consisting of craftsmen and farmers. According to the dogma of the original barbarism God Himself had created these castes or classes, and it was not only illegal but impious for a man to presume to climb up and out "of the station in which God has seen fit to place him." Where did the Medieval Masons stand in this hierarchy of castes? The majority of the pages in the histories of the Fraternity now extant ask the question, What were the Masons? The question raised here is, Who were the Masons? The who is of equal importance to the what for the solution of the problems of Masonic history. The data as we now possess them, only half discovered and seldom thoroughly examined, give a confusing answer. On the whole, they give the impression that here, as on other counts, we shall find that Operative Freemasonry as regards social classes was in a peculiar sense an exception; that impression is of a piece with bodies of data of other kinds which show that in the first period the Fraternity was as "peculiar," as "unique" in many other ways also. During the century prior to the discovery of Gothic architecture in and around Paris, there had been developed to a high degree of perfection the art of the miniature painter, the master who ornamented vellum manuscript books with tiny miracles of almost perfect paintings. and who made most of the discoveries of form, composition, and perspective which made possible the "great painting" in Italy during the Renaissance—Leonardo da Vinci's "Last Supper" is a masterly reproduction in the large of a miniature subject that had been perfected two centuries before his time. Coincidentally with the discovery of the Gothic, miniature painting escaped from the monasteries, which were always tending to lapse into decay from sloth and ignorance (sloth itself was defined as "the idleness of the illiterate"), into the hands of lay artists, and almost immediately it was carried on and up into its own dazzling, great age in the reign of Philip Augustus, in which appeared those supreme artists, Honor, Jean Pucelle, Forrequet, Paul, Hermann Male-well, etc. These miniaturists were not, as the cant of barbarian usage had it, laborers; they did not work in soil, stone, clay, bricks, wood, or the malodorous leather; they were pure artists in the most absolute sense of the word "pure"; and they were great artists —more than one of their masterpieces has actually been used to "ransom a kingdom." It is a revelation, therefore, to see where and how these artists stood in the social scheme. First, they were personally so ignored that they were not suffered to sign their work (occasionally one of them slipped his first name, very small, into an end device), and their works were called not by the name of the artist but by the names of their owners. Second, they formed a gild, had a master and wardens, apprenticeships, fixed hours and wages, and thereby became established solidly in the same social bracket as brick-layers, paviors, cloth weavers, and leather workers, well down among the lower orders, so that if one of them was invited to dine in a patrician's home he ate at table with the servants. Though a craft of pure artists, the miniaturists were thus nevertheless a gild, and their station was that assigned to every other gild of craftsmen in the caste system of the times. The Freemasons' gild was like their gild, and yet m as unlike it. The Masons went through a long hard apprenticeship; they had much schooling beside; they became in adult manhood the superior of any of their contemporaries in knowledge, intelligence, independence, skill, and they also were pure artists; and vet, because they were workmen, they were frozen into the "lower classes." Also, like the miniaturists, they were compelled to work, at least in theory, anonymously; Masters of Masons like William of Sens and Arnolfo, alongside their fellows, not only erected but also conceived, designed, and ornamented the cathedrals, yet the chroniclers of the time, monks most of them, and snobs to their marrow, give no credit to any Master of Masons for any cathedral, but tell us that Bishop Walter Montague "built" the cathedral at Lyon, Bishop Maurice de Sully "built" Notre Dame, and so on, though no one of those bishops could have read a plan or calculated the scale of an arch if his life had depended upon it. Yet on the other hand these Master Masons received oftentimes a princely wage, and consorted with gentlemen and high lords; Martin de Lonay, only one elf hundreds of others, when he was building the Abbey at St. Gilles, ate at the Abbots' table, stabled his horse in the Abbots' stalls, and received gifts of robes of state, collars, and had an honored place in solemn pageants, etc. At one end of it the Craft was solidly imbedded in the lowly craft gild and belonged to the lower orders; at the other end of it, it was embedded with equal solidity in the highest class of all; and as in France, so in England, where apprentices, usually of country stock, were taught the etiquette of the hall and the courtly manners of milord. This meeting and mixture of social extremes inside the Crafts' own circle explains what, as against the known facts of the Middle Ages, would otherwise be inexplicable: the consorting of men of title with working men, the commingling of stone-masonry and pure art, the possession by hand workers of a better education than bishops had, the admittance of non-Operatives into some such status as Honorary membership, the freedom of Masons to work some years in one town and then move to another; their occupancy of a position at the very center of church life and yet their independence from church rule; their having their roots in the very soil of Medievalism and yet their finding out of truths so modern that even yet modern men have not caught up with them. SOCIETAS ROSICRUCIANA IN ANGLIA See Rosicrucianism SOCIETAS ROSICRUCIANA IN SCOTIA See Rosicrucianism SOCIETY ISLANDS See Oceania SOCIETY OF THE CHAIN See Chain, Society of the SOCIUS The Sixth Degree of the Order of Strict Observance SOCIOLOGY AND FREEMASONRY In the eyes of sociology a people consists of institutions, cultural agencies, established groups, organized societies, living traditions, mores, etc. These the sociologists study, classify, and describe as a botanist describes and classifies plants, impersonally, impartially, and without moral judgments. In sociology Freemasonry is classified as belonging to the group of cultural agencies, within the sub-classification of fraternities; the sociologist then attempts to discover the "sociologic laws" of fraternities; that is, principles, forms of organizations, and purposes common to them. Except indirectly, or in passing, sociologists have never made a special study of Freemasonry according to their own categories and canons, but there have been signs lately to indicate that they are about to do so. Secret Societies; a Study of Fraternalism in the United States, by Noel P. Gist, Ph.D., Columbia University; New York; 1940; and "Sociology of Secret Societies" in the American Journal of Sociology; Vol. XI; 1906; p. 441, are together a fairly complete portrait of the Craft as it appears to the eyes of sociologists. Studies of a similar kind, though not technically sociologic, are: Secret Societies Old and New, by Herbert Vivian; London; 1927 (the author does not possess sufficient knowledge for his task, and on some pages writes in a style that is either crude or sarcastic, it is impossible to say which). Hutton Webster's famous Secret Societies is sociologic but is not concerned with modern fraternities. Three of G. G. Coulton's works are histories, but they contain chapters which are in effect sociologic studies of Medieval Freemasonry: Medieval Panorama. Social Life in Britain; From the Conquest to the Reformation (Cambridge; 1919). Life in the Middle Ages; Macmillan; New York; 1930. It is probable that only sociology itself will gain much from these researches, because its data long have been familiar to Masonic scholars to whom it is a commonplace that Freemasonry is a fraternity, and nas secrets, and has only fraternal purposes, is a free association, etc. It is however possible that from sociology Masons will gain a somewhat clearer knowledge of the Fraternity's place among other cultural agencies in modern society. Not long after the beginning of this century sociology came suddenly into a general popularity. Ward, Giddings, Veblen, Ross, etc., were suddenly catapulted into a place among best-sellers alongside popular novelists; even practical politicians began to study these volumes in the hopes of finding a magic key to their own problems; a few adventurers made fortunes out of exploiting the half-conscious fears of the populace, and a cheap and trashy book, called The Rising Tide of Color, foretold a global war between the White race and the Yellow, or even the Black, and this was viewed with huge alarms because it was assumed that the White race was "so vastly superior" to either of the other two that if it "fell" it would take civilization with it! These apocalyptic vaticination had a reincarnation in the "ideologies" of Fascism and Naziism under the label of "racism," though confusion became confounded when the Teutonic champion of the White race discovered to their delighted military surprise that the Japanese are "White Aryans." This episode of lunacy was a debacle for sociology, from which it has not recovered, and will not until it ceases to consider itself a "science" and becomes in name as well as in fact, what Boas affirmed it to be: a series of non-scientific studies of, and of thought about, the subject of race, and of such subjects as are auxiliary to it. Like psychology, sociology had become maddened by too many theories, has fallen from popular interest, and been dropped out of a large number of colleges; even sociologists themselves, some of them, have lost confidence in their own subject. In spite of its thus having been temporarily derailed, sociology has established one truth, and there is no possibility of its being questioned again: it has discovered that men are not born as individuals, separate and mutually-repellent atoms, which can be brought into groups only by preaching idealism, or by force, or by "moral suasion," as the orthodox sociologic theory of the Nineteenth Century had said they were. Men are in groups before they are born, because to be so is in their anatomy, their physiology, is the way they are made. A baby already is a member of a family, belongs to a society of blood relatives, is in a community, is a member of a people, is predestined to attend school, and to be a citizen, and to enter free associations—he cannot evade or avoid these "sociologic" engagements any more than he can avoid eating or sleeping. Society itself, as sociology employs the term, consists not of separate, atomistic individuals (still less of "rugged" individuals), but to begin with consists of institutions, groups, and associations; they are the units by which it is comprised. It is at this point, and in these terms, that Freemasonry is in the field of sociology, and may be sociologically studied. Its regalia, its charity, its Ritual and symbols, these are of no concern of sociology; on the other hand free associations do belong to sociology, and a Lodge therefore, as a Lodge, belongs to it because it is one of many forms of free associations. SODALITIES From the Latin word meaning Companion. Societies or companies of friends or companions assembled together for a special purpose. Such confraternities, under the name of Sodalitia, were established in Rome, by Cato the Censor, for the mutual protection of the members. As their proceedings were secret, they gave offense to the government, and were suppressed, 80 B.C., by a Decree of the Senate, but were afterward restored by a law of Clodius. The name is applied in the Roman Catholic Church to associations of persons for charitable or devotional purposes. SOFISM The Sofis were a mystical sect which greatly prevailed in Eastern countries, and especially in Persia, whose religious faith was supposed by most writers to embody the secret doctrine of Mohammedanism. Sir John Malcolm ( History of Persia, chapter xx) says that they have among them great numbers of the wisest and ablest men of the East, and since his time the sect has largely increased. The name is most probably derived from the Greek wisdom; and Malcolm states that they also bore the name of philosaufs, in which we may readily detect the word philosophers. He says also: "The Mohammedan Sofis have endeavored to connect their mystic faith with the doctrine of their prophet, who, they assert, was himself an accomplished Sofi." The principal Sofi writers are familiar with the opinions of Aristotle and Plato, and their most important works abound with quotations from the latter. Sir John Malcolm compares the school of Sofism with that of Pythagoras. It is evident that there is a great similarity between Sofism and Gnosticism, and all the features of the biofic initiation remind us very forcibly of those of the Masonic 'the object of the system is the attainment of Truth; and the novice is invited "to embark on the sea of doubt," that is, to commence his investigations, which are to end in its discovery. There are four stages or degrees of initiation: the first is merely preliminary, and the initiate is required to observe the ordinary rites and ceremonies of religion for the sake of the vulgar, who do not understand their esoteric meaning. In the Second Degree he is said to enter the pale of Sofism, and exchanges these external rites for a spiritual worship. The Third Degree is that of Wisdom, and he who reaches it is supposed to have attained supernatural knowledge, and to be equal to the angels. The Fourth and last degree is called Truth, for he has now reached it, and has become completely united with Deity. They have, says Malcolm, secrets and mysteries in every stage or degree which are never revealed to the profane, and to reveal which would be a crime of the deepest turpitude. The tenets of the sect, so far as they are made known to the world, are, according to Sir William Jones (Asiatic Researches ii, page 62), "that nothing exists absolutely but God; that the human soul is an emanation of His essence, and, though divided for a time from its heavenly source, will be finally reunited with it; that the highest possible happiness will arise from its reunion; and that the chief good of mankind in this transitory world consists in as perfect a union with the Eternal Spirit as the incumbrance of a mortal frame will allow." It is evident that an investigation of the true system of these Eastern mysteries must be an interesting subject of inquiry to the student of Freemasonry; for Godfrey Higgins is hardly too enthusiastic in supposing them to be the ancient Freemasons of Mohammedanism. His views are thus expressed in the second volume of his Anacalypsis (page 301): a wonderful work—wonderful for the vast and varied learning that it exhibits; but still more so for the bold and strange theories which, however untenable, are defended with all the powers of a more than ordinary intellect. "The circumstances," he says, "of the gradation of ranks, the initiation, and the head of the Order in Persia being called Grand Master, raise a presumption that the Sofia were, in reality, the Order of Masons." Without subscribing at once to the theory of Godfrey Higgins, we may well be surprised at the coincidences existing between the customs and the dogmas of the Sofis and those of the Freemasons, and we would naturally be curious to investigate the uses of the close communication which existed at various times during the Crusades between this Mohammedan sect of philosophers and the Christian Order of Templars. C. W. King, in his learned treatise on the Gnostics, seems to entertain a similar idea of this connection between the Templars and the Sofis. He says that, Inasmuch as these Sofis were composed exclusively of the learned amongst the Persians and Syrians, and learning at that time meant little more than a proficiency in medicine and astrology, the two points that brought the Eastern sages into amicable contact with their barbarous invaders from the West, it is easy to see how the latter may have imbibed the secret doctrines simultaneously with the science of those who were their instructors in all matters pertaining to science and art. The Sofi doctrine involved the grand idea of one universal creed, which could be secretly held under any profession of an outward faith: and in fact took virtually the same view of religious systems as that in which the ancient philosophers had regarded such matters. SOFTAS Students in the universities of Islam SO HELP ME GOD The usual observation or imprecation affixed in modern times to oaths, and meaning, May God so help me as I keep this vow. SOJOURNER See Principal Sojourner SOJOURNERS' CLUB, THE NATIONAL According to data in its own publications the National Sojourners' Club, like the Masonic Fraternity itself, is unable to put its finger on the exact place and date of its origin. More or less tentative experiments, made at widely- separated places and in different years, both proved the need of and prepared the way for it. As Sojourners' Club was founded by army officers (from other services, also) in Manila, P. I., in 1900, it: finally became Manila Lodge, No 342, on October 10, 1901. Another club of Sojourners appeared in the same city, in 1907, Manila being then, as it is non fruitful in Masonic origins, and, it may well be destined to be a Mother City of Freemasonry in the Far East where it maw have nobody can tell how large a future. The present organization in America began when fifteen officers met at the Hamilton Club in Chicago (which is among clubs what Manila is among cities, for it is a mother of clubs), in 1917. A formal organization was completed February 28, 1918 Membership was made eligible to commissioned officers in the uniformed services who are Masons; patriotism was proclaimed its chief tenet. At the first meeting twenty-four were present; Captain F. C. Russell was elected President. The roster of its local and national officers contains names made famous the World over by two World Wars; and also contained at least one President of the United States. Masons in the services on land and sea will always find each other out and form circles regardless of difficulties, for the Mystic Tie means much to them. For two centuries the Craft has tried out Army Lodges, Navy Lodges, Lodges on board ship, Mariners' Lodges, Ambulatory Lodges but they have not everywhere been satisfactory. The Sojourners is not a Lodge but a club, and it may in the future be proved to have found the most satisfactory formula for Masonic fellowship among Masons in the armed services. SOJOURNERS, NATIONAL See National Sojourners SOLDIERS OF CHRIST Milites Christi is the title by which Saint Bernard addressed his exhortations to the Knights Templar. They are also called by a more complete Latin title in some of the old documents, Militia Templi Salomonis, meaning The Chivalry of the Temple of Solomon; but their ancient Statutes were entitled Regina pauperum commilitonum Templi Salomonis, meaning The Rule of the poor fellow-soldiers of the Temple of Solomon; and this is the title by which they are now most generally designated. SOLI SANCTISSIMO SACRUM Latin, meaning Sacred to the most holy Sun. Mentioned in the Twenty-eighth Degree, Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. SOLOMON In writing the life of King Solomon from a Masonic point of view, it is impossible to omit a reference to the legends which have been preserved in the Masonic system. But the writer, who, with this preliminary notice, embodies them in his sketch of the career of the wise King of Israel, is by no means to be held responsible for a belief in their authenticity. It is the business of the Masonic biographer to relate all that has been handed down by tradition in connection with the life of Solomon; it will be the duty of the severer critic to seek to separate out of all these materials that which is historical from that which is merely mythical, and to assign to the former all that is valuable as fact, and to the latter all that is equally valuable as symbolism. But it must constantly be kept in mind that the chronology of early Jewish history is obscure. Periods given in the books of Moses are in round numbers and seem based only on tradition. Only when the biblical dates can be checked by external means, as for example by the records of Assyria, may definite dates be accepted with any certainty. Such is the conclusion of the Dictionary of Dates (Nelson's Encyclopedic Library). Solomon, the King of Israel, the son of David and Bathsheba, ascended the throne of his kingdom 2989 years after the creation of the world, and 1015 years before the Christian era. He was then only twenty years of age, but the youthful monarch is said to have commenced his reign with the decision of a legal question of some difficulty, in which he exhibited the first promise of that wise judgment for which he was ever afterward distinguished. One of the great objects of Solomon's life, and the one which most intimately connects him with the history of the Masonic institution, was the erection of a temple to Jehovah. This, too, had been a favorite design of his father David. For this purpose, that monarch, long before his death, had numbered the workmen whom he found in his kingdom; had appointed the overseers of the work, the hewers of stones, and the bearers of burdens; had prepared a great quantity of brass, iron, and cedar; and had amassed an immense treasure with which to support the enterprise. But on consulting with the Prophet Nathan, he learned from that holy man, that although the pious intention was pleasing to God, yet that he would not be permitted to carry it into execution, and the divine prohibition was proclaimed in these emphatic words: "Thou hast shed blood abundantly, and hast made great wars; thou shalt not build a house unto my name, because thou hast shed much blood upon the earth in my sight." The task was, therefore, reserved for the more peaceful Solomon. Hence, when David was about to die, he charged Solomon to build the Temple of God as soon as he should have received the kingdom. He also gave him directions in relation to the construction of the edifice, and put into his possession the money, amounting to ten thousand talents of gold and ten times that amount of silver, which he had collected and laid aside for defraying the expense. Solomon had scarcely ascended the throne of Israel, when he prepared to carry into execution the pious designs of his predecessor. For this purpose, however, he found it necessary to seek the assistance of Hiram, King of Tyre, the ancient friend and ally of his father. The Tyrians and Sidonians, the subjects of Hiram, had long been distinguished for their great architectural skill; and, in fact, many of them, as the members of a mystic operative society, the Fraternity of Dionysian Artificers, had long monopolized the profession of building in Asia Minor. The Jews, on the contrary, were rather more eminent for their military valor than for their knowledge of the arts of peace, and hence King Solomon at once conceived the necessity of invoking the aid of these foreign architects, if he expected to complete the edifice he was about to erect, either in a reasonable time or with the splendor and magnificence appropriate to the sacred object for which it was intended. For this purpose he addressed the following letter to King Hiram: Know thou that my father would have built a temple to God, but was hindered by wars and continual expeditions, for he did not leave off to overthrow his enemies till he made them all subject to tribute. But I give thanks to God for the peace I, at present, enjoy, and on that account I am at leisure, and design to build a house to God. for God foretold to my father, that such a house should be built by me wherefore I desire thee to send some of thy subjects with mine to Mount Lebanon, to cut down timber for the Sidonians are more skillful than our people in cutting of wood. as for wages to the hewers of wood, I will pay whatever price thou shalt determine.Hiram, mindful of the former amity end alliance that had existed between himself and David, was disposed to extend the friendship he had felt for the father to the son, and replied, therefore, to the letter of Solomon in the following epistle: It is fit to bless God that he hath committed thy father's government to thee, who art a wise man endowed with all virtues.Hiram lost no time in fulfilling the promise of assistance which he had thus given; and accordingly we are informed that Solomon received thirty-three thousand six hundred workmen from Tyre, besides a sufficient quantity of timber and stone to construct the edifice which he was about to erect. Hiram sent him, also, a far more important gift than either men or materials, in the person of an able architect, "a curious and cunning workman," whose skill and experience were to be exercised in superintending the labors of the craft, and in adorning and beautifying the building. Of this personage, whose name was also Hiram, and who plays so important a part in the history of Freemasonry, an account will be found in the article Hiram Abif, to which the reader is referred. King Solomon commenced the erection of the Temple on Monday, the second day of the Hebrew month Zif, which answers to the twenty-first of April, in the year of the world 2992, and 1012 years before the Christian era. Advised in all the details, as Masonic tradition informs us, by the wise and prudent counsels of Hiram, King of Tyre, and Hiram Abif, who, with himself, constituted at that time the three Grand Masters of the Craft, Solomon made every arrangement in the disposition and government of the workmen, in the payment of their wages, and in the maintenance of concord and harmony which should insure despatch in the execution and success in the result. To Hiram Abif was entrusted the general superintendence of the building, while subordinate stations were assigned to other eminent artists, whose names and offices have been handed down in the traditions of the Order. In short, the utmost perfection of human wisdom was displayed by this enlightened monarch in the disposition of everything that related to the construction of the stupendous edifice. Men of the most comprehensive minds, imbued with the greatest share of zeal and fervency, and inspired with the strongest fidelity to his interests, were employed as masters to instruct and superintend the workmen; while those who labored in inferior stations were excited to enthusiasm by the promise of promotion and reward. The Temple was at length finished in the month Bul, answering to our November, in the year of the world 3000, being a little more than seven years from its commencement. As soon as the magnificent edifice was completed, and fit for the sacred purposes for which it was intended, King Solomon determined to celebrate the consummation of his labors in the most solemn manner. For this purpose he directed the Ark to be brought from the king's house, where it had been placed by King David, and to be deposited with impressive ceremonies m the holy of holier beneath the expanded wings of the cherubim This important event is commemorated in the beautiful ritual of the Most Excellent Master's Degree. Our traditions inform us, that when the Temple was completed, Solomon assembled all the heads of the Tribes, the Elders and Chiefs of Israel to bring the Ark up out of Zion, where King David had deposited it in a tabernacle until a more fitting place should have been built for its reception. This duty, therefore, the Levites now performed, and delivered the Ark of the Covenant into the hands of the Priests, who fixed it in its place in the center of the Holy of Holies. Here the immediate and personal connection of King Solomon with the Craft begins to draw to a conclusion. It is true, that he subsequently employed those worthy Freemasons, whom the traditions say, at the completion and dedication of the Temple, he had received and acknowledged as Most Excellent Masters, in the erection of a magnificent palace and other edifices, but in process of time he fell into the most grievous errors; abandoned the path of truth; encouraged the idolatrous rites of Spurious Freemasonry; and, induced by the persuasions of those foreign wives and concubines whom he had espoused in his later days, he erected a fane for the celebration of these heathen mysteries, on one of the hills that overlooked the very spot where, in his youth, he had consecrated a temple to the one true God. It is, however, believed that before his death he deeply repented of this temporary aberration from virtue, and in the emphatic expression, "Vanity of vanities! all is vanity" (Ecclesiastes I, 2), he is supposed to have acknowledged that in his own experience he had discovered that falsehood and sensuality, however they may give pleasure for a season, will, in the end, produce the bitter fruits of remorse and sorrow. That King Solomon was the wisest monarch that swayed the scepter of Israel, has been the unanimous opinion of posterity. So much was he beyond the age in which he flourished, in the attainments of science, that the Jewish and Arabic writers have attributed to him a thorough knowledge of the secrets of magic, by whose incantations they suppose him to have been capable of calling spirits and demons to his assistance; and the Talmudists and Mohammedan doctors record many fanciful legends of his exploits in controlling these ministers of darkness. As a naturalist, he is said to have written a work on animals of no ordinary character, which has, however, perished; while his qualifications as a poet were demonstrated by more than a thousand poems which he composed, of which his epithalamium on his marriage with an Egyptian princess and the Book of Ecclesiastes alone remain. He has given us in his Proverbs an Opportunity of forming a favorable opinion of his pretensions to the character of a deep and right-thinking philosopher; while the long peace and prosperous condition of his empire for the greater portion of his reign, the increase of his kingdom in wealth and refinement, and the encouragement which he gave to architectures the mechanic arts, and commerce, testify his profound abilities as a sovereign and statesman- After a reign of forty years he died, and with him expired the glory and the power of the ancient Hebrew Empires SOLOMON'S TEMPLE, BUILDERS OF In the Cooke MS, written between 1410-1450, is imbedded the oldest Masonic tradition about Solomon's Temple, w hereby is meant the oldest adopted by Masons, because the unknown author of the document drew much of his materials from non-Masonic books. Beginning at line 539 and extending to line 572 the MS. states that when the Israelites came from Egypt to Jerusalem they brought Masonry (architecture) with them. David began the Temple; "he loved well Masons...." But the Temple was made in Solomon's time. He had 80,000 Masons employed. (At the American equivalent of $3.00 per day, that would total $240,000 per day, a yearly payroll of 300 working days of $72,000,000!) The MS. states that "the King's son of Tyre" was Solomon's Master Mason; this would normally be taken to mean the son of the King of Tyre. David had given Masons their charges; Solomon confirmed them, though this is admittedly taken from "other chronicles" and is written "in old books of Masonry" (architecture). Solomon taught them manners, "but little different from the manners that now be used." It is evident that the author is not here writing down Masons' traditions, or he would have said so, since he was careful to give his sources; and he did not have the Boosts of Kings or Chronicles before him but drew from old chronicles, polychrontcons (universal histories), etc. Nor was he offering a history, or connected narrative; the fact is evident from the table of contents which can be made for the MS. and which in this connection are: Abraham teaches Euclid the science of geometry; Euclid creates the craft of Masonry; the Israelites learn Masonry in Egypt; from Solomon's Temple the author then leaps to Charles II (not known to whom this refers); to St. Alban of England; to Athelstan; then back to Egypt and to Euclid. The first, or 1723, Edition of the Book of Constitutions (see ante page 11) has another account. It says that there were 3600 princes [or harodim, or provosts ] or Master-Masons . . . with 80,000 Fellow Craftsmen who were "hewers of stone in the mountains" (in reality the quarry was in the hill under the Temple), and 70,000 laborers; in addition there was a special levy of 30,000, making in all 183,600. They were at work for seven and one-half years. At the rate of only $1.00 per day the cost for 183,600 for 2250 days would come to the large total of $413,100,000! (In a pseudo-learned foot-note it is curious to note that a Hebrew word bonai, pronounced bow-nay, is given as meaning a builder in stone; it is a reminder of another and more famous word. In another paragraph of notes on the next page an attempt is made to explain the name Hiram Abif.) The Book of Kings (I, 5: 15, 16) has a census of the Temple workers: 70,000 workmen; 80,000 "hewers"; and 3600 overseers, or foremen. In the corresponding chapter in II Chronicles, these same numbers are given in two places, Ch. II, 5, and 18; perhaps its editor had two manuscripts before him and deemed it wisest to quote from both. His figures add to 153,600, or 30,000 less than the number given in the Book of Constitutions. In a widely-used version of the Monitorial (or Exoteric) Work: "There were employed in its construction three Grand Masters, three thousand and three hundred Masters or Overseers of the work, eighty thousand Fellow Crafts, and seventy thousand Entered Apprentices or bearers of burdens."It is clear that the author of this enumeration (Preston originally?) was following the Old Testament and not the Old Constitutions —and the fact proves that Masons have never had an orthodox, infallible, unchanging text rigidly binding on them by law. So little was this the case that when the young Mother Grand Lodge prepared a second edition of the Constitutions of 1738 it altered the first part of it radically and at many points. Versions of the Old Charges differ among themselves. It is a reasonable theory that after the Edition of the Book of Constitutions of 1723 was read, a number of Time Imemmorial Lodges discovered its accounts of the "history" to differ from theirs and made a clamor to have their own included. (It is a paradox of the history of Solomon's Temple that though Solomon and his people were Jews, it was built not by Jews but by Tyrians, and working under Tyrian overseers; and these latter must have built it in the Tyrian style because in that period of history Masons were not taught architecture in terms of principles and pure geometry and engineering, but were rained to do only a given style of work—a Tyrian Mason would have said, "I can do Tyrian work but not Egyptian or Assyrian." It is also a curious fact that just after the author of the Constitutions had said that the Jews were trained in architecture he then goes on to say that Solomon had to send to Tyre for architects !)The publishing of a cheap form of illustrated Bible about 1700 set everybody in England to reading it. one of the results was a wide spread amateur study of Hebrew; another was the discovery and popularity of Josephus' History of the Jews. The consequence to Masonry of the former was to introduce a few Hebrew words into its nomenclature, such as gibtim, harodim, bonay, etc.; the consequence of the latter was to introduce into the history of Solomon's period a set of traditions not in Kings and Chronicles, and a number of old Oriental tales about Solomon. There was yet another source of Temple lore: the enthusiastic public interest in the two "great" models of the building exhibited for years in England, one by Schott, the other by Leon, each with a handbook, and of which at least one contained lore from the Talmud. Thus, the Solomon's Temple of the Ritual was constructed, as it were, and in a poetic sense, by at least seven different sets of architects, and not working together: the Old Charges, Book of Constitutions, Book of Kings, Book of Chronicles, Josephus, Schott's model, Leon's model. But this commixing was not yet at an end; indeed, it was only at a beginning. For with Inigo Jones (during 1600-1652) the architectural style perfected by Palladio was brought from Italy into England, and almost at once began to replace the mixture of Tudor styles and the last vestiges of Gothic. Palladio was a modern style, but in essence was an adaptation of Greek; that is, more strictly, it made use of certain features of the classical Greek. It was called Italian, Palladian, Classical, Neo-Classical, Grecian, etc. By the time of the 1723 Constitutions this had become the style, and had been for so long that everybody had forgotten Gothic; and the compilers of the Constitutions not only forgot (or did not know) that Freemasonry was a child of the Gothic, but they sneered at it as a piece of barbarism, and no doubt assumed that each and every fine building in the past, including Solomon's Temple, had been designed in the Italian style. There was thus introduced into the Craft traditions, and on top of Solomon's Temple, "another temple," a Neo-Classical one. But even this was not the end. Once architects and amateurs became engrossed in Palladio, they were inevitably led back to Vitruvius, and through him discovered the genuine, classical Greek temple, which, unlike the Palladian adaptation, was composed of pillars and columns, with few or no walls, and 8 flattened down, simple roof without spires, or domes. or towers. The wonderful Greek columns were adopted into Masonic symbolism, where they became the Five Orders of Architecture. What few data we have about the Esoteric Work indicate that until the middle of the Eighteenth Century, in both Britain and America, and by comparison with its rigidity afterwards, the Ritual was between 1700 and 1750 in a fluid condition. It is improbable that Preston, or any other one man, was responsible for the fixation; but it is probable that the general acceptance of Preston's system of Monitorial Lectures signalized the fact that the Ritual had become stable. When it did so the Temple in it was not Solomon's Temple, or any other in particular. It was wholly a symbolical Temple, called Solomon's for symbolic purposes, and it was "built" out of whatever the Ritualists needed from many styles and traditions. They were not engaged as contractors to erect a London church; they were not historians or architects; they were Ritualists, great Ritualists, and they obeyed the laws of ritualism; and according to those laws historical or technological facts are of small importance; indeed, the fewer of them the better! Their symbolic temple had something of Solomon's in it; yet it also came to a focus in a drama not about his building or Solomon's people or even (this is remarkable!) about himself, but about a Tyrs architect—a workman; the fact that Greek columns of 500 B.C. had no place in a Tyrian Temple on Jewish soil of 1000 B.C. did not disturb them. They introduced priests bowing toward the Inner Sanctum alongside London college professors lecturing on ethics and the curriculum of Medieval Schools. They had Greek columns alongside ancient, legendary pillars. They put Euclid and Pythagoras cheek by jowl with Moses on the one hand and the English St. Albans (Thomas a Becket?) on the other. Historically and architecturally they had a museum of ruins, of anachronisms, solecisms, fallacies; ritualistically they had a masterpiece—and if Phidias had been a Ritualist he could not have built a better ritualistic temple. The once-burning question as to whether Solomon was the founder of Masonry or not (the Tyrians had been Masons long before Solomon!) answers itself as soon as the Masonic student sees the recorded, indisputable facts before him, and studies the Second and Third Degrees for himself. Note. In 1723 the Constitutions give HA.·. as the Master of Masons, in 1738, as Deputy Grand Master. In a very revealing aside Anderson, or whoever wrote the paragraph gives as his authority "the traditions of the old Masons who talk much of these things." What he meant probably was that they talked much to the Grand Lodge leaders whose iconoclasm was disturbing them. The Old Charges do not attribute the founding of Masonry to Solomon, but to Adam—itself another answer to the above referred-to "burning question"; if they give any one man the credit it was Euclid—a Greek, and a Greek whom the Medieval Church had both hated and feared. It also is significant that the oldest existing MS., the Regius, does not include Solomon's Temple—early Operative Lodges enjoyed a wide latitude in matters ritualistic and symbolic. Medieval builders themselves either knew nothing about Solomon's Temple or else took no interest m it; among its few appearances among the cathedrals was Wursburg where the pillars J and B were set up in the porch. The French Compagnonnage had a symbolic rite or symbolism about HA.·. but there is no known connection between that fraternity and early English Lodges- for some 200 years Englishmen and Frenchmen were almost completely out of touch with each other, what with wars and a conflict in religion; the majority of English tourists preferred to go to Italy, which became almost a tourist colony. It remained for Voltaire to rediscover the English and to bring them and their Loeke's philosophy and Newton's science to French attention. The fact helps to explain why Speculative Freemasonry is so purely English in origin. SOLOMON, HOUSE OF Lord Bacon composed, in his New Atlantis, an apologue, in which he describes the Island of Bensalem—that is, Island of the Sons of Peace—and on it an edifice called the House of Solomon where there was to be a confraternity of philosophers devoted to the acquisition of knowledge. Nicolai thought that out of this subsequently arose the society of Freemasons, which was, he supposes, established by Elias Ashmole and his friends (see Micolai) SOLOMON, TEMPLE OF See Temple of Solomon SOLSTICES The days on which the sun reaches is greatest northern and southern declination, which are June 21 and December 22. Near these days are those in which the Christian church commemorates Saint John the Baptist and Saint John the Evangelist, who have been selected as the patron saints of Freemasonry for reasons which are explained in the article on the Dedication of a Lodge, which see. SOMALILAND Sometimes called the Eastern Horn of Africa, south of the Gulf of Aden in the Indian Ocean. Of the three districts, British, Italian, and French Somaliland, the last possesses a Lodge. It was erected at Jibuti under the Grand Lodge of France SONGS OF FREEMASONRY The song formed in early times a very striking feature in what may be called the domestic manners of the Masonic institution. Nor has the custom of festive entertainments been yet abandoned. In the beginning of the eighteenth century songs were deemed of so much importance that they were added to the Books of Constitutions in Great Britain and on the Continent, a custom which was followed in America, where all the early Monitors contain an abundant supply of lyrical poetry. In the Constitutions published in 1723, we find the well-known Entered Apprentice's song, written by Matthew Birkhead, which still retains its popularity among Freemasons, and has attained an elevation to which its intrinsic merits as a lyrical composition would hardly entitle it. Songs appear to have been incorporated into the ceremonies of the Order at the revival of Freemasonry in 1717. At that time, to use the language of the venerable Doctor Oliver, "Labor and refreshment relieved each other like two loving Brothers, and the gravity of the former was rendered more engaging by the characteristic cheerfulness and jocund gayety of he latter." In those days the word refreshment had a practical meaning, and the Lodge was often called from labor that the Brethren might indulge in innocent gaiety, of which the song formed an essential part. This was called harmony, and the Brethren who were blessed with talents for vocal music were often invited "to contribute to the harmony of the Lodge." Thus, in the Minute-Book of a Lodge at Lincoln, in England, in the year 1732, which is quoted by Doctor Oliver, the records show that the Master usually "gave an elegant Charge, also went through an Examination, and the Lodge was closed with song and decent merriment." In this custom of singing there was an established system. Each officer was furnished with a song appropriate to his office, and each Degree had a song for itself. Thus, in the first edition of the Book of Constitutions, we have the Master's Song, which, says Doctor Anderson, the author, is "to be sung with a chorus— when the Master shall give leave—either one part only or all together, as he pleases"; the Warden's Song, which was "to be sung and played at the Quarterly Communication"; the Fellow Craft's Song, which was to be sung and played at the grand feast; and, lastly, the Entered 'Prentiss' Song, which was "to be sung when all grave business is over, and with the Master's leave." In the second edition the number was greatly increased, and songs were appropriated to the Deputy Grand Master, the Secretary, the Treasurer, and other officers.. For all this provision was made in the Old Charges so that there should be no confusion between the hours of labor and refreshment; for while the Brethren were forbidden to behave "'ludicrously or jestingly while the Lodge is engaged in what is serious or solemn," they were permitted, when work was over, "to enjoy themselves with innocent mirth. " The custom of singing songs peculiarly appropriate to the Craft at the Lodge meetings, when the grave business was over, was speedily introduced into France and Germany, in which countries a large number of Masonic songs were written and adopted, to be sung by the German and French Freemasons at their Table Lodges, which corresponded to the refreshment of their English Brethren. The lyrical literature of Freemasonry has, in consequence of this custom, assumed no inconsiderable magnitude; as an evidence of which it may be stated that Kloss, in his Bibliography of Freemasonry, gives a catalogue—by no means a perfect one—of two hundred and thirteen Masonic song-books published between the years 1734 and 1837, in the English, German, French, Danish, and Polish languages. The Freemasons of the present day have not abandoned the usage of singing at their festive meetings after the Lodge is closed; but the old songs of Freemasonry are passing into oblivion, and we seldom hear any of them, except sometimes the never-to-be forgotten Apprentice's Song of Matthew Birkhead. Modern taste and culture reject the rude but hearty stanzas of the old song-makers, and the more artistic and pathetic productions of Mackay, and Cooke, and Morris, and Dibdin, and Wesley, and other writers of that class, have taken their place. Some of these songs cannot be strictly called Masonic, yet the covert allusions here and there of their authors, whether intentional or accidental, have caused them to be adopted by the Craft and placed among their minstrelsy. Thus the well-known ballad of Tubal Cain, by Charles Mackay, always has an inspiring effect when sung at a Lodge banquet, because of the reference to this old worker in metals, whom the Freemasons fondly consider as one or the mythical founders of their Order; although the song itself has in its words or its ideas no connection whatever with Freemasonry. The first two verses are as follows: Old Tubal Cain was a man of might,Brother Burns's Auld Lang Syne is another production not verbally Masonic, which has met with the universal favor of the Craft, because the warm fraternal spirit that it breathes is in every way Masonic, and hence it has almost become a rule of obligation that every festive party of Freemasons should Close with the great Scotchman's invocation to part in love and kindness. But Robert Burns has also supplied the Craft with several purely Masonic songs, and his farewell to the Brethren of Tarbolton Lodge, beginning, Adieu! a heart-warm, fond adieu,is often sung with fine effect at the Table Lodges of the Order. As already observed, we have many productions of our Masonic poets which are talking the place of the older and coarser songs of our predecessors. It would be tedious to name all who have successfully invoked the Masonic muse. Masonic songs—that is to say, songs whose themes are Masonic incidents, whose language refers to the technical language of Freemasonry, and whose spirit breathes its spirit and its teachings—are now a well-settled part of the literary curriculum of the Institution. At first they were all festive in character and often coarse in style, with little or no pretension to poetic excellence. Now they are festive, but refined; or sacred, and used on occasions of public solemnity; or mythical, and constituting a part of the ceremonies of the different Degrees. But they all have a character of poetic art which is far above the mediocrity so emphatically condemned by Horace (see Poetry of Freemasonry). SON OF A FREEMASON The son of a Freemason is called a Louveteau, and is entitled to certain privileges, for which see Louveteau and Lewis. SON OF HIRAM A mixed tradition states that Aynon was a son of Hiram Abif, and was appointed master of the workmen who hewed the cedars and shaped the timber for the temple, and was recognized for his geometrical knowledge and skill as an engraver (see Aynon). SONS OF LIGHT The science of Freemasonry often has received the title of Lux, or Light, to inculcate that mental and moral illumination is the object of the Institution. Hence Freemasons are often called Sons of light. SONS OF THE PROPHETS We repeatedly meet in the Old Testament with references to the Beni Hanebiian, or Sons of the Prophets. These were the disciples of the prophets, or wise men of Israel who underwent a course of esoteric instruction in the secret institutions of the Nabiim, or prophets, just as the disciples of the Magi did in Persia, or of Pythagoras in Greece. "These sons of the prophets,;' says Stehelin (Rabbinical Literature i, page 16), "were their disciples, brought up under their tuition and care, and therefore their masters or instructors were called their fathers." SONS OF THE WIDOW This is a title often given to Freemasons in allusion to Hiram the Builder, who was "a widow's son, of the tribe of Naphtali" By the advocates of the theory that Freemasonry originated with the exiled House of Stuart, and was Organized as a secret institution for the purpose of reestablishing that house on the throne of Great Britain, the phrase has been applied as if referring to the adherents of Queen Henrietta, the widow of Charles 1. The name is also applied to a society of the third century (see Widow, Sons of the, also Widow's Son). SOPHISIENS, SACRED ORDER OF Founded at Paris, early nineteenth century, by Cavalier de Trie, Master of the Lodge Freres Artistes and had three Degrees and a short life. SORBONNE A college of theological professors in Paris, who exercised a great influence over religious opinion in France during the sixteenth, seventeenth, and greater part of the eighteenth centuries. The bigotry and intolerance for which they were remarkable made them the untiring persecutors of Freemasonry. In the year 1748 they published a Letter and Consultation on the Society of Freemasons, in which they declared that it was an illegal association, and that the meetings of its members should be prohibited. This was republished in 1764, at Paris, by the Freemasons, with a reply, in the form of an appendix, by De la Tierce, and again in 1766, at Berlin, with another reply by a writer under the assumed name of Jarhetti. SORROW LODGE It is the custom among Freemasons on the Continent of Europe to hold special Lodges at stated periods, for the purpose of commemorating the virtues and deploring the less of their departed members, and other distinguished worthies of the Fraternity who have died. These are called Funeral or Sorrow Lodges. In Germany they are held annually; in France at longer intervals. In the United States of America the custom has been introduced by the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, whose Sorrow Lodge Ritual is peculiarly beautiful and impressive, and the usage has been adopted by many Lodges of the American Rite. On these occasions the Lodge is clothed in the habiliments of mourning and decorated with the emblems of death, solemn music is played, funeral dirges are chanted, and eulogies on the life, character, and Masonic virtues of the dead are delivered. SOTER A Greek appellation implying Savior SOUL OF NATURE A platonic expression, more properly the Anima Mundi, that has been adopted into the English Royal Arch system to designate the hundred Delta, or Triangle, which Dunckerley, in his lecture, considered as the symbol of the Trinity. "So highly," says the modern lecture, "indeed did the ancients esteem the figure, that it, became among them an object of worship as the great principle of mated existence, to which they gave the name of God because it represented the animal, mineral, and vegetable creation They also distinguished it by an appellation which, in the Egyptian language, signifies the Soul of Nature." Doctor Oliver (Jurisprudence, page 446) warmly protests against the introduction of this expression as an unwarrantable innovations borrowed most probably from the Rite of the Philalethes. It has not been introduced into the American system SOUTH When the sun is at his meridian height, his invigorating rays are darted from the south. When the sun rises in the East, we are called to labor; when he sets in the West, our daily toil is over; but when he reaches the South, the hour is high twelve, and we are summoned to refreshment. In Freemasonry, the South is represented by the Junior Warden and by the Corinthian column, because it is said to be the place of beauty. SOUTH AUSTRALIA A state in the Commonwealth of Australia. Friendship Lodge at Adelaide introduced Freemasonry to South Australia in 1834. The ceremony, at which the President of the Legislative Council and the Chief Justice of the Colony were initiated, was held in London. In 1844 the first Scotch Lodge was opened and eleven years later an Irish Body was chartered. Provincial Grand Lodges were formed by Scotland in 1846, England 1848, and Ireland 1860. In 1883 it was feared that a few of the Lodges were about to annex authority over the rest. Brother H. M. Addison thereupon called a Convention which met April 16, 1884. Twenty-eight Lodges sent delegates and the Grand Lodge of South Australia was opened in due form, with Chief Justice the Hon. S. J. Way as Grand Master. Almost all the Brethren supported the new Grand Lodge, indeed only one Lodge, the Duke of Leicester No. 363 remained wholeheartedly faithful to its early authority (see Grand Lodge). SOUTH CAROLINA Solomon's Lodge was warranted in 1735 by the Grand Master of England and organized at Charleston on October 28, the following year. John Hammerton was appointed Provincial Grand Master by the Earl of Loudoun in 1736, but no further facts about the establishment of a Grand Lodge are available until there appeared a notice in the South Carolina Gazette of January 1, 1754, of the formation of a Provincial Grand Lodge on December 27, 1753. On March 30, 1754, a Deputation was signed in London and given to Chief Justice Leigh by the Marquis of Carnarvon which resulted in the reorganization of the Provincial Grand Lodge. According to Doctor Mackey this Grand Lodge became independent in 1777 and Barnard Elliott was the first Grand Master of the "Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons." The Athol or Ancient Freemasons appeared in the State as early as 1783, and in 1787 there were five Lodges of the Ancient in existence. On March 24 of that year they held a meeting and organized the "Grand Lodge of Ancient York Masons 29 In 1808 a temporary union between the two Grand Lodges took place but not until 1817 were they united under the name "Grand Lodge of Ancient Freemasons." On February 1, 1803, the Grand Chapter of Ncw York granted a Warrant to Carolina Chapter at Charleston. The Grand Chapter for South Carolina was instituted May 29, 1812, and was represented at the Convocations of the General Grand Chapter held in 1826, 1829, 1844, and 1859. The Grand Chapter has always paid allegiance to the General Grand Chapter and has firmly resisted any suggestion that it should be independent. Nine Councils of Royal and Select Masons were established by Charters from the Supreme Council of the Southern Jurisdiction, Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, during the years 1858-9. In 1860 the Supreme Council relinquished its authority and a Grand Council was constituted on February 15. In 1880 the Degrees reverted to the Supreme Council but in 1881 the Grand Council was reorganized and duly became a constituent of the General Grand Council. A Certificate of Membership still in existence, dated March 3, 1782, proves that South Carolina Commandery, No. 1, of Charleston was constituted at an early date. The first Warrant was destroyed by fire in 1843 and the Encampment petitioned for renewed authority. A Dispensation was therefore issued by the Grand Encampment on May 17, 1843. South Carolina, No. 1; Columbia, No. 2, and Lafayette, No. 3, formed a Grand Encampment in 1826 which was represented the same year in the General Grand Encampment. In 1830 Templarism had died down to such an extent that for over eleven years no work was done. It revived in 1841, but owing to the Civil War relapsed again until December, 1865, when Sir Albert G Mackey became eminent Commander Encampments at Columbia, Georetown and Baufort had disappeared for the time being, but after a time enthusiasm awakened and on March 25 , 1907 representatives of South Carolina, No. l; Columbia, No. 2; Spartanbury, No. 3, and Greenville, No. 4, met and instituted the Grand Commandery of South Carolina according to a Warrant issued on March 15, 1907. In the City of Charleston Delta Lodge of Perfection, No. 1, was granted a Charter by the Supreme Council, Southern Jurisdiction, Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, March 23, 1868; Buist Chapter of Rose Croix on May 10, 1871; Bethlehem Council of Kadosh on February 20, 1907, and Dalcho Consistory, No. l, on June 9, 1911. SOUTH DAKOTA When the Territory was divided in 1890 the Grand Lodge of Dakota became known as the Grand Lodge of South Dakota, and among its Lodges was the one which had been the first to be formed in Dakotan namely, Saint John's Lodge, chartered on June 3, 1863. In the same way it was decided to organize two Grand Chapters, one for North and one for South Dakota. All the Chapters treated in the latter State met on January 6, 1890, at Yankton to discuss the question, and the Grand Chapter of South Dakota was constituted in Ample Form. Representatives from Yankton, No. 1; Aberdeen, No. 14; Mitchell, No. 16; Brookings, No. 18; Orient, No. 19, and Rabboni, No. 23, were present at this meeting. On April 11, 1891, the Officers of the General Grand Council granted a Dispensation to Alpha, No. 1, at Sioux Falls, and a Charter was issued on July 21, 1891. A meeting of representatives of the chartered Councils in South Dakota was held on June 9, 1916, at which Companion Andrew P. Savanstrom, Past General Grand Master, presided. Officers were installed and the new Grand Council constituted. Dakota, No. 1, was the first Commandery to be established in Dakota. It may also be considered the first Commandery in South Dakota, since it was located in that District. With Cyrene, No. 2; De Molay, No. 3, and Fargo, No. 5. Dakota, No. 1, organized on May 14, 1884, the Grand Commandery of Dakota, which later changed its name to that of Grand Commandery of South Dakota. A Consistory of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, Southern Jurisdiction, was established at Yankton by Charter dated December 22, 1888. Robert de Bruce, No. 1, a Council of Kadosh, was chartered on March 10, 1887; Mackey, No. 1, a Chapter of Rose Croix, on February 27, 1882, and Alpha, No. 1, a Lodge of Perfection, on February 8, 1882. SOVEREIGN An epithet applied to certain Degrees which were invested with supreme power over inferior ones; as, Sovereign Prince of Rose Croix, which is the highest Degree of the French Rite and of some other Rites, and Sovereign Inspector General, which is the controlling Degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. Some Degrees, originally Sovereign in the Rites in which they were first established, in being transferred to other Rites, have lost their sovereign character, but still improperly retain the name. Thus the Rose Croix Degree of the Scottish Rite, which is there only the Eighteenth, and subordinate to the Thirty-third of Supreme Council, still retains everywhere, except in the Southern Jurisdiction of the United States, the title of Sovereign Prince of Rose Croix. The expression Sovereign of Sovereigns was a title once used for the presiding officer of a Consistory (see Doctor Mackey's revised History of Freemasonry, page 1891) and a similar title was also applied to members of Supreme Councils, Sovereigns of Masonry, in the circular letter sent out by the Supreme Council at Charleston, December 4, 1802 (reprinted fully in above History, pages 1871-5). SOVEREIGN COMMANDER OF THE TEMPLE The French expression is Souverain Commandeur du Temple. Styled in the more recent instructions of the Southern Supreme Council Knight Commander of the Temple. This is the Twenty-seventh Degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite The presiding officer is styled Most Illustrious and Most Valiant, the Wardens are called Most Sovereign Commanders, and the Knights Sovereign Commanders The place of meeting is called a Court. The apron is flesh-colored, lined and edged with black, with a Teutonic cross encircled by a wreath of laurel and a key beneath, all inseriloell in black upon the Hap The scarf is red bordered with black, hanging from the right shoulder to the left hip, and suspending a Teutonic cross in enameled gold. The jewel is a triangle of gold, on which is engraved the Ineffable Name in Hebrew. It is suspended from a white collar bound with red and embroidered with four Teutonic crosses. Vassal, Ragon, and Clavel are mistaken in connecting this Degree with the Knights Templar, with which Order its own ritual declares that it is not to be confounded. It is without a lecture. Vassal expresses the following opinion of this Degree: "The twenty-seventh degree does not deserve to be classed in the Scottish Rite as a degree, since it contains neither symbols nor allegories that connect it with initiation. It deserves still less to be ranked among the philosophic degrees. I imagine that it has been intercalated only to supply an hiatus, and as a memorial of an Order once justly celebrated." It is also the Forty-fourth Degree of the Rite of Mizraim. SOVEREIGN GRAND INSPECTOR- GENERAL The Thirty-third and Last Degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. The Latin Constitutions of 1786 call it Tertius et trigesimus et sublimissimus gradus, that is, the Thirty-third and Most Sublime Degree; and it is staled the Protector and Conservator of the Order. The same Constitutions, in Articles I and II, say: The Thirty-third degree confers on those Freemasons who are legitimately invested with it, the quality, title, privilege, and authority of Sovereign, Supremorum, Grand Inspectors-General of the Order. The peculiar duty of their mission is to teach and enlighten the Brethren; to preserve charity, union, and fraternal love among them; to maintain regularity in the works of each Degree and to take care that it is preserved by others, to cause the dogmas, doctrines, institutes, constitutions statutes and regulations of the Order to be reverently regarded, and to preserve and defend them on every occasion; and, finally, everywhere to occupy themselves in works of peace and mercy.The Body in which the members of this Degree assemble is called a Supreme Council. The symbolic color of the Degree is white, denoting purity. The distinctive insignia are a sash, collar, jewel, Teutonic cross, decoration, and ring. The sash is a broad, white watered ribbon, bordered with gold, bearing on the front a triangle of gold glittering with rays of gold, which has in the center the numerals 33, with a Sword of silver, directed from above, on each side of the triangles pointing to its center. The sash, worn from the right shoulder to the left hip, ends in a point, and is fringed with gold, having at the junction a circular band of scarlet and green containing the jewel of the Order. The collar is of white watered ribbon fringed with gold, having the rayed triangle at its point and the swords at the sides. By a regulation of the Southern Supreme Council of the United States, the collar has been worn by the active, and the sash by the honorary, members of the Council. The emblem is a black double-headed eagle, with golden beaks and talons, holding in the latter a sword of gold, and crowned with the golden crown of Prussia. The red Teutonic cross is affixed to the left side of the breast. The decoration rests upon a Teutonic cross. It is a nine-pointed star, namely, one formed by three triangles of gold one upon the other, and interlaced from the lower part of the left side to the upper part of the right a sword extends, and in the opposite direction is a hand of, as it is called, Justice. In the center is the shield of the Order, azure (blue), charged with an eagle like that on the banner, having on the dexter (right) side a Balance or (gold), and on the sinister (left) side a Compass of the second, united with a Square of the second. Around the whole shield runs a band of the first, with the Latin inscription, of the second, Ordo ab Chao, meaning Order out of Disorder, which band is enclosed by two circles, formed by two Serpents of the second, each biting his own tail. Of the smaller triangles that are formed by the intersection of the greater ones, those nine that are nearest the band are of crimson color, and each of them has one of the letters that compose the Word S. A. P. I. E. N. T. I. A., or Wisdom. The ring is a triple one, like three small rings, each one-eighth of an inch wide, side by side, and having on the inside a delta surrounding the figures 33, and inscribed with the wearer's name, the letters S..G.. I..G.., and the motto of the Order, Deus meumque Jus, meaning God and my right. It has been worn on the fourth finger of the right hand but in 1923 provision was made that the Thirty-third Degree ring should be worn on the little finger of the left hand in ache Southern Jurisdiction. The ring is worn on the third finger of the left hand in the Northern Jurisdiction of the United States of America (see Ring). Until the year 1801, the Thirty-third Degree was unknown. Until then the highest Degree of the Rite, introduced into America by Stephen Morin, was the Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret, or the Twenty-fifth of the Rite established by the Emperors of the East and West. The administrative heads of the Order were styled Grand Inspectors-General and Deputy Inspectors-General; but these were titles of official rank and not of Degree. Even as late as May 24, 1801, John Mitchell signs himself as Kadosh, Prince of the Royal Secret and Deputy Inspector General The document thus signed is a Patent which certifies that Frederick Dalcho is a Kadosh, and Prince of the Royal Secret, and which creates him a Deputy Inspector-General. But on May 31, 1801, the Supreme Council was created at Charleston, and from that time we hear of a Rite of thirty-three Degrees, eight having been added to the twenty-five introduced by Morin, and the last being called Sovereign Grand Inspector General. The Degree being thus legitimately established by a Body which, in creating a Rite, possessed the prerogative of establishing its classes, its Degrees and its nomenclature revere accepted unhesitatingly by all subsequently created Supreme Councils; and it continues to be the administrative head of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. SPECULATIVE MASONRY, EARLY The Masonic Fraternity writes its own history as it goes along in the form of Minutes and Proceedings. Unfortunately, it is not an easy history to read, nor convenient, nor is it furnished with an index, but it is a better and more reliable chronicle of the Craft than any work written by the historians. Below is a summary drawn from some 200 Minute Books and Lodge Histories of the oldest Lodges in Britain, Canada, and the United States; of these, about 60 are of the very earliest Speculative Lodges, of which one-half or so are long since defunct, or else have been merged with other Lodges. The items are chosen to illustrate some point important to the history of the Fraternity; and to save space, names, numbers, and dates are omitted; also, the data are representative, not exhaustive; scarcely any two of the earliest Lodges were alike in the details of Lodge practice, and the same Lodge made changes in itself from time to time. The summary is not so much a portrait of early Speculative Freemasonry as a photo montage: The majority of Lodges were very small; one of Sixty members was excessively large, almost too large to be managed; the majority had some fifteen or twenty members. Meetings with only six or seven members present were common. During the Eighteenth Century and well into the Nineteenth they met in taverns inns hotels. Since the room was in use for other purposes, Lodge furniture was either the property of the landlord, or else had to be packed up and stored away between meetings. The arrangement was almost never satisfactory, and Lodges moved much about—one of them made twelve removals in ten years. It did the Fraternity no good to hold its meetings at the centers of hard drinking. Sometimes a " wine drawer " or waiter, or even the landlord, were 'made" expressly to enable him to enter and leave the Lodge Room while the Lodge was in session. Lodges went by the name of the tavern in which they met—thus " the Lodge at the Goose and Gridiron, " the Lodge at " the Goat's Head, " etc. They were thus entered on the Grand Lodge's engraved lists of Lodges. They were not numbered until Dr. Thomas Dunckerley made the suggestion (he ranked with Desaguliers, Preston and Dermott as an architect of the Fraternity). In the center of the Lodge Room was placed a table, usually of the board and trestle type. The Lodge was opened with the members at table; Lodge business was conducted there; initiations were "made"; the Brethren ate and drank together for hours on end, the feasting being not an adjunct to Lodge business but as an integral part of it. A Lodge "feast" was therefore a Lodge meeting, and when the old Lodges insisted that Grand Lodge "Quarterly Feasts " be restored, it was in reality a demand that full Grand Lodge meetings be held, "as according to the old customs. " The meals in the richer Lodges sometimes were elaborate and costly, with a dozen liquors, and a long list of " healths. " In one instance the Secretary of a rich Lodge set down one "feast," for 51 members, at a sum now worth about 8500. Many Lodges owned their own punch bowls, plate, glasses, pitchers; a few of them had their own wine cellars. Dues were caned "subscriptions"; most of the money went to pay for the dinners. The charity fund usually was voluntary, a Charity Box being kept at hand. Fines were imposed right and left, for non-attendance, for "being disguised in liquor, " for quarreling, for "profane swearing, " etc. Visitors were " fined " a dollar or two as their share of the costs of the food and drink. The title of the Master was " Right Worshipful. " He was elected for six months, and in some instances appointed his own Wardens. Only a few Secretaries received stipends, and almost none of them had any regular system of books, so that there was frequent trouble over Lodge accounts (The Grand Lodge of Scotland expelled a Grand Secretary for that reason.) The Tiler wore a sword or a " poignard, " and received pay- he was a "servant" and seldom belonged to the same "class" as the members. He had many duties: to stand guard, to examine visitors, to deliver summons, to care for the furniture, etc.; the office was sometimes held in succession from father to son in the same family. (Montgomery, a famous Grand Tiler, became a personage almost as well known as the Grand Masters.) In at least one ease a Brother made a profession of being Lodge Secretary to a group of Lodges; Tilers often did. Minutes were bare, brief, and never of large importance in the early years. For decades they were not countersigned by the Master. The Secretary kept his records " in ye bag," and either took the bag home with him, or stowed it in the bottom of a pedestal. Spelling went by ear, and a Secretary spelled words as they chanced to sound to him at the moment; in more than one Minutes the Master's name was spelled three ways in one entry. Thus, one encounters apprentice as prentice, interprentice, prentiss, prentayee, etc. (The language was not pronounced then as now; thus, tea was pronounced to rhyme with " tay, " as one recalls from a couplet by Bro. Alexander Pope.) Minutes were meager because Secretaries did as little work as possible; or were afraid of violating secrecy; or as a protection from prying eyes when they kept the bag at home. Candidates, it appears, wore robes, for there is often mention of the purchase of them in Lodge inventories or minuses; sometimes "trousies," or "drawers" are mentioned. (Present day British Masons have weird notions about American customs. Even a learned Lodge of research was recently told that " in the States Candidates go naked!") The average early British Lodge was as local as it was small. and knew little about the Fraternity at large, still less about foreign countries To many of them "America" meant the West Indies. This lack of knowledge made them an easy prey to " foreigner " impostors. A number of Minute Books record relief being given to "Turks" who turned out to be frauds, to French counts, ditto, and to men coming over as " rich Americans "—the "rich American" myth is even now still alive in some British centers; a "Turk" was almost any dark-skinned foreigner. The great majority of members were Fellowcrafts only. In one ease a Worshipful Master was an Apprentice. The two grades often were conferred at one time, in "emergency meetings." The Master Mason grade was at first given in Masters' Lodges, and was confined, it appears, to Masters or Past Masters only (actual or virtual.) The oldest Lodges, such as constituted the first Grand Lodge in 1717, were familiar with the rites and customs; but after Lodges of 'new men" had multiplied by the hundreds, the Masons themselves had only a rudimentary understanding of Freemasonry, and made many experiments, changes, etc., trying out first one thing and then another. (One Lodge might use a Bible on the altar, another would use the Old Charges on a pedestal.) The Lodges of Speculatives under the Grand Lodge with their two Degrees (and later, their Third) were only one of many developments which came out of the old Operative Masonry; there was a Right Worshipful Society of Operative Masons; Masons' Companies in the cities; there were many self-constituted (St. Johns') Lodges which were regular but did not belong to a Grand Lodge; in North Ireland there were many individual Masons who sometimes called themselves " clandestines " and who had no Lodges or only loose and temporary ones; there were many " high grades, " or " side orders " (sued as the "Scotch Masons" who appear then disappear in English Lodge Minutes), etc.; that this was confusing to Chartered Lodges is exhibited by almost every Minute Book, and it took nearly a century to clear up and crystallize and unify a single system of Regular Masonry. If Masons quarreled outside the Lodge, if one of them accused another of some dishonest practices they often brought the quarrel into the Lodge for adjudication. (This occurrence of private non-Lodge affairs is another reason for the brevity of the Minutes.) Lodges (except in and about London) had little consciousness of Grand Lodge. or interest in it, and the Grand Lodge itself appears to have had even less interest in the Lodges because it was almost impossible oftentimes for a Lodge to secure a reply from the Grand Secretary. After a Provincial Grand Lodge was established, a Lodge was given to thinking of it, rather than "the London Grand Lodge," as "Grand Lodge." Also, Lodges were not encouraged to submit their grievances to Grand Lodge; still less were they encouraged ever to question any act of Grand Lodge—one Lodge was rebuked for doing so by the Grand Secretary who told them they had " insulted H. R. H. the Grand Master." The Wigan secessionist Grand Lodge was formed partly in consequence of the almost complete inactivity of both Grand Lodge and a Provincial Grand Lodge for nearly four years. An American Mason is always very conscious of "the Fraternity"; even when he has his own Lodge in mind he refers to it as "the Fraternity"; Masons 501) years ago had only a thin awareness of "the Fraternity" and their interest was almost solely concentrated in the local Lodge. But as against the present day Mason, with his dim consciousness of his own Lodge, a Mason 200 years ago loved his Lodge next only after his home. He filled it up with gifts—silverware, glassware, pictures, furniture, paraphernalia, books, etc., until many old Lodges had scarcely a square yard of bare wall, and a very rich atmosphere of family feeling, of an intimate friendliness, and of Brethren gone but who had left many mementos in the Lodge Room. Piecing together scattered hints it appears that a "Degree" followed in the main the same pattern as now, but with less of it enacted (wherein American Masonry still differs most from British). The Candidate was prepared; he took an OB--; a Tracing Board (or floor Cloth, or the "Lodge") contained the symbols of the Degree and these were explained. It was only gradually that Degrees became in a strict sense "degrees," or separate ceremonies, each one complete in itself, and with its own members and officers, with the Lodge not permitted to alter the ceremonies, and with Lodges everywhere using the same ceremonies. The earliest Speculatives spoke not of the "Degree" of Apprentice (etc.) but of the Lodge of Apprentices. To become a full-fledged member of the circle, was the principal aim of initiation; the ceremonies were a means to that end. A new movement began, and was destined to become triumphant, especially in America, when Preston and Hutchinson and a few others began to study the Ritual for its own sake. Any Mason could belong to more than one Lodge— in one Lodge record a member is listed as belonging to thirteen. The smallness of Lodges was partly responsible. As "class Lodges" became a rule, each with a specialized membership and interests, a new incentive to plural membership came into play. But the greatest incentive was the simple one, that many Masons enjoyed Lodge life for its own sake. The Minute Books and Lodge Histories leave the history of the Master Mason Degree as unsettled as ever, not because these contradict each other but because for nearly a century there was no uniform rule. Some of the oldest (Time Immemorial) Lodges appear to have kept firm hold on the whole of ceremony. Some had the Master's Degree separate from the other two (a Candidate was "made" a Fellowcraft) but kept it under Lodge control. There were Masters' Lodges, with their own rooms, officers, and meeting times; to them would go members from a number of surrounding Lodges. In some Lodges it looks as if any member could become a Master Mason; in others, only Masters or Past Masters; and in the latter, some had to be actual Past Masters, some could be "virtual" Past Masters by "passing the chair." The general tendency seems to have been to look upon the Grand Master as sovereign over the Craft, with Grand Lodge in a secondary role; which was in contrast to the present American tendency (in reality the Grand Master and the Grand Lodge have equal sovereignty but in different fields). Since a Grand Master was a Prince of the Blood, a Duke, an Earl, etc., the prerogatives which belonged to his person remained with him in the Grand East; in consequence a deal of snobbishness and exclusiveness developed among the Lodges, titles and ranks were over-valued, and this exclusiveness was (the writer so takes it) the principal reason for the division of England between two Grand Lodges; such a Mason as Peter Gilkes refused to accept Grand Honors or to attend Grand Lodge because the gentlemen there were "above his station." This was not true of the Ancient Grand Lodge, or of Scotland, Ireland, Canada, and the American Colonies. The oldest American Minute Books could almost be interchanged with the oldest British, so alike were the customs of the two until the end of the Revolution. There were, however, two fundamental differences in the Craft in general; first, Lodges of English, Scottish, Irish, and French origin worked here side by side, and this made more puzzling the questions the earliest American Masons were called upon to decide; second, the American Provincial Grand Lodges were left hanging in the air, because they could not obtain continuous cooperation or supervision from Britain, and at the same time did not possess complete sovereignty; expediency became the general rule. Also, the American Lodges could not obtain light on Masonry itself, because it had no teaching from Grand Lodge and no literature of its own. (Note. One instance is that of Thomas Smith Webb, who had to move in the dark, and who adopted Preston with no clear knowledge of Preston's status in the Grand Lodge in England. Another is the odd fact that two of the first American Books of Constitutions begin with a paragraph explaining that the Book is designed for Operative ( ! !) Masons; further on in the Book it transpires that the authors had taken Operative" to mean the book-keeping of the Secretary, the care of Lodge rooms funds, etc.; by "Speculative" they meant the Ritual.) The Eighteenth Century Lodges had no Order of the Eastern Star; yet the women had some connections with the Craft. In Ireland there were called "Masonic Dames." In England one Lodge purchased "gloves for the ladies." The history of Lodge symbolism is obscure; in old Tracing Boards are pictures of symbols no longer used, absence of symbols none in use, and symbols would be dropped and then resumed, etc. The broached thurnel (a stone axe plus a certain type of stone); Common Gudge (or judge; a template); perpend ashlar; these are a few of the symbols or terms not familiar to us also on Tracing Boards were arches, the Star of David, a chisel, sometimes a pencil, etc.; the trowel v, as once widely used then widely discontinued. The Pps. of the OB. . was used at least as early as 1700, but not in its present elaborate form. The Ob.-. appears to have been shorter. The Box, for relief, was a fixture in a Lodge; but such monies were expended from it represent but a fraction of the relief given; for where Lodges were small, and relations were close, much help was given Masonically to widows and orphans which was not done by Lodge action. Early American Lodges were those which worked between 1730 and 1780-5; and while, as stated above, they were in essential Lodges of the same sort as worked in Britain during the same period, there was as between the former and the latter one difference which though small at the time was to lead to an ever widening divergence: the British Lodge was small, its members were recruited (generally) from its immediate neighborhood, and their social evening around the table was their Lodge's greatest appeal to them; an American Lodge was larger, had fewer sister Lodges near it, drew its members from a larger radius, its membership represented every type, and the Lodge's greatest appeal to them was as a meeting place, an opportunity to become acquainted, a social center, a place to see friends which a man could not see otherwise; there was far less emphasis on the "feast" (which usually was a lunch) and much more on the Work. (At the present time, and not to make comparisons, the American Craft Ritual is larger, more complete, more interesting, and more artistically and self-consistently developed than its English counterpart in any one of the English Workings.) In their first impact on a Masonic student's mind the 200 or so Minute Books and Lodge Histories of which the above random notes are only slight indicia, alive him a sense of confusion, as if Speculative Masonry began with no clear understanding of itself; in the end he learns that the opposite was true. There never has been deviation or uncertainty in the things that count. Before even the Mother Grand Lodge was dreamed of, Freemasonry was a fraternity of workmen, was a philosophy of work (the first ever given to the world). raised work to the level of an attribute of God whose name was appropriately Sovereign Grand Architect (or Workman), envisaged mankind as a Lodge, or body of workmen, taught that work was not a curse but belongs to what a man is and therefore it cannot be despised without abasing him. It was these discoveries truths, and principles which brought Freemasonry into being; they drove it forward, they persisted unaltered among many changes, and in the long run, by the tests they imposed, determined what belonged to Freemasonry and what did not, what rites, ceremonies, symbols, lectures, rules. regulations, and customs; whatever has opposed them has died, or hangs withering on the branch; and it is they, working through the Lodges, which have made Masonry a power among men. Deviations, details, experiments, localisms, these have been unimportant in the long run. It is Freemasonry that has created the Lodges; not the Lodges that have created it. This stands clear and evident in the Histories and Minute Books themselves. SPECULATIVE (2) The word Speculative is used by Freemasons in its primary sense as symbolic, or theoretical, when opposed to Operative. The Matthew Cooke Manuscript transcribed about 1400 A. D. from an earlier original, makes use of the word in this technical connection, and its adoption by Anderson in his version of the Old Charges, 1723 A.D., is one of the proofs that this Manuscript was under his hand when compiling the Book of Constitutions Otherwise he would have substituted for Speculative and Operative the Scottish terms Geomatic and Domatic, just as he used Fellow Craft and Cowan. Dogmatic is derived from the Latin word Domus, which signifies a house. It therefore means of or belonging to a house. Its Masonic meaning is transparent from its usage in former times. When a body of Freemasons who were also Operative Masons, applied for a Charter to found a Lodge, as was the case with the petitioners for Ayr Kilwinning in 1765, they designated themselves Dogmatic Masons. On the other hand, members of Lodges who were not Operative Masons—Nobles, Lairds, etc.—were styled Geomatic Masons, a term derived from the Greek word afa, the land or soil, and therefore intended to show that they were landed proprietors or men in some way or another connected with agriculture. This was evidently the idea the word was meant to express at first but it was by and by applied to all Freemasons who were not Operative Masons, and who were in those days styled "Gentlemen Masons." So says Brother D. Murray Lyon, of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, in his History of Mother Kilwinning. But this will hardly hold water; it may pass with the bastard Latin Domaticus, but no one sufficiently acquainted with Greek to know that meant the Earth, could tolerate the meaningless termination. Judging by linguistic analogues, Geomatic should be a corruption of Geometic, due to the sharp sound of the short e in Lowland Scottish aided by the jingling assonance of Domatic (see Domatic). Similarly, the word Cowan is first met with amongst Scottish Operative Masons applied with contempt to a Dry-Diker, that is, a spurious Freemason who builds walls without cement. Its etymology is uncertain and the far-fetched derivations from a dog, or from listening, a listening person, that is, an eavesdropper, must be dismissed as inconsistent with philological principles. In the present writer's opinion the most likely derivation is that which connects it with the French Cofon or Coyon, a man of no account, a wretch. If so, it adds another to the list of low French words embedded in Lowland Scottish, during the medieval intercourse of the two countries, for the curious derivation of the French word and its Romance cognates from Latin Coleus, Greek (see Cowan). The above notes are by Brother W. J. Chetwode Craxvley (Caementaria Hibernica, Faseieulus 1, page 6). SPECULATIVE FREEMASONRY The lectures of the Symbolic Degrees instruct the neophyte in the difference between the Operative and the Speculative divisions of Freemasonry. They tell him that "we work in Speculative Masonry, but our ancient Brethren wrought in both Operative and Speculative." The distinction between an Operative Art and a Speculative Science is, therefore, familiar to all Freemasons from their early instructions. To the Freemason, this Operative Art has been symbolized in that intellectual deduction from it which has been correctly called Speculative Freemasonry. At one time each was an integral part of one undivided system. Not that the period ever existed when every Operative Mason was acquainted with, or initiated into, the Speculative Science. Even now, there are thousands of skillful artisans who know as little of that as they do of the Hebrew language which was spoken by its founder. But Operative Masonry was, in the inception of our history, and is, in some measure, even now, the skeleton upon which was strung the living muscles and tendons and nerves of the Speculative system. It was the block of marble, rude and unpolished it may have been, from which was sculptured the life-breathing statue. Speculative Masonry, which is but another name for Freemasonry in its modern acceptation, may be briefly defined as the Scientific application and the religious consecration of the rules and principles, the language, the implements, and materials of Operative Masonry to the veneration of God, the purification of the heart, and the inculcation of the dogmas of a religious philosophy. Speculative Masonry, or Freemasonry, is then a system of ethics, and must therefore, lice all other ethical systems, have its distractive doctrines. These may be divided into three classes, namely, the Moral, the Religious, and the Philosophical. 1. The Moral Doctrines. These are dependent on, and spring out of, its character as a social institution. Hence among its numerous definitions is one that declares it to be "a science of morality," and morality is said to be, symbolically, one of the precious jewels of a Master Mason. Freemasonry is, in its most patent and prominent sense, that which most readily and forcibly attracts the attention of the uninitiated; a fraternity, an association of men bound together by a peculiar tie; and therefore it is essential, to its successful existence, that it should, as it does, inculcate, at the very threshold of its teachings, obligation of kindness, man's duty to his neighbor. "There are three great duties," says the Charge given to an Entered Apprentice, "which, as a Mason, you are charged to inculcate—to God, your neighbor, and yourself." And the duty to our neighbor is said to be that we should act upon the square, and do unto him as we wish that he should do unto ourselves. The object, then, of Freemasonry, in this moral point of view, is to carry out to their fullest practical extent those lessons of mutual love and mutual aid that are essential to the very idea of a brotherhood. There i8 a socialism in Freemasonry from which spring all Masonic virtues—not that modern project exhibited in a community of goods, which, although it may have been practiced by the primitive Christians, is found to be uncongenial with the independent spirit of the present age but a community of sentiment, of principle, of design, which gives to Freemasonry all its social, and hence its moral, character. As the old song tells us: That virtue had not left mankindThus the moral design of Freemasonry, based upon its social character, is to make men better to each other; to cultivate brotherly love, and to inculcate the practice of all those virtues which are essential to the perpetuation of a brotherhood. A Freemason is bound, say the Old Charges, to obey the moral law, and of this law the very keystone is the divine precept—the Golden Rule of our Lord—to do unto others as we would that they should do unto us. 'I`o relieve the distressed, to give good counsel to the erring, to speak well of the absent, to observe temperance in the indulgence of appetite, to bear evil with fortitude, to be prudent in life and conversation, and to dispense justice to all men, are duties that are inculcated on every Freemason by the moral doctrines of his Order. These doctrines of morality are not of recent origin. They are taught in all the Ok. Constitutions of the Craft, as the parchment records of the fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth centuries show, even when the Institution was Operative in its organization, and long before the speculative element was made its predominating characteristic. Thus these Old Charges tell us, almost all of them in the same words, that Freemasons "shall be true, each one to other, that is to say, to every Mason of the science of Masonry that are Masons allowed, ye shall doe to them as ye would that they should doe unto youth 2. The Religious Doctrines of Freemasonry are very simple and self-evident. They are darkened by no perplexities of sectarian theology, but stand out in the broad light, intelligible and acceptable by all minds, for they ask only for a belief in God and in the immortality of the soul. He who denies these tenets can be no Freemason, for the religious doctrines of the Institution significantly impress them in every part of its instructions. The neophyte no sooner crosses the threshold of the Lodge, but he is called upon to recognize, as his first duty, an entire trust in the superintending care and love of the Supreme Being, and the series of initiations into Symbolic Freemasonry terminate by revealing the awful symbol of a life after death and an entrance upon immortality. Now this and the former class of doctrines are intimately connected and mutually dependent. For we must first know and feel the universal fatherhood of God before we can rightly appreciate the universal brotherhood of man. Hence the Old Records already alluded to, which show us what was the condition of the Craft in the Middle Ages, exhibit an eminently religious spirit. These ancient Constitutions always begin with a pious invocation to the trinity, and sometimes to the saints, and they tell us that "the first Charge is that a Mason shall be true to God and holy Church, and use no error nor heresy." And the Charges published in 1723, which professes to be a compilation made from those older records, prescribe that a Freemason, while left to his particular opinions, must be of that "religion in which all men agree," that is to say, the religion which teaches the existence of God and an eternal life. 3. The Philosophical Doctrines of Freemasonry are scarcely less important, although they arc less generally understood than either of the preceding classes. The object of these philosophical doctrines is very different from that of either the moral or the religious. For the moral and religious doctrines of the Order are intended to make men virtuous, while its philosophical doctrines are designed to make them zealous Freemasons. He who knows nothing of the philosophy of Freemasonry will be apt to become in time lukewarm and indifferent but he who devotes himself to its contemplation will feel an ever-increasing ardor in the study. Now these philosophical doctrines are developed in that symbolism which is the especial characteristic of Masonic teaching, and relate altogether to the lost and recovered word, the search after divine truth, the manner and time of its discovery, and the reward that awaits the faithful and successful searcher. Such a philosophy far surpasses the abstract quiddities of metaphysicians. It brings us into close relation to the profound thought of the ancient world, and makes us familiar with every subject of mental science that lies within the grasp of the human intellect. So that, in conclusion, we find that the moral, religious, and philosophical doctrines of Freemasonry respectively relate to the social, the eternal, and the intellectual progress of man. Finally, it must be observed that while the old Operative Institution, which was the cradle and forerunner of the Speculative, as we now have it, taught abundantly in its Constitutions the moral and religious doctrines of which we have been treating, it makes no reference to the philosophical doctrines. That our Operative predecessors were well acquainted with the science of symbolism is evident from the architectural ornaments of the buildings which they erected; but they do not seem to have applied its principles to any great extent to the elucidation of their moral and religious teachings; at least, we final nothing said of this symbolic philosophy in the Old Records that are extant. And whether the Operative Masons were reticent on this Subject from choice or from ignorance, we may lay it down as an axiom, not easily to be controverted, that the philosophic doctrines of the Order are altogether a development of the system for which we are indebted solely to Speculative Freemasonry. SOVEREIGN MASTER This title has two references. 1. The presiding officer in a Council of Companions of the Red Cross. He represents Darius, King of Persia. 2. The Sixtieth Degree of the Rite of Mizraim. SOVEREIGN OF MASONRY See Sovereign SOVEREIGN OF SOVEREIGNS See Sovereign SOVEREIGN PRINCE MASON A title first conferred on its members by the Council of Emperors of the East and West. SOVEREIGN PRINCE OF ROSE CROIX See Rose Croix SPAIN Anderson says (see Constitutions, second edition, page 194) that a Deputation was granted by Lord Coleraine, Grand Master, in 1728, for constituting a Lodge at Madrid; another in 1731, by Lord Lovell, to Capt. James Cummerford, to be Provincial Grand Master of Andalusia; and a third in 1732, by Lord Montagu, for establishing a Lodge at Valenciennes. George Smith, writing in 1783, says (Use and Abuse of Freemasonry, page 203): "The first, and, I believe, the only Lodge established in Spain was by a Deputation sent to Madrid to constitute a Lodge in that city, under the auspices of Lord Coleraine, 1727; which continued under English jurisdiction till the year 1776, when it refused that subordination, but still continues to meet under its own authority." From these two differing authorities we derive only this fact, in which they concur: that Freemasonry was introduced into Spain in 1727, more probably 1728, by the Grand Lodge of England. Smith's statement that there never was a second Lodge at Madrid is opposed by that of Gadieke, who says that in 1751 there were two Lodges in Madrid. What was probably the first active Masonic Lodge in Spain was held at a French Hotel in Madrid on February 15, 1728, and was summoned by Philip, Duke of Wharton. This was also the first Lodge to be warranted abroad by the Grand Lodge of England. Saint John of Jerusalem Lodge, Number 51, was chartered at Gibraltar on March 9, 1729, and two years later Capt. James Cummerford was appointed Provincial Grand Master for Andalusia. Llorente says ( History of the Inquisition, page 525) that in 1741 Philip V issued a Royal Ordinance against the Freemasons, and, in consequence, many were arrested and sent to the galleys. The members of the Lodge at Madrid were especially treated by the Inquisition with great severity. All the members were arrested, and eight of them sent to the galleys. In 1751, Ferdinand VI, instigated by the Inquisitor Joseph Torrubia, published a Decree forbidding the assemblies of Freemasons, and declaring that all violators of it should be treated as persons guilty of high treason. In that year, Pope Benedict XIV had renewed the Bull of Clement XII. In 1793, the Cardinal Vicar caused a Decree of death to be promulgated against all Freemasons. Notwithstanding these persecutions of the Church and the State, Freemasonry continued to be cultivated in Spain; but the meetings of the Lodges were held with great caution and secrecy. From 1728 onwards although Freemasonry suffered much persecution it grew strong amid dangers and in 1809 a Grand Orient of Spain was actually founded at Madrid in the dungeons of the Inquisition. Not until the Revolution of 1868 could Freemasonry be practiced openly in the country. But the York Rite, which had been formerly practiced, appears now to have been abandoned, and the National Grand Lodge just alluded to was constituted by three Lodges of the Scottish Rite which, during that year, had been established at Madrid. From that time the Freemasonry of Spain has been that of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. Clavel says (Picturesque History, page 252) that in 1810, the Marquis de Clermont-Tonnere, member of the Supreme Council of France, created" near the National Grand Lodge, of the Scottish Rite m Spain, a Grand Consistory of the Thirty-second Degree; and, in 1811, the Count de Grasse added to this a Supreme Council of the Thirty-third Degree, which immediately organized the National Grand Lodge under the title of Grand Orient of Spain and the Indies. The overthrow of French domination dispersed, in 1813, most of the Spanish Freemasons, and caused the suspension of Masonic work in that country Ferdinand VII having succeeded to the throne, 1814, restored the Inquisition with all its oppressive prerogatives, proscribed Freemasonry, and forbade the meetings of the Lodges. It was not until 1820 that the Grand Orient of Spain recovered its activity, and in 1821 we find a Supreme Council in actual existence, the history of whose organization was thus given, in 1870, to Brother A. G. Goodall, the Representative of the Supreme Council of the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction of the United States. The parties now claiming to be a Supreme Council assert that the Count de Tilly, by authority from his cousin, De Grasse Tilly, constituted a Supreme Council, Ancient Accepted Rite, at Seville, in 1807; but in consequence of a revolution, in which Tilly was a prominent actor, the Grand Body was removed to Aranjuez where on the 21st of September, 1808, the officers were duly installed; Saavedra as Sovereign Grand Commander, Ad Vitam, or for life; Count de Tilly, Lieutenant Grand Commander, Carlos de Rosas, Grand Treasurer, Jovellanos. Grand Chancellor; Quintana, Grand Secretary Pelajos, Captain of Guard. On the death of civilly anti Saavedra, Badilla became Sovereign Grand Commander and under his administration the Supreme Council was united with the Grand Orient of Spain at Granada in 1817, under the title of Supreme Council, National Grand Orient of Spain. On the death of Ferdinand VII in 1853, the persecutions against the Freemasons ceased, because, in the civil war that ensued, the priests lost much of their power. between 1845 and 1849, according to Findel ( History, page 584), several Lodges were founded and a Grand Orient established, which appears to have exercised powers up to at least 1848. But subsequently, during the reign of Queen Isabella Freemasonry again fell into decadence. It has however, revived, and many Lodges continued in existence who formerly were under the jurisdiction of the Grand Orient of Portugal. Nowadays there are several independent Masonic Bodies in Spain and it is almost impossible to trace their history and their present status. However, the Annuaire reports the Grand Lodge of Spain, formerly Catalonia-Baleares, to have been founded in 1885, and that the Grand Orient of Spain at Madrid had decided at an Assembly held on October 21-4, 1922, to dissolve and form the following Bodies: Grand Lodge of Northeastern Spain (comprising Catalonia, Navarre, Baleares, and Aragon), Grand Lodge of the Levant (Valenee, Mureia, Cuenea, and Ferrol), Grand Lodge of North western Spain (Galieia, Asturias, Leon), Grand Lodge of Middle Spain (Andalusia, Canaries, Northern Africa), Grand Lodge of Central Spain (Castille, Estremadure, Vaseongadas), Grand Lodge of Porto Rico, and the Grand Lodge of the Philippines. The last two projects must not be confused with the properly authorized Bodies already at work in these islands. But the Grand Orient of Spain has not respected jurisdictional boundaries and even before the above ambitious undertaking, had attempted a Regional Grand Lodge of North America, which was promptly denounced and vigorously condemned by the regular Grand Lodges of the United States. SPARTACUS The characteristic name assumed by Adam Weishaupt, the founder of the Order of the Illuminati. SPEAKERS BUREAU The Educational Committees of American Grand Lodges which maintain Speakers Bureaus for convenience of their Lodges employ such methods as their needs require or their circumstances allow, methods thereby differing from one Grand Jurisdiction to another. The most comprehensive system, and the one in which almost every possible method has a place at one point or another, is the one employed by the Board of General Activities, an educational department of the Grand Lodge of New York, which occupies a floor of Masonic Hall in New York City, and is administered by a salaried staff. In 1920 the then Grand Lodge Committee on Educational Service, R.-. W.. Sidney Morse being Executive Secretary, established the first Speakers Bureau. When this and four other Committees were consolidated in 1926 to become the Board of General Activities (not to be confused in its functions with the Board of General Purposes of the United Grand Lodge of England) the Speakers Bureau was enlarged and placed in care of a full-time, salaried member of the Department. Volunteer speakers were called for from each of the fifty-nine Districts. They furnished data about themselves. These reports were in each District reviewed by the District Deputy Grand Master and the Masters. The Board made a final selection, averaging three per District. The name, address, occupation, Lodge, and favorite speech subjects., etc., were entered in a file. When a Lodge asked for a speaker the Board sent it data on three speakers at convenient distances from it. The Lodge made its choice, and itself made the arrangements with the chosen speaker in person. Afterwards the Lodge made a report to the Board of General Activities; and if from these reports it was learned that some given speaker was a failure, or personally unsuitable, etc., his name was removed from the list. SPENCER MANUSCRIPT A manuscript copy of the Old Charges of the date of 1726, which belonged to the late Brother Richard Spencer and was sold in 1875 to Enoch T. Carson, of Cincinnati, Ohio, and with his library, after Brother Carson's death, became the property of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts through the generosity of General Lawrence. It was reproduced in Spencer's Old Constitutions in 1871. SPES MEA IN DEO EST A Latin motto meaning: My hope is in God. The motto of the Thirty-second Degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. SPETH, GEORGE WILLIAM English Freemason, a founder of Quatuor Coronati Lodge and the first Secretary. He originated the Correspondence Circle of that Lodge. This eminent Brother was born in 1847, was initiated in the Lodge of Unity No. 183 of London in 1872, becoming Worshipful Master in 1876. He wrote several papers and works on the Fraternity, History of his Mother Lodge appearing in 1881 and a work on Royal Freemasons being published in 1885. He was also the author of many articles appearing in Masonic journals such as Ars Quatuor Coronatoram. For sixteen years he held the office of Secretary to the Quatuor Coronati Lodge, his service only terminating with his death on April 19, 1901. SPIRE, CONGRESS OF Spire is a city in Bavaria, on the banks of the Rhine, and the seat of a Cathedral which was erected in the eleventh century A Masonic Congress was convoked there in 1469 by the Grand Lodge of Strasburg, principally to take into consideration the condition of the Fraternity and of the edifices in the course of construction by them, as well as to discuss the rights of the Craft. SPIRITUALIZING In the early lectures of the eighteenth century, this word was used to express the method of Symbolic instruction applied to the impalements of Operative Masonry. In a ritual of 1725, it is said: "As we are not all working Masons, we apply he working-tools to our morals, which we call spiritualizing ." Thus, too, about the same time, Bunyan wrote his symbolic book which he called Solomon's Temple Spiritualized. Phillips, in his New World of Words, 1706, thus defines to spiritualize: "to explain a passage of an author in a spiritual manner, to give it a godly or mystical sense." SPIRITUAL LODGE Hutchinson (Spirit of Masonry page 94) says: "We place the spiritual Lodge ,in the vale of Jehosophat, implying thereby, that le principles of Masonry are derived from the knowledge of God, and are established in the Judgment of the Lord; the literal translation of the word Jehosophat, from the Hebrew tongue, being no other than those express words." This refers to the Lodge, which is thus described in the old lectures at the beginning of the eighteenth century, which were in vogue at the time of Hutchinson. Where does the Lodge stand? Upon the Holy Ground, on the highest hill or lowest vale. or in the vale of Jehoshaphat, or any other sacred place. The Spiritual Lodge is the imaginary or Symbolic Lodge, whose form, magnitude, covering, supports, and other attributes are described in the lectures. SPIRITUAL TEMPLE The French Freemasons say: "We erect temples for virtue and dungeons for vice"; thus referring to the great Masonic doctrine of a spiritual temple. There is no symbolism of the Order more sublime than that in which the Speculative Freemason is supposed to be engaged in the construction of a spiritual temple, in allusion to that material one which was erected by his operative predecessors at Jerusalem. Indeed, the difference, in this point of view, between Operative and Speculative Freemasonry is simply this: that while the former was engaged in the construction, on Mount Moriah, of a material temple of stones and cedar, and gold and precious stones, the latter is occupied, from his first to his last initiation, in the construction, the adornment, and the completion of the spiritual temple of his body. The idea of making the temple a symbol of the body is not, it is true, exclusively Masonic. It had occurred to the first teachers of Christianity. Christ himself alluded to it when he said, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up"; and Saint Paul extends the idea, in the first of his Epistles to the Corinthians (iii, 16), in the following language: "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the spirit of God dwelleth in you?" And again, in a subsequent passage of the same Epistle (vi, 19) he reiterates the idea in a more positive form: "What, know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?" But the mode of treating this symbolism by a reference to the particular Temple of Solomon, and to the operative art engaged in its construction, is an application of the idea peculiar to Freemasonry. Hitchcock, in his Essay on Swedenborg, thinks that the same Idea was also shared by the Hermetic Philosophers He says: "With perhaps the majority of readers, the temple of Solomon, and also the tabernacle, were mere buildings—very magnificent, indeed, but still mere buildings—for the worship of God. But some are struck with many portions of the account of their erection admitting a moral interpretation; and while the buildings are allowed to stand, or to have stood, once, visible objects, these interpreters are delighted to meet with indications that Moses and Solomon, in building the Temples, were wise in the knowledge of God and of man; from which point it is not difficult to pass on to the moral meaning altogether, and affirm that the building, which was erected without the noise of a 'hammer, nor ax, nor any tool of iron' (First Kings vi, 7), was altogether a moral building—a building of God, not made with hands. In short, many see in the story of Solomon's Temple, a symbolical representation of Man as the temple of God, with its Holy of Holies deep seated in the center of the human heart." SPOULEE, JOHN DE He is claimed to have presided over the Freemasons of England in 1350, in the reign of Edward III. Doctor Anderson says he was called Master of the Ghiblim (see Constitutions, 1738, page 70). SPRATT, EDWARD Editor of an Irish edition of Anderson's Constitutions of 1738, published at Dublin, 1751. He was Grand Secretary to the Grand Lodge of Ireland. SPREADING THE BALLOT Taking the vote on the application of a candidate for initiation or admission. It is an Americanism, principally developed in the Western States. Thus: "The ballot may be spread a second time in almost any case if the harmony of the Lodge seems to require it."—Grand Master Swigert of Kentucky. "It is legal to spread the ballot the third time, if for the correction of mistakes, not otherwise." —Rob Morris. It is a technicality. SPRENGSEISEN, CHRISTIAN FRIEDRICH KESSLER VON An ardent adherent of Von Hund and admirer of his Templar system, in defense of which, and against the Spiritual Templarism of Starck, he wrote, in 1786, the book, now very rare, entitled Anti Saint Nicaise, and other works. He was born at Saalsfield, in 1731, and died January 11, 1809 (see Saint Nicaise). SPRIG OF ACACIA See Acacia SPURIOUS FREEMASONRY For this term, and for the theory connected with it, we are indebted to Doctor Oliver, whose speculations led him to the conclusion that in the earliest ages of the world there were two systems of Freemasonry, the one of which, preserved by the patriarchs and their descendants, he called Primitive or Pure freemasonry (see Primitive Freemasonry). The other, which was a schism from this system, he designated as the Spurious Freemasonry of Antiquity. To comprehend this system of Oliver, and to understand his doctrine of the declension of the Spurious from the Primitive Freemasonry, we must remember that there were two races of men descended from the loins of Adam, whose history is as different as their characters were dissimilar. There was the virtuous race of Seth and his descendants, and the wicked one of Cain. Seth and his children, down to Noah, preserved the dogmas and instructions, the legends and symbols, which had been received from their common progenitor, Adam; but Cain and his descendants whose vices at length brought on the destruction of the earth, either totally forgot or greatly corrupted them. Their Freemasonry was not the same as that of the Sethites. They distorted the truth, and varied the landmarks to suit their own profane purposes. At length the two races became blended together. The descendants of Seth, becoming corrupted by their frequent communications with those of Cain, adopted their manners, and soon lost the principles of the Primitive Freemasonry, which at length were confined to Noah and his three sons, who alone, in the destruction of a wicked world, were thought worthy of receiving mercy. Noah consequently preserved this system, and was the medium of communicating it to the post-diluvian world. Hence, immediately after the Deluge, Primitive Freemasonry was the only system extant. But this happy state of affairs was not to last. Ham, the son of Noah, who had been accursed by his father for his wickedness, had been long familiar with the corruptions of the system of Cain, and with the gradual deviations from truth which, through the influence or evil example, had crept into the system of Seth. After the Deluge, he propagated the worst features of both systems among his immediate descendants. Two sets or parties, so to Speak, now arose in the world— one which preserved the great truths of religion, and consequently of Freemasonry, which had been handed down from Adam, Enoch, and Noah—and another which deviated more and more from this pure, original Source. On the dispersion at the Tower of Babel, the schism became still wider and more irreconcilable. The legends of Primitive Freemasonry were altered, and its symbols perverted to a false worship; the mysteries were dedicated to the worship of false gods arid the practice of idolatrous rites, and in the place of the Pure or Primitive Freemasonry which continued to be cultivated among the patriarchal descendants of Noah, was established those Mysteries of Paganism to which Doctor Oliver has given the name of the Spurious Freemasonry. It is not to Doctor Oliver, nor to any very modern writer, that we are indebted for the idea of a Masonic schism in this early age of the world. The doctrine that Freemasonry was lost, that is to say, lost in its purity, to the larger portion of mankind, at the Tower of Babel, is still preserved in the ritual of Ancient Craft Masonry. And in the Degree of Noachites, a Degree which is attached to the Scottish Rite, the fact is plainly adverted to as, indeed, the very foundation of the Degree. Two races of Freemasons are there distinctly named, the Noachites and the Hiramites; the former were the Conservators of the Primitive Freemasonry as the descendants of Noah; the latter were the descendants of Hiram, who was himself of the race which had fallen into Spurious Freemasonry, but had reunited himself to the true sect at t he building of King Solomon's Temple, as we shall hereafter see. But the inventors of the Degree do not seem to have had any very precise notions in relation to this latter part of the history. The Mysteries, which constituted what has been thus called Spurious Freemasonry, were all more or less identical in character. Varying in a few unimportant particulars, attributable to the influence of local causes, their great similarity in all important points showed their derivation from a common origin. In the first place, they were communicated through a system of initiation, by which the aspirant was gradually prepared for the reception of their final doctrines; the rites were performed at night, and in the most retired situations, in caverns or amid the deep recesses of groves and forests; and the secrets were only communicated to the initiated after the administration of an obligation. Thus, Firmicus, a Latin author in the reign of Constantine who about the year 346 A.D. wrote of false objects of worship in De erroributs profanarum religionum (book vii), tells us that "when Orpheus explained the ceremonies of his mysteries to candidates, he demanded of them, at the very entrance, an oath, under the solemn sanction of religion, that they would not betray the rites to profane ears." Hence, as Warburton says from Horus Apollo, the Egyptian hieroglyphic for the mysteries was a grasshopper, because that insect was supposed to have no mouth. The ceremonies were all of a funereal characters Commencing in representations of a lugubrious description, they celebrated the legend of the death and burial of some mythical being who was the especial object of their love and adoration. But these rites thus beginning in lamentation, and typical of death, always ended in joy. The object of their sorrow was restored to life and immortality, and the latter part of the ceremonial was descriptive of his resurrection. Hence, the great doctrines of the mysteries were the immortality of the soul and the existence of a God. Such, then, is the theory on the subject of what is called Spurious Freemasonry, as taught by Doctor Oliver and the disciples of his school. Primitive Freemasonry consisted of that traditional knowledge and symbolic instruction which had been handed down from Adam, through Enoch, Noah, and the rest of the patriarchs, to the time of Solomon. Spurious Freemasonry consisted of the doctrines and initiations practiced at first by the antediluvian descendants of Cain, and, after the dispersion at Babel, by the Pagan priests and philosophers in their Mysteries (see Clandestine) . SPURS In the Orders of Chivalry, the slurs had a Symbolic meaning as important as their practical use was necessary. "To win one's spurs" was a phrase which meant "to win one's right to the dignity of knighthood." Hence, in the investiture of a knight, he was told that the spurs were a symbol of promptitude in military Service; and in the degradation of an unfaithful knight, his spurs were hacked off by the book, to show his utter unworthiness to wear them. Stowe says (Annals, 902), in describing the ceremony of investing knights: "Evening prayer being ended, there stood at the chapel-door the king's master-cook, with his white apron and sleeves, and chopping-knife in his hand, gilded about the edge, and challenged their spurs. which they redeemed with a noble a piece, and he said to every knight, as they pressed by him: fair Knight, look that you be true and loyal to the King, my master, or else I must hew these spurs from your heels.' " In the Masonic Orders of Chivalry, the symbolism of the spurs has unfortunately been omitted. SQUARE This is one of the most important and significant Symbols in Freemasonry. As such, it is proper that its true form should be preserved. French Freemasons have almost universally given it with one leg longer than the other, thus making it a carpenter's square American Freemasons, following the incorrect delineations of Brother Jeremy L. Cross, have, while generally preserving the equality of length in the legs, unnecessarily marked its surface with inches; thus making it an instrument for measuring length and breadth which it is not. It is simply the trying square of a stone-mason, and has a plain surface; the sides or legs embracing an angle of ninety degrees, and is intended only to test the accuracy of the sides of a stone, and to see that its edges subtend the same angle. In Freemasonry, the square is a symbol of morality. This is its general signification, and is applied in various ways: 1. It presents itself to the neophyte as one of the Three Great Lights.Everywhere, however, it inculcates the same lesson of morality, of truthfulness, of honesty. So universally accepted is this symbolism, that it has gone outside of the Order, and has been found in colloquial language communicating the same idea. Square, says Halliwell, Dictionary of Archaic and Provincial Words, means honest, equitable, as in "square dealing." To play upon the square is proverbial for to play honestly. In this sense the word is found in the old writers. As a Masonic symbol, it is of very ancient date, and was familiar to the Operative Masons. In the year 1830, the architect, in rebuilding a very ancient bridge called Baal Bridge, near Limerick, in Ireland, found under the foundation-stone an old brass square, much eaten away, containing on its two surfaces the following inscription, the U being read as V: I. WILL. STRIUE. TO. LIUE.—WITH. LOUE. & CARE.— UPON. THE. LEUL.—BY. THE. SQUARE., and the date 1517. The modern Speculative Freemason will recognize the idea of living on the level fled by the square This discovery proves, if proof were necessary, that the familiar idea was borrowed from our Operative Brethren of former days. The square, as a symbol in Speculative Freemasonry, has therefore presented itself from the very beginning of the revival period. In the very earliest catechism of the eighteenth century, of the date of 1725, we find the answer to the question, "How many make a Lodge?" is "God and the Square, with five or seven right or perfect Masons." God and the Square, religion and morality, must be present in every Lodge as governing principles. Signs at that early period were to be made by squares and the Furniture of the Lodge was declared to be the Bible, Compasses, and Square. In the public lecture of Brother Herbert A. Giles, Worshipful Master of Ionic Lodge, No. 1781 at Amoy, delivered in 1880 and entitled Freemasonry in China, says: From time immemorial we find the Square and Compasses used by Chinese Writers to symbolize precisely the same phases of moral conduct as in our system of Freemasonry. The earliest passage known to one which bears upon the subject is to be found in the Book of history embracing the period reaching from the twenty-fourth to the seventh century before Christ. There in an account of a military expedition we read:In all rites and in all languages where Freemasonry has penetrated, the square has preserved its primitive Signification as a symbol of morality."Ye officers of government, apply the Colllpasses!"The public discourses of Confucius provide us with several Masonic allusions of a more or less definite character. For instance. when recounting his own degrees of moral progress in life, the Master tells us that only at seventy-five spears of age could he venture to follow the inclinations of his heart without fear of " transgressing the limits of the Square." this would be 481 B.C. belt it is in the works of his great follower, Mencius, who flourished nearly two hundred years later, that we meet with a fuller and more impressive Masonic phraseology. In one chapter we are taught that just as the most skilled artificers are unable, without the aid of the Square and Compasses to produce perfect rectangles or perfect circles, so must all men apply these tools figuratively to their lives, and the level and the marking-line besides, if they would walk in the straight and even paths of wisdom and keep themselves within the bonds of honor and virtue. In Book iv we read: SQUARE, THE The article on page 963 shows that in Freemasonry (and Masons can have only a secondary interest in the symbol as used outside the Craft) the Square has more than one use or exposition: it can even be said that instead of taking it as one symbol with many meanings it is more correct to take it that in Ancient Craft Masonry there are a number of Squares, each (relatively) independent of the other. The following can be added to the article given on that page: 1. The Oblong Square. This is an old and not very fortunate name for a rectangle, one never properly belonging to the nomenclature of mathematics. 2. Circumambulation. In almost every known instance outside of Freemasonry the rite of circumambulation has meant a movement, or procession, or walking in a circle. or circuit; in Freemasonry it is movement along a line that is part circle and part square—a circuit around corners. The Lodge room itself is an Oblong Square in which the members comprise a Circle, Circumambulation is, among other things, a visible representation of that combination of square and circle. 3. " Part upon the square. " This is a verbal symbol but it is an independent one, and not merely a commentary on the Square in general. Masons meet upon the level, no member being excluded from other members by any taboo of rank, class, title, or caste and it is expected that they thou thus meet not in theory, nor in some remote and abstract sense, but actually and regularly; but while they are thus meeting they will do and say only what upright men do and say, so that when they part (leave the Lodge) they will not carry away any feeling of hypocrisy or resentment. In this instance the symbolic try-square does not lie in a horizontal plane but in a vertical plane, and one leg is on the level, the Lodge room floor; the other leg is upright. 4. The Forty seventh Proposition, or Pythagorean Theorem. This theorem concerns a right-angled triangle, but a good half of it is composed of the properties of the Square. The Square itself is probably the oldest, or at least one of the oldest, of any Masonic tool, instrument, or action used as a symbol, for in the " Mason window " of some of the oldest cathedrals it is used to symbolize the Mason Craft; but it is probable that the Pythagorean triangle is as old, or almost as old, because the data indicate that it was used as the method for teaching geometry, since so much of Euelid can be deduced from it. Euclid himself worked out a proof for this theorem, one of the very few known to have been his. though it has never been wholly satisfactory to geometricians- our Brother Mason James A. Garfield, discovered a new proof for it as late as the Nineteenth Century. The Minute Books of the oldest Lodges prove that for a number of years after 1717 Speculative Masons were in confusion about Masonic symbols; differed among themselves as to what symbols to include, differed as to their correct form, and differed as to their symbolic meaning. It is to that period of confusion that we owe the phrase "Working Tool" as applied to the Square (also the Level, Plumb, and Gage); manifestly it is not a tool but an instrument, and it had far more use by the mind (consider today the carpenter's square and the slide rule) than by the hand; in colas sense there was always much Speculative Masonry in the Fraternity even when the great majority of members were working masons.
A |
A2 |
A3 |
B |
B2 |
C |
C2 |
C3 |
D |
E |
E2 |
F |
G |
H |
I |
J |
K |
L
|